A Canadian Cat

Yeah those sites try to be tricky. Here is what I see: With the top two buttons trying to download SaveAs.exe And the bottom one just going back to the same place.

I think it is a great idea though.

I can totally relate to that. Cool post. This could be a great discussion. Well the most important thing is to pick something you will enjoy doing. Given the activity around here I would leap at create scenarios as something that is moving along at a slow pace. If you look in the mod section you will a bunch of guys beavering away on vehicles and buildings and other stuff. There is one on going AAR on this forum right now. Another one of those would be cool too. There are lots of guys posting videos and screen shots but you can never have to many of those so post some of your new scenarios

You have things backwards. You bought the game with a known set of features - play it - that's what you bought. You did not buy some special right to dictate future development - that costs way, way more than $50. Sure you are entitled to voice your opinion on what features you would like to see next but so do I. My requests are in my sig - I hope to get them one day but I bought what the game can do now nothing more nothing less. Same as you. Well said.

Who knows. You will just have to wait and see. This is a game of stuff happens. If you are looking for a table with die roll probabilities and pluses and minuses I don't think you will find them.

Chris did confirm that this change was going to be in 1.02 - but he did not give an ETA.

I 100% guarantee that the developers will fix bugs that get reported. When the get there is another matter and do they think my top priority or your top priority is *the* top priority is another question. But my experience is that improperly modelled armour protection usually gets attention. You guys!! That is much to complex... ^^^ this. Quantum tunnelling is the newest technology in ammo, come on keep up. If you put in the $ on the basic physics research it eventually pays dividends

As the saying goes you are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to the facts. Some of these threads have been very interesting and the opinions of other are always interesting to consider but some posts contain "information" that is so far away from what can plainly be seen as to make me wonder if they came from an alternate reality or something. Discussing alternate realities in real life is not really very interesting. So by all means lets discuss what is happening on the ground but in this reality please

Nice I really like the idea. I believe that points awarded for touch objectives are not lost when you surrender. Let us know if you find out different. So, The only issue is this does not work for Head to Head play. However if a touch objective could be given negative points then you could make it work no matter what and on top of that you could give reserves to both sides. With negative points you would no need the AI group that moves to a touch objective and instead just make the area surrounding the reserves a negative point touch objective. I wonder if you can put a negative value in the objective editor...

Well you felt some pain that turn, but your T90 dished some pain back - that's for sure. Congratulations on getting a bridge head. One squad and a BTR over is a start. Where are you currently located? Have you called in an air strike yet?

Ah, that is not working for me. The only thing I can download is a SaveAs.exe file - and I ain't doing that. Am is missing something on that download page? How about attaching the file here to the post or even the repository. Please. I really like the consistent look of the green - nice work.

Wow that is bright - and oddly dust free. Cool, add that to your mod when you get to the hummers. Did the tanks and IFVs also use those or is it just the hummer drivers that are scared of the USAF? I guess it is easier to tell and M1 from the other guys tanks than it is to tell one truck form another from above.

Oh well then carry on I am sure I just never noticed - sorry.

Yeah paying attention to the business side of things is actually much harder than people think. I have a lot of respect for guys that can do that well. Frankly that's why I work for someone else for a living The only real test that matters in business - are you still around as a company this time next year / next decade. Indeed - some time spent on making network multi player smoother would be a good thing including some kind of investment in a lobby. Even if the investment in a lobby was just allowing someone else to create the lobby but be able to integrate with the game to make it seamless. Agreed with the addition of triggers the work on the AI is going in the right direction to make scenarios even more challenging. Other than adding some way of supporting people that want to play mutlti player in real time I agree with that. Yeah, I want in on that too.

Yes, in the scenario editor on the Data page switch the Force vs Force setting from Blue vs Red (standard) to Red vs Red or Blue vs Blue and that will allow out add whatever you like. Then switch back to Blue vs Red (standard) when you are done playing musical equipment. See page 81 of the manual.

I am *not* down with these mascots. I want a cuddly brown bear or a goat yeah a goat - they can eat anything left over from the canteen.

Hee hee I always have too much on the go and I keep signing up for more. Actually in my middle age I am getting better at not signing up for too much stuff but I do seem to be always skirting around the edge.

I do agree that there are improvements to be made. The conga line and plowing ahead after disaster leap to mind. We agree there. I do however see a problem with your characterization that fighting in the woods a platoon should beat a squad. Sorry but that is just one dimensional thinking. My dad used to tell a story about umpiring a Nato exercise where one force had a choke point we'll covered by a handful of guns and the advancing force complained that they should win because they had a battalion of tanks against a platoon. Pointing out that just throwing everything down the road wound lead to one or two tanks at a time against the platoon didn't seem to help The situation you describe in the woods is exactly where CM2 gets it much better than CM1. If you stick to describing incidents of bad behaviour I'll agree with you more not that you need to care able that

Actually I didn't so thanks for that.

Wow cool. Nailed it I would say.

The concrete look does concern me. This is a shed right and in game these are very fragile and offer slim to no protection. If they look concrete in game that leaves players with a false impression and bad things wait at the end of that garden path. Don't get me wrong they look excellent - I'll take that wooden one for sure. I think it would be good for building moders to remember that people judge the protection from what buildings look like and try to keep their new look in line with the vanilla one at least in terms of their perceived sturdiness.

Is this where you see a referee coming in to it? To garble the message? I think you should also consider if the Company CO's solider model is close enough to talk to one of his platoon's solider model in game they should be allowed to have an extended conversation without garbling. Similarly if the Lt.s are close enough talk.

Nope, when the pack first came out it was a higher version. A patch after that brought the base game to 3.11 and now you can play someone with the pack without a version problem.

LOL yeah that was a bunch of work - I am sad it just died away though. I still kick my friend in the but for bailing on me when I see him. But while I will play a battle that big again and I will do an AAR again I don't think I'll do both at the same time

Great story So, if I am reading this correctly we can use these mods for CMBN, CMFI and CMRT - correct? The look great BTW.