Sailor Malan2

WAD for ages. Biggest issue I have with textures now is that you cant force turrets and hulls to stick together. So tac markings or alternate pain schemes end up as mix and match so you cant do (e.g.) a set of tanks with individual markings on turret and hull and expect them to match. I would love it if BF could alter the system to add a letter, or decimal. So Hull 1, hull 2 etc are picked randomly, as are turret 1, turret 2 (i.e. 4 combinations for that example). But Hull 1.1 or Hull 1a has to be picked with Turret 1.1 (or 1a). So a set: Hull 1a Hull 2a and Turret 1a and Turret 2a gives 2 combinations that match. The clever bit would be combinations: Hull 1, Hull 2, Turret 1a, turret 2a, mount 1a mount 2a gives the following: Hull 1, Turret 1a and mount 1a, or turret 2a/mount 2a Hull 2, with both the above (i.e. 4 options but all options have matching turret and mount) the you could have Turret 1a and 1b, mount 1a means you have mount 1a but with either turret etc etc. If properly designed the options would be endless... I want a system that enables proper Ge tank numbers 111, 112 113 etc (no more than 1 of each in scenario) and different colours/marks/mud etc) rather than bespoke random types...

And I will bet you anything you like, those numbers are all wrong. Unfortunately I don't know by how much and in which direction!

Like all these things (and certainly RL WW2), the real effectiveness will be a function of all manner of things (some of which are not modelled in CMBS. Using WW2 where we do have data, if you fight Panthers vs Shermans (even late models) in equal numbers, you get complete German dominance. I may be a dud player, but I cant get 1:1 kills (except in special circumstances like perfect ambushes), even using Commonwealth forces with Fireflies. However in RL, the allies didn't meet them in equal numbers, and losing 2-3 Shermans per Panther still brought them out on top. As to the individual vehicles, I am with the 'no one knows' school. It is so difficult to extrapolate (read: guess) from published data, and then factors like combat philosophy, training and supply make speculation even harder. I will go with 'explore the game, work out what seems to be the situation, and adapt play to suit'! But I am still on CMRT, so BS will wait!

Yes, the way to see that it is from the waypoint, not the target line origin is to look at the range quoted. Put it near the waypoint and the ranges shrink to zero (or close)

Lets assume that BF have not found the bug yet. After all, the alternative is that they are a bunch of deranged sadomasochists. So, in order not to make people wait, they should have...? Not released RT yet? Thus you wouldn't be stuck with the bug. Also, we would have a thread called 'Where is RT'. Oh, and they wouldn't yet know the bug existed since they are unlikely to have the bug occur on any hardware they have, or the beta testers have. Let's assume they are doing their best, and will tell us (probably in huge fluorescent capital letters with a new emoticon or two) as soon as they have. Or carry on whining. Your choice...

I move a lot of the time behind the lines. If you need to rush, you should have moved earlier. Dont use it in action (either Slow, or quick, with Fast occasionally when I really dont want them to stop if fired on... crossing a gap, the street, things like that)

What? no fresh outbreak of conspiracy theories? How come BF are still working on Black sea and not fixing this bug? Really! You just cant get the whiners these days...

Kinda guessing here guys, but I suspect discussing a competitor (even in the terms above; that is fairly negatively) might be against the forum rules? Lockup incoming?

I was giving another example of subjective assessment that was undone by objective testing, not suggesting equivalence. If you are basing msg performance on films we need a 'goody/baddy' switch:). Otherwise we need historical data and some range tests.

Mouse clicks,fair enough, but you try moving a couple of hundred rounds and a few bazooka rounds out of a truck in less thank a minute...

Lots of speculation/guesswork. Not seen any tests of the SMGs etc. I was in a long thread a while ago that argued that HMGs were undermodelled! Need an objective standard and some firing ranges if you want to go anywhere with this... The suppression test was perfect...

Interesting, I must admit I thought I had observed that longer than one minute was necessary to get reliable suppression. Maybe your volume of incoming fire is high, and say 4 rifles would need longer. I guess it might not need longer to do the suppression, but have a smaller chance of suppressing so need longer to get more checks?

I have heard accounts of Bangalore torpedoes being used but you need a long length for your average minefield.

please do not misquote me: "Then, posters found a vacuum and (as is the way) started addressing the little asides as there was nothing further to say on the original topic..." This is not an instruction, nor even a suggestion; it is the continuation of an alternative theory I was describing about what could have happened to your thread ("Although I could suggest an alternative view:..."). I am sorry if English is your second language - I certainly wouldn't be able to discuss at this level in my 2nd language, but nor would I assume that I fully understood what was being said and choose to interpret it as a deliberate attack (or troll).

You mean Ge and Sov don't have a 75/76mm portee?

Where did I say any such thing? You suggested that people were trolling to attack the thread starter and supporting posts. I merely suggested an alternative view. The only instruction or direct suggestion I made was "By all means make a further point on the original question if you want to". Maybe you see this as arrogant of me, in which case I am sorry. However it was intended as a suggestion that you could get the discussion back on topic if you had anything new to say. Do you see how there are usually 2 sides to any discussion?

All this debate about cost/value is meaningless. Very few things have universal value in the world. Food is one. Shelter/warmth. Sex (no, I am not getting into a debate about vice - it is just the human being has an almost universal drive to procreate, and hence most humans value sex). Van Gogh 'Sunflower' paintings cost a lot of money. Food is relatively little money. If there were a planet wide disaster, a Van Gogh would be worthless. Food on the other hand would be very valuable. In fact in labour terms, food might tend towards the longterm maximum it can be - a day's worth of nutrition cannot sustain a cost of above about a day's worth of labour (actually less, because you cant work flat out all day every day). Any more than that and you can't earn enough to stay alive and people starve. The population reduces and due to less demand, food value falls. Thus what is the vehicle pack worth? What is a fair price? In a free market, it is worth what people are willing to pay for it. Anyone know why formal c16th gardens went out of fashion in the C17th century amongst the very rich, and Capabilty Brown 'natural' parklands became the 'must have' by the end of the C18th? Because labour became too expensive so more and more rich people couldn't afford them. Keeping up with new fashions being what it is, everybody wants the latest thing and exploits the 'get out' ('natural parklands' cost capital to create but have much less running cost). So the value of a formal garden fell from 'very desirable' to 'very old fashioned, so that no one has one these days'. The cost of a formal garden actually rose, but the value disappeared, therefore so did they. What has this to do with VP? The value of a thing is what you are willing to pay. The cost is only relevant to BF (in that they need to make a profit). Thus buy what you are willing to pay for, and don't what you aren't. Buy alternative (cheaper/better) products, but there is no point trying to argue what a price 'should' be. Unless you can find the 'haggle' button on the shop screen? And haggling just means that the advertised/first price is higher to start! If haggling resulted in the price really dropping much (on average), the supplier goes bust and will be replaced by someone who actually understands business! Why don't we discuss perpetual motion machines instead?

Please indicate examples of Trolling to the moderators - it is in no one's interest for trolling to go unremarked. Although I could suggest an alternative view: the original point about how long and eagerly nay, frustratedly, the patch has been awaited has been made. Various conspiracy theories raised. BF answer, with the reason for the wait (the bug that everyone wants nailed is a slippery little sucker and is fighting back). Without re-reading the entire thread, it is possible that BF's explanation is added to the conspiracy theory (although I am very willing to be corrected if I dreamed that). Then, posters found a vacuum and (as is the way) started addressing the little asides as there was nothing further to say on the original topic (having been asked and answered). I think it is important to differentiate between trolling argument/debate and casual chat don't you? By all means make a further point on the original question if you want to. With new (relevant) input I find threads stay on topic quite well, don't you?

I realise English may not be your first language, and I am probably going to get flamed here, but in the spirit of helpful education, "we" is the first person plural, not the third person. Writing in the third person ("he/she", "they") can be impersonal or be read as making assumptions. "We" on the other hand, by definition includes the speaker/writer and hence the most you can say is the the author believes he is not alone. This may be presumptive also, but I think not in this case.

Technically (I think), since the author put it in the public domain, you could modify it anyway, but you shouldn't pass it off as your own work (i.e. acknowledge the author), nor seek to make commercial advantage. Of course, to stay accepted around here, making reasonable attempts to get permission would be pretty nice!

And we are told Sweden is such a nice civilised country with a working social model... In Britain you aren't a real village until you have your Chinese Takeaway. In order as villages go up in size you get: Church (usually sharing a priest with 3 or so others) Pub (maybe - Chinese may come first!) Chinese (serving Fish and chips if only takeaway in the village) Fish and Chips 2nd Chinese Indian restaurant and takeaway (strange that, you need to be a big town to have a Chinese restaurant, the first 3 or 4 Chinese will be takeaway only but the first Indian will be a restaurant that does takeaway) A kebab joint 2nd Chippy (or maybe 2nd Indian) Once you have about 3 Chinese, 2 Indians, a Kebab place and 2 Chippies, then you will get a Pizza place. About the same time you may get a burger joint but one of the others will do burgers (unless a McD within 5 miles!) Never met anywhere with more pizza than Chinese!

Why aim so low? Why not suggest BFC give it away free to random customers? Or give cashback? I think BFC, having been doing this for 14 years either: a) are mad (and broke) have a faint idea what they are doing Which do you think? Oh, and $20 dollars too much? Here you are: http://www.businessinsider.com/20-items-under-20-everyone-should-buy-2013-11

I am aware of that, and am perhaps fortunate in that it doesn't affect me. However there are still lots of playable scearios. I wasn't joking when I said I have bought games that are really unplayable - CTD, no opponent AI, multiplayer bugged so as to be impossible. Just out of curiosity, show me a map where it is actually essential to enter a single story building.

As I said before, it's not only vehicles - the Crab and (to a lesser extent) the AVRE required functionality

That's SO last year. The NSA launch a worm that sucks you into a USB port and emails you to Gitmo...