AttorneyAtWar

Two campaigns (1 US, 1 Russian with 11-13 missions each), 27 new QB maps and 6 standalone scenarios. Thats not bad for 10 bucks!

Thanks Steve, patched and licensed perfectly!

I wouldn't even be mad if that was the excuse for an SSBN to be over their honestly.

Maybe I used a bit too much hyperbole by saying "anything", but the point still stands in relation to what we've been talking about. I see no straw man here because it was still on topic

So basically provide no alternate view point to anything BFC is doing? No thanks! I trust them enough to see what we have to say and make a decision based on it.

I agree that it is ridiculous its cannon doesn't work right now but at the very least it is supposed to have one! Also your kidding yourself if you think the A-10 would be able to successfully operate in a battle sapce with systems like S-400,S-300 and successfully provide CAS. F-35 at the very least has built-in defenses against this such as its stealth capability. I'm not saying the A-10 needs to go because it absolutely has its benefits, but A-10's aren't going to be flying around busting T-90's on day one, its just not possible. As for the "fighter mafia" and the air force doesn't enjoy air-ground thats an insult to the pilots who fly CAS today in theaters around the world. There isn't a more important thing to a CAS pilot or a fighter pilot than making sure the guy on the ground is protected to the best of their ability.

F-35 is perfectly capable of carrying out CAP missions, its internal load of 4 AMRAAMS does limit this ability to an extent though (F-22 carries 6 internally). This problem will be solved with the block (24?) F-35 due out in 2024 which will increase interal payload capacity by 2 missiles. If you have to you of course have the option of an external load. As for the dog-fight problem if a pilot has to resort to cannon in it he probably has done something wrong or has been put in a situation he shouldn't be in. To aid this the F-35 is capable of using Aim-9X which is capable of high off-boresight firing and targeting using HMCS (Helmet mounted display) or the F-35's external sensors that allows engagement in 360DG around the aircraft. Its also important to note that the F-35 is a flying AWACS, Jammer and ISR aircraft, its sensors are very good at doing all of those things.

If a game as old, complex and "bland" (As in graphics not depth and gameplay) as Command Ops 2 can release on Steam and be successful Combat Mission can do that 10 fold. Its a great game that deserves more attention.

Who said anything about making a game for the masses? Releasing the games that already exist on another platform does not equal that, stop making strawmen. Not to mention trying to say this guy hates the game just because he wants it to have more exposure? If you took a minute and read what he wrote he said he liked the game a great deal and wants to see it become more popular, I think YOU are the problem here.

Yes I agree largely with what Rooibos is saying, especially from the exposure angle. I'm still amazed at how popular HOI4, Graviteam tactics, and even Command Ops 2 now! are selling on Steam. People play these complicated games now, this is not as niche as everyone seems to think so on here, its bizarre. Take a look at the respective community hubs and all of the activity they get and compare that to here.

Just a heads up, this scenario still isn't available on FGM.

How about that M1A2 Upgrade?

That extra armor was initially designed to stop anti-tank rifle rounds, the affect on shaped charge warheads was not intended from the beginning. I'm pretty sure in some cases it actually doesn't help much at all because it detonates the charge prematurely and the jet can still penetrate afterwords. I'm sure someone will come along and correct me but I think I have the jist of it!

I'd be pretty surprised and disappointed if RT wasn't after Italy.

There's plenty of formations in CMFB that have all the soldiers using STG-44's or at the very least all automatics. Sturm, Heavy sturm, and volksgrenadiers come to mind.

Graphics aren't subjective if CM is lacking in certain areas like modern AA and atmospheric effects, however it is subjective whether or not people are bothered by them in any game. Most of the games I play my friends affectionately refer to them as "map simulators" like Command Modern air/naval. I only went after that graphics statement because its simply unrepresentative of that game as a whole and if someone were to see be falsely influenced by that comment it wouldn't be fair to the game. I have never said CMFB has bad graphics, infact I think their fine, the fact of the matter is GTOS and Mius have better graphics. I love CM and i'm not trying to trash it so I'm not sure where you saw me saying its graphics are "bad". My only point in this thread about the current topic is that CM deserves more exposure and would see more success in my opinion because of how mainstream military history/ESPECIALLY WW2 is becoming.

Ill give you the soldier models definitely, even in Mius they haven't improved much. I agree BFC's model has worked for them, I'm not saying Steves an idiot, but this forum is still a bit of its own little world in terms of what people think about strategy games in general, ESPECIALLY World War 2.

You both couldn't be anymore wrong about that game, I recommend going back and playing it for at least 2 hours. Your claims about the graphics are actually hilariously innacurate, especially with the new title. All I will say on this subject is that people on this forum have no idea how popular WW2 games and strategy games are becoming and if they think Combat Mission wouldn't sell with more exposure than I'm sorry you just don't understand the trend right now. Theres hundreds of people that play IL2 Battle of Stalingrad, IL2 Cliffs of Dover and even 1946 still, many newcomers are from War Thunder which is more on the arcade side but serves as an avenue to more serious study sims like DCS.

Is there ever a time where recon by fire or speculative suppression is considered gamey? When I usually send out scouts to find the enemy its a platoon at least that is bounding overwatch, but never do I fire at a position I'm advancing towards if I don't know the enemy is there. Of course this changes if its an objective that I've been specifically told has enemy units in it. This usually leads to being shot at first and taking casualties of course. Is this a rational viewpoint if I'm trying to play realistically or am I being way too stupid?

I never said we (the customers) didn't want them.

Those were never mentioned to be working on or planned, not sure why you thought they would be included.

Looks like Santa (Steve ) left us something in our stockings!

Historians are going to have a lovely time writing about this conflict, separating fact from fiction is going to be a ridiculous process. One the one hand having so many sources is great, but when 90% of it is garbage its going to be tough to sift through.

Fair enough!

The only cool thing about this is the fact it turns on lights and stuff for you.