Jargotn

von Luck, it's the danger you refuse to recognize. It might cost ... A lot.

I'd compare it to jumping into water to find out if you can swim. Will you know if you can swim afterwards? Probably. Will it help you? Nah. You took the risk and you either swam or, well drowned. Drowning is not an option for BF. It's not a diceroll you can repeat. "What if" is not how you should run a company. I don't claim that I know how good BF is standing financially, but if they say that they don't want to take the risk because they think that they might drown... Well. I believe them. But the DRM makes it harder to pirate a game. A LOT. I'd like to do some research on the subject and find out if there are free copies of Cm games around the internet but I never pirated before and therefore I don't really know how to find those copies. And honestly, I don't want to know. DRM can be annoying and it often is. I never ran a company that produced software and therefore I can't claim that I know how effective BFs DRm is. However, they don't get the DRM for free. And if they pay for it it probably is necessary.

*Enters room, puts hat on a desk* You guys still talking? I thought we moved on. Well, let's keep hitting that horse. Steam is the better distribution platform. No questions asked. Buy with one klick? Yep. Install with one click? Granted. Patch with one klick? Included. Play with one klick? Done and done. But that's not the point. The point is that BF has to think as a business because it has to survive as a business. From a consumer perspective there is (almost) no reason not to put CM on Steam for the reasons stated above. Steve isn't a consumer, though. He is a business (Well, he is the guy who represents the business in this thread). As a business his primary concern is not to give you the best product he could possibly produce at all costs. His primary concern is to make a living. He has to produce something we want to buy AND he has to do that at a price <= his production costs. Steam does not change the equasion in a favourable way for him. And in the end, if Steve fails to make the right choices we won't need to talk about how hard or easy it is to patch our games. Because there will be no games. Also, I'm incedibly proud that we managed to switch from a rather agressive tone to a "No offense meant/ no offense taken" tone. You guys are great.

Actually, if you move your pixeltruppen "slow" they will quickly become exhausted. While you can't just disable the time limit you can modify every scenario, including the time limit, in the ingame editor. You won't need more than three hours for a mission the scenario designer gave you 45 minutes for, no matter how slow you play Don't let these time limits stop you from enjoying the game. It's worth every penny.

Yeah. That was Steve. All the answers (and the forum discussion the article refers to) can be found in the CMBS subforum. You should find the Steam-thread quite quickly.

I somehow feel watched. At least we finished this discussion. Now Steve made sure that everyone understands why CM isn't on steam. Until another thread opens. *takes hat and leaves, silently planning his revenge*

If I could change one thing? I'd force Battlefront to find a easy way to export and import units from and to an operational layer. Until we get a campaign mode I won't stop dreaming.

"Hiding while at the same time trying to do spotting" is what soldiers in CM are doing when they are not hiding. On the battlefield you try to expose yourself as little as possible. "Hiding" is our command to tell the pixeltruppen to keep their heads down, no matter what.

AFV is Armored fighting vehicle. Op should be Observation post and ACR *might* be Armored Cavalry regiment. NOt shure on the last one. The technique you are describing is what scouting in CM is. I normally moe in a team of two first to check for ambushes and move in force against expected enemy positions.

As a member of the post war generation I can tell you that the American attempts to get rid of both national socialism and nationalism in Germany were more than succesfull. As an example, the german NPD, a party that follows the tradition of the NSDAP (Even though they call themselve National democrats, opposed to national socialists. Otherwise they would be prohibited) only received 1.3 percent in the last federal election (You have to get at least five percent to enter parliament). Something like military parades doesn't exist in the Bundeswehr. Other militarys try to build up a fighting spirit, by promoting a long and successfull history. If you'd try to place the Bundeswehr in line with the Germand Army of WW1 or worse the Reichswehr you'd be called a Nazi. You are not allowed to show Nazi-symbols without educational effect. Denying the holocaust can lead to a prison sentence of up to five years, etc. Yeah. After WW2 west Germany followed a policy of only hunting the "big fish". Policemen, judges, etc. put on a new uniform and kept working unless they actively promoted national socialism- otherwise you'd have to imprison most germans, and that's not how you build a nation. However, while the older generation didn't start shouting "this is what I did in WW2 and it was bad", the next generation asked "what did you do". It became a major problem when students realised that many of the old national socialists were still working, and they actively protested against the, in their opinion authoritarian, state. Western Germany saw and sees itself as the nation that is responsible for everything that happened and acts upon that knowledge. As an example you can look at the German-Israeli relations. In eastern Germany things were a little bit different. Since eastern germany itself was a dictature they often followed nazi traditions (which is something they would never have admitted). The Stasi (short for Staatssicherheit, which translates to federal security. It was the east- german intelligence service.) is often seen as a spiritual successor to the GeStaPo (Geheime Staatspolizei, translates to secret federal police. One of the intelligence services of Nazi germany), and was even more powerful. And since eastern germany didn't see itself as a followup to the Reich but as something completely new and detatched there never was a major workup in society. In the east one authoritarian regime was destroyed and a new one was build up. That link you provided was interesting. If you look at the description "Winner of the prestigious peace award at the Film festival of the independent film in Osnabrück Germany," you can see how the German society handles its past.

I'd say it's out of scope. A sniper is an extremely valuable asset. Just like special forces you don't want him on the frontline where he could die to a stray bullet. Snipers -those in ghillie suits you are talking about- normally don't just link up with an advancing infantry platoon. That would waste their potential.

Shock Force released... mid 2007, right? I didn't follow Battlefront actively back then. That survey really surprised me.

We talked about this on another thread (Can't remember which one). The biggest problem, even if the smaller lasers were capable of activating the automatic reaction, is that those infantrymen would be dead within seconds. Modern systems can analyse the laser and track it back to a few degrees. Or, to put it in simpler words,it would be suicide.

Earlier in this thread somebody (I can't remember who. Please forgive me) posted a new idea. The "Put CM on Steam" debate is done. What about putting a CM demo on Steam? If Steam were to accept it as a free to play game BF could get the exposure without actually losing any kind of control. Please tell me if this still is our horse. I think by talking about the demo we can start hitting the pony. Steve, has this been considered? Would Steam allow a demo, without a full release?

Hmmm... did you use "More reply options"?

For youtube don't post the link in the address bar. Post the link you find when you klick the "share" button under the youtube video.

If I may quote the manual: "The Stryker line of vehicles was developed as an answer to post-Cold War combat scenarios which often necessitated fast deployment across the world. The Stryker provides infantry with high strategic mobility while having a smaller logistical footprint than heavy mechanized units." Even if it won't survive the environment, thats what it's supposed to do. It wasn't build for a war against a techological rival.

I assess the situation a bit different: There are two types of arguments. First there is the argument that is about arguing. You try to explain your point of view to a partner. He responds, presenting his own point of view. The goal is to inform each other or to have fun. Due to it's nature this first type is mostly used in debates about politics or ethics, due to their relative nature. The second type of argument is used to come to a conclusion. People discuss to see results. Now if we look back at the start of this topic: the topic didn't start as an argument at all. We are not talking about why steam is good or bad for Cm. We are explaining why it is not on Steam, and why it won't be considered. If you want to start a discussion about the pros and cons of Steam please feel free to do so, but please don't do it here. The thread started as something different, and discussing whithout knowing why or about what is a bad idea. Always. I hope you can understand my view of the situation.

Artofwar (going by the youtube name JS Warpaint) shows us how CMBS precision artillery will feel.

Pressing shift and tab at the same time opens the "steam overlay" You can use it to... uhm... If I remember right the only thing you can really do is chat while in game and use a browser. Some time ago they added the ability to listen to musik while playing. Nothing to fancy, really.

I suddenly feel so exclusive! All the details, I think I know what I have to do on the modern battlefield! That is until I get the game.

Please correct me if im wrong, but all I see on the first page of the thread is forum members politely telling the poster that Steam has been discussed to death, and that BF has stated that they aren't on Steam not because they never heard of it but for a reason. Granted, at the beginning nobody posted direct links to the older threads. That could have been different. I think that this is the best way to deal with a "dead horse": Refer the new poster to the place where the issue was discussed. If the poster thinks that he can add something he is free to do so. In this thread, however, all I see is old arguments, or no arguments at all.

That is a lot of firepower. In the original scenario, what would be the best strategy for the Russian player? Should Bill have taken the objectives with force and used his tanks in close quarters? I don't know how he could have taken the force, even if he hadn't lost some of his tanks.

Ouch. That hurts. Let's look at the ups: There will be a lot of explosions in the next turns. Anybody that doesn't like explosions?

If both oponents have the vehicle pack all its contents should be available in QBs. However, remember that existing missions won't change. Unless they were used by the mission designer you won't see the new vehicles.