Jargotn

The difference is that in the west there is a lot of media with lots of opinions. If you look at Fox and compare it to other western channels (Let's say BBC) you'll see that they voice a very different opinion. Thats something that is very important for a free society.
 
Also, Fox is being accused for biased reporting by (alomst)  everyone. I don't see general distrust against something like RT. Thats the difference between "The west" and Russia.
 
Without a doubt the USA is an extremely powerfull country. However, I don't think that it is fair to call everyone who sees themselves as allies sattelites. Look at Germany. During the Lybian crysis, when the UN security council decided whether or not to get involved, Germany did not support the resolution. If they were an american sattelite, would they openly oppose American interests?
 
Many western countries don't support the US and its politics because the US controls them. They support them because they share the same values. If you have the same goals you tend to stick together.

Psss! You are spoiling the surprise for everyone that didn't need the manual!
 
But that is correct. To verify:
 
Micro-UAVs can not be attacked by SAMs, but can be attacked by AAA fire. (This includes the russian ZALA drone and the american Raven)
 
Medium UAVs can be attacked by both AAA and SAMs. (this includes the american Shadow and the russian Pchela-1T)
 
The large US-UAV can't be attacked while observing. They can be attacked while conducting a strike (Not observing, which I falsely claimed) mission by both AAA and SAMs. (The gray eagle is our large UAV)
 
The russian large UAV can be attacked while observing (Orlan-10)
 
The gray eagle is the only UAV that is armed.
 
Also, be aware that the "micro, medium, large" order is not official. Thats how I remember it.
 
Edit: Fixed lack of sleep. Thanks, Vanir!

Fixed that for you

Take a look at this thread:
 
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/112866-status-update-on-black-sea/
 
You'll find the first version of the story in Steves post.

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.

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.

Not gonna happen. Battlefront said that they won't put CM on steam and they'll say it again. Search the forum for details.
 
If you try to start an argument why it is better to publish CM on Steam be prepared. Unless you yourself have a long and succesfull history of publishing games you won't be able to argue with Steve.
 
My honest advice is to just forget it. You'll save yourself from a lot of trouble.

Question for quantifying this subject.  One big item that is the core of a Steam argument for BF is the size of the Steam community. I have not really seen a large number of people coming here saying I heard about this game from another discussion group on Steam, wondered why that might be considering we are comparing CM to other games a fair amount here.  I tried to find a way to see if there was some type of quantifiable numbers we could at least agree to.
 
So far this is all I have. Can someone who is more familiar with data collecting at Steam maybe fill in some?
 
Battlefront forum membership as of today 36,253 - Granted that is more than just CM folks, but everyone here sees all the same forums so they'd at least have CM exposure.
CMBS Thread count as some kind of indication of activity - now this is a game announced last year but not yet released. 139 topics  Red thunder 1,675, CMFI 2013, CMBN 10.920
 
On Steam
Steam- Close Combat - this is a released game on steam looks to be about June of last year, thread count 209.
Slitherine group which covers all their games - 959 members it is a new group started only November last year.
 
 
Matrix games forum 8,834 active members (not sure what defines active)
I don't think this is representative, but not sure where I might find something showing a better perspective.
 
What am I missing?
 
What I am trying to do is show some quantifiable way of making this not just another argument that goes no where and recurs every 6 months with no real progress to it.  Steve states his reasons for not wanting to go to steam, other folks say those are old tired arguments and that there is this huge potential in steam, but no ones seems to really be able to prove anything one way or the other.  The numbers above at face value say, sorry this community is already larger and more active than a comparable community on steam.  Maybe that is true, maybe it isn't.  Can a Steam aficionado point me in the right direction for better numbers?

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.

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.

m0317624 (and likeminded),
 
I barely know what Steam is, have never used it and have no dog in this hunt. That said, though you're coming off badly (and are drawing heavy fire inconsequence), I believe you really are coming from a god place; that your intention is to help. Unfortunately for you, the examples you offer as "proof" aren't necessarily broadly applicable. If any firm falls under that rubric, it's BFC. Recall, not only did BFC conceive and develop, on a very slender shoestring, a revolutionary wargame, CMx1's CMBO, but it simultaneously pioneered a revolutionary way of marketing that game. BFC has thrived where many others wargame firms have foundered and sunk, or have simply vanished. It survived an imploding economy. It survived a painful and expensive outing in brick and mortar land, and it came back determined never to go there again. There was also, I believe, a fiasco in which CMSF (?) was rushed to release because of contractual obligations. BFC absolutely doesn't and won't do that anymore. Steve has repeatedly made it clear that BFC, unlike EA some years ago which, despite its vast resources (millions) was nearly destroyed by one bad decision (all eggs in one basket dropped; bad for eggs), yet survived, simply can't afford to be wrong.
 
We can have opinions and argue them until the end of Time, but BFC must ever weigh the risks against the gains, and we, too, must hope Steve et al. continue to make wise business decisions. Saying, in essence, "BFC is like a dinosaur which won't adapt and dooms itself to extinction" seems, to me, to be a huge overstretch. I guarantee you that some very sharp and highly motivated (like to eat, have a place to live, etc.) people keep a gimlet eye on everything pertinent in their industry. BFC has learned the hard way that giving up control is likely a business killer. And what if BFC did go with Steam, but then there's some upheaval which fundamentally alters, disrupts or even destroys Steam? What then? How bright would that business decision have been--as seen from bankruptcy court?! As it stands, BFC creates the product, BFC handles and ships the product, so BFC isn't losing a huge chunk of revenue to layers of middlemen, nor do its products suffer the ignominy of the $5 clearance bin. In fact, CMBO is still for sale at a very respectable $15--for a game released in 2000! There are still people playing it--and new ones discovering the game and buying it.
 
BFC isn't a PC but a Mac (smaller production, but high quality and higher profit margin); it isn't GM but Rolls Royce; it's not Wonder Bread but artisanal bread, to give but a few examples. I can't speak to the useful gaming life of what's on Steam, but I will say that the overwhelming feedback from our members who play many games and of various sorts is that nothing touches CM when it comes to entertainment value and duration per dollar spent. And BFC gives away the demos so people don't have to make the outlays you find so objectionable blind; so they can determine, for themselves, whether this game is for them. Why is it that people don't bat an eye for a $70 FPS which has a play through time of, say, 14 hours, but gag over spending $105.00 (discounted from $135.00 if purchased separately) for the complete CMBN (v 3.12), including CW and MG, yet can play the latter pretty much forever? Which, I ask, is the more cost effective outlay? Nor is it safe to assert that because CM isn't on Steam, that no one knows about it, therefore can't possibly buy the game. In addition to game mags and game sites, which run game reviews and interviews with Steve about every pending CM release, there's this thing called YouTube and some other means called Twitch. ChrisND has done a great deal to raise CM's profile, and people searching for WW II computer games will find goodies like these served up. And ChrisND isn't the only one.
 
1716 views--for a game still in Beta!


 
5250 views


 
4956 views


 
7234 views
 

 
Nor does it follow that these are the same gamers watching these diverse games. Quite the opposite. Gamers very definitely have preferences, some quite emphatic. And for every person who sees one of these vids, how many additional positive marketing events result when someone shares what was seen? Word of mouth advertising is incredibly powerful, and social media have only made it more so. And what you need to realize is that because of its business model, BFC doesn't need massive sales in order to prosper. Would they be nice to have? Sure, but BFC is niche marketing, rather than trying to sell everyone MoH, Halo, GoW or the latest MMORPG for that matter. BFC's business model works for BFC and, by extension, us. BFC has no suicidal impulse at work here in avoiding Steam, and if it needs to change how it does what it does, it will do so and for good, solid reasons based on an intimate understanding of BFC.

On a whimsical note, what's next? A debate on who played Hammurabi via Time Shared acoustic modem first?!
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

Not gonna happen. Battlefront said that they won't put CM on steam and they'll say it again. Search the forum for details.
 
If you try to start an argument why it is better to publish CM on Steam be prepared. Unless you yourself have a long and succesfull history of publishing games you won't be able to argue with Steve.
 
My honest advice is to just forget it. You'll save yourself from a lot of trouble.

I'll light a candle for you.
 
 

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?

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?