Jump to content

Parker Schnabel

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Parker Schnabel

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

535 profile views
  1. I'd recommend to read this thread: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/111876-hull-down-spotting-disadvantage/ Ignorance, denial, excusions, then admitting observations of a few strange things over the years - until finally several bugs in spotting mechanism were admitted. And the fanbois have hailed - once again - a bugged functionality... Am I the only one noticing the same in this discussion? I have mentioned a few parameters that could give the shown results some plausibility. We have learned the camouflage effects are not present. But if they are not present, then the results that a
  2. LukeFF, I don't believe that you can improve CM's success with your permanent attacks on customers. The building entering bug, the water fording bug, the QB setup bug and many more. If you would invest more energy in your job as beta tester and less into playing Ghostbusters, maybe you could prevent customers from facing nasty surprises?
  3. You could have presented a few arguments to support the claim, the 79. VGD was destroyed during Wacht am Rhein. Aha, the racist hatred of a chauvinist? But, but your numbers show still lower losses than Alliied losses...Not bad on the tactical level for a failed operation, isn't it? As a tactically interested person I can only admire this effectiveness and combat power. I understand that you try to bring the discussion down by bringing up even German warcrimes to deny their combat power then, because it fits your emotional way to judge things. But I must disappoint you: what deems you f
  4. It's not semantic. A rebuilt is nothing that is secret. You do not admit your logical failure that you brought up a newly set up unit like the 6th army as an absurd argument why 79. VGD was destroyed during Wacht am Rhein. What really counts for the soldiers on the tactical level is (and CM is only about that, you know), if the unit is capable to continue fighting. The 79. VGD division's history shows it kept fighting. So the claim it was destroyed is not only wrong from the operational view, it is even more false from the tactical view. Did the Alliied soldiers that kept fighting it,
  5. Thank you. If I understand this correctly, it would be possible to include for example blown off turrets or much bigger objects as flavor objects, too? Could Kohlenklau place flavor object ships on the "isles" at the Malta coast?
  6. But the 79. VGD was not rebuilt after Bulge. Therefore what was fighting afterwards was the same 79. VGD. This can be hardly called "reappear as a Kampfgruppe": What I know that during Wacht am Rhein the attack on Heiderscheid did not succeed and both sides suffered heavy losses. After the attack on Heiderscheid had failed, the division was defending at the Braunschweig bridgehead for four more weeks (January). Then in February it planfully begun to retreat (you know, destroyed units and retreating...). It was during these weeks of retreat in the Mosel valley, where the highest loss
  7. Can flavor objects be created by customers? If yes, how? Are they restricted in size?
  8. It was written that the 79. Volks-Gren.-Div. was not destroyed. Did I miss something in the discussion? Who wrote the 6. Armee was not destroyed?
  9. Isn't BFC at every opportunity emphasizing loudly that only they know what is good for business, when customers make suggestions? IIRC it was already around December that they had announced that Bulge was developed parallel with Black Sea and therefore that Bulge was claimed to be more or less already almost done and only the artistic finetuning was taking place. Now we are almost three months later, no graphical and atmospheric improvements at all even torwards CMFI can be seen, tactics and realism will not be improved, because the engine will stay the same and one week or so ago we learned,
  10. It could help if camouflaged units would show some kind of - well - camouflage.If this tank has not moved and has such a bonus, then it could be imgined as being hidden under branches and bushes. Especially at night it could happen that one could stand beside it and believe it's a bush. It would be positive, if the behaviour was a result of that bonus. But currently the player has no indication at all, if it's a really cool feature or a bug.
  11. If it was done already it seems to me to be the worst possible point in time, since Vulkan and SPIR-V are about to lift off. First demos from Intel show incredible performance (+50% framerates @50% less driveroverhead). The days of buggy and overall complex OGL and DX drivers forcing developers to implement specific workarounds finally seem to come to an end with this low level multiplatform solution.
  12. Thanks, as a player since CMx1 one probably needs suggestions where to find a mod. A grid overlay is only needed during the turn phase, not permanently like a mod during playback. Since a toggable grid overlay for the terrain is an old and often wished feature among PBEM-players and it is argued it was technically not possible, I wanted to share my idea to use thrown shadows as grid.
  13. Yes, to pinpoint unspotted ATGs to the exact action spot. Really great... Chess vs checkers. Trying to attract checkers players to play chess can only result in losing both in the long term. CM is WAAAY to complex to be attractive for the masses EVER. It will always be a niche product. Chess will also NEVER appeal to the masses. NEVER. One could pump up the graphics of chess and make it look like a FPS, but after the initial spike of shallow interest, it will again only be played by chess players who are not interested in explosions and action, but like the challenge of the mind. The same is
  14. Hi all old CMx1 player here. I registered because I want to share idea for grid overlay:
×
×
  • Create New...