.jpg.33bfb9df823cd0ec57b1f33d1eceacce.jpg)
lapdog33
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by lapdog33
-
-
21 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:
I bought the Commonwealth module to try my hand at the British forces, and they definitely play differently from the US "easy mode" army
The Brits play like the worst of the German army (slow firing rifles, lack of proper platoon based mortar - what do you mean you only brought 12 rounds for this 50mm popcorn launcher?) combined with the worst of the US army (weak, slow, myopic WW1 style tanks). Add to that slow artillery call times, and you have the recipe for a good challenge.
The bren gun is pretty good though and especially the bren carrier is the queen of the battlefield.
The included campaign Scottish Corridor also has many good battles (and some less good, but let's focus on the positives here).
true brits are different but in my view its safer to jump from BN vanila to CMFI or even better CMBS , you get something much more different when you take into account everything
-
2 hours ago, IanL said:
Ah, huhh?!? Am I missing something? Why are you here if you don't like these games? It is totally your prerogative if you don't like them it just seems strange that you would post here if you don't enjoy these games.
i do like this game, i probably have 1000 hours in it, but for someone who is not sure what to buy, he shouldnt focus on 1 theatre with modules since changes are far less noticable than those in completely different theatres and most maps do not feel real. as i said ofc unless he is fanatical worshiper of ss or american army in cmbs or russians or whatever, he should go wide instead of trying to build up one game.
even if i like the game, maps,bugs, and lack of features/visuals are facts and it all relates to this thread since hes deciding how to approach buying the games. for example if there were vast amounts of details in BN dlcs , had the game less abstracted things which would be able to visualize in those modules, then perhaps they would be a good choice. this way you are just buying more of the same and failing to see whats up in CMBS or FB for example since money is a key factor at the present moment
also quoting 7% of my text is NOT a good choice
-
On 11/2/2016 at 9:57 PM, c3k said:
Yes, the ratio of the number of programmers to the game quality is the best in the industry, IMO. (There are some very talented artists, as well.) I don't keep count of these things, but I'd be amazed if BFC has more than a dozen folks on payroll (either employees or contracted).
It's amazing (from the Beta side of things) how rapidly issues get corrected, once identified and verified. (The fix may not get released right away due to the desire to have fewer but better patches to keep the number of game versions down.) I cannot imagine the daily work schedule going on behind the scenes.
Ken
: D
-
i was about to write 10 000 suggestions but then i remmebered that steve would implement only 2 per year
-
modules are worst choice. for example in bn modules you get one hundread quick battle maps u will never play.out of those 100, only 10 are decent. formations are (regardless of historical accruracy which is subject for itself) boring in a way that everything is similar. there are very little unique ambient/atmosphere things in modules to justify those formations being "a must".
if u are fanatic about waffen SS or luftwafe, yes buy cmbn modules
my recomendation would be to stick to base games , whatever you choose. after 1 month every choice will seem like a bad choice
i'd go for cmbs right now, its in good shape after 1.04 patch, then i'd go for cmFB, its winter soon
-
maps are bad. try playing on maps that have more grass and heavy woods,trees and lots of bushes, difference is noticable. 90% of maps in cmbs are lacking grass/bushes so the cover is considerably reduced. tank crew set to normal would help too
try Ambush map, from a scenario, its maybe even best cmbs map in the game. do not bother with QB maps (maybe few work)
-
would it be probable in real life (on the front) that a typical russian platoon with lets say 3x infantry squads and hq thing be modified into a sort of ad hoc style platoon for untold amount of time like 1x atgm team , 2x inf squads reduced to 60% strenght and 3x Lmg teams + 1 sniper team
now i am not trying to ask is this latter combination probable or not , but is the change of that kind of situational formaton or ad hoc style probable. for example if they have deficit of ak 74s and have sufficit of pkps, or they expect large armoured attack , would they consider modifying the platoon by adding 1 or 2 atgm crews/teams. how likely and easy are those transitions/changes and how do the platoon in question interacts with company and battalion hqs/ leaders
how does that interact with rigid military formations and desire for clean numbers ,logistics etc. what is more desireable on operational sort of way
what does prevail more, robotic paper formations in cmbs qb screen or situational formations, when can we expect to see the former more and when the latter
also , when defending what kind of formation defends, for example a battalion needs to send part of itself to a nearby 1km2 village and its outskirts, what composition is likely?
-
3 hours ago, Sublime said:
Kino- it may not be doctrine however and plus the ppl would complain their squads had no leader. instead of all but the leader leaves i think detaching a scout element is the best solution. you can use them to scout or for bmps.
Theres rlly no way to make everyone happy ajd a ui addition just for cmdr to stay would be a huge waste when we could have say an atgm use only toggle. or follow vehicles. or hull down. or shoot n scoot.
yes, theres just one problem with that
we wont have atgm use only toggle , follow vehicles, hull down, shoot and scoot simply because adding that is too hard for bfc and requires actual effort on their part so they just might aswell add non existant spoter in btr/ boost spotting to compensate the vehicle/s . i am sure its much easier than those things you mentioned,
i think its perhaps even easier than beating russians under 7 minutes with US army and losing only 2 tanks + 1 immobolized out of 10 , without APS
-
2 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yup. I'm done with it. My patience has worn out, especially because all of this fuss is apparently some wildly out-of-proportion reaction to something that happened long ago and wasn't even appropriate at the time. Petty nonsense like this is definitely a distraction and serves no purpose other than diminishing his own value in the eyes of fellow forum members.
Jammersix, you have repeatedly shown yourself (in this thread and others) to be in gross violation of the Forum rules, specifically those which pertain to Axe Grinding and Trolling. This is a formal warning.
Steve
i agree with you,mister
-
8 hours ago, sburke said:
damn that avatar looks reaallly familiar, but I can't put my finger on where I saw it. Is that a famous statue or something? Some great leader of infinite wisdom perhaps? Maybe a really great brewer?
Oh wait for some reason I am suddenly feeling a little vertigo...
i am your alter ego. everything is fine T.
-
2 hours ago, lapdog33 said:
i am central european time, its 8;22pm here. i duuno if i am 8 hours ahead or behind
seems i am ahead 9 hours, so 1am your time is 10 am my time, i think we can arrange something. i could play as early as 8am (11 pm your time)
-
19 hours ago, eniced73 said:
I am game to try real time. What time zone are you? I am in PA. Computer time is usually any night from 1100pm to 1am.
i am central european time, its 8;22pm here. i duuno if i am 8 hours ahead or behind
-
Looking for opponentS (more than 1) for cmbs and CMSF
pbem,wego Turn based ,real time, all is played
3-10 turns per day
-
since patch is out ,perhaps there are some people that would like to play some multiplayer battle?
since patch is out
-
why doesnt republican guard/paratroopers have bulletproof or some kind of vest. game takes place in 2008. i think, anyone got some articles/sources that justify this decision by bfc
-
how much would you ask for it , in Dollars/euros
-
looking for pbem/wego/real time opponentS (More than 1) . CMBS and CMSF. any skll range will work
2-10turns per day (IF pbem). if we are playing wego then 1/4 of battle in 1 day at least and if we are playing real time then whole battle in 1 day
would preffer smaller battles tiny,small or medium (IF CMSF cos theres no quick battles, then we can make a scenario really fast and easy,using existing maps and using our troops,works very well)
-
looking for opponents for CMBS and CMSF ,any of those 2 will do , not interested in World war 2 atm
Game modes:
1) PBEM (4-8 turns/day) 8 is max , 4 minimum. does not need to be that strict, but basically that should be the average
2)WEGO turn based (can save and continue next day/whenever, no need to play whole battle in 1 day). cmon give wego a chance
3)Real time battles (CMSF doesnt have wego)
each game mode is fun and works, just change how you approach the battle
i'd preffer americans
-
1 hour ago, Muzzleflash1990 said:
The issue with the Russian vehicles, is that the squad leader is also the commander. Whether or not he dismounts various in RL, but in game he is always part of the dismount squad. This means, if you disembark your infantry squad from a BMP, you are left without a commander to man the good spotting equipment. This does not happen with the Bradley where there is a dedicated commander, part of the vehicle crew, but not the dismount squad. What some do with russian IFV/APC, is split two guys off (it is not possible to only split off one) from the squad and keep them in the vehicle, but then you are left with only 4 dismounted soldiers.
I just played a QB, where I had a 2 man sniper team in my BMP-3. They spotted an infantry squad to the front, and engaged with the BMP-3 bow machine guns. Unfortunately, they did not manage to inform the gunner of the vehicle about the position of the enemy, before a javelin struck.
so if you had a squad leader that comes with a vehicles, he wouldve alerted the crew?
i mean is squad leader the best option or any team would do
-
5 minutes ago, Muzzleflash1990 said:
@lapdog33 do you remember to keep some extra crew in the russian vehicles to help spot?
i heard about that improvisation, will try to use it but isnt bmp3 3man crew (in game it has 2 guys ) yet strykers which have 2 crew members have better spotting
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
Heh... well, I guess that is because I published a rough draft before the full changes were known. Oops
I'll fix that.
This is a standard disclaimer that comes with all patches/upgrades. We have no control over what people do for Mods and that means we can't be sure they will work. We've had instances of problems in the past (in particular with Hotkeys) and people say "this is broken!" and we say "try it without your mods".
Yes. All generic changes are always applied across all titles eventually.
You'll have to be more specific than that.
Steve
while i was writing that post i did not have 1.04 installed but since i did not see any concrete mentioning of russian optics/spoting i figured nothing changed
Literally the main issue with CMBS and maybe only really bad thing that makes me think weather to play CMBS or not is Spoting of Russian APCs , IFVs and MBts
ive been playing CMSF today and t62 /72 can immidatelly spot abrams m1a2 or m1 ,or any vehicle that pops in front of it 50-100 meters away
(surely t62 doesnt have better optics/observation than t90A/AM?)
in CMBS (Pre 1.04 patch) t90 would need 1-3 seconds to spot moving abrams while it was stationary and would usually get rekt by abrams cos abrams have considerably better fire controll system or whatever its called, it can hit before you blink
Now after i have installed CMBS 1.04 patch, something changed. i duuno if i am halucinating or not but i ve tested it about 40 times various positions and commands but Abrams tank actually on average, spots slower. lets say its equal, theres room for roullete always. (armour is far superior and fire controll, but thats ok)
NOTE: even tho this is a pleasant surprise , i noticed that in CMBS vehicles tend to spot objects 1-4 seconds later (literally even if its sits infront of them, this is regardless of patch) than vehicles in CMSF.
did you change anything to improve Russian MBT spoting?
i still havent tested IFVS and APCS so i have no idea are russians still high on weed and blindfolded when they need to spot US vehicles
-
any chance that russian spotting is fixed?
I'll fix that.
I Have No Idea What to Buy
in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
Posted
theres a much better name for that. for example you can call it twisting the context of my message and cherry picking sentences in order to present it in different light. but whatever you are the smartest guy on the world, ofcourse after stevey boy.
no need to tell me that i just lied about you thinking you are 2nd smartest guy in the world
we all know that you are 4th smartest guy on this planet