Jump to content

contact wait out

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by contact wait out

  1. Do you have something similar to MOS´s TOC for CMBS in mind where its up to the player to decide how he uses his resources in order to respond to emerging threats on a big map? I don´t think focusing on one map or your idea in general is boring. I´d say go for it
  2. In my first attempt I´ve tried a similar approach and almost all of my vehicles got bogged and immobilized
  3. Hello Ridaz I am a bit late to the party. My account is pretty new but I am no stranger to this place and there are certain reasons why I never was too excited to get a forum membership. Some reasons and individuals we could definitely find in your thread but lets get to the topic . I´ve digged into your idea and to be honest it sounds very interesting. I can´t (and won´t) speak for all of us like others here that think they´re godsent to speak for all of us. But while we at it lets us think his objection through: He states the community dismisses a campaign idea because its surrounding story ends eventually in defeat and claims nobody wants to play this… To be honest this is like not wanting playing the Germans in WW2 from onwards 1943... Ridaz I hope you see how irrational and narrowminded this objection is and we both know that this definitely nothing more than a private opinion wrapped into some -speaking for the community- greatness in order to give it some legitimization. Also kudos that you ignored his further hostile responses and his troll attempt to derail your thread with his cuisine issues frankly nobody cares about. Also I don´t agree with the strange claim that CM and narrative can´t go along. To share my view on this: Watching a playthrough of the CMBN campaign "The Field Where the Poppies Grow" which features great story and characters was what got me into Combat Mission after all. And - surprise, surprise - the campaign was received very well by the community. I think it is from Dragonwynn (which is responsible for some of the best custom campaigns in CM) but perhaps I am wrong. Apologizes to the author/s when I´m giving false credit here. But you should definitely check his outstanding work out. I would even suggest to contact him in order to get some help when you´re ready but at the moment it looks like he isn´t around since months now when he went off due to a relocation project. I hope he is well. I just wanted to let you know that there are definitely guys that back you up on your idea and hope that you and other potential designers won´t get discouraged by some of the stuff here
  4. I didn´t know that this is a concern. We created testing scenarios with huge regiment-sized forces including tons of all module´s units simultaneously and it worked like a charm for us. I understand that it may can cause trouble for some people with older computers however. The more important fact is that it would require lot of coding work. In my opinion having QB mix forces isn´t that important and I agree that there are definitely better things to spent development time on. But please do not remove Syrian air support like one proposed here. Even while we should consider Syrian Air Support just as an extra goodie added due to player request I still had tons of fun calling in and watching those Migs and Sukhois… even so when I ended up on the receiving end . Nevertheless best success for further Combat Mission development. Love CMSF2
  5. Seeing the Starstreak would be fantastic but it requires alot of work and I don´t think the NATO countries that come without AA use them. Perhaps there is an easier solution without the need to create new weapons. The mission editor allows to purchase from every blue or red faction at the same time. I think having something similiar for quick battle "service selection" tab would be great: Extra options called "ALL BLUE FORCES" or "ALL RED FORCES" could be added to this service tab allowing quick battle players to purchase multibranch or multinational forces. The player then could purchase an American stinger for his British forces for example. This would give qb- and multi-players further options without doing harm to TO&E. Nobody wants to go full crazy with that (except you and your opponent want this to happen) but you can still play the usual British- or NATO-only or what you have negotiated with your opponent but furthermore could agree that American stinger teams are authorized. This allows players to have possible Syrian air intervention but also for possible British and NATO anti air defenses. What do you guys think?
  • Create New...