8outof8 Video Commentary Review

[sburke]

Wait, so Eastern front is a family and these are games:

Bagration (Summer 1944 - Spring 1945)

Kursk (Summer 1943 - Spring 1944)

Case Blue (Summer 1942 - Spring 1943)

Barbarossa (Summer 1941 - Spring 1942)

and each of these will have separate modules (let's say each three modules)?

That would make it 4x55$+4x3x35= 640$ for someone who would want to enjoy the whole eastern front?

No. Eastern Front is a theater. Bagration for example is a family. BFs definitions are quite clear though I understand your point. By the same token though you could have included CMFI, CMBN and the Bulge family and just said they are all ww2 compared to the more modern CMSF. Best to stick with BF's definitions to avoid confusion.

PS for a comparison you may want to look at the Where Eagles Dare/Devils Cauldron duo boardgames $320 for the pair and you get one campaign only.

[sfhand]

...

Fortunately we don't charge $200 for "one" game Though there's nothing stopping us doing that if we wanted to...Steve

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I almost wish you would, just once; the reaction from those who complained about the $5 Vista patch would almost be worth it...

I would like to say I was wrong. I was one who supported the development of moveable waypoints and so far haven't seen much of a need to use them (maybe this will change with time), however, I think it is all your fault, you've conditioned me to play the game without them. It was really sneaky the way you did that, and I'm sure you've done the same with the horrible camera controls that I use very comfortably.

My new crusade is going to be installing FPS camera controls. Other games use them really well. Until you put FPS camera controls in, the game will not attract new players who are used to running and jumping (spacebar should be mapped to this) around the battlefield!

The cloud shadows rolling by is a nice subtle touch, btw (please don't tell me they've been in since CM:SF and I just haven't noticed until now).

The night bright switch is a welcomed addition too, and I haven't played a night battle yet, but I do remember trying to do so during the daytime (in reality not in game) and not being able to see what the heck was going on.

[sburke]

Personally, I haven't fired up CMBN for a very long time. It just feels too much like work. So much of the instant feedback from CMx1 has been removed. Now you have to go searching for information which used to be right there.

When CMSF was released we were told to "get used to it". That didn't make it less cumbersome. Whereas CMx1 was a joy to fire up and get into a battle, CMx2 is much more irksome.

It really would be terrific if instead of the really defensive tone there could be more of an open minded attitude to issues that really are a problem, whether the more experienced player would like to ackowledge it or not. A great many of the issues raised in the video would really help the CM series if they were dealt with, and dealt with in a more timely manner. And again, with all due respects to resources, comprehensive tool tips, as an extreme example, are not a huge drain on resources.

Depends on how you define "open minded", "defensive" etc. If by open minded you mean willing to discuss, that is one thing. If by open minded you mean willingness to agree with you, that is quite another. What I usually find from the folks who throw the term fanboy (and no I do not mean you) is they don't want discussion, they want agreement. They are in fact less open minded than anyone though they continue to use the term as if they aren't the close minded party.

You feel CMx2 is more work. That I would agree with. The game is simply more complex than CMx1. I think we could all agree that is pretty much fact. However how you deal with that delves in to the world of opinion. I happen to disagree with many of the criticisms of the game. I do not have an issue with camera controls, the graphics, the UI etc. Barbed wire is currently still a bug issue, hopefully to be fixed shortly. I do like many of the additions in version 2 (like an armored covered arc) but I don't neccessarily think all of them were needed. I do however understand that BF for some odd reason caters to a larger audience than just me and that my thinking is purely my own opinion. I only wish others who are more critical of the game would take the same approach instead of trying to ram their opinion based on wanting it to be more like CMx1 (or some other wargame that I am not even interested in trying a demo of) down our collective throats.

I think that most of us even if sometimes bitchy are really gratefull for the things you do and how you do them and most of the subtle hate is actually frustration that the game shapes in a different way that particular whiner is imagining his perfect game most of the time overreacting over flaws and lack of features thinking it will have more impact that way. ...in that way i percieve the "civilised" whiners with more respect as those brown-nosed fanboys.

hmmmm the problem is we usually get called fanboys when reacting to those over the top dumb ass poorly thought out "the game is totally ruined" criticisms. The "civilized" whiners can also include many of us who have been termed "fanboys". We just keep our criticisms and wishlists within the realm of "this would be cool if you could" or "I think this might be an issue" and then provide at least something with hard data to establish a starting point. We trust BF to do what is within the realm of possible and within the scope of their longer term plans which we are not privy to. That trust has been rewarded time and again and lately in spectacular fashion. I see no reason to expect anything different from them going forward and am content to have a non ranting tirade exchange of views with them and anyone else interested in that. Are there things I still want in the game? Hell yeah. Ditches, 20/37/40 mm AAA guns in a ground role, tank riders, mouse hole charges, subterranean movement, true non movement firing including for the AI, elevation restrictions for armored vehicles and on and on. I doubt my wishlist will ever be clear. The more BF does, the more I will want. What I do know is they don't usually disagree with us what they would like in the game (though sometimes they do and in those cases unless you can convince them otherwise you just gotta accept them as final arbiter), they just have a better idea what may be possible when and hence the trust factor. BF will do it when they feel they can do it right and not one release earlier. Our own impatience is what usually gets the better of us.

[Bison]

Personally I just wish the patch cost was passed on with the release of the next CMBN module. I'd rather pay the money and know that its packaged fully functional in a released module where you get both the content and the engine upgrade. But that's just me, I'd rather have 3 installs instead of 4 regardless of how small or "painless" they are.

I also don't see any issue with a civil discussion about the game whether it's mechanics, pricing or how its been determined to release the game by Battlefront.

For example I'd rather that Battlefront had a single WW2 CM base game with 9 module expansions than 3 seperate released base games. (I know thats not going to happen just using an example) Unfortunately I think that on a developer board (not just here) the player base becomes overly defensive of criticism. And in the end hurts new or perspective players more than a poor review.

Anyway I'm having fun with all of my CMX2 games. Although I do wish that the engine upgrades could be worked into CMSF too. I'd love to have movable waypoints to reroute my Strykers.

[Rocky Balboa]

I also don't see any issue with a civil discussion about the game whether it's mechanics, pricing or how its been determined to release the game by Battlefront.

........ Unfortunately I think that on a developer board (not just here) the player base becomes overly defensive of criticism. And in the end hurts new or perspective players more than a poor review.

I think the level of civility in this thread has been pretty restrained at least somewhat less than the apparent arrogance and exasperation exhibited by the reviewer in his video.

Anyway I'm having fun with all of my CMX2 games. Although I do wish that the engine upgrades could be worked into CMSF too. I'd love to have movable waypoints to reroute my Strykers.

I would like to see CMSF art and data ported to the CMx2 engine as well and I would expect to pay considerably more than $10.00 for that upgrade.

[Bison]

I would like to see CMSF art and data ported to the CMx2 engine as well and I would expect to pay considerably more than $10.00 for that upgrade.

Oh yeah. I'd pay for module price for the upgrades easily.

[Erwin]

I find it amazing that after all the gameplay value we get from just one CM title that people are still complaining about the price.

Compare it to all those other mediocre and even good games that cost as much and more and may barely last a few weeks on one's computer before one is done with them.

It's embarrassing that we continually and repetitively make BF justify themselves regarding their price points. BF could have written a routine to auto-reply to many of these posts since we've seen em so many, many times.

I know that I am in a minority here, but I would prefer to pay MORE... but have an entire game family available (even though releases would be much less frequent) - kinda like we had with the CM1 games.

My concern with the way CM2 is being marketed is that I feel burned out on a "family" by the time another module is released.

However, in any other way one calculates it, CM prices are VERY reasonable and xnt value considering what a player gets in return.

[ChrisND]

With all this "glass half full" talk I am now obliged to post this:

http://what-if.xkcd.com/6/

[sburke]

I know that I am in a minority here, but I would prefer to pay MORE... but have an entire game family available (even though releases would be much less frequent) - kinda like we had with the CM1 games.

My concern with the way CM2 is being marketed is that I feel burned out on a "family" by the time another module is released.

However, in any other way one calculates it, CM prices are VERY reasonable and xnt value considering what a player gets in return.

I think over the next year that problem will be remedied as you have CMBN/CMFI/CM Bagration and a new Modern Era CM game plus modules flooding through your computer.

Hell I am still working on CMBN and have only played a handful of games of CW module material yet.

[Battlefront.com]

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I almost wish you would, just once; the reaction from those who complained about the $5 Vista patch would almost be worth it...

Heh... that would be a hoot

My new crusade is going to be installing FPS camera controls. Other games use them really well. Until you put FPS camera controls in, the game will not attract new players who are used to running and jumping (spacebar should be mapped to this) around the battlefield!

Yes. The plan is to have three choices:

FPS

RTS

Classic (i.e. pretty much what we have now)

And of course customization within those paradigms. The reason for this is FPS and RTS controls are not the same, yet we have RTS guys telling us their way is best and FPS guys telling us their way is best. Though both camps agree on one thing... everybody else's preferred way to play sucks

Personally I just wish the patch cost was passed on with the release of the next CMBN module. I'd rather pay the money and know that its packaged fully functional in a released module where you get both the content and the engine upgrade. But that's just me, I'd rather have 3 installs instead of 4 regardless of how small or "painless" they are.

We do intend on an Arnhem/Upgrade bundle. Not only a single product to download and install, but $5 knocked off the price. Win-win for you, I'm sure!

I think the level of civility in this thread has been pretty restrained at least somewhat less than the apparent arrogance and exasperation exhibited by the reviewer in his video.

I agree. There's plenty of people here who have said "hey, the guy has some good points even if it's not presented very well". I don't see that as defensive, I see it as constructive criticism. Anybody who makes a living from being a critic should be subjected to criticism as well. Constructive criticism, anyway, is designed to help improve.

I would like to see CMSF art and data ported to the CMx2 engine as well and I would expect to pay considerably more than $10.00 for that upgrade.

I wish it were that simple. The game has moved on SO MUCH since then I don't think we can make any of the original scenarios work, and if we did the balancing could be quite "off the mark". There are other things which you guys aren't aware of, such as the trees for CMSF being made using a different rendering system, so they will all have to be redone (and that is stupidly time consuming), different methods for LOD handling, etc.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Wait, so Eastern front is a family and these are games:

Bagration (Summer 1944 - Spring 1945)

Kursk (Summer 1943 - Spring 1944)

Case Blue (Summer 1942 - Spring 1943)

Barbarossa (Summer 1941 - Spring 1942)

and each of these will have separate modules (let's say each three modules)?

As stated, Eastern Front is broken up into 4 different Families, each with probably 2x Modules and lots of Packs.

That would make it 4x55$+4x3x35= 640$ for someone who would want to enjoy the whole eastern front?

Yup, that's about right. I always find it fun to see someone thinking there is some sort of standard for the Eastern Front being covered all in one $45 game. What's the logic behind this? Because it's all on the same front? Well, why not expect a $45 game for all of WW2 because it's all in the same war? Oooo... wait! How about all warfare of all time as one game because, when you get right down too it, all war is a continuation of the wars that came before it!

We base our decisions on what content is covered, and when it is covered, on what we think our economic return is going to be. That's one of the silly things about for profit companies... we aren't charities. So far we're pretty happy with the model we have set up. As stated above, we are a healthy and sustainable company with the ability for careful and limited growth. We're not rich by any reasonable standard, so obviously we're not over charging.

We told everybody back in 2005, officially, several things about the CMx2 concept. The two relevant ones are:

1. We way undercharged for CMx1 games. Especially CMBB, because despite what Eastern Front fanatics think... not the biggest group of gamers out there. In fact, by the looks of it I'd say Fortress Italy and Shock Force 2 will each sell as well as any one Eastern Front Base Game. We do, however, expect higher Module and Pack sales for Eastern Front content relative to the Base Game sales. Eastern Front fanatics are, after all, fanatics

2. The focus is on quality instead of quantity. Quality always costs more item for item than quantity approach. Someone that values quantity over quality can continue playing CMx1. We're no longer interested in that approach, and the vast majority of our customers are also done with it.

As an example. All that content listed above is about 5 years worth of development by roughly 5 people full time and about that many part time. If you think there's enough Eastern Front fanatics to pay for all that development work with a mere $45 purchase... well, there's a bridge I'd like to sell you. It's in NYC, but I promise you it's a beauty.

Steve

[z1812]

Well, why not expect a $45 game for all of WW2 because it's all in the same war? Oooo... wait! How about all warfare of all time as one game because, when you get right down too it, all war is a continuation of the wars that came before it!

Steve

When will it be ready? At $45.00, I presume future upgrades will be included as new conflicts and wars breakout. Otherwise it's too pricey.

[Battlefront.com]

Forgot this one. It's fun to recover this old beaten path every once and a while, so here goes...

The underlying complaint is that the game engine hasn't moved on as much as it should have.

I hear this from time to time, but never heard what this is based on. I mean, what other highly detailed tactical 3D wargames are there that shows we're not improving as fast as we "should be"? It's interesting that nobody considers that, given the market size and technical requirements of servicing it, we are improving things as fast as we "can be".

While noting the reduced resources available the evolution of the engine is sluggish.

Matches our customer base

For example, tool tips. The experienced CMx2 player might scoff at that, but for newcomers the interface is nt exactly optimal.

Noted. But if we have to tell the customers we know we have, who have been paying our bills, that we are going to nuke a few of their most favored improvements so we can tell someone that the thing that looks like a MG42 is, in fact, a MG42... well... I'd expect worse threads than this one

Still, we're getting to the point where we can add stuff to the game that isn't central to the game itself. Like the ability to bind hotkeys from within the game instead of a TXT file. The dialogs to handle sorting and deleting files isn't exactly what I would call a hardcore gamer feature either.

Personally, I haven't fired up CMBN for a very long time. It just feels too much like work. So much of the instant feedback from CMx1 has been removed. Now you have to go searching for information which used to be right there.

When CMSF was released we were told to "get used to it". That didn't make it less cumbersome. Whereas CMx1 was a joy to fire up and get into a battle, CMx2 is much more irksome.

Each to his own, of course. There are plenty of customers who can't play CMx1 now because it feels like a hollow shell from a gameplay and immersion standpoint. Granted, I too would like to have CMx2 be friendlier to nOoBs. We're getting there.

It really would be terrific if instead of the really defensive tone there could be more of an open minded attitude to issues that really are a problem, whether the more experienced player would like to ackowledge it or not. A great many of the issues raised in the video would really help the CM series if they were dealt with, and dealt with in a more timely manner.

This is one of the lamest, most tired comments posted by the "I want it NOW and don't tell me why I can't have it NOW" mentalities. We aren't defensive at all. We love constructive criticism since that's how we make our games better. What we don't need is...

And again, with all due respects to resources, comprehensive tool tips, as an extreme example, are not a huge drain on resources.

people who have never made CM, or probably any game of any sort, holding us to arbitrary standards which have no relation to reality.

No, too tips aren't a huge drain on resources. They are a drain, though, and if we do that particular feature then we don't do another one. What you would be willing to give up for tool tips another person would rather not give up. Which means your own personal pet peeve list is not the Word Of God to be judged by. If you can understand that then maybe you will understand better why it is we have have to prioritize what we do and when since we can't possibly add 1000 new features each year.

If our most vocal overly critical customers understood the concept of humility a bit more then maybe we wouldn't have to come across as so "defensive". After all, if customers weren't so damned sure they knew our business better than we know it, we wouldn't have to tell them differently. Because, fact is, they don't.

Steve

[eltorrente]

I can see both sides of this discussion.

I'm in game development, also, and have been for well over a decade now. I work on "mainstream" action games and have been on many different projects. I know what it's like to be in the trenches at crunch time, and during long dev periods where everyone is working on a common goal for a complicated project.

People always say stuff like, "why didn't they just do THIS", "I can't believe they didn't do THAT", as if noone on the dev team ever thought about that and decided to leave features out on purpose just for the hell of it.

The smallest thing, no matter how seemingly easy, affects the production schedule in one way or another. It takes iteration and testing and coding to make the simplest thing work. You decide to steer in another direction for a bit to get some feature in, and the rest of the team is often affected in some way. The programmer/designer/animator or whoever could be working on something more critical, or maybe someone else needs to be hired with specific skills, which costs money.

Unless you've actually been on a game project, you can't really know how "easy" this or that is to just throw in the game and make it work. The best teams are the ones who stick to a schedule and don't constantly deviate every time someone has some bright idea - otherwise the project runs long and money starts running out, then it gets rushed out the door and has all sorts of issues.

All this being said, however, most dev teams do read forums and reviews and gather information about common complaints and wish lists and what not, and takes note. It's then discussed in a future production meeting, and maybe gets placed on a prioritized to-do list for some point in the future - if deemed important enough.

I personally think this game is really awesome, but isn't perfect - and BF knows this better than we do. I'd love to see some tool tips and UI work. Volume sliders. Scroll bars for menus and stuff like that - but ultimately the game is realistic and fun and is only going to get better.

[ridethe415]

That would make it 4x55$+4x3x35= 640$ for someone who would want to enjoy the whole eastern front?

As Steve said this would be over five years. All things considered, this is an extremely cheap hobby. We're talking $120 a year.

My other hobbies; photography and cycling, are financial black holes.

[Chek]

I'm utterly self centred when it comes to BFCs time.

I don't want them wasting time on something I have no problem with especially when it could be spent on content.

That list of Russian front releases makes me weak at the knees just thinking about it,dare I wish for such things!

$640 can I give it to you now?

[Battlefront.com]

I'm in game development, also, and have been for well over a decade now.

Always nice to see someone who knows what he's talking about, er, talk about it

The best teams are the ones who stick to a schedule and don't constantly deviate every time someone has some bright idea - otherwise the project runs long and money starts running out, then it gets rushed out the door and has all sorts of issues.

(cough-Duke Nukem-cough)

The other common outcome is the game company going bust or the team getting sacked. In my days of Working For The Man I saw the latter happen. While nearly all the employees were retained and put on other projects, we had a huge budget black mark on our division. Our Master Overseers were kind enough to let the rest of us keep doing what we were doing, but now had to cover the failed project's development cost. The game I was producing (and therefore financially responsible for) suddenly had a 50% (IIRC) increase in it's budget, all of that increase already spent. Which meant we would ultimately be judged profitable if we covered the failed team's game. We did cover it and then some, thankfully. Then the Master Overseers killed the whole division 7 years later, despite it being profitable. It wasn't profitable enough, apparently.

Oh, the fun of corporate development meetings. I don't miss 'em!

All this being said, however, most dev teams do read forums and reviews and gather information about common complaints and wish lists and what not, and takes note. It's then discussed in a future production meeting, and maybe gets placed on a prioritized to-do list for some point in the future - if deemed important enough.

Yup. This is the best place to get ideas. Worst place to get prioritization tips.

I personally think this game is really awesome, but isn't perfect - and BF knows this better than we do.

Holy crap yes we do! What you guys probably don't understand is I'm still waiting to get features into Combat Mission 2012 that I envisioned back in 1997. Yet you guys don't see me whining and complaining about having to watch 11 releases over 14 years go by without my pet favorites getting in, do you? Nope! Only Charles gets to see that

I'd love to see some tool tips and UI work. Volume sliders. Scroll bars for menus and stuff like that - but ultimately the game is realistic and fun and is only going to get better.

This is our take on prioritization. The best sliders and most detailed tool tips don't matter if the game isn't worth playing. Gameplay first, everything else second. I thought gamers wanted it that way? Sometimes I wonder if they would rather play Tooltip Mission.

Steve

[eltorrente]

The other common outcome is the game company going bust or the team getting sacked. In my days of Working For The Man I saw the latter happen.

Yup.. In fact I'm a victim of this right now..

The studio I worked at just got closed down suddenly. We had just put a game out that sold 1.5 million copies, and we did so under budget, and on time. Our studio was ran really well, and we stuck to our schedule and had no problem cutting features that needed to be cut, and making design decisions that got us to the finish line successfully. It was reviewed well also, and fans were looking forward to the sequel.

The problem was with our parent company in a studio in another location. They worked differently than we did. They had been working on a game for over 6 years, and refused to cut features because they wanted EVERYTHING imaginable for their perfect game. They kept hiring people to make it happen, and spinning their wheels as they kept changing direction and wanting to make sure it was all perfect for their perfect game. They were a classic case of too many cooks in the kitchen and they couldn't make decisions and just make the friggin game.

Of course, they ran out of money and investors/publishers weren't buying into their BS. They imploded and sank quickly, taking down our studio with them - and hundreds of people were suddenly without a job.

Such is the nature of the gaming industry - it can be brutal.

Gamers should understand that NO GAME gets released with all the features that were on the devs wish list. EVER. Whether it's a small studio with 20 people, or a behemoth like Blizzard with all the resources in the world.. it just doesn't happen. Stuff must be cut and trimmed, and compromises made to get the product out the door.

[ChrisND]

The studio I worked at just got closed down suddenly. We had just put a game out that sold 1.5 million copies, and we did so under budget, and on time. Our studio was ran really well, and we stuck to our schedule and had no problem cutting features that needed to be cut, and making design decisions that got us to the finish line successfully. It was reviewed well also, and fans were looking forward to the sequel.

I sure was! I'm sad that there won't be a sequel to that game.

[Collingwood]

That list of Russian front releases makes me weak at the knees just thinking about it,dare I wish for such things!

$640 can I give it to you now?

I'm with you. It's a dream come true! Although I have to say, CMFI is a very pleasant diversion until we get to the real action.

Regarding the current discussion about improvement - I am very happy with the improvements and tweaks so far. One that hasn't been mentioned much but which has been a huge step toward making battlefield navigation easier is assigning short-cut numbers to units. That along with moveable waypoints, target armor arc and customizable hotkeys made me very happy. A few times I thought "what a pity, I really won't want to go back to CMBN now" - and then I remembered we have an update coming. Which made me even happier!

Each game on its own provides excellent value for money, to the point that I think it costs me literally only a few cents per hour of playing, yet the quality of the entertainment is worth so much more.

[Destraex1]

I sure was! I'm sad that there won't be a sequel to that game.

A good reason to appreciate that battlefront is independent of the mainstream junkie publishers.

By the way a thread about the 8outof8 review on the wargamer got so heated that it went thermo-nuclear and has been thrown into religion and politics to cool off. lol.

People sure get passionate about battlefront... Michael Dorosh was in there as well...

[sburke]

Rotflmao, why am I not surprised?

[Childress]

By the way a thread about the 8outof8 review on the wargamer got so heated that it went thermo-nuclear and has been thrown into religion and politics to cool off.

And you have to email the moderator to get permission to access it. It reminds of a visit to Pompeii many years ago. The guides restricted entry to the rooms with the naughty pictures to adult males.

[Battlefront.com]

Yup.. In fact I'm a victim of this right now..

Damn, sorry about that. I attended a "wake" for my old division even though I had long since left it. It was great to see old friends, especially since loyalty was really high there and so even in 7 years the old faces greatly outnumbered the new ones. Corporate culture was a huge part of it, as well as acquisitions and general stupidity.

Gamers should understand that NO GAME gets released with all the features that were on the devs wish list. EVER. Whether it's a small studio with 20 people, or a behemoth like Blizzard with all the resources in the world.. it just doesn't happen. Stuff must be cut and trimmed, and compromises made to get the product out the door.

I've told customers this since the beginning... good idea are a dime a dozen. Selecting from the good ideas, and putting the rest aside, is where the real art comes in. I was told this when I started making games way back when. It is so, so very true.

Regarding the current discussion about improvement - I am very happy with the improvements and tweaks so far. One that hasn't been mentioned much but which has been a huge step toward making battlefield navigation easier is assigning short-cut numbers to units. That along with moveable waypoints, target armor arc and customizable hotkeys made me very happy. A few times I thought "what a pity, I really won't want to go back to CMBN now" - and then I remembered we have an update coming. Which made me even happier!

This is exactly why we pushed forward with the Upgrade strategy. We saw this feeling of "being left out" becoming a huge problem for people very quickly. Didn't sit well with us, as I'm sure it wouldn't with you guys.

A good reason to appreciate that battlefront is independent of the mainstream junkie publishers.

We didn't come up with this business model by accident, that's for damned sure

By the way a thread about the 8outof8 review on the wargamer got so heated that it went thermo-nuclear and has been thrown into religion and politics to cool off. lol.

People sure get passionate about battlefront... Michael Dorosh was in there as well...

Heh... if there's a Holy Jihad against Combat Mission and/or Battlefront, you can be very sure Dorosh is the loudest mouth in the shouting match. Fortunately I don't need to read his rantings to know what he's saying. He's very repetitious. Most Jihadis are.

Steve

[Childress]

Heh... if there's a Holy Jihad against Combat Mission and/or Battlefront, you can be very sure Dorosh is the loudest mouth in the shouting match. Fortunately I don't need to read his rantings to know what he's saying. He's very repetitious. Most Jihadis are.

Maybe banning Dorosh was a tactical error. Despite his egregious behavior on the forums. Who knew he'd get pro-active and become an anti-BF evangelist? As LBJ said of J Edgar Hoover: 'It's probably better to have him inside the tent p*ssing out, than outside the tent p*ssing in'. On the other hand....