sburke Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 1 minute ago, Pericles said: In any case, I may give the demo a spin shortly and see if I notice any difference. and my main point is, regardless of whether you agree the changes are that significant or not, CMSF is still a really good game/deal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 The difference between titles, huge game engine advancements aside, is the TO&E and nations and timeline. This is important stuff. There is no equivalent of Mujahideen or Syrian militia fighters in CMBS, There's no equivalent of the Ukrainian army in CMSF. The Russian army in CMBS is very different from the Russian army in CM:A. Heck, the initial Afghanistan invasion force is very different from the Russians at the time of the withdrawal. The super-robust Marine squad in CMSF has no equivalent in any of the other modern war titles. You get Stryker brigade in both CMSF and CMBS but the vehicles have different defense arrays and they're facing very different threats. About CM games all operating like CM games. Well, yeh. In the same way all pizzarias sell pizza. This is the CM product. In CMBS you have amphibious vehicles. In CMSF you don't even have water. In CMSF you have IEDs and suicide cars and spies. In CMBS you have drones and AA missiles. CMSF RPG-7s don't fire tandem warheads or have night sights. Afghanis lack armor completely. These are all differences, they're all big differences. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericles Posted November 20, 2016 Author Share Posted November 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, MikeyD said: The difference between titles, huge game engine advancements aside, is the TO&E and nations and timeline. This is important stuff. There is no equivalent of Mujahideen or Syrian militia fighters in CMBS, There's no equivalent of the Ukrainian army in CMSF. The Russian army in CMBS is very different from the Russian army in CM:A. Heck, the initial Afghanistan invasion force is very different from the Russians at the time of the withdrawal. The super-robust Marine squad in CMSF has no equivalent in any of the other modern war titles. You get Stryker brigade in both CMSF and CMBS but the vehicles have different defense arrays and they're facing very different threats. About CM games all operating like CM games. Well, yeh. In the same way all pizzarias sell pizza. This is the CM product. In CMBS you have amphibious vehicles. In CMSF you don't even have water. In CMSF you have IEDs and suicide cars and spies. In CMBS you have drones and AA missiles. CMSF RPG-7s don't fire tandem warheads or have night sights. Afghanis lack armor completely. These are all differences, they're all big differences. I think MikeyD has a Point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 11 minutes ago, Pericles said: I think MikeyD has a Point. rotflmao 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Maybe as a sim grog these differences between the older CMSF and the new CM2 engine make a big difference. For gamers and as someone who plays a lot of CMA, CMSF as well as the newer titles one notices very little difference in gameplay experience. There is virtually no "reacquainting" necessary when going from one game to the other. For example, yes, the new titles have AAA etc. But, it's not as if one has to order the AAA unit to engage aircraft. Everything is done by the AI that one hardly notices (until something blows up). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericles Posted November 20, 2016 Author Share Posted November 20, 2016 1 hour ago, Erwin said: Maybe as a sim grog these differences between the older CMSF and the new CM2 engine make a big difference. For gamers and as someone who plays a lot of CMA, CMSF as well as the newer titles one notices very little difference in gameplay experience. There is virtually no "reacquainting" necessary when going from one game to the other. For example, yes, the new titles have AAA etc. But, it's not as if one has to order the AAA unit to engage aircraft. Everything is done by the AI that one hardly notices (until something blows up). Agreed. The consensus is that there is no noticeable difference in core gameplay or unit behaviors. Differences b/w CMSF and CMBS are marginal, incremental, etc. There are new theatres of war and unit types/capabilities, as MikeyD pointed out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Sigh, it's time to just give up guys. We are talking across each other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Pericles has a point. Objectively, there is little difference between WWI and modern war. Antagonists still use gunpowder propelled projectiles, marshalled by uniformed formations, to wreak mayhem upon one another. There have been incremental changes in equipment (e.g., bolt action -> semi-auto -> assault rifles), but, overall, it's all the same. Pericles...what you're looking for is too sublime to describe. Try the demos and determine the differences for yourself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericles Posted November 21, 2016 Author Share Posted November 21, 2016 1 hour ago, IanL said: Sigh, it's time to just give up guys. We are talking across each other. Agreed. I will end by thanking all those who contributed to this discussion, as I have learned something about the differences b/w CMSF and CMBS from it. To constructive discourse, and decimation of pixeltroppen in modern combat environments! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprint31 Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 Wow. Allow me to interject, if I may. As someone who sits solidly in the middle of the road here, I think Pericles point is that the changes that have been made to the CMx2 series are really only fully appreciated by those that have have been around to see the iterative impact on game play in an immediate fashion. If you fall in to that category, congratulations. No cookies to give you at the moment though. Believe it or not, Battlefront does acquire new customers. This "game" requires a lot of buy-in to get past the demo stage. Believe you me, I've tried. Even my TT gamer buds say nah. I for one LOVE the system. Which is what it is. You play by the same set of core rules no matter the theatre. You have to play any version of the game for a decent amount of time before you would even notice the difference. ToE notwithstanding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 12 hours ago, Pericles said: b/w Okay, to veer wildly off topic, I have to say that that usage right there puzzles the hell out of me. See, in normal discourse 'b/w' typically stands for 'black and white' and usually refers to photography or some other graphics regime. From the context that you use it, I am really confident that is not what you mean to say. Again reading from context, it might be some intended abbreviation of 'between', in which case I have to say it is a really sorry-assed one, and for my part I hope to never see it again. Or it could mean something entirely different and might somehow represent a stroke of genius that I am not yet up to the level of appreciating. In which case I await enlightenment. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machor Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 I too was not familiar with b/w, but it appears to be pretty solid, with 11 years in Urban Dictionary - we unfortunately can't get frequency data for lexical items like these: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=b%2Fw 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 LOL but there are four different definitions that could fit in a forum context listed under that link. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machor Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 This is why things get tricky without frequency data. I usually go with the top definition, which in this case has 216 thumbs up vs. 78 down, but of course those responses are self-selected, and we also don't get any info on their demographics. The point though is that Pericles wasn't inventing a new Chinese character with his 'b/w' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 21, 2016 Share Posted November 21, 2016 4 minutes ago, Machor said: The point though is that Pericles wasn't inventing a new Chinese character with his 'b/w' True enough. And I was correct in my guess that his intended meaning was 'between'. I believe he stands exonerated of responsibility for inventing this loathsome and unnatural usage, but I do feel that he has fallen under the influence of the evil powers that lurk in social media. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pericles Posted November 22, 2016 Author Share Posted November 22, 2016 If the evil powers of social media have indeed beset me, I am grateful that their influence has been largely constrained to this "b/w" abbreviation, rather than emoticons and lmao's and the like. I have suffered for this grievance, reputationally, as evidenced by the critiques from "senior members", and physically, as I have written over 100 words in an attempt to explain the absence of five letters. Never again. Between. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraze Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 (edited) You can watch youtube videos of ArmA1 On 20.11.2016 at 9:54 PM, Pericles said: ... You can watch Youtube videos of ArmA1 vs ArmA2 and conclude that there's no change bar graphical differences. You just aim and click LMB to fire. Likewise you can watch Youtube videos of XCom EU and XCom2 and conclude that they play no different and the only difference is graphics. You just send your guys into cover and click to fire. Sure in CM interface looks the same and you give orders in the same way as 7 years ago and core gameplay is exactly the same across the same series of games - it's a sequel after all, how else should it look on Youtube? But seriously disregarding something that changes the way the game plays in many ways as "duh it's just some new vehicles and forests, rivers? meh" - is unwise at best. If ~7 years of advances in gameplay, AI, features and simulation aren't enough for you, then what is? Edited November 22, 2016 by kraze 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 9 hours ago, Pericles said: I have suffered for this grievance, reputationally, as evidenced by the critiques from "senior members", and physically, as I have written over 100 words in an attempt to explain the absence of five letters. Never again. Between. Hear! Hear! A noble resolve. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtHatred Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 A multiplayer system that works (WEGO) Target Briefly A toggle to turn music off. A quick battle system that won't pit 10 technicals up against 10 T-90s. Performance. CMSF runs like a dog on my mega-PC, compared to CMBS, CMRT, and CMFB. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.