Jake the Peg Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 As it says on the Battlefront website their 'unique games offer depth, replayability, historical accuracy, original gameplay and most of all, fun!' All commendably and excellently true but it has to be said that sometimes realism isn't much fun, certainly not when a hard fought PBEM game of several weeks standing is suddenly decided by random factors, such as friendly aircraft fire or bogging. I know all the arguments for and against this and accept both equally, so why not have realism levels like FOW levels in future versions that lower the chances of bogging and other negative stuff. It'd preserve the fun factor for relatively casual WW2 strategy gamers and still give the hardcore grogs the super realistic experience they want. Everyone's happy. I know its probably been suggested before but what the hell. It's quicker to type a new thread than search through so many interesting and distracting threads. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salkin Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 On the other hand (ladder players wont agree with this) : What if there has been a long struggle between the two sides and your opponent has the definite upper hand . He has three AFVs vs your single AFV. It looks like you're a dead duck , but then one of his tanks bog and your chances increase.....voila fun factor increases for you. This type of discussion has recently been had in another thread , I just wanted to add my 2 cents. Check out the "Has luck replaced skill " thread. //Salkin The lucky swede [ January 11, 2003, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: Salkin ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 IMHO excesive bogging is only a problem if you use overly heavy tanks on a regular basis. The last thing I'd want is for CMBB to replicate those other awful WWII games which rely on hit-points and fast mouse action. As has already been said, for the sake of gameplay, and perhaps other reasons, we have been spared the frustrations that commanders had to face in reality, such as breakdowns and other regular mechanical failure. IMO the balance is right, let's not dilute it any more. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWB Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 Trying to avoid excessive bogging is easy--dont use move fast for heavy tanks in bad terrain. Move is alot more forgiving. WWB 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auggy Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 Originally posted by wwb_99: Trying to avoid excessive bogging is easy--dont use move fast for heavy tanks in bad terrain. Move is alot more forgiving.Yes, but if you move "fast" won't you get out of that poor terrian quicker and time of your chance of bogging is reduced? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted January 11, 2003 Share Posted January 11, 2003 You may leave the area faster but you greatly increase your odds of running into a bad patch of ground while greatly reducing your time to deal with it. Combat speed in an AFV is a bone jarring experience. The faster you go the harder it is for that poor kid in the driver's hole to see much of anything. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichadwick Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I dated a happy medium once. She left me when she predicted the outcome of my bank balance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I had to settle for a cheerful large does that count? 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.