Cpl Steiner Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I find it quite limiting that in order to purchase something like a sniper team you have to purchase the battalion HQ, even for a small platoon-level battle. Would it not make more sense to allow the player to pick a sniper team and transfer it to a platoon HQ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNac Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I fear that these same C2 issues that prevent QB purchasing are behind this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted August 16, 2007 Author Share Posted August 16, 2007 I still think it is silly that the battalion HQ has to be physically on the map for its associated teams to be in command. CM:SF should, IMHO, allow you to leave off parent HQs and assume they are in radio contact off-map somewhere. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by KNac: I fear that these same C2 issues that prevent QB purchasing are behind this. But in real life, you really can transfer a sniper team to platoon control for an operation, so why not have the ability to do it in the game? Steiner - why have him in radio contact with battalion at all? Why not detach him from battalion to platoon HQ for an operation? It would make sense to be able to do that. Most modern armies are reorganizing with that kind of flexibility in mind - company battle groups, Battalion Combat Teams, etc.; these are named thusly for a reason. The idea is to be able to mix and match, or plug and play, in just such a manner. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Wasn't this kind of thing raised during testing, Michael? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Sirocco: Wasn't this kind of thing raised during testing, Michael? If it was or wasn't, do you think I'd really break my NDA to tell you? To be brutally honest, there were so many different things discussed, and in so much detail, I couldn't say what was discussed, when. And of course, the conversations are still going on, so it's all a jumble. Steve would be the appropriate one to comment publicly on this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Well, we can ask someone else to ask you if that would help. I just have the sense that CMSF is a more personal vision, if you will, than the CMx1 games, and I'm wondering how open to external input Steve and Charles were during testing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 All I can tell you was that when I suggested using Charles' wife as an ally in lobbying for changes, I was laughed at. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I used to know Steve's wife from a previous job and can tell she probably wasn't one of thosw laughing. 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.