Dennis50 Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GunzAbeam: Michael ..why do you have to be so precise and correct and ...why can't you just one time even ..just say bite me. That would really make my day. I'm not slamming you now , so don't get all rhetorical and stuff ..just pretend to be unwashed or something and say "eat my shorts". Would really make my day seem so ...so real and worth it sort of speak. Regards, Gunz Pretend to be unwashed? You should see my bathroom. My houseguests dry their hands on their shirt tails because they're scared of the towels. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis50 Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by thewood: So, eat my towels then! So ...so ..on the safe side ...come on guy let loose. Regards, Gunz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelmia Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: thelmia I don't know the answer because this is really the first I've heard about it. Testing didn't uncover any problems, but that means little since a couple dozen people playing doesn't give a fair representation of the possible variables out there. I'll see what I can dig up though. Steve Thank you for aknowledging it. I've been posting in tech support for a week, and 2 other people there had the same problem. I guess it's not pervasive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Kruger Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Prince of Eckmühl: 2) Yeah, it's lame, but the game's really meant for multi-player, so it's shortcomings in this respect don't undermine the integrity of the design. Um, BFC has publicly stated forcefully that most of their customers prefer to play alone, ie. vs the AI. So a competent AI would seem absolutely essential to the success of the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jep Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 delete [ August 16, 2007, 01:50 PM: Message edited by: jep ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jep Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 delete 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jep Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Will all the guys complaining about lack of point purchase in CM:SF please present your mathematically perfect system that everyone can agree on? Same problem with the Total War games. My answer: Web-hosted database. When some unit grows too popular database increases its price (and vice versa). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feltan Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Feltan: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: So what else is there? Other games I suppose. Regards, Feltan </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 I'll settle for just Evil. Ok, I take your point. I'd be sorry to see you go - there are plenty of other scenarios - and campaigns - out there waiting to be built. Lots of creative energy in the community at large, but I think it is on hold until some of the bugs get sorted out. Don't go away too quickly, because I sense more good things coming down the pipeline. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />With a more limited scope CMx2 needs a better implementation of QB's.It will get better. Immediately there will be some fixes, but for CM:WW2 there will be some significant changes. It won't be like CMx1, but it will have more of the feel of it.</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 If you look at the scenario editor you can trim down a formation, and I wonder whether that's a solution for QB's; not picking units, per se, but dropping them to fit into whatever quantifier makes sense. The solution for the maps if they can no longer be random would be to lock rune in a room and have him pump out a vast number of maps. With CMSF I've played a grand total of two QB's, and got the same map both times. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: I'll settle for just Evil. Ok, I take your point. I'd be sorry to see you go - there are plenty of other scenarios - and campaigns - out there waiting to be built. Lots of creative energy in the community at large, but I think it is on hold until some of the bugs get sorted out. Don't go away too quickly, because I sense more good things coming down the pipeline. Or maybe that's just the burrito you had for lunch? Haha! Gastro-humor is always top-shelf! -le dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Originally posted by Sirocco: The solution for [most of our problems] would be to lock rune in a room [and leave him there to rot]I like you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 Damn you, Dale-em, for filling the "poor humour" quota for that minute! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted August 16, 2007 Share Posted August 16, 2007 That would be "humor"... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted August 28, 2007 Share Posted August 28, 2007 Sirocco, Since you want me locked in a room, toss me your email. [insert Evil Rune Laugh here} Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted August 29, 2007 Share Posted August 29, 2007 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: The point balancing is even more difficult in CM:SF for reasons I've raised either in this thread or some other thread. How do you point balance an Abrams with ANYTHING on the Syrian side? In the correct circumstances the only way to kill the Abrams is to have more taks than the Abrams has ammo. In other situations one dude with an RPG to the flank can quite nicely knock it out. Steve How is this different from say, a Tiger in early war. How is the Russian/US player supposed to knock out a Tiger with T34s or 75mm Shermans? Well, they could use Bazooka (RPG) or an ATG (ATGM). I dont see your point here. At all. The only *major* argument in the point debate was the point value for the Stug, seeing it had its frontal armour abstracted to the point it could not be killed from the front by a T34, which was not historically correct. Seems the only good reason for this, is athe C&C as you have mentioned. A shame really. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie901 Posted August 29, 2007 Share Posted August 29, 2007 Originally posted by Si32: Steve has already said there will never be a QB unit purchase option in any CMx2 games, which means the longevity of the game for me (and I guess many others) will be drastically reduced. We're not all cherry pickers, and like a few others have mentioned, being able to spend time thinking and purchasing your force always was half the fun of a QB. Don't fix what isn't broken in the first place. Yup! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 29, 2007 Share Posted August 29, 2007 FWIW, TacOps (published by battlefront) has a points value system for modern ground combat units. The points are mainly used for victory point calculations, but people also use them in a Quickbattlish' way (we do PBEM and each one picks 10000 points worth of gear). There are some bugs in the values but the major ones for tanks, apc, infantry seem to make people pretty happy. Reminds me to ask: what does CM:SF use for victory points when you get a M1 killed? [ August 29, 2007, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: Redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fritzthemoose Posted August 29, 2007 Share Posted August 29, 2007 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSX Posted August 29, 2007 Share Posted August 29, 2007 Ive never been a QB man, never really enjoyed the unreality of it all. However, there should be some system in place to allow those that do like it to play it. As for CMSF. I quite enjoyed it. But I have finished it now and that for me is the rub. I dont feel like I have ever finished CMBB or CMAK but I do feel as if I have finished CMSF and there is nothing else left for me to do with it. It felt more like playing an FPS through to the end than a CM game. Quite fun, but very easy to play a campaign using US forces against the Pish of the East. The Syrians would be no better than the Iraqis, or anyone else for that matter. Have Javelin, will travel......... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 Originally posted by GSX: But I have finished it now and that for me is the rub.Funnily enough, it is exactly the opposite for me. I like the feeling of having 'completed' the game in a way. Now I can lean back and experiment with patches and download quality scenarios, but even if I don't: the war is already won Best regards, Thomm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mishga Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I for one have not even looked at the campaign...not interested in it. QB for me is the big pull. 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.