Armchair_Ranger Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I was interested in buying this back in '07 but the performance of the first demo on my Core 2 Duo e6300 convinced me otherwise. That and reviews of the game where bugs and poor AI were mentioned. I have since upgraded and my system specs is as follows - C2D e6600 2.4ghz 4GB RAM Nvidia 9800 GTX+ 512MB Tried the latest version of the demo and the game seemed to run decently with maxed out model details and "better" textures. I didnt encounter any bugs so far. But I want to know if you veteran players feel that all the bugs and performance issues were fixed since 2007? Has the AI improved in any way compared to the first release? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thin Red Line Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Hi, I've similar specs and the games runs fine, and yes the game has been fixed and plays very well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Unfortunately it will still run very slow but as a game it is greatly improved. Just don't expect any great performance with those specs, you'll often have sub 30 fps, many times into the teens unless you run on very low model settings, turn off trees and shadows. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 On the AI side of things you are aware that the scenario designer has to create the AI battle plan for the scenario. Much can depend on how creative that is but if the job has been done well you will get a good battle that is quite challenging. However, AI is always going to have its limitations and it is not the same as playing against a human opponent which is also possible, In general I think you will find game results reasonably realistic. Luke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I was interested in buying this back in '07 but the performance of the first demo on my Core 2 Duo e6300 convinced me otherwise. That and reviews of the game where bugs and poor AI were mentioned. I have since upgraded and my system specs is as follows - C2D e6600 2.4ghz 4GB RAM Nvidia 9800 GTX+ 512MB Tried the latest version of the demo and the game seemed to run decently with maxed out model details and "better" textures. I didnt encounter any bugs so far. But I want to know if you veteran players feel that all the bugs and performance issues were fixed since 2007? Has the AI improved in any way compared to the first release? The demo is very representative of the state of the game. There are of course always bugs remaining, but nothing game breaking more like minor quibbles. I do not know what is meant by poor AI, the TaCAI is in my opinion great and the pathing issues from the beginning have been resolved (you just have to realize that doors are there for a reason). So if you're happy with the gameplay in the demo, you'll most probably be happy with the full game. Like mentioned the computer will follow one of several fixed "game plans" for each scenario and the quality of those game plans depend on the scenario designer. Of course you can just play other humans (there is only TCP/IP real time though and PBEM of course). Performance-wise, the scenarios in the demo are averaged size so if you're getting bad lag there, this can be an issue. I personally haven't noticed bad lag myself unless on very large maps or maps with a lot of buildings. Hope this helps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 If anything, the sale version (1.31) is better than the demo version (1.30). Eg. there is an nVidia lighting bug in night missions in 1.30 that was fixed with 1.31. Performance wise it's the same - the actual result depends on scenario, but for instance the demo scenarios should have the same performance in the full game as in the demo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 To echo some of the thoughts above, the STRAT AI is no different (scripted enemy movements that have no knowledge of or ability to react to the moves of the player) but the TAC AI is much improved - for both the computer and the human player's forces. If you play the demo enough times you should see some or all of the following: - Friendly troops stopping mid-move to fire a burst at a spotted enemy before continuing the move; - Friendly and enemy troops "buggering off" via back doors and stairwells when they've taken more fire than they can stand; - Soft and lightly armoured vehicles backing away from spotted enemy tanks - Troops lobbing grenades to hit enemy troops in range but out of line of sight (over crests, into ditches etc). Then there are all the other small incremental improvements that collectively add up to a whole new level of realism, such as: - Ammo "cooking off" in burning vehicles; - Snipers taking a really long time to aim but achieving one-shot kills at 800m; - Crews bailing out of functioning vehicles when they've had enough. So go ahead and buy the game and all the modules. If you get low FPS, smaller scenarios should run fine and are often more fun anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I've lost track of the number of significant game patches since the original '07 release. Thirteen or fourteen? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets_All_Fight Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 To be honest I don't remember a single killer bug after the Marines module came out. By 1.10 the game was pretty much sorted out and leftover issues have been dealt with on a fairly frequent bases since them. In fact, even prior to Marines it was getting better and better. It may have been rather buggy on release but it didn't actually stay like that for very long. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 It is fixed. what ever issues are left are EXTREMELY minor. Hundreds of hours of great fun. You really can't beat that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alchenar Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 It is fixed. what ever issues are left are EXTREMELY minor. Hundreds of hours of great fun. You really can't beat that. Panzershreks? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Springelkamp Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Panzershreks? RPG29, Panzerfaust III, AT-14 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair_Ranger Posted February 24, 2011 Author Share Posted February 24, 2011 How "random" or dynamic are the built in campaigns and missions? Is each mission in a campaign a totally different expereince each time you play? Would you say that the built in missions alone are very replayable? How good is the Quick Battle generator at creating random missions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astano Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I can't say for certain, but I believe that most of the built-in missions (both campaign and stand-alone), and certainly those from the newest modules, have more than one AI plan, which makes them somewhat dynamic. Some of the campaigns have player choices (like Marines) or "dynamic" outcomes based on how you perform in the missions, so they can be good for more than one replay. To be honest, if you're concerned about getting mileage out of the game, I wouldn't even worry about replaying missions. If you get all the modules it includes A TON of content - 6 campaigns (I believe the shortest is 7 missions?) plus I don't even know how many stand-alones. If you include player-released scenarios there's more out there than any typical gamer could ever play. Personally, the only scenarios I've played twice are a handful I really enjoy, and I'm still nowhere near through all the material that comes with the game and modules a year after getting the base game. QBs are still weak, not so much in terms of the AI plans or quality of the maps but in terms of the unit selection. You have very little control over what you get, so it's not always either what you want, varied, or practical. For example, when I first got Marines I kept trying to play a QB as Marines, and all the generator would give me was either a CAAT platoon or LAR platoon every time, never the rifle platoon I wanted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair_Ranger Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 I gotta know, how come ariel support like helicopters arent modelled? From the youtube videos I've seen, you can only hear them and see their tracer fire, but you never actually get to see the support helicopter in the map. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blinky123abc Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Just yesterday i experienced my Syrian Special Forces getting pinned down in a building and then proceding to run out of the building towards the enemy, go over the nearest cover then lay down on the opposite side of the cover (a low wall) and cower. They were all cut down in case your wondering. Thanks to the glorious CMSF TacAI. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astano Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I gotta know, how come ariel support like helicopters arent modelled? From the youtube videos I've seen, you can only hear them and see their tracer fire, but you never actually get to see the support helicopter in the map. BFC decided that the time and effort for visually modeling air support was better spent elsewhere so it's not in. A forum search might turn it up from the horse's mouth, I know Steve addressed it around here somewhere. Considering the ancillary role that air support generally plays in CMSF, and considering that most of the two dozen-odd air support options in the game wouldn't be operating low enough to be seen from a CMSF-level altitude, I think it was a good decision. Certainly you can argue that only helicopters would need to be modeled, but as BFC tell it even that would still require a huge investment of time and resources (and with precisely zero development experience I for one am in no position to argue that) for relatively little return, considering their secondary nature and relative rarity in the game. It would be awesome eye-candy, but IMO, there are other things I see every time I fire up the game that I'm glad to see the effort was put into rather than modeling a helicopter I see every fourth or fifth mission. YMMV. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietrich Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Granted, one can find hundreds of videos on YouTube showing Apaches, Cobras, etc., passing directly over the heads of the troops they're supporting, but any of those is in effect anecdotal evidence. Given the size of CMSF maps (the larger ones run in the 1.5 to 2 km per side range; very few are any larger than that in either direction), if a helicopter gunship were shown "on map", it would thus be within range of enemy weapons, whereas in real life the rotary-wing asset would stay outside the range of RPGs, HMGs, etc., and engage targets from stand-off range. (Right?) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abneo3sierra Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 I think Dietrich hit it right on the head..if you put in Air assets that actually appeared, you would be forced to also figure out how to add air defenses and point air defenses,and aircraft that in real life would stay far out of range of things like AAA would suddenly be in the range. BFC made the right choice,hands down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger33 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 A couple weeks ago I decided to play the Afghanistan demo on a whim and was really impressed with how much more polished it seemed than the last time I played CMSF (when Marines came out) so I patched up CMSF and it discovered that it was indeed much improved. It was like playing the game you imagined it would be back in 2007. Long story short I picked up the module pack and couldn't be happier. I have not seen my troops do anything suicidal or defy gravity or any of the other problems from the early versions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 2 cents. No thinking needed. CMSF is awsome. A must have in a wargame collection. Nato still needs fixing- but there's more great strategy gaming moments in CMSF than almost anything else. Don't forget to mod those awful green weapon icons, and try some of the other 'must have' mods. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Ideally it would be great to have the capability to shoot down aircraft witihn the game but as someone else has said this would require considerable additional work and resources. Also the maximum size battlefield we have is 4000m by 4000m and most SAM or AA weapons today have a range considerably longer than that so there is a strong case for abstracting the air defence situation. Luke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armchair_Ranger Posted March 5, 2011 Author Share Posted March 5, 2011 Well I finally gave in and bought CMSF Base game + Marine, Brit, NATO Bundle. Better be worth the $83! Downloading as I type. One more thing I need to know, is the CMSF Base game that I download already patched to the latest version? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 I am pretty sure installing NATO will bring you up too 1.30, you might have to patch too 1.31 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medex Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Well I finally gave in and bought CMSF Base game + Marine, Brit, NATO Bundle. Better be worth the $83! Downloading as I type. One more thing I need to know, is the CMSF Base game that I download already patched to the latest version? Another Canuck got suckered I see. I wasn't going to get CMSF. I'm waiting for CMBN to come out. But I read on these boards that playing the CMSF demo was a great way to get used to the CMBN interface. So I did and liked it so much I bought the same thing you did. So far its been pretty cool. I have been playing it alot and I'm glad I got something to play before CMBN comes out. Playing the Nato Alamo right now. I have to agree with poster who says the AI can show some unusual behaviour. I have had some guys running around like chickens with their heads cut off. One guy who was running around out in the open was killing enemy as he went so I was kind of proud of him. Had a Rambo moment going on there. But all in all its a BIG improvement over CMBO/BB/Ak's AI. And no you will have download and install the latest patch 1.31 after you install the Bundle. 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.