Not as much fun as previous games.

[Tarquelne]

if target-lines are a psychological key factor in CMx1 for tension buildup!

Information is a key factor in "tension buildup"

If you don't see the conflict in the situation you see on the screen, there's no tension, no thrill as it resolves.

So if you have lots of target-lines, sight-lines, command-lines, etc. etc. etc. showing what's going on that can help build tension. Going further, if you can replay the turn over and over to not only watch everything but to make sure you notice and comprehend all those cues, that leads to more tension and/or thrill.

Toward the other extreme: A virtual battle with no Heads Up Display and all in real-time is going to... not necessarily contain less information... but it's going to be harder to extract without the artificial aids. And since it's real-time no do-overs to see what you missed or help you understand what's happening. So, less tension or thrill.

Unless, OTOH, you do just fine extracting the information without the lines, etc. You might even find the lines detracting from the tension. Makes suspension of disbelief harder to achieve, or truncates the build up of tension. (Seeing the line before the unit fires, type of thing.) And Real-Time can also be more exiting - at least taken over multiple games. "What's happening here... no here! The tank's buring, OMG, what happened!"

To be frank I'd prefer BTS magically create replayable-RT. But I still generally prefer RT for it's other advantages, and I find it exiting enough. But as far as tension or thrill goes, I don't miss the various lines or cues at all. I'm doing fine without 'em. I expect most people will after they get used to it. But not everyone - if we're talking about thrills were talking, at least in part, about a matter of taste.

[Battlefront.com]

my rhetorical question to the other member implied that i think you do not actually remember how CMx1 worked on these parts.

You said that in our last debate. I explained exactly how it worked because it's so basic and simple there's nothing really to forget. You didn't get it then and I doubt you'll get it now.

it's not a question of having intellectual capacity. the subject is extremely simple and extremely simple to test.

Which is why your lack of understanding is so baffling. It *is* so simple, yet you don't understand the difference between the two systems.

the statement that in CMx1 area fire "was always targeted to the center of the 20x20m action spot. Its the graphical representation that made it looked as though you were targeting a precise point." is simply counterfactual. it's not a question of opinion. there is no way to "explain" such statements to somehow be true.

Well, Sgt. Joch did make a mistake. In CMx1 you could Area Fire on a particular part of the 20x20m Tile and the game would spread out the effect of that fire around the point you indicated. Not centered in the middle of the 20x20m Tile. In CMx2 there are roughly 4 Action Spots for every one CMx1 Tile. You indicate which Action Spot to Area Fire and the fire is spread out around that particular Action Spot. The result is about the same in this sense. No better, no worse. The benefits of the Action Spot system lie elsewhere, as do the shortcomings of the CMx1 system.

i find it extremely strange how people defend this utter and complete nonsense again and again. seriously, what's the purpose? CMSF and CMBN are great wargames that do not need absurd counterfactual CMx1 bashing to excel.

I don't feel any need to bash a game I spent 6 years of my life making. But I also spent 6 years of my life making CMx2. And those 6 years weren't sent on redoing what we already did, but rather to go way beyond it. In that sense CMx2 is better than CMx1 because it was engineered to be better. The single most important reason, above all others, is the 8x8 Action Map grid system. So it is it is rather... interesting... to have a customer claim that he not only knows the game guts better than I do, but that the most important aspect of CMx2 is no better (or inferior as you've argued) to what CMx1 had.

just suck it up and move on

I was happy too after the last time, but you were the one that brought it up again. Sorry, I have to at least make sure others know that you don't know what you're talking about.

Steve

[Speedy]

I can't believe I read through 12 pages of this tripe. And it all started because one fellow isn't enjoying the game,morphed into a Bill Clinton explanation of "fun"........then topped off with URC vs Steve.

Must admit the URC vs Steve aspect is fun to watch.

Yes got to agree the URC vs Steve part is the most entertaining aspect of this thread.

[DaveDash]

Implementation does not necessarily mean to understand the magic it creates in the player's mind. You don't know the reason why target lines were implemented. Maybe tey wanted to give the player more information and it simply worked. But i doubt that BTS/BFC ever analyzed the psychological impact of tension buildup caused by the target lines.

Lmao what the hell? I have studied three years of psychology and I have no idea what you're talking about.

If anything they will ruin the suspension of disbelief, and thus tension. It's like watching a good movie and then having one of the film crew come out with a tape measure in the middle of an action scene, to see if someone got hit with a bullet.

You sir, sit on the far edges the bell curve, me thinks.

[lookeylou]

Pavlov's dog. those lines became the start of an engagement for him. they need to higher a shrink to consult with, it seems now before any "radical" changes.

[Redwolf]

Am I the only one thinking that outgoing target lines from your own units are both more important and more FoW-appropriate than enemy unit's target lines?

[gunnergoz]

I play WEGO and I don't want any target lines except when I'm planning fires and those are for my own troops.

[DaveDash]

In this game you are meant to be a Platoon, Company, or Bn level commander.

Does such a commander have target lines at his disposal, nice and easy, in real life?

No. You want a war simulator or don't you?

Part of the realism of the game is having things shoot at you, and your units shoot back, without having a clear idea of what's going on. FoW is a real part of war, and CMx2 does a much better job of simulating it than CMx1.

[pad152]

I'm sorry to say, I have to agree this game is not as much fun for me. The issue seems to be, it just doesn't seem like WWII, things seem to happen way to quickly (WEGO or RT), weapons seem a tad too quick to target enemies and weapons are bit too accurate/deadly. I've had tank battles last longer in Shock Force then in CMBN. If one could mod in tanks & models from the cold war 1970/1980's, the weapon accuracy and battle tempo won't be far off.

Seeing enemy icons but, not the enemy units was ok for modern battles (Shock Force) but, just doesn't seem to work that well for WWII.

Despite the rich land scape of Normandy, nothing seems to provide much in the way of actual cover for units. (trenches, foxholes, buildings, etc.).

Unit selection in QB's and the Editor are a mess.

[Redwolf]

In this game you are meant to be a Platoon, Company, or Bn level commander.

Does such a commander have target lines at his disposal, nice and easy, in real life?

No. You want a war simulator or don't you?

Part of the realism of the game is having things shoot at you, and your units shoot back, without having a clear idea of what's going on. FoW is a real part of war, and CMx2 does a much better job of simulating it than CMx1.

Then why show friendly units at all? Ah because this isn't a command game where you get a text-only PDF every 5 minutes and if you are lucky an (incorrect) overlay every 10 minutes.

The scope of the game is that you direct control single vehicles. You position your vehicle by the meter, and you can direct it to shoot at something by the meter. Yet you think it somehow is a realism problem if the unit tells you what it is shooting at?

[DaveDash]

Then why show friendly units at all? Ah because this isn't a command game where you get a text-only PDF every 5 minutes and if you are lucky an (incorrect) overlay every 10 minutes.

The scope of the game is that you direct control single vehicles. You position your vehicle by the meter, and you can direct it to shoot at something by the meter. Yet you think it somehow is a realism problem if the unit tells you what it is shooting at?

Obviously there is a line, and that line is drawn where "Common Sense" sits. The game is sitll a game, but it tries to emulate real life in as many was as possible, not all ways.

Target lines ruin the suspension of disbelief. They only add to the game if you're the number/stat geek type. Maybe BFC could throw such things in on basic skill levels, but I doubt they'd bother. I wouldn't.

Seriously if you're having problems with seeing where things are shooting. Play WEGO. It's really not that hard.

[Redwolf]

Obviously there is a line, and that line is drawn where "Common Sense" sits. The game is sitll a game, but it tries to emulate real life in as many was as possible, not all ways.

Target lines ruin the suspension of disbelief. They only add to the game if you're the number/stat geek type. Maybe BFC could throw such things in on basic skill levels, but I doubt they'd bother. I wouldn't.

Seriously if you're having problems with seeing where things are shooting. Play WEGO. It's really not that hard.

OK, again, where do you see the space to draw the line given that you can instruct the unit to shoot at a given target, or at an area you want, but somehow it doesn't tell you what it is shooting at?

I don't see that space between those two that you see big enough to place a line in.

BTW, for those who forgot, of course you can turn them off like in CMx1.

[DaveDash]

OK, again, where do you see the space to draw the line given that you can instruct the unit to shoot at a given target, or at an area you want, but somehow it doesn't tell you what it is shooting at?

I don't see that space between those two that you see big enough to place a line in.

BTW, for those who forgot, of course you can turn them off like in CMx1.

If you issue a target order, it shows you the line.

Not showing TacAI targeting is actually useful as you can see at a glance which orders you have issued. Having lines all over the place however would get terribly distracting and make for an ugly game.

[Macisle]

As someone who comes from a CMx1 (all titles) and ASL background, I thought I'd throw in my two cents...

First off, I'm loving RT. In fact, I haven't tried WEGO yet, as the thought of only being able to issue orders every minute is very off-putting. So much can happen in 60 seconds and I like to micro-manage with extremely liberal use of the Pause button. I have only played on Elite level and, against the AI, have won all but one (a draw) of the seven battles played so far. -Most with light casualties. I play S-L-O-W, but I win and have usually inflicted 2 or 3 times the casualties on the enemy as I'm losing.

Now, against a human, I might well get my arse royally kicked. I'm just saying this to point out that people coming from CMx1/ASL backgrounds can have very different experiences with this new game.

I actually dropped CMx1 in favor of ASL, as I felt it to be a much deeper, richer game experience (in terms of giving the player juicy battlefield decisions. For the record, prior to the release of CM:BN, CMx1 was still the best video game I have ever played). With CM:BN, however, the gap is greatly narrowed. With unit-splitting ability (LOVE ma' Scouts!)weapons recovery, and a few other things, infantry play is now as rich, or even richer in some ways than ASL. The only area yet lacking is modelling of close combat. On the tank side, individual control of weapons/defense systems would eliminate the gap with ASL.

As far as CMx1 vs CMx2, the only thing that I would really like added back is a target armor arc. That would really help with AT asset control.

I'd love the option to record a RT battle and watch it over at the end, but I don't need it for actual game play. I probably wouldn't use it for that even if I had it.

On command lines, I'm getting the hang of the new system and don't really need it, but a (perhaps) relatively easy to code improvement might be to build on the current system by tweaking the icon highlight feature. So, for example, when you click a unit, icon colors could show you the same info as command lines using different hues of icon. The system already shows you which units are connected, but icon hues denoting C2 status could elegantly satisfy the desire of some players for command lines.

As far as demo charges and bocage, I've had no problems.

I have to end here, but two points of advice for CMx1 players who are having less fun than they anticipated:

First, learn to use the mouse drag for camera control. For large movements you can use the screen edges, but for most needs, use click and drag. After a short time, it's not bad at all.

Second, learn the key shortcuts. It's a bit of a pain, but well worth the effort and will speed things up a lot.

Oh--and try RT! Give it a fair chance. Like me, you may find that you have a lot MORE control in RT than in WEGO (in SP mode with pause, anyway).

Lots more to say, but my lunch break is over. Last thing for now...

watch out for smoke barrages! I lost 10 guys coming in too close under a rolling smoke barrage last night. Ouch!

Yes, CMx2 has way more tension than CMx1-fer sure!

Macisle

[Mord]

Well, I said this before somewhere but I think a good portion of these arguments are guys that are stuck in a board game/miniatures mentality (terrain modifiers, fire power tables, hit and damage abstractions etc.) VS guys that see the game as real soldiers, man on man, tank on tank, personal up close and intimate fighting....bullet to chest, armor piercing round to exact location on vehicle. The table top guys can't let go of the past and the realism guys don't wanna return there. The table top guys want their charts and measurements and percentages laid out and the realism guys want to hunker down in the dirt and watch Sgt. Jones, after losing most of his team, charge an AT gun and lay its crew to waste. One man can make a difference, the player doesn't rely on whether his unit has a 56 fire power rating...it's how well they shoot their weapons.

I don't miss, nor do I have a problem that a target line is not drawn from a squad to the dude they are shooting at and low and behold I've never had a problem figuring it out either, whether it's a tank or a rifle squad...I've been playing and testing and modding CMX2 since the beginning and can say without a doubt that lack of target lines has NEVER EVER lowered the stress, tension or excitement level for me...it never even crossed my mind. The newer, tighter fidelity of the engine has actually provided more stress, tension and excitement...watching a split team of Marines duke it out down a trench line, with a Syrian Uncon who kept popping in and out of sight, turned what would've been a rather bland moment in a CMX1 game into a heart pounding kickass epic in CMX2...because it wasn't a lumped up group of bobble heads sharing a fire power modifier...it was a couple Marines vs 1 guy, trading shot for shot, bullet for bullet, grenade for grenade (one of which arced out of no where from the Uncon who was out of LOS)...AND not a target line in sight.

Mord.

[Battlefront.com]

I'll say this again... if the targeting lines were so critical to the game, don't you think we'd have seen SOME lobbying activity by CM:SF players at the very least? You guys aren't known for being shy about asking for stuff, yet here we are... years later and I can't recall anybody mentioning this before now. I *do* recall customers and testers asking, repeatedly, for Armor Cover Arc as mentioned above. And even that is fairly minor on the scale of requests. Target lines doesn't even register a footnote until now.

Part of the UI changes for the future of CM do include a fresh look at Commands.

Steve

[Macisle]

Well, I said this before somewhere but I think a good portion of these arguments are guys that are stuck in a board game/miniatures mentality (terrain modifiers, fire power tables, hit and damage abstractions etc.) VS guys that see the game as real soldiers, man on man, tank on tank, personal up close and intimate fighting....bullet to chest, armor piercing round to exact location on vehicle. The table top guys can't let go of the past and the realism guys don't wanna return there. The table top guys want their charts and measurements and percentages laid out and the realism guys want to hunker down in the dirt and watch Sgt. Jones, after losing most of his team, charge an AT gun and lay its crew to waste. One man can make a difference, the player doesn't rely on whether his unit has a 56 fire power rating...it's how well they shoots their weapons.

I don't miss, nor do I have a problem that a target line is not drawn from a squad to the dude they are shooting at and low and behold I've never had a problem figuring it out either whether it's a tank or a rifle squad...I've been playing and testing and modding CMX2 since the beginning and can say without a doubt that lack of target lines has NEVER EVER lowered the stress, tension or excitement level for me...it never even crossed my mind. The newer, tighter fidelity of the engine has actually provided more stress, tension and excitement...watching a split team of Marines duke it out down a trench line, with a Syrian Uncon who kept popping in and out of sight, turned what would've been a rather bland moment in a CMX1 game into a heart pounding kickass epic in CMX2...because it wasn't a lumped up group of bobble heads sharing a fire power modifier...it was a couple Marines vs 1 guy, trading shot for shot, bullet for bullet, grenade for grenade (one of which arced out of no where from the Uncon who was out of LOS)...AND not a target line in sight.

Mord.

Very well said, Mord!

[CKibler]

CMx2 is a different game. Nothing has been removed or changed, unless you are comparing to CMSF...

No? Can you assign infantry units (such as a squad, or even half squad) to "ride" on the back of a (non-light) tank? I know I could do that in CMBB, but I sure can't figure out how to do it in CMBN. Maybe it's just me, but I've asked around & a few others can't seem to find that, and I don't see it mentioned in the manual. Am I missing something? I just can't understand why this realistic feature of previous CM games has been dropped (inadvertently????) in the new & (otherwise) wonderfully improved CMBN. Maybe this has been discussed here on the forum, but I looked & could not find it. Also could not find a "search" feature (sorry; I don't get up here as much as I used to).

I've been enjoying the game since getting downloading it, and enjoying the manual since it arrived. Wonderful graphics, nicely-done maps, great modeling. Love the artillery/air support programming, and almost everything else.

One other minor gripe: load times of maps. Tiny & small ones take 2+ minutes; a congested Medium one took over 8 minutes. Kind of a pain having to wait for maps to load, esp. when playing a lot of PBEM games, mostly. Ah well... gives me time to digest more of the manual. (oh yeah, I also don't care for the brown type on tinted pages... definitely hard to read in low light).

But, overall -- A+

Charlie Kibler

[Peregrine]

No? Can you assign infantry units (such as a squad, or even half squad) to "ride" on the back of a (non-light) tank? I know I could do that in CMBB, but I sure can't figure out how to do it in CMBN. Maybe it's just me, but I've asked around & a few others can't seem to find that, and I don't see it mentioned in the manual. Am I missing something? I just can't understand why this realistic feature of previous CM games has been dropped (inadvertently????) in the new & (otherwise) wonderfully improved CMBN. Maybe this has been discussed here on the forum, but I looked & could not find it. Also could not find a "search" feature (sorry; I don't get up here as much as I used to).

I've been enjoying the game since getting downloading it, and enjoying the manual since it arrived. Wonderful graphics, nicely-done maps, great modeling. Love the artillery/air support programming, and almost everything else.

One other minor gripe: load times of maps. Tiny & small ones take 2+ minutes; a congested Medium one took over 8 minutes. Kind of a pain having to wait for maps to load, esp. when playing a lot of PBEM games, mostly. Ah well... gives me time to digest more of the manual. (oh yeah, I also don't care for the brown type on tinted pages... definitely hard to read in low light).

But, overall -- A+

Charlie Kibler

Infantry riding on tanks is still to come but no here yet.

Loading times that long mean you have something seriously wrong with your system or it is seriously old.

[Mord]

I'll say this again... if the targeting lines were so critical to the game, don't you think we'd have seen SOME lobbying activity by CM:SF players at the very least? You guys aren't known for being shy about asking for stuff, yet here we are... years later and I can't recall anybody mentioning this before now. I *do* recall customers and testers asking, repeatedly, for Armor Cover Arc as mentioned above. And even that is fairly minor on the scale of requests. Target lines doesn't even register a footnote until now.

Part of the UI changes for the future of CM do include a fresh look at Commands.

Steve

I'd love a Armor Cover Arc...

Just thought of something and it may have been mentioned already, when playing like say Elite or Iron mode...if you are trying to figure out who your unit is firing at click on that squad and only the enemy icons it can see will pop up on screen...bingo...that's probably who I am engaging.

Mord.

P.S. Thanks, Macisle.

[Speedy]

LOL no matter how many times they're told they just never seem to understand that the CMx2 series is totally seperate from the CMx1 series, the only thing the two series have in common is the CM name.

Troops cannot ride on tanks in CMBN, troops have never ridden on tanks in any CMx2 game.

Maybe try this CMx1 is Space Invaders and CMx2 is Asteroids, both games are about aliens and spaceships and shooting stuff but that is all they have in common. Does that help?

[Mord]

Well, it's also much easier getting a squad of three guys representing 12 onto a tank in CMX1, than it would've been (coding and time wise) to get 12 guys representing 12 guys onto a tank in CMx2...

Mord.

[MikeyD]

I've lost count of the number of times the phrase "you removed this feature" has been used despite 'that feature' having never been in the game to get removed. No, they didn't 'remove' aircraft shadows or unit scaling. CMx2 never had aircraft shadows or unit scaling. They did remove terrain-mesh-breaking non-FOW sunken trenches. Those were in CMx2 previously. They also removed Extreme heat' weather conditions, and they also removed snow terrain tiles since snow terrain is in CM:Afghanistan.

[McAuliffe]

tI fire at a Tiger and see my shell bounce off, I see its turret rotate towards mine. Will my next shot get in kill shot before that slow turret comes around? I don't know, but I certainly don't need a yellow line to tell me that the Tiger is after me. It's pretty obvious.

The typical battle I play has usually more than 1 German cat opposing more than 1 Ronson. There are trees around and brushes. I don't always see what the gunner is seeing, nevertheless I am supposed to act for a fraction of a second as the gunner.

I don't doubt you believe in what you say. I'm sure for you this is a real issue. But I don't see the evidence that it is for others.

Mark me down as evidence and another 5 threads focusing eventually on this problem.

Well, Sgt. Joch did make a mistake. In CMx1 you could Area Fire on a particular part of the 20x20m Tile and the game would spread out the effect of that fire around the point you indicated. Not centered in the middle of the 20x20m Tile. In CMx2 there are roughly 4 Action Spots for every one CMx1 Tile. You indicate which Action Spot to Area Fire and the fire is spread out around that particular Action Spot. The result is about the same in this sense. No better, no worse. The benefits of the Action Spot system lie elsewhere, as do the shortcomings of the CMx1 system.

Interesting, this explains while in the same tile, a unit was benefiting from positioning itself in the scattered trees versus staying on the open road. Hence, we can conclude, it did matter where you were pointing your waypoint or target area in one and same tile, not with the same accuracy we were made to belief, but variance was at least limited to 100m2 instead of 400m2 as pretended by Sgt. Joch.

The only grip I have with the grid snapping of target lines is basically, you don't know if you're pointing at the right tile. Maybe it would help, if the tile that will be subject of area fire should be hi-lited when hovering your cursor over it, just like destination tiles are hi-lited when you make your mov orders.

[Sgt Joch]

Interesting, this explains while in the same tile, a unit was benefiting from positioning itself in the scattered trees versus staying on the open road. Hence, we can conclude, it did matter where you were pointing your waypoint or target area in one and same tile, not with the same accuracy we were made to belief, but variance was at least limited to 100m2 instead of 400m2 as pretended by Sgt. Joch.

I was only stating what Steve had said before. Do not start dragging me into your silly complaint thread unless you want me to go through everyone of your posts and point out every error you ever made. It's a game, you like it play it, you don't like it, play something else, or better yet go out and get some fresh air for a change.