CMBN Game Review Link

[ChrisND]

That might get Mike back here....

It sure won't. He was banned.

[Holien]

It sure won't. He was banned.

Was he? Oh dear....

I will have to do some digging to find out what that was all about...

[stikkypixie]

"...but building interiors are empty shells" = True

Building interiors are abstracted.

[Vanir Ausf B]

the weird FantaSyria game

Dorosh seems to have a much lower opinion of CMSF now than he did when he was a BFC beta tester for it.

What I would have liked to see in his little review was a recommendation for a game similar to CMBN that is better. He seems to be comparing CMBN to a theoretical ideal. I could use that criteria to demonstrate that every game ever made has sucked.

[JonS]

"...but building interiors are empty shells" = True

Not true. Buildings can have any number of interior walls you want, and flavour objects can be used as sim furniture ... if you think there's any value in that.

"...and infantry cannot ride on tanks (despite the fact historian Michael Doubler insisted the 2d Armored Division did just that as a reaction to the challenges of the bocage)."

= True

Not true. Units did not ride into combat on tanks. They rode to combat on tanks. CM deals with the 'into', not the 'to'.

"Two-foot tall hedgerows in the game are impassable to 20-ton tanks,"

= True

Not true. There are about half-a-dozen different ways to have a tank cross a bocage.

" and the same-old pathing problems from CM:SF have reappeared, as they show off their vulnerable flanks to go finding the long way around. "

= True

Generally this is as the result of user error. In any program, if I as the user do something stupid, the program will generate stupid results. GIGO is, I think, the technical term.

"Headquarters units still lead attacks. The AI leads attacks with headquarters units (and there are a lot of them with the new order of battle and command/control structure)"

= True

See previous comment about GIGO. I, personaly, never have HQs leading my attacks. Unless I want them to.

"As for the history - German paratroop units, some of the major defenders of the Normandy front, are not included."

= True

'Yet' is an important omission in that sentence, and its abscence speaks volumes.

"Tiger tanks are, despite not having been present in Normandy versus the Americans. Hornets are not included, neither are the SS. We have to wait and pay for the add-on modules."

= True

Not true. Hornets were never in Normandy, and as far as I can tell, never in France.

"This definitive game depicting Normandy also doesn't include a single parachute, glider, landing craft, beach assault or custom fortification, be it a Tobruk or an H677 bunker. No Army Rangers. No DD tanks."

= True

Not true. If you think it's worth the effort its trivial to produce a beach assault scenario complete with all kinds of defences and obstacles. The highly impressive OMAHA and Pont du Hoc scenarios illustrate that rather well.

CM has never modelled specific types of fortifications - H677 and Tobruks? Give me a f***ing break. That isn't a review, it's a tosser publically masturbating in an effort to impress with his knowledge ... knowledge that is a mile wide and an inch deep.

Mike has expressed his opinion and the points he raises are true.

No, they aren't.

Of course he does not balance it with all the good stuff but that is his choice.

Of course he doesn't. That's rather the point. He should add 'Fair and Balanced' to his sig line.

After walking a fair bit of Normandy it is a pity that no beach scenarios could be included especially the fortifications like tobruk pits which are a fairly common feature.

If that were true, that would indeed be a pity. But it isn't, so it isn't.

Jon

[Tarquelne]

I could use that criteria to demonstrate that every game ever made has sucked.

A TRUE grog would.

An unsophisticated grog would limit himself to demonstrating that the wargames he sucks at suck.

A "Renissanse grog" would go on to demonstrate that everything ever made has also sucked.

A sophisticate grog would do the same, but less convincingly and with far more verbage.

What I think you're talking about here, Vanir, is a "bitter grog." Which is also a mix of certain kinds of ale and beer. So, despite the criticism in this thread, it's the best type of grog of all.

[Holien]

Hi Jon I disagree with some of your analysis and rather than get into a long debate about it I think will leave it as agree to disagree...

I can see where you are coming from but I do not agree with all of your perspectives.

I fully accept that you can hold those views absolutely NP.

BTW I can see that Mike has upset some people (still need to dig out threads) so I will slowly close the door and walk away from this topic...

Too much gaming to do to get bogged down with semantics...

[sburke]

Was he? Oh dear....

I will have to do some digging to find out what that was all about...

My advice for what it's worth. - Let it be. Is it really worth giving up time you could spend doing anything else you enjoy to try and understand what is apparently not a very happy story no matter what? Life is too short.

Reviewers no matter what have their own perspective of what is or isn't important and in this case their own desires that are making them less objective about the game than I think they should be. Yes SS and Fallschirmjager are not in this module, but BFC has always been upfront about that and has already demonstrated the module concept and how they intend to add additional material with the CMSF series. The only possible criticism is of the module system itself which then implies no game should ever be created with the idea of any follow on material. It is simply an absurd position which undermines the reviews authenticity.

The game is what it is and has what it has, the relative importance of things they left out is very subjective and puts too much weight (IMHO) on rarity items. Yeah we are missing DD tanks for example, but they were really important on only 1 day (and not even all day). Now BFC may add them in in another module or not, but really items for 1 day in a 90 day campaign and nothing floats in the game so why have a DD tank at all? Just because you want to SEE a DD tank. That to me is just looking for nit picking items. Now if they had said it is a shame that water itself isn't modelled better so we could actually use assault boats (thinking Market Garden here) or have water flow down hill, that to me carries a bit more weight that you aren't simply trying to be negative but are looking for things that may be really difficult to include, but have a wider application. You can write things that are "negative" about the game AND true AND things that are a shame aren't part of it. You don't have to stoop to misrepresentations and distortions or having to look at things that are ridiculously rare. That for me tells whether the reviewer is trying to be "fair and balanced" or simply has an axe to grind.

[British Tommy]

JonS,

What part of this don't you understand?

I quote from Phil's post:

' Guys, none of this please. It's not okay to attack and vilify people when they can't effectively defend themselves. That goes for review comment threads, and forums people don't visit, alike.'

There will be more reviews of the game so don't beat yourself over the head with MD's review.

[Tarquelne]

JonS,

What part of this don't you understand?

I quote from Phil's post:

' Guys, none of this please. It's not okay to attack and vilify people when they can't effectively defend themselves. That goes for review comment threads, and forums people don't visit, alike.'

I took that as implicit encouragement to vilify Holien, an active poster. IMO if JonS should be criticised, it's for failing to do that.

(still need to dig out threads)

I did awhile ago. I thought it disappointingly prosaic and endorse sbuke's recommendation.

[MikeyD]

"...but building interiors are empty shells

CMSF "Lone Star Shopping Plaza" 3rd party scenario has a 96-interconnected-room suburban shopping mall including an interior mall fountain and chapel, plus a seperate multi-unit high-rise condo development. I doubt Dorosh played that scenario, as I doubt he bought the Marine module. BTW, the scenario's a blue-on-blue bloodbath

[sburke]

CMSF "Lone Star Shopping Plaza" 3rd party scenario has a 96-interconnected-room suburban shopping mall including an interior mall fountain and chapel, plus a seperate multi-unit high-rise condo development. I doubt Dorosh played that scenario, as I doubt he bought the Marine module. BTW, the scenario's a blue-on-blue bloodbath

You know there are some severely twisted designers out there. Ya just gotta love it! I am gonna have to go get this one now as someday I might have a moment or two when I am not playing CMBN.

[user38]

Is this turning into a Michael Dorosh thread now? When I (posted my Michael Dorosh post earlier ) I was making a joke (admittedly at slysniper's expense). But Michael Dorosh was banned on this forum in 2008 and you guys are still talking about him. It seems that posters on this board have some sort of fascination with Michael Dorosh. It is like some sort of man-crush gone wrong.

He doesn't like the game. He has his reasons. You disagree with him. Fair enough. But Michael has been gone for three years now. I know that when you lose someone you grieve, but surely it is time to move on.

[BFCElvis]

As it is this is one of those "the glass is half full" issues. Von Kleist and I are winding down our Bois de Baugin PBEM and I think we are both intensely impressed with how the game has functioned. Yeah I had an AT gunner waste a few rounds hitting the same tree, but heck he was firing from an orchard at a target fairly distant. This is not an unexpected result. As one can tell from my posts in the screenshot thread, every single turn in this battle produced yet another fairly stunning vignette. If this game had only come packaged with the Bois de Baugin scenario I have already gotten well over 100 hours of very intense game play time. Meanwhile Broadsword and I have launched into a game with an OP layer and map that is frankly stunning. The play time/game cost value chart curve is going up at an extremely sharp angle and is only getting better.

Did either of you follow my lead from the first beta AAR and charge your troops into the woods on the hill of the US left side and have them slaughtered?

That scenario is a great PBEM scenario. It can be played out so many different ways.

[sburke]

Did either of you follow my lead from the first beta AAR and charge your troops into the woods on the hill of the US left side and have them slaughtered?

That scenario is a great PBEM scenario. It can be played out so many different ways.

I hear that, heck this scenario is in my sig line now. Incredibly well done IMHO and I love the map. Geez flavor items INSIDE the buildings?!!

Von Kleist spent quite a bit of time reconning but eventually yes he made a thrust into the woods on Hill 146. I had moved most of the minefields over there to create enough delay to allow the German artillery to come into play. I put the German foxhole line right on the heavy forest tiles and a trp right on them. When the American infantry struck the line I pulled back after the intial firefight and called in the artillery and in my one majorly successful moment of the game hit two platoons + of infantry. From then on it was a slow grind downhill. Von Kleist was able to overcome that initial setback, reorganize and come up with a winning plan to overcome the German forces in the woods and eventually backed me up to the fence line. I tried a final flanking manuever on his far left that was counterattacked and over run.

By the time we got to the fight in the Villa it was like two punch drunk sailors blindly swinging at each other while still managing to keep landing shots every now and then.

I have played that scenario twice now in PBEM and can't recommend it highly enough. Both sides have the forces required to accomplish their goals, but not enough to afford a lot of room for error.

[BFCElvis]

Is this turning into a Michael Dorosh thread now? When I (posted my Michael Dorosh post earlier ) I was making a joke (admittedly at slysniper's expense). But Michael Dorosh was banned on this forum in 2008 and you guys are still talking about him. It seems that posters on this board have some sort of fascination with Michael Dorosh. It is like some sort of man-crush gone wrong.

He doesn't like the game. He has his reasons. You disagree with him. Fair enough. But Michael has been gone for three years now. I know that when you lose someone you grieve, but surely it is time to move on.

Oh man!!! I went to your link to the ban announcement and looked forward a couple of pages and saw Pengs comments. Posts 87 and 88 in the thread. I laughed so hard the beer almost came out my nose. 88 is a Peng classic.

[BFCElvis]

I hear that, heck this scenario is in my sig line now. Incredibly well done IMHO and I love the map. Geez flavor items INSIDE the buildings?!!

Von Kleist spent quite a bit of time reconning but eventually yes he made a thrust into the woods on Hill 146. I had moved most of the minefields over there to create enough delay to allow the German artillery to come into play. I put the German foxhole line right on the heavy forest tiles and a trp right on them. When the American infantry struck the line I pulled back after the intial firefight and called in the artillery and in my one majorly successful moment of the game hit two platoons + of infantry. From then on it was a slow grind downhill. Von Kleist was able to overcome that initial setback, reorganize and come up with a winning plan to overcome the German forces in the woods and eventually backed me up to the fence line. I tried a final flanking manuever on his far left that was counterattacked and over run.

By the time we got to the fight in the Villa it was like two punch drunk sailors blindly swinging at each other while still managing to keep landing shots every now and then.

I have played that scenario twice now in PBEM and can't recommend it highly enough. Both sides have the forces required to accomplish their goals, but not enough to afford a lot of room for error.

Jon and I started the game 3 or 4 times before doing the AAR.

Who won?

[sburke]

He doesn't like the game. He has his reasons. You disagree with him. Fair enough. But Michael has been gone for three years now. I know that when you lose someone you grieve, but surely it is time to move on.

What can one say other than a product some of us really like got trashed in way that showed little objectivity or even an attempt at it. What anyone likes or dislikes is always a subjective thing and that is just life. I can easily live with someone feeling that CMBN isn't the game for them. There are plenty of games I don't like. However a purported review that is a thinly disguised attempt to bash a company is just a load of ****. I may not like farmville, but I am not going to slam farmville in a review because I don't like facebook.

I honestly do not know and don't care to know what went down in 2008. It isn't relevant to me. However I do object to someone presenting a statement as some authority on BFC and it's products that is just looking for things to trash about it because he doesn't like BFC. There are folks out there who might actually really enjoy this product and are going to read those reviews and put credence into them potentially affecting the community of folks who play this game. For me that crosses the line and it is current, not 3 years ago.

However I agree it is a pointless waste of time to allow this to continue to be a distraction and I for one would be happy to see BFC close this thread. Frankly I'd rather discuss Bois de Baugin. My response was simply to address the issue head on, I sent Herr Probst down there to speak for those of us who have found the gold in this here hill.

[sburke]

Jon and I started the game 3 or 4 times before doing the AAR.

Who won?

Von Kleist. 969 to 295. We both had about 175 casualties. I destroyed or damaged a good portion of his armor while losing... well almost everything.

He achieved all his point objectives where I was able to cause enough damage to his Infantry platoons to meet the objectives and held hill 145 at the end.

What really grabs me in this scenario/game is all those little moments. I can't speak for the ones form his viewpoint. But for example at one point he had gotten a recon guy up to the villa and a tank had blasted a hole into the wall and building giving him visibility. I had an MG team do a quick attack through another gap in the wall, took down the recon guy and made it back inside the villa before the enemy could bring down fire upon them. It seemed every turn had something like this for a good portion of the game.

Between the fact that you can plan these kind of moves and succeed and the game creates a movie for you to watch of it. geez and it only cost what?

[sburke]

Oh man!!! I went to your link to the ban announcement and looked forward a couple of pages and saw Pengs comments. Posts 87 and 88 in the thread. I laughed so hard the beer almost came out my nose. 88 is a Peng classic.

Now that was worth investigating. I have to admit to having no idea what foul combination of noxious chemicals conspired to come together to create a Peng thread. Nor was I even sure there was a Mr Peng. Fortunately your note had me prepared and I had set my beer down. It promptly spilled on the floor when I accidentally kicked it while laughing...damn you that was a nasty trick.

[Guest]

I think it's absolutely fine to criticize the content of Mr. Dorosh's review - he put it up for public consumption and clearly intended it to stand on its own.

[British Tommy]

I think it's absolutely fine to criticize the content of Mr. Dorosh's review - he put it up for public consumption and clearly intended it to stand on its own.

Agree 100% about his review but several posters here have launched into personal attacks on MD and as he can't defend himself here (and the posters know it) I think they should be ashamed of themselves.

[slysniper]

Agree 100% about his review but several posters here have launched into personal attacks on MD and as he can't defend himself here (and the posters know it) I think they should be ashamed of themselves.

Oh, I am ashamed, I place myself at the same childish level as he is.

I will not say any more. I will let it rest

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Agree 100% about his review but several posters here have launched into personal attacks on MD and as he can't defend himself here (and the posters know it) I think they should be ashamed of themselves.

Pffft, and whose fault is it he cannot defend himself here? He only has his own lovable self to blame for that.

[British Tommy]

Pffft, and whose fault is it he cannot defend himself here? He only has his own lovable self to blame for that.

So people like you take full advantage of that.

Let's get back to talking about the reviews and stop with the personal attacks.