The differance between CMx1 and "CM"x2.

[Fullhouse]

and I'm having great fun with the demo just ordering a couple of Strykers around, telling the passengers to get out and get back in, shaking out into different formations,

Well if just moving strykers from A to B makes you happy, Combat Mission Sans Fun may have something for you. If you dig deeper you will find that this game is a clunky mess and you will be frustrated in your attempts to carry out your tactical plans. The game just dosnt work.

[kineas]

I think BFC was overconfident, and they thought their new idea of gameplay will be revolutionary again. But for revolutions talent and diligent work is not enough, you need luck and proper circumstances.

I have been following the design of CMSF on the BFC forums for about a year, and frankly, I didn't understand them. I think the guys don't even like wargames, they focused too much on a superrealistic-realtime simulator of a battle, which was just a too big undertaking for them.

[PoorOldSpike]

you will find that this game is a clunky mess and you will be frustrated in your attempts to carry out your tactical plans.

Yes that uncertainty is a refreshing change and is actually part of the appeal for me.. :)
I mean, in old CM everything can be plotted with neat surgical precision, but in SF it can't, which adds to the challenge.
I kinda like ordering units in SF to "go here, go there, kill, don't kill", and hope they'll perform reasonably well within that framework of orders, so in that respect it's far more realistic than old CM..

PS - and realtime play in SF makes a refreshing change too, as it adds to the realism..
I still like old CM best though, but SF makes an interesting diversion with lots of new toys to play with like missiles and stuff..

[Fullhouse]

What I meant was you will tell something to go there do that etc and it wont. Also TAC AI is more like TAC AS (Artificial stupidity). Buy the game you will find out.

[Fubar]

I love the BFC post about the troubles of how abstractions with the new LOF and LOS rules allowing units to shoot through terrain is OK because we have a lovely looking map as compensation.

That's why there's no hulldown order anymore i guess.

[Phil Davies (FGM)]

Ok I have read a lot of stuff about how dissapointed people are about the CMSF, for myself I am going to sit on the fence and say that with some work it would become a great game. Some say the way pointing is poor, I myself have no issue's with it except for the facing command. I do have an issue with the command display and the sub menus which are not the easiest/clearist of things but I am getting to grips with it. I miss the the right click of the drop down menu which we get with CM. So far I have only played the AI, I have found that the American 155m arty is devistating and one only needs to rain this down on the poor Syrians with pin point accuracy and you'll win. My Abrahams knocked out nearly all T72's on the first turn of the first campaign and then killed all the Syrian T55 reins as they appeared on the edge of the map. The biggest single dissapointment for me is the poor QB format, anyone who has played me knows I really only play QB's as I am not restricted by a designers choice and this for me makes CM a fantastic game.
Will I play this as a PBEM ? yes I will despite the huge files which everyone is taking about, I would like to try it online also and see what happens there.
If BF do bring this out as a WW2 game then I hope they listen to what is being said and the howls of anguish. I don't think many of us were ever really sold on the near furture thing but we still hoped they would deliver a game which would live up to it's CM name, unfortunalty they didn't.
As for patches I don't see them altering the game style, they will be for bug fixes of which there do seem to be a few.

[Phil Davies (FGM)]

Another thing I forgot to mention in my last post was the lack of stats, I liked to see what thickness of armour my rounds will penetrate at different distances. I also like to know who has killed what at the end and how many kill each made, firepower of infantry at different distances also, all these things add up to a lot and that's what made CM good.

[Sgt Joch]

Considering the game only came out 5 days ago and that it is not only a new game, but a new engine, it may be a bit early to label it a POS. I have to admit I have already gone from WOOT to WTF and now back to starting to appreciate the game for what it is, while recognizing its faults and limitations. After about 15 hours of playing exclusively in RT mode, I am starting to get the hang of it and it is starting to grow on me. From what I can see, the tactics that worked in ww2 CMx1 still work in 2008 CMSF (i.e. charging the enemy with your halftracks/strykers is a bad idea ).

Let us not also forget that BFC will not dump this game, like some developpers, but will work to improve it. Already, thay have commented on issues which will be addressed.


Anyway, if anyone wants to try a PBEM game, either scenario or QB, any size or parameter, I am game. I prefer the U.S. side, but will also play as the Reds.

[Copper]

I'm filling out the disputing charges form for my order as I type... I'm too far poor to waste 50 bucks on something like this to wait for a patch and play a wannabe RTS game that can't compete with the ones already out there. I'll go buy GRAW2 instead...

[Fubar]

I'm filling out the disputing charges form for my order as I type... I'm too far poor to waste 50 bucks on something like this to wait for a patch and play a wannabe RTS game that can't compete with the ones already out there. I'll go buy GRAW2 instead...

I thought all sales were final.......how do you get your dosh back?