V
Volksgrenadier
Guest
I was asked to introduce myself and since it's part of the rules I hereby follow it.
I play CMRT, CMFI+GL, CMBN+CW+MG and can't stand CM's modern war products and I greet everyone.
CM is a great game, but what frustrates me most with CM is the following:
1. Fortifications on slopes become visible to the oponent without being spotted - that brought my scenario design career for FI to an abrupt end and I wish I would have recognized that before I bought it.
2. That recon vehicles cannot be used for what they are intended. Which recently finished my young and ambitious CMRT scenario design career, too.
3. That all scenarios and all campaigns only model one certain phase of battles. I find this a big problem from the point of realism, but also a bit boring.
The scenario editor would theoretically allow for great asymetrical recon-phase scenarios, but vehicles can't be used for it. And what is more boring in a game than to recon by feet...
But what is even worse, is that the campaign system only can link independent scenarios (with one phase of the battle) with new maps covers that shortfall with a cheap fairy tale. The realistical and correct solution would be the reuse of used and damaged maps, the import of units, their locations and conditions, and that all embedded in a system that allows to use a master map and a management of a reinforcement pool by the player.
IMO the campaign system will render a Stalingrad-module simply ridiculous and for a player like me, who is mostly interested in realism, the childish story telling can never be a replacement for adecently working simulation model.
I would prefer if the game was developed more quickly torwards realism instead of a stream of content creation without addressing the biggest problems that make it impossible to design realistic scenarios or campaigns.
I play CMRT, CMFI+GL, CMBN+CW+MG and can't stand CM's modern war products and I greet everyone.
CM is a great game, but what frustrates me most with CM is the following:
1. Fortifications on slopes become visible to the oponent without being spotted - that brought my scenario design career for FI to an abrupt end and I wish I would have recognized that before I bought it.
2. That recon vehicles cannot be used for what they are intended. Which recently finished my young and ambitious CMRT scenario design career, too.
3. That all scenarios and all campaigns only model one certain phase of battles. I find this a big problem from the point of realism, but also a bit boring.
The scenario editor would theoretically allow for great asymetrical recon-phase scenarios, but vehicles can't be used for it. And what is more boring in a game than to recon by feet...
But what is even worse, is that the campaign system only can link independent scenarios (with one phase of the battle) with new maps covers that shortfall with a cheap fairy tale. The realistical and correct solution would be the reuse of used and damaged maps, the import of units, their locations and conditions, and that all embedded in a system that allows to use a master map and a management of a reinforcement pool by the player.
IMO the campaign system will render a Stalingrad-module simply ridiculous and for a player like me, who is mostly interested in realism, the childish story telling can never be a replacement for adecently working simulation model.
I would prefer if the game was developed more quickly torwards realism instead of a stream of content creation without addressing the biggest problems that make it impossible to design realistic scenarios or campaigns.
