Over at battlefront.
Loaded it up and looked at it. It looks purty. Don't know how it plays yet. I have a slight nazi killing murder boner.
Definitely going to have to give this a try tonight! CM was always one of my favorite games ever.
Plus, there is a demo for that Panzer Command :Ostfront game.
http://www.matrixgames.com/news/802/Demo.Launched.for.Panzer.Command:.Ostfront!
More dead krauts.
:licklips:
Thanks for the heads-up!
After playing both demos, I think I like Ostfront better. And that pains me, as a longtime Combat Mission junkie.
Quote from: Ed Anger on May 17, 2011, 02:52:28 PM
After playing both demos, I think I like Ostfront better. And that pains me, as a longtime Combat Mission junkie.
I also tried both demos, and I think you are wrong. And I am saying that despite being a thousand times more interested in the eastern front.
Ostfront just looks so unpolished compared to CM, despite the better handling of formation-orders.
I think I'll buy CM.
I think you are a poophead.
To be serious...for those with time to play a lot, it is a good time to be a kraut killing wargamer.
I think these past few months (or year?) has been great for strategy gaming in general.
I have more money to piss away than time, so I end up buying (yes, buying, not pirating, I have become stupid like that) games than never really exploring them, because some other cool stuff comes up.
OMFG fighting in the bocage is HARD
QuoteI have more money to piss away than time
I hear ya. I just have no time. I will probably buy both, they will sit on the self for a couple of years till I get around to them. That's what happened with CM:BB and CM:AK. Bought them and they sat for close to three years. :Embarrass:
Watched both on youtube. Panzer Command gets ordered tonight and CM:BfN when it comes out.
Took a shot at the demo. I see that hiding in the brush, and jumping up suddenly to shout "Panzerfaust!" is still an effective anti-tank method.
I noticed the Manuel and Wikipedia both use the same sentence. I'm not if one copied the other or both stole from the same source.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 02, 2011, 12:26:27 PM
I noticed the Manuel and Wikipedia both use the same sentence.
Si?
I think Manuel wrote the wiki article.
Quote from: Habbaku on July 02, 2011, 12:39:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 02, 2011, 12:26:27 PM
I noticed the Manuel and Wikipedia both use the same sentence.
Si?
Article concerning the M10 TD. Don't know which one was written first (cause I never did figure out how to see previous revisions on Wikipedia.
"It was numerically the most important U.S. tank destroyer of World War II and combined a reasonably potent anti-tank weapon with a turreted platform " Appears in both.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 02, 2011, 12:59:37 PM
Quote from: Habbaku on July 02, 2011, 12:39:18 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 02, 2011, 12:26:27 PM
I noticed the Manuel and Wikipedia both use the same sentence.
Si?
Article concerning the M10 TD. Don't know which one was written first (cause I never did figure out how to see previous revisions on Wikipedia.
"It was numerically the most important U.S. tank destroyer of World War II and combined a reasonably potent anti-tank weapon with a turreted platform " Appears in both.
Google that quote, it appears everywhere, from Youtube comments to blogs to internet forums. I haven't seen anyone credit a source with it, they seem to pass it off as their own thought.
This might help
M10
Grand Blanc Arsenal 11/1942 - 12/ 1943: 4,993
Ford 10/1942 - 9/ 1943: 1,038
Grand Blanc 9/1943 - 11/1943: 675
Total 6751
M18
M18: 2,5073 Manufacturer: Buick Motor Division (GMC)
Production: July 1943 - October 1944
The Encyclopedia of Weapons of World War II, Chris Bishop, 1998
Quotenumerically the most important U.S. tank destroyer of World War II
I would have to say that is a correct statement.
That's really strange.