Hi.
Thanks to your good self, and all the other reasonable, mature responses to my, I thought, perfectly reasonable complaints.
To those that have all started to name-call, try and offend, insult blah blah... Grow up, and learn that if you don't agree, that's ok. You don't have to. Lol, I mean, I think someone even tried to make something of the fact I didn't respond immediately to the various childish attacks. As though I haven't got a life and just sit here waiting for the world to respond to my relatively trivial comments. I had no idea it would cause some people to get so emotional and offensive.
Right, I'm playing in veteran mode and I stand firmly by every point I made. Maybe I haven't taken hours to analyse every moment that seems amiss and categorically nail said cause, but I don't think I need to. This game is, as always, half-baked. It doesn't need detailed analysis to prove it.
Sure, I like it as it's the only game of its kind, but that doesn't mean I'm going to get all emotional about it and ignore its failings. It's got a long way to go before it can claim to be a polished, or some might say "finished" game.
Furthermore, if the AI needs so much micro management, and that level of control is not made abundantly clear in some form or tutorial or other mechanism to inform the player, and all that's left is trial and error to find out, then how can you blame someone for jumping to a conclusion based on their own frame of reference; ie/ other games that have ai involved, that aren't nearly as flawed.
Thanks to those that have advised on how to manage the AI, I'll give it a go in future. As for that particular level, it's done now, even though all my ai were slaughtered. I sent them charging in after the artillery, as cannon fodder, while I snuck in from the south and picked off all the anti-tank armour.
Still, I scored full marks!! The game's so realistic it doesn't penalise for losing your entire squad/platoon/whateveryoucallthem... ;)
*that last comment is for all the fanboys who will invariably rant back after they recover from reeling at such a heinous suggestion that the game's not absolutely perfect.
btw, CoD is definitely not my favourite wargame! In fact I can't think of any other game (at least in MP) that causes so much stress while managing to be boring at the same time.
I appreciate that BIS are working hard to fix things, but maybe they could take the quality a bit more seriously, which must end up having a positive impact on the end product. I mean time and resources are allocated to any project according to its goals right, and they decide them, so the logical conclusion to the massive content over the obvious flaws must be that they either haven't got the talent required to polish the game, or they just don't regard it as highly?
Anyway, I hope that BIS focus a bit more on quality and sacrifice a little content, for example? I mean, once the quality is laid down, can't they just add more content easily enough later on?
As for my comment about save-games seemingly being overwritten, I found out the problem...
... If you make a save-point, it doesn't appear as an option to "resume" to unless you completely fail said mission. If you fail it, then it does appear as a point to revert to. If you get hit hard and are about to fail, but hit escape with the intention of saving the few minutes it'd take to fail proper, the option to resume from a save-point doesn't appear. Again, another flaw that requires trial and error to find out.
