Troops under cover?

[ironsight]

69th NYSV wrote:
I don't know about anyone else, but honestly I was thinking the new game was going to be more like TC2M on steriods, rather then "new".

Norb wrote:
Actually that is probably a good description. All lessons learned from previous games, plus a bunch of stuff that we wanted to do, plus a new graphics engine, plus multiplayer. So on steroids

I for one would be happy if no new things were added just all the frustrations of TC2M's skiddish cavalry, next to useless longrange artillery, annoying message subscreens, better order taking, misc. bugs, etc. etc. etc. were tweaked.
I think if later patches were added to TC2M with all this in mind it would be just about perfect for me anyhows.

Perfection is a relative thing which can mean different things to different people. For me it has more to due with flawless-bugless running code than bells 'n whistles.
If every single feature mentioned in this forum were implemented even if it were possible due to memory constraignts, the game IMO would be in a state of perpetual development.

[GShock]

Please mind the good sides of games in perpetual development (such as Ageod's American Civil War) because there are.
The community grows to the infinite with grognards evolving into beta, community managers, tournament runners and newcomers freshly coming seeing the active community and buying the game.

Ultimately this would put food to keep devving...it's a matter of balancing costs and incomes but it is possible.

[Hancock the Superb]

I have just perfected the use of long range artillery, see Modder's Corner...