RTFM?

[HalfLifeExpert]

Thank you so much for answering that Apache! I was at a complete loss as to what that meant.


And thank you for the complement on my guide. I created it after seeing on more than a few occasions things like let's play videos and reviews, while mostly fine, failing to effectively convey at a fundamental level just what CMANO is.

[guanotwozero]

ORIGINAL: HalfLifeExpert
And it would be divided into categories instead of a long alphabetical list of everything.

Agreed. That way we can find what we need instead of having to do a full search. For a game like CMANO, the challenge is to get to grips with the concepts and related details, not memorise the terms. Clever category arrangement is the key to that.

That is the core purpose behind my Steam Guide which I will link here for those who have not seen it: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/f ... 1081327870

Oh, this is very useful, many thanks for doing this!

I do share Wood's frustration at players who with this, as well as other games, who fail to do much if any research on games before buying them. To me that is just lunacy.

Disagree. Well, it's their money. It's not up to us judge how they choose to spend their own money, even if we'd do differently. If anything, it's more money going to WarfareSims, which will help them develop CMANO further - that can only be a good thing. I've bought more than a few games on impulse, myself, and rarely regretted it.

There is practically unlimited information available for free for many games out there, CMANO included, and there is simply no excuse in this day and age, in my opinion, for complaining about not understanding a game you just bought on a whim without any research on your own part.

Agree. Whether you've bought a game after deep research or on impulse, any valid complaint should be based on sufficient knowledge and understanding of the problem. In other words, learn the game enough to judge if there's a real problem.


Oh, and isn't it Read The Fabulous Manual? [:'(]

[alphington]

apache85

[/quote]

I've got another 4 submarine scenarios just in the final stages of testing which should be out in the next day or two; beyond that there's another 4 in production (bringing the total to 12).

This is very good news, thank you!

[Andrea G]

ORIGINAL: apache85

Gunner98 has the strike side of things well covered with his excellent Strike Tutorial set, submarines are getting a proper treatment with 12 tutorials, what other topics are of interest? I was thinking perhaps air-to-air warfare, and I saw some mention of confusion over the cargo model so that is likely to get a tutorial.

Any other requests?

I am doing this as a personal project, just to clarify.

Thank you for your endeavour, as I already mentioned, cargo is the fuzziest area for me now and any tutorial would be a great starting point to delve into it.

[thewood1]

"There will always be some players that will never get CMANO at any level. That has to be accepted. This is by no means a game for everyone, or even the majority. In fact, I almost consider playing Command to be a hobby in of itself, and that's without any scenario creation (based on my experience). "

And finally, someone gets my point. This is exactly what I have been saying. You can typically see these people a mile away. You either need to convince them that Command is a little different than Order of Battle or tell them the hard truth that they just don't have what it takes to play a game. Building your documentation plan around these guys is going to be a lot of wasted effort because no matter what you build, they will not use it and just get pissed that aren't helping them.

And you are better off doing that early rather than having them hang around and getting frustrated and mad. The War Room is a great example of that type of person.

[LordFlashheart]

Late to the party here but I think what would be of real benefit to both beginners and veterans is a CMANO 'Strategy Guide' that not only explains HOW to do it, but WHY.

I'm thinking of the old Total Air War, Tornado or flightsim manuals which gave you an overview of how the basics of how to plan/organise an air campaign - what targets to prioritise, etc.

If you had it broken down into a series of mini-AARs - each one dedicated to a different role (interdiction, SEAD, air superiority, ASW, mines,) with screenshots and playing hints that i think would enable it to act a resource for new players and old...

Just my 2penneth!

[c3k]

There are far too many "how do I.." questions which pop up in this forum. I'm a Newb. I haven't asked ANY of those questions because I'm still trying to grapple with some basic concepts. (The friggin' RTB options are...interesting.)

Just recently, someone posted a question about "how do I dedicate one aircraft to a target and repeat that for all 16 in a strike package?" (Attempting to get 16x 1v1 air-ground strikes. Instead, the game gave him 1x 16v1 air-ground strike, then shifted to the next target...16 times.) Now, thewood1 showed that HE could do it...but as a newb, I didn't see the difference. (He mentioned checking a box in "the second column". Shrug.) Okay. There's a checkbox somewhere which needs to be checked. When a question like that pops up, a PDF would be far easier to find and read than trying to watch a bunch of videos until you find the video which covers the EXACT question you have...and then you actually SEE how to do it. (Imagine fast forwarding past the relevant part in the relevant video? Grrrr.)

A searchable PDF would allow a quick hit in just few minutes.

Tutorials have their place, but they cannot answer every question. A PDF document should be able to do that. A few paragraphs given to explain EVERY checkbox? That would be very helpful.

[Grazyn]

ORIGINAL: c3k

There are far too many "how do I.." questions which pop up in this forum. I'm a Newb. I haven't asked ANY of those questions because I'm still trying to grapple with some basic concepts. (The friggin' RTB options are...interesting.)

Just recently, someone posted a question about "how do I dedicate one aircraft to a target and repeat that for all 16 in a strike package?" (Attempting to get 16x 1v1 air-ground strikes. Instead, the game gave him 1x 16v1 air-ground strike, then shifted to the next target...16 times.) Now, thewood1 showed that HE could do it...but as a newb, I didn't see the difference. (He mentioned checking a box in "the second column". Shrug.) Okay. There's a checkbox somewhere which needs to be checked. When a question like that pops up, a PDF would be far easier to find and read than trying to watch a bunch of videos until you find the video which covers the EXACT question you have...and then you actually SEE how to do it. (Imagine fast forwarding past the relevant part in the relevant video? Grrrr.)

A searchable PDF would allow a quick hit in just few minutes.

Tutorials have their place, but they cannot answer every question. A PDF document should be able to do that. A few paragraphs given to explain EVERY checkbox? That would be very helpful.

edit: that wasn't me

[Dimitris]

thewood1 < Your inbox is full, please delete some messages. Thanks!

[thewood1]

Done...

[SirAndrew]

Hello everyone!
About Apache's request...I've started some time ago (when I first saw this thread tm.asp?m=4299665&mpage=1&key=tutorials ) to create a few air-ops tutorials following and improving Dimitris' guidelines (for example I added a few tutorials with Air Damage and tutorials for NATO and WP weapons and so on) and also a Cargo tutorial, as I am really interested in that part of the game.
The first 4 AAW tutorials are ready and the others are well on their way, I hope to release all of them in the next days/weeks.
So if you then think they are OK, that may solve the need for AAW and Cargo tutorials.
That will leave only the Naval tutorials ("Maritime Ops" in that thread) to be done... [;)]

[schweggy]

FWIW

Tutorials are perhaps the best medium for Command. The more I get into the "nuts and bolts" of the game engine, the database, etc. it becomes apparent there's a lot of untapped customization available.

I've been in the IT business (FedGov) for 30 years and played Harpoon, then Command since about 1987. I'm selfish in that I get more out of the "learning by doing" than by RTFM.

[HalfLifeExpert]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

"There will always be some players that will never get CMANO at any level. That has to be accepted. This is by no means a game for everyone, or even the majority. In fact, I almost consider playing Command to be a hobby in of itself, and that's without any scenario creation (based on my experience). "

And finally, someone gets my point. This is exactly what I have been saying. You can typically see these people a mile away. You either need to convince them that Command is a little different than Order of Battle or tell them the hard truth that they just don't have what it takes to play a game. Building your documentation plan around these guys is going to be a lot of wasted effort because no matter what you build, they will not use it and just get pissed that aren't helping them.

And you are better off doing that early rather than having them hang around and getting frustrated and mad. The War Room is a great example of that type of person.

I basically agree, but I think it would be good to be more welcoming to potential players, as your approach can at times come off as a bit too firm. It isn't without some real basis, as there are no doubt players that are as you say they are, but I don't see it in the exact same way as you do.

In my paragraph you quote, I meant that we should be welcoming to all potential players at first, and through their initial process of being explained CMANO, and initial support (answering questions etc) then one can tell whether Command is for them.

It's the express reason for my guide, and while I am proud of it, I do know that it is not a perfect, one stop, solution.

[thewood1]

Again, I'll point out, I don't jump on any player for the first questions they might ask. Its after repeated attempts get them to help themselves and pointing out where they can find resources. I can't think of a single person I jumped on for asking some simple beginner questions.

[Rory Noonan]

More submarine tutorials released today: tm.asp?m=4459109

[Andrea G]

ORIGINAL: apache85

More submarine tutorials released today: tm.asp?m=4459109

EVVIVA! [:D]

[$trummer]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Again, I'll point out, I don't jump on any player for the first questions they might ask. Its after repeated attempts get them to help themselves and pointing out where they can find resources. I can't think of a single person I jumped on for asking some simple beginner questions.

Oh, you jumped on me for just about the first question I asked in four years, about the process of updating older scenarios. You were bad tempered and patronising and your lectures were way out of proportion with the crime of laziness you were accusing me of committing. The sheer length of the posts you dedicate to attacking questions vs. actually answering them — or ignoring them, which is your right — makes me wonder how much time you must have on your hands that would be better spent getting some fresh air. I will be asking more questions, probably, as well as reading the manual and other materials I have had printed and bound; however, despite your being, in between lectures, a useful and valuable resource, I hope to get my answers from someone else who will spare me the forum-cop lecture.

[thewood1]

I sure hope you aren't using this post as your example...

tm.asp?m=4456018&mpage=1&key=%24trummer

Because that right there is a good example of someone who has had the game for a while coming in and not only not even taking a quick look at the manual, but even reading the posts in the threads. So you didn't just pop a question into the forum, you jumped into the middle of an existing thread and didn't seem to have enough ambition to even look at the info provided in that same thread.

[$trummer]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I sure hope you aren't using this post as your example...

tm.asp?m=4456018&mpage=1&key=%24trummer

Because that right there is a good example of someone who has had the game for a while coming in and not only not even taking a quick look at the manual, but even reading the posts in the threads. So you didn't just pop a question into the forum, you jumped into the middle of an existing thread and didn't seem to have enough ambition to even look at the info provided in that same thread.

My god you are a pompous ass. That troll of yours is right.

[DWReese]

Kevin,

So, now you are going to try and throw me under the bus? You are a pathetic, worthless piece of crap.

Please do everyone a favor, and stop responding to EVERYONE. Stay away from EVERYONE, and EVERYONE will be just fine. You must have a screw loose. You have some nerve trying to drag me into your pathetic defense. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, wants YOUR ADVICE or HELP on anything. Just leave EVERYONE alone.

I, and many others, will be glad to help them with whatever they want.

I AM PUTTING YOU ON OFFICIAL NOTICE....DON'T EVER RESPOND TO ANYTHING THAT I EVER WRITE AGAIN. Additionally, don't ever mention my posts, or put them out as an example of anything. I will report your actions and it won't be pretty.

NO ONE WANTS TO HEAR FROM YOU. PLEASE GO AWAY! PERMANENTLY!

I am starting a new thread that members can add their name to it that will serve as official notice that these listed members no longer desire to have you respond to anything that they write.

Doug