Eventually!!

[JudgeDredd]

Managed a decisive on Normal difficulty on teh first boot camp campaign mission and a legendary victory on the second one!

Some things that are affecting my enjoyment of the game though...
Artillery

[b]Bad[/b]
• Unpredictive Access. A strength but a weakness...for example in the second boot camp, I didn't get access to Artillery until turn 6! Perhaps, as someone suggested, the probability of receiving arty should increase on each check
• Adjusting Artillery. I don't mean after it's started. I'm fine with living with the fact that I have to anticipate where artillery goes. I mean when spotting for it...once you've selected the order and clicked on the map...that's it. This is particularly a problem as some artillery have different spreads (81mm mortar smoke open sheaf has two target cursors pop up...105 artillery has 3)
• Cancelling - once artillery is ordered, it seems you cannot always cancel it because the next turn, you may not have radio contact. I think once you have artillery contact, you should have it for the duration of the bombardment.
• Access during Raction Phase - I don't know if you can ever have artillery on call during a reaction phase. From a command and control pov, I think it's vital that you can. I have yet to see artillery being on call during a reaction phase.
  Good
• Realistic spread
• Unpredictiveness (see above)

Animations/Sound/Skins

[b]Bad[/b]
• Posture - I need an indication from my troops that they are adopting the correct posture. It's disconcerting to see your troops get to the end of their rush command and simply stand there!
• [/b]Vehicles Skins[/b] - I think alot more work needs to be done on the vehicles. They are fairly good models, but seriously...I was hoping we had all but left the hexagonal wheel behind.
• Speaking - seriously lacking in speech content. Very repetitive. Alot more required
• [/b]Vehicle Sounds[/b] - obviously looping is required here...but you can HEAR the loop
  Good
• Artillery Sounds - Nice sound effects...although again variety is required...81mm should not sound like 105mm (at least I think I couldn't tell the difference. I know smoke sounds different to HE...but I'm not sure I noticed a difference between 105mm and 81mm HE
• Artillery Visuals - again more variety required, but what is there is nice and smoke is very good
• Tracer - I like
• Landscapes - especially the different varieties of tress - I think it gives the map variety and an authentic look

General Points

• Pathfinding on occasions. I watched one russian truck take a dip in a river
• Cannot get to see briefing during game
• Menu Command - I'm still not completely used to the fact that my units have limited commands allowed based on what the HQ of the unit has been ordered to do. As a little example, I'm STILL giving my HQ an arty command and then selecting a squad only to find they only have the Defend command available, meaning I have to go back to the HQ and issue a command so I can give my subords a command.

Now this is "generally" a negative post. There is something about Panzer Command:Kharkov...there must be because, despite all these little issues I've mentioned, I'm still playing it.

Also, whilst they are little issues and they are specific to me (alot of people will disagree with some points I've made and state realisim etc, etc)...to me, they do affect my enjoyment of the game. Not just this game, ANY game.

However, I'm still playing it and that is a big thumbs up for the game. I've played games with similar/lesser/fewer problems than this, and I gave up on them. I can see me playing this for some time to come.

I know some of these points have been mentioned and I also know that Erik and clan have responded. I know you are aware of the animation and lack off feedback to the player.

Just, please, get some immersion issues ironed out for the next one.

Oh...and thank you for this [:D]

[Erik Rutins]

Hi Judge,

Thanks for posting your feedback, a few comments...

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
Managed a decisive on Normal difficulty on teh first boot camp campaign mission and a legendary victory on the second one!

Congratulations! Glad to see you've gotten through that and I'm sorry that you were affected by that menu refresh issue. We're working to fix that for Update #1.

[*] Unpredictive Access. A strength but a weakness...for example in the second boot camp, I didn't get access to Artillery until turn 6! Perhaps, as someone suggested, the probability of receiving arty should increase on each check

The thing is, you're judging this based on a scenario where you have _one_ HQ. When you start playing the historical scenarios and random battles, I think you'll find that you have regular artillery access (at least as Germans), just not necessarily with the exact HQ you want.

We tried to keep the artillery system from being too complex, but we did specifically want to model in some unpredictability because frankly, that's realistic.

[*] Adjusting Artillery. I don't mean after it's started. I'm fine with living with the fact that I have to anticipate where artillery goes. I mean when spotting for it...once you've selected the order and clicked on the map...that's it. This is particularly a problem as some artillery have different spreads (81mm mortar smoke open sheaf has two target cursors pop up...105 artillery has 3)

Since the current artillery system represents your platoon HQ(s) being in contact with an abstracted Forward Observer (they might be in contact by radio/phone, or by messenger or he may be nearby) he is left to do the adjusting. Each fire mission only lasts for a few minutes and you can cancel it early if you need to re-adjust. The FO is automatically adjusting the barrage (under the hood, so to speak) each turn to make it more accurate to your original target location.

Things I would like to do though is allow you to see the location of the "open sheaf" artillery targets before you click to set them and also to show the expected area the artillery will affect (with say a blue box) as you are trying to decide where to set it. This will help get the initial targeting just the way you want it.

[*] Cancelling - once artillery is ordered, it seems you cannot always cancel it because the next turn, you may not have radio contact. I think once you have artillery contact, you should have it for the duration of the bombardment.

This is indeed by design, simply because things change on the battlefield and you may not always have contact with the FO. But again, you are seeing this as an issue I'd say because you're in a unique scenario with a single HQ squad. In a normal scenario, you may not be able to cancel the fire with the original HQ, but there will almost certainly be another HQ squad in communication that can cancel it.

[qote][*] Access during Raction Phase - I don't know if you can ever have artillery on call during a reaction phase. From a command and control pov, I think it's vital that you can. I have yet to see artillery being on call during a reaction phase.[/quote]

You mean for purposes of canceling a barrage? I don't see it as being vital to be able to call in artillery during reactions at all. As with other orders that require planning ahead, you should know if you need artillery ahead of time and it's never more than 80 seconds to the next available Orders phase. If anything, artillery may be a bit more flexible in Panzer Command than historically, but not less.

[*] Posture - I need an indication from my troops that they are adopting the correct posture. It's disconcerting to see your troops get to the end of their rush command and simply stand there!

I agree, they should kneel when they're done rushing. I'll see what we can do. Have you seen any other issues like this?

[*] [/b]Vehicles Skins[/b] - I think alot more work needs to be done on the vehicles. They are fairly good models, but seriously...I was hoping we had all but left the hexagonal wheel behind.

Ok, we'll try to do better, but hear me out.

In order to allow systems with our low end spec to run the game, we had to keep the model polys and textures down. We could have put the most amazingly perfect tank model in the game with 5,000 polys and hyper-detailed textures, but the lower end systems would have been able to have perhaps a dozen on the screen before they slowed to a crawl. We wanted all gamers to be able to have BIG battles with our system and that required a few compromises. I think we did a good job with the wheels overall and only on some models from a few angles do they really look non-round to me. Again, this was a poly-saving technique.

Honestly, unless you are zooming in as close as possible, I think the vehicles look excellent. They were designed for viewing from the "1" level rather than the Tab/Super-zoomed view so when you get that close some flaws are certainly visible on some of them.

Take a look at the Panther G if you'd like to see a somewhat more detailed model in this engine.

[*] Speaking - seriously lacking in speech content. Very repetitive. Alot more required
[*] [/b]Vehicle Sounds[/b] - obviously looping is required here...but you can HEAR the loop
Good
[*] Artillery Sounds - Nice sound effects...although again variety is required...81mm should not sound like 105mm (at least I think I couldn't tell the difference. I know smoke sounds different to HE...but I'm not sure I noticed a difference between 105mm and 81mm HE

We've definitely heard that we need to improve the sounds. We'll make sure we do for the next release definitely, at which point they'll apply to all previous content too. We'll see if we can improve that looping sound for the next update. Note that the sounds for 81mm and 105mm are fairly different, but may be hard to tell apart when multiples are falling and with other sounds.

[*] Pathfinding on occasions. I watched one russian truck take a dip in a river

Was he crossing at a ford?

[*] Cannot get to see briefing during game

Added this to the wish list.

[*] Menu Command - I'm still not completely used to the fact that my units have limited commands allowed based on what the HQ of the unit has been ordered to do. As a little example, I'm STILL giving my HQ an arty command and then selecting a squad only to find they only have the Defend command available, meaning I have to go back to the HQ and issue a command so I can give my subords a command.

Keep in mind that you can call in artillery and then immediately give your HQ aother order. I'm confident that with some more time you'll get used to the different orders and how the platoon command system works.

Now this is "generally" a negative post. There is something about Panzer Command:Kharkov...there must be because, despite all these little issues I've mentioned, I'm still playing it.
Also, whilst they are little issues and they are specific to me (alot of people will disagree with some points I've made and state realisim etc, etc)...to me, they do affect my enjoyment of the game. Not just this game, ANY game.
However, I'm still playing it and that is a big thumbs up for the game. I've played games with similar/lesser/fewer problems than this, and I gave up on them. I can see me playing this for some time to come.

Thanks, we're listening and glad you're having fun. We'll work to iron out the things that are bothering people as time goes on.

Regards,

- Erik

[Capitaine]

Things I would like to do though is allow you to see the location of the "open sheaf" artillery targets before you click to set them and also to show the expected area the artillery will affect (with say a blue box) as you are trying to decide where to set it. This will help get the initial targeting just the way you want it.

Oh yes, that is the only thing about artillery that I think needs a fix. I'm not sure if there's a pattern to it, but when using open sheaf I'm never sure in what direction the other targets will go from the point I click on. And once you click, the mission is set in stone. Even knowing the methodology of the game would help, even if I couldn't see the expected target area. So that would be a great addition Erik.

Cancelling - once artillery is ordered, it seems you cannot always cancel it because the next turn, you may not have radio contact. I think once you have artillery contact, you should have it for the duration of the bombardment.

Not really. Why would you think radio contact would be maintained? Especially if your platoon is off doing other combat things and not staying in perpetual "spotting indirect" mode for the entire bombardment? Erik also explains how it goes in other, bigger scenarios and he's indeed correct that in truth the system probably allows too much flexibility to artillery spotting.

Access during Raction Phase - I don't know if you can ever have artillery on call during a reaction phase. From a command and control pov, I think it's vital that you can. I have yet to see artillery being on call during a reaction phase.

You need to understand what the reaction phase is, and what it isn't. The reaction phase is not your time to give new orders. That's the Orders phase of each turn. The reaction phase is a time to react to something that crops up during orders phases.

In general, players need to keep in mind that they're basically commanding platoons, not squads, and that each turn is 80 seconds, not 40. The presence of subunits and subturns is an added feature that permits a bit more detail and management. It's a valid approach in my opinion that conveys the reality that you cannot have godlike control over everything that happens in a battle.

I will say that the approach works better when there are plenty of troops available and the inevitable loss of a unit doesn't spell immediate loss of the scenario. If each unit is so essential to a game that you can't afford to lose it, then I'd say that more godlike command over things would be needed.

[JudgeDredd]

deleted as a double post!!

[JudgeDredd]

Thx for the update.

Unpredictive Access
Good answer and fair point. That'll do until I'm in bigger scenarios

Adjusting artillery

Erik
Things I would like to do though is allow you to see the location of the "open sheaf" artillery targets before you click to set them and also to show the expected area the artillery will affect (with say a blue box) as you are trying to decide where to set it. This will help get the initial targeting just the way you want it.

I don't want to adjust artillery "on the fly". I was specifically talking about when placing it...I want to know "the coverage" so I know where I'm placing it. So we are along the same lines here.

Cancelling
Again fine...I'll wait until I get to bigger scenarios.

Access During Reaction Phase
I'm not talking about cancelling here...actually becoming in contact with the FO and calling artillery. I have to disagree to a degree. Ok...it isn't "vital"...but it is called the "reaction phase" because you are reacting to the changing battlefield. If an enemy unit suddenly popus up during my orders phase, lets say 10 seconds into my orders phase...I effectively have to wait 70 seconds before I can call in artillery (IF I get it) and another 80 seconds before it comes down...that's alot of turns gone and could mean alot of damage. If you allow artillery to be called in (subject to the "in contact" check), then you can knock that down from 150 seconds to 110...that's alot of soldiers saved.

Anyway, looks like a pov...so I'll drop it.

Posture
I have only really seen this when completing an order before the end of a phase.

Vehicle Skins
I agree, to allow as many people to enjoy it as possible, it is essential to have lower models...but get some big buggers out! Seeing those hexagonal wheels go round is just a bit "yucky". But you are correct, on the lesser zoomed in levels, they are nice.
I know it's like comparing apples and pairs, but I fired up Theatre of War last night and I don't know what's going on different under the hood, or whether its' down to efficient coding, but that game has some awesome graphics on it, particularly for vehicles. Also, Combat Mission Shock Force has some awesome graphics, and it doesn't seem to suffer in "under the hood" calculations, either. Alot is going on in that game and it still manages to put up some fantastic looking graphics.
I do take your point though...system specs are a big concern, so I won't try and piss people off with "lesser" hardware by harping on about this.

About the pathfinding issue, he most definitely wasn't crossing at a ford (see attached pic)...but he was trying his best to make one. Funny thing is, he looked like he was "slipping" down the bank and into the water. I initially thought "WOW! That's realistic"...but don't pretend it was meant!

Menus...yeah. I know it's just not being used to them. I don't really have a problem with that as I'm sure I will get used to it. I just thought I'd mention it as it is still something I'm having a "blonde mometn" with.

Thx for the response anyway.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
I don't want to adjust artillery "on the fly". I was specifically talking about when placing it...I want to know "the coverage" so I know where I'm placing it. So we are along the same lines here.

Ok, then we agree on that.

Access During Reaction Phase
I'm not talking about cancelling here...actually becoming in contact with the FO and calling artillery. I have to disagree to a degree. Ok...it isn't "vital"...but it is called the "reaction phase" because you are reacting to the changing battlefield. If an enemy unit suddenly popus up during my orders phase, lets say 10 seconds into my orders phase...I effectively have to wait 70 seconds before I can call in artillery (IF I get it) and another 80 seconds before it comes down...that's alot of turns gone and could mean alot of damage. If you allow artillery to be called in (subject to the "in contact" check), then you can knock that down from 150 seconds to 110...that's alot of soldiers saved.

I just think this would make artillery much more flexible than it was historically - as it is the artillery delays are often on the optimistic side, in many cases it took even longer.

I know it's like comparing apples and pairs, but I fired up Theatre of War last night and I don't know what's going on different under the hood, or whether its' down to efficient coding, but that game has some awesome graphics on it, particularly for vehicles. Also, Combat Mission Shock Force has some awesome graphics, and it doesn't seem to suffer in "under the hood" calculations, either. Alot is going on in that game and it still manages to put up some fantastic looking graphics.

It is apples to oranges, unfortunately, but I understand why it's not easy to separate out why they're different. TOW and CMSF both have significantly higher "minimum requirements" than Panzer Command. If we raised our minimum requirements, we could have immediately set a different target for polys and textures and made vehicles look better.

During development, we actually imported a Theater of War Sherman with textures into Panzer Command and guess what? It looked just as good as it looks in TOW, but it was (IIRC) a 6,000 poly model with a high res texture and ours are 1,500 polys. That means that for your average system, you can have three times as many tanks in a battle in Panzer Command as in TOW before your machine cries "Uncle!". Our goal was to both make lower end systems (which are common among wargamers) work well with Panzer Command and also to allow big battles to be realistically possible. We did have to make some compromises to achieve that.

As time goes on of course, people upgrade their sysems and I expect we will increase the minimum requirements a bit for the next release.

About the pathfinding issue, he most definitely wasn't crossing at a ford (see attached pic)...but he was trying his best to make one. Funny thing is, he looked like he was "slipping" down the bank and into the water. I initially thought "WOW! That's realistic"...but don't pretend it was meant!

Actually, that is an entirely fordable stream. It's very shallow on that map and the entire area is marked as "fordable water". It's pretty slow for vehicles though.

Regards,

- Erik

[JudgeDredd]

Well...he was going slow [:D]

Thx

And I do understand about the graphics issues. But, as I've said many a time, I'm a graphics whore. I have a relatively powerful system and I like to use it.

Anyway...back to boot camp 3 where I just lost 2 half tracks to mines!!

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Actually, that is an entirely fordable stream. It's very shallow on that map and the entire area is marked as "fordable water". It's pretty slow for vehicles though.

Regards,

- Erik

Before I saw the JPG, I thought that JD had a truck crossing the Dnepr, or something! [X(]

I've got one of those in my backyard, and you can drive and SUV through it.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
Vehicle Skins
I agree, to allow as many people to enjoy it as possible, it is essential to have lower models...but get some big buggers out! Seeing those hexagonal wheels go round is just a bit "yucky". But you are correct, on the lesser zoomed in levels, they are nice.

Yeah, wheels that don't have many polys don't look that good. A wheel to look round takes a lot of polys (because there's so many of them) and I've pushed the model poly limit trying to get as many into the models I do as possible. But the limit is 1500 and I try to stay close to that as I can an bring in a good model. (Sometimes going a bit over if its a really cool vehicle.) I think my KV-2 model will come in closer to 1700 projecting from the 50% complete point its at.
As Erik indicated more people can play the game because less need for a high end machine. But the high poly models will work in the game on a powerful box just as well. If someone want's to build a 6000 poly model it would be useable.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

As Erik indicated more people can play the game because less need for a high end machine. But the high poly models will work in the game on a powerful box just as well. If someone want's to build a 6000 poly model it would be useable.

Can you tell us off the top of your head how many polys Laryngoscope's Panther has? It's a great looking vehicle.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: Mobius
As Erik indicated more people can play the game because less need for a high end machine. But the high poly models will work in the game on a powerful box just as well. If someone want's to build a 6000 poly model it would be useable.

Can you tell us off the top of your head how many polys Laryngoscope's Panther has? It's a great looking vehicle.
PoE (aka ivanmoe)

(Stridor aka Laryngoscope)
He got away with putting 3000+ polys in that. But since it costs so much in points it was figured that the total poly count of a scenario with Panthers would be about the same with a lot of lower poly cheap units.

I built a T-34 for each Model 1940-1943. But the Model 1941 has a rubber rimmed road wheel type so it pushed the poly count to nearly 1600 and Matrix had their own Model 1941. So mine was not used. Here are my four T-34 brothers.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Those are some sweet lookin' AFV. I particularly like your textures, very nice choice of color-palate. Any chance you'll unleash them on the world at some future date? [;)]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
Those are some sweet lookin' AFV. I particularly like your textures, very nice choice of color-palate. Any chance you'll unleash them on the world at some future date? [;)]
PoE (aka ivanmoe)

Yeah, I wili eventually. (BTW all but the Model 1941 are already in the game.) Since it is post release I can add a few more touches (polys) on the 1941.

[Grotius]

I've got a pretty fast machine (and an 8800 Ultra video card), so I'd sure love to see a mod or scenario of this game with higher-poly models. But I appreciate the devs' efforts to make the game playable on a variety of systems.

My pet peeve actually isn't vehicle models; I think they look pretty good. I'm more put off by the infantry walking and running animations. But, I can live with them.

[dennisb55]

I agree with many of the Judge's comments, especially about 'plotting' the arty in the orders phase. If there can't be a overlay of where it's being called on, then you should at least be able to redo the placement before you hit the 'continue' arrow.
 
Being able to view the briefing during the play would be nice.
 
I'd like to be able to turn on the 'coins' only for the enemy.  I know, there's always something...
 
I'd like to have one infantry squad target a tank to try and make it button up before another squad tries to gain position to close assault.  But whenever I tried it in the bootcamp I'd just get a grey line.  Maybe some explaination for the grey line would help.
 
More rollovers.
 
Sound:  All the sounds you'd ever need are in SPWAW.  If they aren't public domain by now, maybe you could talk to Alby and see if you can get some for PZCmd.  As for the voices, well I think you all knew they were going to be complained about and can fix them later. 
 
Graphics: Good enough for me, but that's not saying a lot.  I think it's good that the graphics were kept as a secondary priority and the focus was on gameplay and design.  There are many eyecandy games that people can buy.  To have it all at this time isn't a possibility, especially with the smaller shops and large performance range of installed computers.  With a niche product like this, you need as large a customer base as possible and can't afford to tailor to the high-end users.  But keep optimizing PZCmd and you can probably improve it.  Every so often some genius comes up with a major breakthrough which jumps the industry forward.  Wouldn't it be great if the video cards supported circles internally?  Sorry about the rant.
 
Phases: Works for me.  I just have to remember I won't be able to get real control back for 80 seconds.
 
Command entry: Also good with me.  Seems like you need some more formations though.  However, I could probably set up any formation by positioning the units with individual move commands and then using the leader's move commands since they maintain position.  But that doesn't simulate the searching/covering archs used in certain formations.
 
Overall, I didn't get into CM but this one seems different.  Don't know exactly why but I'm sure a lot of it has to do with the HUD and role playing aspect (core units).
 
If you don't mind I'll continue playing and throwing out ideas, sorry if I'm wasting your time.  I'm sure you'll be as responsive as IBM, EMC, Commvault and BMC have been....   But now I'm going golfing, I'll probably need to come home an blow some things up after that, lookout Ivan!!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[NefariousKoel]

Artillery adjustments during the turn you're calling it in is something we need.

[JudgeDredd]

NefariousKoel

I think Erik said that is already in "to a degree" and performed by the AI.

I certainly noticed that the 105mm arty I used in the second bootcamp mission pretty much stayed on top of the Russian trucks.

[z1812]

Hi All,

Just an observation on unit graphics and comparisions to CMSF and ToW. I have ToW,CMSF, and now PCK. ToW and CMSF graphics are wonderful. However I do not play ToW at all as I find the game system quite inadequate.

CMSF has very nice graphics and I love the game. I play it frequently. I have made mods and scenarios for it. It is one of the most satisfying games I have, both from a graphic and gameplay point of view. But remember that is after 8 patches. The game was terrible in version 1 as was ToW. The difference being that CMSF was brought along and is now IMHO a very good game. ToW is another matter and it flounders as a potentially great title that has serious gameplay flaws.

PCK is a breath of fresh air. I have only finished the Tutorial, messed with a few of the scenarios and looked at the editors. But after 10 hours of play I can say as a game it "feels right". It is what a version 1 should be. ( how many games have this level of quality at version 1 ) A little rough around the edges but with no great flaws. At least as far as I see. Imagine what PCK may be like after 8 patches..............

So while the graphics may not be cutting edge, they are more than adequate. The game play certainly is much, much more than adequate.

Regards John

[JudgeDredd]

Absolutely agree...I'd just like more detail.

And I feel the same about ToW. Gameplay wise, I find it sub standard. CMSF I like, but has it's faults.

And as I said in my post, the fact that I've continued with PCK despite those things I pointed out, speaks volumes.

[rickier65]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd


Posture
I have only really seen this when completing an order before the end of a phase.

I actually have a bigger issue with posture - I'm still unsure that the squads are adopting a different posture when they reach their destination. I'm going set something up to see if I can check this, but besides the posture grpahic, I was sure the unit orders also didn't change for me.

Vehicle Skins
I agree, to allow as many people to enjoy it as possible, it is essential to have lower models...but get some big buggers out! Seeing those hexagonal wheels go round is just a bit "yucky". But you are correct, on the lesser zoomed in levels, they are nice.
I know it's like comparing apples and pairs, but I fired up Theatre of War last night and I don't know what's going on different under the hood, or whether its' down to efficient coding, but that game has some awesome graphics on it, particularly for vehicles. Also, Combat Mission Shock Force has some awesome graphics, and it doesn't seem to suffer in "under the hood" calculations, either. Alot is going on in that game and it still manages to put up some fantastic looking graphics.
I do take your point though...system specs are a big concern, so I won't try and piss people off with "lesser" hardware by harping on about this.

Judge, I'm really glad that Matrix adopting their approach on graphics. I downloaded the TOW demo before PCK came out and tried to play - After updating my graphic drivers, I was able to run the deom, but I couldn't even 'play' it on my desktop. The system drag was so bad, my mouse would float all over the screen - I didn't even attempt to load it on my laptop. So Judge - you can blame guys like me for not having better graphics.

On the other hnad - I can see where folks would like to take advantage of having their big rigs - I hope that as mods come out with more detail, suitable warnings are given.

One more possibility might be an options setting for "better models" (or use the very detailed setting), then have a flag set to point to different mod version of the same vehicle.

I sure hope Erik doesn't increase the minimum system graphics too much for the next release (well unless he's going to make us wait two years for next one).

I'm really enjoying the BootCamp campaign I'm up to the last battle now.

Rick