Don't have Men of war...but have a question.
 

Hello everyone, I recently just discovered Men of war on Steam, and tried out the demo and LOVED it...I was thinking about buying it, but on the recommended system settings, it says it doesn't support Vista X64 :(.

Has this been implimented in the patches to support it? or does it still not support it, or should I just wait for the new Men of war Assault Squad to come out instead.

Thanks for the help
TodaysKiller

From what i have heard Vista 64. works for some but not for everyone. But im no expert.
But if you can play the Demo you should be able to play the full game.


Anyway its your call. But if you can play it, you should buy it!
I also enjoyed the MP demo before i bought mow...but damn the Multiplayer in MoW is 10 times better.
It might take some time to learn, bad gamespy lobbys etc... But once you have learned how it works its almost impossible to play other RTS games.

So you NEED gamespy to play online?...and is there quite a few people who still play? or almost a ghost town now lol.

And should I buy this one? or wait for the new Assault squad???

BUT...I was reading another forum, and a guy said this game had a lot of different companies working on it, making different patches and such that's why multiplayer was so blown to hell lol.

another question, he also said assault squad was gonna not have 1C helping make it anymore? he said DMS was just gonna do it now, will that have an impact in the game, or does he just not know what he is talking about :-P.

BTW: like your vids LOL :D america, **** yeah :)

download and run MoW-Demo.

i have no problems running Men of War & Men of War: Red Tide & Men of War: Assault Squad on my 64 bit system (Windows 7).

... but you need latest DirectX9 version installed.

Well, the MP is a bit messy, but whenever I play I see from 400 to 500 people so I don’t think you would have a problem with joining a game. Just make sure you get the correct patches installed.

And I am not sure if Steam would be the best place to buy the game from.

And if you like SP, don’t play MP till you get bored with SP. MP is so awesome (esp, when you’ve got a nice team) that it’s hard to return to SP missions.

MoW AS is definitely a must buy too, esp. the international community may find a better support coz DMS is better with dealing with them than Best Way. AS will surely divide the MP community even more.

Hehe thanks man :)

But i think you kinda misread my post. The Multiplayer Itself is pure ownage, its just that the lobby etc is kinda simple. But its really no big deal.
Ohh and you should definatly get original MoW first.
After all its pretty damn cheap.

I'm running Vista 64 and have had no problems playing MoW. Playing demos is a great way to try out games, and since you loved the demo it sounds like you'll love the game. I shouldn't make comments on the Mp part, but from what I've read it has good points and bad points. I can however make comments on the SP part and for me anyways MoW and the earlier games are the best WW2 RTS games around. I like having the disk for my games but that's a personal choice. I do however have both a Steam DL and a disk copy of MoW.

Hey guys, thanks for the replies! :)...so 400-500 people eh? that's more than coh :D.

Well, I live in the United States, and no stores carry the game, so steam is pretty much my only option lol...but why is steam a bad place for this game?

I have played the demo, and it works fine on my vista x64! :)...I will probably buy this game (hopefully), if I do I will let u guys know so you can teach me a thing or two about it :D :).

EDIT: also, It has Co-op correct? online?

Gamestop and or BestBuy sells the game in the US as far as I know.

Yes, it also has Co-op in online and LAN MP.

Some Steam players complain about the patches in the MP lobby.

And well you can have a read al well:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=14778

But I know some who bought the game from Steam and it plays fine.

There are many players online before 21.00 GMT. Like around 02.00 GMT there was about 150 players.

i think Gamersgate.com is a better joice than steam. with gamersgateversion you can use the "standard" patches. with steamversion you must wait till a "special" patch for steam is avaiable.

Well, I'm sure they do carry it...but not in Arkansas (where I live) I'll have to check the local gamestops, but on Best Buy online, they have it out of stock everywhere around here so idk.

So buying off steam is pretty much a risk? some it works some it doesn't? :P...I mean the demo works fine, got it off steam so idk :)...I'll end up getting it there if all else fails.

Never Heard of Gamersgate.com...will possibly give it a try.

Men of War is also in 1C-online-shop (downloadversion) avaiable. ;)

No, the SP will work for sure. It is the MP you might have problems with.

I am currently playing the Steam version of Red Tide (SP only, have not tested MP) under Windows 7 64-bit without any problems.

Alright, so If I downloaded off the 1c website or w/e, would the multiplayer be able to patch just fine? or any other website of that matter.

i think with downloadversion from 1C online shop you dont have any problems patching game. 1C is official publisher from MoW. also the "first source". ;)

If your going to buy online, buy it straight from 1C.

I personally have a thing against online shopping, credit cards and other stuff. Before buying online, check in local game stores, you may save money and will get your game quicker.

thats a matter of taste. local stores are most expensive with "older" games.
my local store list MoW with 39.90€ at time - downloadversion cost 12-15€.

when you have a good downloadspeed - you have downloaded the game in 15-20 min.

... but thats all a matter of taste. ill never buy any game in local stores again, when i get the same game online with 1/2 price.

You can buy it from here:

http://www.amazon.com/Men-War-Pc/dp/...5434372&sr=8-1

It's $12.99 + free delivery.

I also got mine from amazon. Good price, free delivery.

P.s: Changing your mind and not buying MoW after so much affort and good will from the community would be criminal. ;p

Thanks for all the posts :)...

You are correct about it being twice as much in stores, it is still $30.00 at Best Buy and only $15.00 on Steam...I have never downloaded an actual game besides on steam...What if I accidently Delete it? did I just lose $15.00? lol.

Also, I thought Steam had the most recent Patches?...always auto patches my games unless I tell it otherwise, Is that just a problem with the MOW patching system? or something of the sort?

EDIT: can I not buy it off of steam? then turn off the auto patching? than patch it myself off a different website?

no. you can download game every time new again.
eg. at gamersgate you can download the installationfile and burn on DVD or save to harddisk -> you dont need download new again -> same with other download stores.

i think steam isnt the best solution (my opinion).
eg. MoW patch 1.17.5 is out since 1 month - but not avaiable for steam version at moment. patching MoW steam version manual needs a lot of knowledge in manipulating files.

You know the great thing about Steam is the weekend deals/special offers which you see sometimes. Got MoW for 5 euro that way.

alright well, I guess Steam is the worse way to go :D.

So would they email me a cd key? if I downloaded off the internet?...I'm just trying to get all this stuff figured out before I actually do buy it :).

I plan to try and get it today if I can :)

EDIT:Thanks for all the community help btw :))) more than any other game Ive had.

Hey guys, I'm able to get it today :)... Where should I get it from? Amazon? 1c company website?..which one would probably be the best?

if you get it from steam you download it and will see the CD key in the steam browser once you started the game. Just type it from there and you can play.

The real issue with the Steam version of MoW is that you have to download the patch manualy from somewhere in the net install it and add its exe. file manualy to steam. No bit thing if you know what to do. But it should be a lot more comfortable.

The cheaper the better if you ask me. Save some money for Assault Squad.:)

Well I finally Bought MOW!!! :)!!!

(I ended up going the Amazon way, 4 bucks cheaper lol (I know 4 bucks woohoo, but I already had an account on that...and thought heck, no shipping charges, 4 bucks cheaper...I can wait 2 days for that :P.

So anyways, if anyone wants to give me a few pointers once I get it, That would be much appreciated, Once again, thanks for all the help from everyone..See ya on in about 2-3 days :).

Yeah right. Don't worry you will come back here sooner than you think. This is just the beggining of your troubles. You will need more our help with patching the game. ;)

I talked to one guy who bought the game from Steam and whenever he patches the game he gets the message that MoW is not installed. For two days he was struggling with it without any success.

Oh, well...I got mine from amazon...SO hopefully I will have less of a patching problem than your friend had ;).

And yeah, I will be back once I get it :D

EDIT:I should be getting the game tomorrow...in the meantime...should I go ahead and get gamespy?

Well getting my game around 3:00-4:00 :) (1:00 now) I can't wait.

Then you should be busy all weekend having fun. Good luck! :grin:

oh I know I will! :)...thanks a bunch.

That's great! I wish I was playing MoW for the first time.

lol yeah it's a blast :)...Loved the 2nd Russian mission (defending the train station) had like 200 units it seemed like, non stop action :)...BUT, I hated the first German mission sheesh, took me like 2 hours it seemed like.

Well, I got a new problem...I have the most recent patch 1.17.5 or w/e, and even got the hotfix for it...does it now show up as 1.17.5.1 in game? it just says I have 1.17.5 still... This being said,

I can't join any multiplayer games, it puts me in the lobby then kicks me out of it within 5 seconds until I'm by myself :(...any ideas on how to fix it?

It does take awhile to beat that Crete lvl. Even after I modded in my modded MG42s and even put a Sherman right near that Vickers for me to use it still takes me atleast an hour or more to beat that lvl....its long =D my least favorite mission is BOrg Last Fight...its long, hard and annoying......

Yeah, I mean if they gave you a tank or two that mission would be no problem, but they have AA guns, Machine Guns, tanks of their own, and all you have is infantry and a mortar lol :/...but now that i'm on the 2nd german mission idk which one I hate more, the first or the 2nd one lol. :D


Do you know what problem I am having on not being able to connect to multiplayer?...Do I actually have to have Gamespy downloaded?

You do have to have a Gamespy arcade account and that is what you use to log into MoW MP.

I think I figured it out, I was trying to join games in progress LOL :D

Thats great...to funny =D

I know I'm a noob :)...Also, any tips on how to beat the first American mission? I can't ever raise the flag without sounding the alarm.

Ive got nothing on that first level....it took me forever and a week to beat it. I took my 4 dudes and snuck through the middle of town to the tower where your supposed to meet D'Astaie or w/e and then snuck around the back of the base then launched my 4 man attack haha. Then raised the flag

Yeah I pretty much did that also, finally beat it :)...now the 2nd one is just like that x10 it seems like :/.

cant say I liked this kind of missions in MoW. 2-3 men beating a whole army. Not my taste.

I think MoW really shined where you had either a whole army under your hood or at least a tank with some men to achieve your targets while some allied army was attacking together with you. So obviously the missions I liked most have been in the Soviet champaign. It feels to me anyway like most of the time and resources went in to that and the rest like the German or Allied missions got not so much attention. Sad actualy. I would have loved to get more of such situations. It would have been great to see some fighting in the ardenes against Panthers, Kingtigers even ~ there have been quite succesfull American defences around Stravelot, Bois Jacques or the attack on Foy (not very far from Bastogne) and of course LA GLEIZE where the US captured a Kingtiger in perfect conditions!. Missions like the battles around Caen or Market garden which seen much use of Jagdpanthers and Panthers against the Brits equiped with Fireflies, Achiles and Cromwells one very interesting operation was the fighting around Arnhem (a bridge to far) which involved British paratroopers. The Soviets could have got as well Kursk, Operation Bagration (sandomirz where they captured a couple of Tiger II). The Rhein and Ruhr Pocket would have allowed for some action of Jagdtigers and Pershings.

http://cartomedia.de/blog/wp-content...essel_1945.jpg

The foxholes near Bastogne (Belgium)

That one is easier...load up on ammo and guns and grenades from the truck...if it comes then follow the edge of the map, along the front of the base on hold fire. Then when u get to the side opposite where u start toss an AT nade on the wall and make a quick attack into the base, just dont go too fast and lose everyone. Then to capture the admiral, just target his car and gun it down =D I tried to do it sneaky, couldnt make it happen. You dont lose if u get seen in that mission so a fast attack is n option and the one I like =D The Defense of the compound afterwards is a pain in the rumpus seeing how they roll in 234's and Panzy I's. try to capture some of thier 234s....they help...hit turrets

agree 100%! Those sneak missions were pretty much useless. Only ones I liked are the ones where ur sneaking acutally has consequences for the main battle (Seelow, some of the german missions)

Pretty much for the german missions it's all defence...which isn't to my liking either :/.

Each mission follows specific soldiers and commanders. The Soviet missions have Kuznetsov and Smirnov (I don't believe they were at Kursk)

You could put these extra missions as bonus maps, but they won't go into the campaign.

Kuznetzov and Smirnov were really people then? I figured they jsut came up w/ a good storyline and went with it.

Well then they could have made it bonus missions at least. Thing is just that I have the feeling a lot more attention was spend to the Soviet mission. Particularly the Allied mission was extremly boring. Except for 1 or 2 missions. And the end came way to sudenly. It was like "ok last assault by the Germans now letz get to Itally/europe!" but nothing. It was simply over. kinda sad :(

The allies were really boring in real life. Most of the heavy fighting took place on the Eastern front.

wong:

Falaise pocket

Operation Totalize

Operation Market Garden

Battle of the Bulge

Operation Overlord

Crossing of the Rhine - Ruhrpocket

Allied invasion of Sicily, Anzio, Avalange, Gustav Line, Monte Casino etc.

~ and to some extend there are the operations of 1940 during the German invasion in France where the British and French troops saw fighting. Not every battle there was a clear victory for the Germans and in some indidivual cases the allies proved a hard defence though as whole they could not gain the tactical iniative.


Granted the west didnt saw some of the battles like in the east with operations that saw men advancing in the million but Kursk was also not something you had every day even though champaigns in the east involved a lot of contingents but many battles have been as well siedges or encirclements. But here the War started in 41 and had much room for the Germans to operate. The first major operations with the US primarily was in Africa around November 42 (Operation Torch). The battles in france have seen quite a lot of heavy fights particulary around Caen (Operation Totalize) where the British forces at some point faced aprox 70% of the in France deployed German armored forces. And those have been quite a lot. One could also name the operations in the Netherlands (Market Garden) which was the bigest paratrooper operation since today even biger to the D-Day operation or the Ardenes (Wacht am Rhein - Battle of the Buldge) to name a few other situations with heavy fighting. The Falaise Pocket eventualy was a pocket which traped aprox 100 000 German soldiers inside exposing them to heavy artillery fire since the Allies didnt managed to close it completely in time so the Wehrmacht managed to almost remove all their men under constant shelling and bombing. But they had to leave any heavy equipment back though. I think only a handfull of vehicles made it out from the thousands of armor which was left behind.

It is plain wrong and historicaly very questionable to simply say the east would have been the only location wich has seen heavy fighting.

~ 85% of Wermacht KIA happened in the East.

4.3 million axis KIA, 6,8 million Soviet+allies KIA... very bloody

The only thing I thank the allies for was the trucks for our rockets, North Africa, and Battle of the Bulge.

The allies were somewhat lazy to begin with while in the East our people threw rocks at tanks. The war could have been won in 3 years instead of 6 if a little more effort had been put into it.

If the americans never joined in...It would of been a tough fight, and I personally believe Hitler would of waxed Britian, then turned all of his attention on russia and wipe them out too...

I mean heck, look at D-Day, thousands of Americans/britians/canadians lost their life on that day, without the D-Day landings/paratrooper jumps in the night before...They would of never been able to push inland and personally I think Germany would of still been in control of France, and would of bombed the living hell outta Britian :/...Then took over the rest of Europe and Asia in no time...then sooner or later the whole world lol.

Don't be so sure that Germany would had ruled the world. Yes with UK out of the picture USSR would have had it even harder.
But Germany was struggeling with Stalingrad, Just think about how hard it would be to capture Moscow.

Soviet had already moved there important factories far away from the frontlines. Beginning to produce more and more equipment.
The war might had been a few years longer but i do think Soviet would had won anyway.
Germany could't match Soviet in terms of production and manpower, even if there factories did't get bombed by the brits/USA.

Interference from the Allies = less land for the USSR. If Stalin wanted to conquer the world, having Germany have the other half would be a perfect excuse to invade America and other countries. World domination does not work, everyone saw the Roman Empire, Russian Empire, and Mongolian empire along with the USSR crumble. You can have 10 leaders equally divide the world and have something like the UN rule, but not one whole country or unified earth without war or riots.

Is this asuming Japan was also not in the war? Im sure if us/uk werent in it then Japan woulda taken what they wanted in the pacific then attacked Russia from their side and Germany from the other making Russia fight a 2 front war. With Japanese not fightiing in the pacific they coulda put in more production into better tanks and better supplied thier men to give the RUssians a tougher fight, meanwhile with Germany not fighting a 3 front war in Italy, France and Russia they coulda put more time and manpower into making mroe Tiger's, Panthers, fixing the flaws in their 262s and making the King Tiger more mechanically reliable. Meanwhile the Russians prolly woulda been on a 2 front war and it woulda been thier factories being bombed by im sure both sides and they woulda had a harder time mass producing thos T34s and research woulda been harder for them so im sure the IS2 wouldnt have come as soon. The Germans woulda taken the oil or w/e it was they were after in Africa so supply wouldnt have been a problem so much for them. Then they woulda also been able to produce more of those STG 44's giving thier squads better firepower against the mass Russian charges.

Russian tanks and much of their other equipment was manufactured in the Urals, well hidden and fortified.

True about taking over moscow, would be really hard...but Millions of casualties would of resulted imo even if the USSR did end up winning...Would be devistating for both sides.

OOOPS: SORRY!!

It was 6,8 MILLION SOVIET KIA (not 7.8!) Vs 4,3 million AXIS KIA!!!

Such losses must come with every great victory.

Since the whole reason behind WW2 was not about a usual war there was NO chance at all that Germany could win.

Hands down. This kind of point "could have Germany won" is moot. Why? Cause there was no way Germany could have achieved its goals. Even under best conditions. Evn whenyou you asume they would have captured Stalingrad, Moscow, the oil fields of Baku/Kaukasus. There was no chance to "win" the goals Hitler decided for Germany. Which are the complete destruction of the Jewish / communistic ploting. This would have sooner or later meant a conflict with any other nation at some point. Most important the US. But also Canada, South America, Africa (midle east). When would the Germans have achieved their goals and most important when would someone like Hitler made peace ? After Britain was defeated ? Doubtful. Conquering of Russia? Even if the Whermacht would have achieved a glorious victory in the east they had no option to hold the teritory for long without more wars and keeping their own German economy in a always war like situation. The German state was bankrupt. Only war in 1939 saved the German Reich from a inflation and mass layof that would have toped the time of 1918.

Eh no. Thats inacurate. Hitler tourned his interest to Russia before any conflict with the USA was even apparent one idea was to stay as long as possible neutral to the USA as long at least Britain was not defeated and one reason to attack Russia was to defeat Britain (the idea was without Russia Britain would have no more reason to continue the war though that was a wrong misconception as we know today). One of his targets was always a conquering of the east ~ see Hitlers history "Mein Kampf" as best example. Why in 1942 Hitler declared a war to the US is even today a question for many historians ~ it had nothing to do with Japan though. The Luftwaffe loost already in 1941 the battle over Britain which is known today since the British airfoce managed to shoot down more planes then the Luftware could replace not to mention the number of pilots they loost as the battle was over British ground. So any landing (see the planing for Operation Sea Lion) would have been extremly risky and done without complete Air superiority and adding to that the Wehrmacht had no experience with landing operations. Not of such a scale. And Hitler hasnt seen much interest in Africa for example or parts of it thinking about it as one of the mistakes from WW1 and the colonialism as he thought that not the African soil was of German interest but the east. But this was one of the grounds the British had a lot of success. At least against the Italian troops. Same to greece which in retourn was a reason for a delay of operation Barbarossa so the Wehrmacht could help the Italian forces on the Balkan region and in Greece. I think the delay was about 5 weeks or something. The fighting in Greece was also one of the few cases where Waffen SS units received limited honor by British troops for their excelent fighting.

Or the tanks, radios, amunition, knowledge (from their inteligence service, both British and US) planes, locomotives and a lot more.

Even Stalin acknowledged to Zhukov once in a discussion. Without the leand lease they would have probably loost the war ~ as said if that would really have been the matter is a different question. Its just to show the importance of the economic support.

If the preasure by the Germans would not have been high even during 1942/43 Stalin would not have persisted so much on opening a second (or if you want third) front in the west:
D-Day to Victory
"Final plans for invasion took some time to establish. Stalin argued strongly for a new front in the West, wanting to relieve pressure on Russian forces in the east. America also, showed great eagerness for an invasion of France. Churchill was however more reluctant. Knowing that a failed invasion would leave the whole of Europe at the mercy of tyranny (Communist or Fascist) and distrusting the Soviets because of their complicity in the invasion of Poland, the British Prime Minister was able persuade the US to postpone the invasion until 1944. This was to allow the Americans and British time to establish air superiority and defeat the U-boat fleet in the Atlantic, thereby allowing them to freely bombard Nazi-occupied Europe and build up troop numbers and supplies to more formidable levels. Eventually, the Russians were promised an invasion by Summer of 1944."

This went even so far that Stalin directly insulted Allied commanders they should not be such "cowards".

you mean they come with hastily decisions.

How I see it there have been 2 big reasons for the high looses of the Sovietunion. The first was the maxime of the "total war" which did not just started in 1943 as preached by Goebels to his people but started in the east already since the first day. Many times the German military made no difference between civilians or military personal and we know today that millions died as POWs in provisional German camps in the east since the German Reich simply had neither the will nor the resources to support the millions of soviet POW. They also many times engagned in killing everything they seen as threat (including communists and jews) regardless if they have been civlians or captured military personal the order by the German command was that no east european deserved mercy. Which was of clear diference to the way how the German Reich has seen the French and British population.

The second reason in my eyes was the many times Stalin and his generals without any remorse forbid the civilians for example to evacuate certain locations or gave very expensive orders. Like shown in Leningrad or Stalingrad. For almost 4 years most of the fighting in the east happend on over Soviet areas which means civlian looses have been substantialy higher compared to for example Germany or the US which in particular only had military looses and almost no civlians (an exception are the Philipines and Hawaii of course as here have been many US american civlians present). Operations like Kursk for example proved to be sometimes very expensive for the Soviets in the looses of men. One example that can be named here is the Battle of Prokhorovka in Kursk. Certain sources say that the loos in tanks for example was for the Germans between 3 and 60 where the Soviets loost 200 and 300 armored vehicles which included many times the T34-76 but also many more light weight vehicles and as well the KV1. The loos of men is believed (aprox) to be between 500 for the Germans and around 5000~ for the Russians. This big diference wasnt even unoticed by the Soviet HQ and gave even them a head ache. There have been plans to punish the leader of the 5th Guards Tank Army as with the first sight of heavy looses he gave the order to send all armored units even his reserve right in to the German front and guns. Though cause of popaganda reasons (Kursk as whole was a tactical victory for the Soviets) any punishment was exposed to the commander.

Another not less important reason for the high looses been the haste of which Soviet troops rushed in to German lines. Stalin promoted openly competition between his Generals which can be seen very nicely in 1945 between Zhukov 1st Belorussian Front and Konev comanding the Fourth Ukrainian Front of who would be the first one to attack and capture Berlin (Stalin gave later Zhukov the favour of capturing Berlin).

In the east it was anyway very hard to make a clear difference between civlians and military personal cause of the big partisan movements which have been many times civlians lead by a military officer by the red army left behind from retrating forces.

I would like to see the figures of that. Not that I am saying its incorect but those numbers seem a bit wonky (particularly since the DRK ~ German red corss) gives numbers of 3.800 000 Million killed and missing men for the German Wehrmacht which is somewhat close to the Numbers of the OKW ~ Wehrmacht himself. The Soviet numbers present only Military personal I guess. But its very hard to give any numbers anway. Recording was on both sides poor. Particularly the further the war was going.


I find the oppinion of some here the Allies or western nations did nothing or very few in the defeat of the German military a bit disturbing ignoring eventualy the combat in Africa, France, Italy and most important the situations in Greece for example which caused a delay of Operation Barbarossa. It was Mahnstein I think which said once that it have been those "5 weeks in front of moscow" that have cost them the war in the east ~ if that is true or not is another story but it shows the importance of allied actions even if they have been small. But many small operations make for a biger pictures. Many operations happend in the east and with a scale and size like never seen before. But I think its not right to deny any allied forces their part in the war. Who did how much is in the end to the big picture irelevant. And in the end we should do it like the veterans. They dont ask who did more or less. Whos wrong or right. And If some of them as the people which have seen the trenches and horrorible conditions can come together after 60 years. Feel as friends and honor each other. Why cant we ?

How can Russia respect America or Britain when we were never given much respect. Patton wanted to get to Berlin first, but we deserved Berlin as we lost so many of our people. They did not even land untill after millions of deaths. I would not mind if Germany and Japan conquered the west. The west has surrounded our country with anti missile stations, and gave guns to our enemies in the 70s and 80s. Why shouldn't we hate the west? If it were up to me I would have taken Alaska back, just to make things even.

that a serious question ... :confused: cause hate is bad for you, mkay. Never watched Star Wars ? Dark side and all. No hate. Its bad for you mkay.


To be more serious parts of the things you mention sound to me like propaganda. The same happend in the west during the *50s you know the evil comunist empire and all, Reggan area. Or McCarthynism. Letz not go in to that ground. Thats nothing more but unhistorical and unethical comparisions. Who was worse. Who made the bigest lies. Who is the worse (sub)human and has the better politics. In the end we arrived at 2010. Without nuclear war. Thats all what counts. Its not 1910 anymore. And all systems that only go for the extrem proved to be either corrupt or flawed ~ which includes American Capitalism just as it does Soviet Comunism. Durint the cold war it was for both systems important to keep the population at bay and fear proved to be here a valuable tool. Sadly many of the politic phrases by both sides still roam inside the heads of a view people. I know Americans, Russians, Kaukasians, Indians, and quite a lot of moslems. Its all the same to me. What do I care from where they come or what their nations did. Its the people one should value. Not their history. Or the lack of it. I know my deal. Such thinking and bigotry killed a lot of people on the balkan. And it never did anything good. You know some serbian guy just has to go to the crotian he has as neighbour and slize his throat open cause a croatian killed in 1945 his grandfather. I dont see the reason behind that.

*But just about Patton. He was Nuts. And people knew that. It was usefull as long the war was going but he got removed quite fast from service after that and some believe he even comited suicide. Also Berlin was left to the Reds if you remember history carefully. The US did gave the Soviets Berlin for as they rushed to Bavaria and the Alps after the victory on the Rhine in fear of eventualy hidding remenant forces and most important to aquire any technology / scientists that have been left behind by the German Reich ~

In 1945 "national redoubt" was the English term used to describe the possibility that German dictator Adolf Hitler and armed forces of Nazi Germany (Wehrmacht) would make a last stand in the alpine areas of Austria, Bavaria and northern Italy in the closing months of World War II in Europe. In German this concept was called the Alpenfestung (Alpine Fortress). Although there was some German military planning for a stand in the Alpine region, it was never fully endorsed by Hitler and no serious attempt was made to put the plan into operation.

I believe in total the Germans lost 3,6 million on the Eastern front + 600k dead Axis soldiers and collaborators.

Source is Deutsche militariche verluste am Zweite Weltskrieg.

This is off topic of what you guys are talking about :P...but...

I was wondering why my game is a bit laggy?

PC SPECS:
Nvidia 9800 gt
2.20 GHZ AMD Phenom 9550 Quad-Core Processor
6GB RAM
Windows Vista (x64) (could this be the problem)?

Now, I run on Medium settings pretty much on everything, no antialising, no nothing...But I still get lag. Anyone know what's up?

Americans got some Russian soldiers killed 16 years ago. We can not cooperate with them if they do not trust each other. I'll never forget that day when given coordinates were thought false. I'm not going to trust them.

probably the processor. Turn down ur graphic settings 2 minimum. If this doesn't give a very sizeable performance increase, it is definitely your processor which is the bottleneck.

Ok, I will try in a lil bit. and let you now.

Thats strange your game should't lag with those comp specs.
I got pretty much the same equipment and not even half your RAM.
However i got a better graphic card(Radeon 4800).

Maybe you need to patch your Nvidia card or something. Playing MoW with lowest settings isn't fun. You lose alot of the magic...

Got the Nvidia card all up to date :/

I played MoW at maximum with a similar Intel Q6600 + 8800GT + 4GB RAM system so I doubt it is your hardware, as mentioned above try updating your video drivers and audio drivers. Also make sure to turn off all unnecessary apps running in the background just in case. And if that doesn't help, you might want to test it under Windows 7 (preferably on another unused hard drive). Don't forget you can install and run Windows 7 for up to 30 days. ISOs are available from Microsoft.

UHHM, AMD phenom 2.2 is pretty crap at games that barely use even two cores.

I'm pretty sure it's his processor.

Hey, did turning down 2 minimum graphic settings work or not?

I have had that alot about My processor being the thing that lags me down...But on games like Arma 2 for instance, needs alot more then what mow needs...And I can play that on medium settings and get pretty much no lag, unless there is tons of explosions and stuff lol.

Another thing is...I have COH, and it runs perfectly fine on high/medium settings without any lag at all, and that is pretty much the same as mow Recommended system requirements wise.

So I'm just wondering if MOW doesn't like Vista? (I'll give that windows 7 a try here in a little bit)

Also, I did turn my settings all down to low...I mean of course it helped out performance wise (would on any game), but looked really shitty :) lol.

EDIT: another thing I forgot to add, The Demo of mow was smooth as can be...without all the patches and such, and I turned my settings exactly the way it was on the demo, but I got lag?...Could there be something wrong with the patching? possibly? I know they have a hotfix for 1.17.5...I downloaded that but it doesn't say that it is 1.17.5.1 in game??? should it be like that? or did the hotfix not get patched correctly.

I play MoW on Vista and it works fine...

Well I mean it works fine also, but idk why the demo runs smoother than the Actual game itself lol.

I play MoW on Vista-64 on the highest possible settings, no problem.

I think it still says 1.17.5 with the hotfix.

Hmm... you should try experimenting with the settings. Removing useless crap like shadows sometimes help. AA is also very demanding.

I mean I don't use AA anyways, have it off or w/e on all the games I play...Just makes the game itself run laggy lol.

Yeah I think I might of got it to be the way that the demo was (pretty smooth anyways)...I'll let you know later if I experience any more problems. From playing for an hour or two..