Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gpig

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling


  • Location
    Vancouver, B.C. Canada
  • Interests
    animation, sports, gaming, life
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree that Apocal knows what he's talking about. I took care to differentiate between "conflict" and small scale engagements in my blatherings. How about the Spanish American war for a conflict? From Wikkipeida: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springfield_Model_1892-99 "According to contemporary, perhaps sensationalized accounts, the Krag's complex design was outclassed[1] by the Spanish Mauser during the Spanish American War, and proved ill-suited for use in tropical locales such as Cuba and the Philippines. American soldiers found themselves unable to match the volume of fire displayed by the Spanish 1893 Mauser rifle, with its box magazine that could be fully reloaded with clips, and a high-velocity, flat-shooting 7mm cartridge which was quickly dubbed the 'Spanish Hornet'. During the American assault on the strategic Cuban city of Santiago, a small force of 750 Spanish troops armed with Model 1893 Mauser rifles defended positions on San Juan and Kettle hills. The attacking force consisted of approximately 6,600 American soldiers, most of them regulars, armed with the then-new smokeless-powder Krag-Jorgensen rifle and supported by artillery and Gatling gun fire. Though the assault was successful, the Americans soon realized that they had suffered more than 1,400 casualties in the assault. A U.S board of investigation pinned the blame on the superior firepower of the Spanish Model 1893 Mauser rifles, although modern analysis has determined that many of the casualties were due to superior Spanish fortifications on the high ground. With the Krag's replacement with the Mauser-derived M1903, the rifle is tied for the shortest service life of any standard-issue firearm in US military history (1892–1903)." Gattling guns usually make up for any differences, I imagine.
  2. Thank you Mr. Emrys, that's where I was meaning to go. Albeit a pre-modern conflict, and that there were many more rifles among the native warriors is not in doubt, there is some evidence that Custer was not only outnumbered but out-gunned. Was there not also some battles (or A battle) between the British and the Zulu wherein a choice of rifle was disastrous? Or was it an ammunition problem. Can't recall... It's an interesting topic you pointed out, Apocal. "At any rate, I can't imagine a single conflict in the modern era that was decided by the choice of rifle." I'd be curious to know where else that might be a factor. I think for small scale engagements there would be many. Like the Wagon Box fight http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon_Box_Fight or the Fetterman massacre: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Cloud%27s_War#Battle_of_the_Hundred_Slain.2FFetterman_Fight Gpig
  3. Little Bighorn? (Not quite the modern era, I'll grant you.)
  4. Go Canucks! Especially that snorkel-equipped platoon. Gpig
  5. Hi John, CM has a WIDE ANGLE function (alt C on my computer). This distorts the view near the camera, but allows a wider field of view overall. That is what you are seeing in Vencini's screen grab. Cool, eh?
  6. Great news, thanks! Adding it to my wish-list. Gpig
  7. For the upcoming Bridge Too Far module, It would be great if the British Player on the Arhnem bridge head could use the Dutch underground and their "spies" telephone network to relay intel on German troop movements. Only if the player decided he could trust the Dutch underground, that is. (Which apparently the Brits did not, in real life.) ;-)
  8. Cool video. Didn't even notice that Sherman hiding there until the Tiger backed up.
  9. Well, at least it IS now possible to share ammo. And two ways, no less. Hell, even grabbing ammo from a vehicle is new stuff. I remember when . . . .
  10. I'm happy to hear that Cannister rounds fired at buildings are less than effective. I recalled a CMBB game long ago when cannister was first introduced. My Germans were inside a church (in CMBB, the heaviest and best cover afforded by any building), but a T-34 cannister round decimated their squad. Cannister seemed under-modelled at the time, at least in how it worked with regards to cover and penetration etc. I could imagine some effective Cannister usage versus light cover (small, wooden buildings, fences and low walls). In CMx2 So far, I've not noticed tanks firing their cannister at buildings. I would agree that HE should be the tool of choice verses men in buildings, more often than not. But my experience is mostly based on "feel," rather than practical real world experience. Cheers, Gpig
  11. Heh heh, EXCELLENT! Love the "burn baby," moment. The triumph of Bazooka-man, very well done.
  12. Sometimes it's OK to switch screen direction. You can have the intention to break the rule when it works for you. (And it's more of a guideline than a rule.) I thought it worked well. Visually, it told a story (approach 1st objective, battle, enemy surrender, consolodate, approach 2nd objective, assault, battle, victory, aftermath) without any dialogue required. Well, except for the ingame voices. The ending was a bit more chaotic, but I think it worked. Battle should have a feel of chaos. Cheers, Gpig
  13. Really excellent work. My favourite shot? @ 2:30: The 2nd objective in silhouette, the italians fighting and falling screen left. Overall, excellent use of screen direction to help tell the story. Italians moving from Right to Left. Americans defending from Left to Right. Minor quibble: In a few places, the screen direction switches, which creates some momentary confusion for the viewer. 1:11: Italians attacking Left to Right 1:46: Italians hunting Left to Right Sometimes this can't be avoided (especially when the action generated in game might not look as good when viewed from the opposite angle). It can be mitigated by establishing beforehand, that you're "crossing the line." Or, taking the time to establish the overall layout in the scene. Which I think you've done well when depicting the 2nd objective assault. Really nice work. A joy to watch. Makes me want to fire up the game. Gpig
  14. Ooh, that damn panzer rush cost me dearly, as well. A grenade immobilized it, and it sat there chewing up my infantry. Nasty bidness! I can't remember how I ended up taking it out. But I'll never forget that ballsy german tank (and the meansy-nasty scenario designer!) ;-) Gpig
  • Create New...