Jump to content

GreenAsJade

Members
  • Posts

    4,877
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from LongLeftFlank in CMx1 Mods Warehouse under "attack"   
    Hi All,
    For the longest time, I've been supporting the community with mods warehouse infrastructure, though I don't play anymore.
    This is not free, but it is on cheap plans so I haven't minded.  Also the occasional kind soul has donated (I think I get about $5 per month this way, which doesn't cover costs).
    However, this infrastructure can't support bots or automated downloads.   They put too much load on it, it runs out of allocation.
    For some reason, the last few months, we've been running out of allocations at CMx1 Mods Warehouse.
    I've ponied up a few more dollars this month to go to the next level and get it running again.
    And I've had a look in the logs.   It appears that someone has an automatic script/bot that is trying to download everything, one mod a a time.
    This is not OK.    The allocations we have can support people using it at a moderate rate, but not sustained bot usage.
    If this doesn't stop, I'll have to turn it off, or ask you all for the money to keep it going.
    In case it's of any use or interest, the IP address originating the requests is 94.130.18.159.  Unlikely we could do anything with that, but just in case.
    GaJ
     
  2. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from OrdeaL in Any Way to Get in Touch w/ GreenAsJade?   
    Glad that worked (thanks to Shane for passing on the message).   Sorry the password reset function isn't working - the technology used for CMMODs is so old now I'm scared to try to fix things like this: easier just to reset manually.
    About time we had a brand new site eh?
     
    I can be contacted via forum message here, FWIW.
    Cheers,
     
    GaJ
  3. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from Seedorf81 in CM:BN Screenshot Thread #2   
    Nice one!!!!! Be excellent to each other. And... Party On Dudes!

    Oh, and here's what the guys at the top is looking at, courtesy of Sergei's Esper machine:




    GaJ
  4. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to Aragorn2002 in The Sheriff of Oosterbeek – A Scenario Design DAR/AAR   
    This is all very entertaining, but this thread needs screenshots. :-D
  5. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to JonS in The Sheriff of Oosterbeek – A Scenario Design DAR/AAR   
    2 - Research

    "It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data."
    Arthur Conan Doyle (via Sherlock Holmes)

    Since the beginning of the CM franchise there’ve been three basic categories of scenario: historical, semi-historical, or fictional.

    The boundaries between each are highly blurred, but basically a historical scenario consists of actual forces, fighting an actual battle, in an actual place, for actual objectives. These require a LOT of research, and even then the designer often has to take a lot of liberties to overcome deficiencies in either the CM scenario editor or in the level of detail that can be uncovered. Historical scenarios also tend to be of iconic battles which can make them very engaging for players, but because of that it’s often difficult to maintain any meaningful Fog of War (FOW). When discussing the battle to clear LZ N on the Groesbeek Heights, Colonel Eckman, commander of 505th PIR, said “We knew what we were going to do, when we were going to do it and what was coming, the enemy did not.” That knowledge disparity would be irrelevant when playing against an Allied AI, and impossible to duplicate in a HTH battle.
     
     
    It can also be surprisingly hard to find a CM-worthy historical battle. It’s easy enough to find examples of men shooting at each other, and killing and dying, but I think a good scenario needs more than that. Without some definite tactical problem, some definite and discrete engagement with worthwhile objectives, trying to create a fully historical scenario can leave me floundering around trying to mallet a square peg into a round hole.

    Semi-historical tends to include some level of fictionalisation of the map, the forces, or the battle. It could be that the player was simply unable to find out exactly what forces were on “the other side of the hill”, or a decent map. It’s for this reason that a lot of scenarios start out as historical and end up being labelled semi-historical. Or it could be that I had a particular tactical scenario in mind, and used real forces and real locations to create a plausible, but fictional, battle. It could just be that I want to change something to make a real battle more interesting – altering something about the time of day, the length of the scenario (maybe compressing events that occurred over many hours into a much shorter scenario), the weather, the force sizes, and so on – to make for a better, more interesting, more engaging, and more fun scenario. This is why I’ve chosen to move quite strongly away from Historical scenarios and instead construct mostly semi-historical ones; there’s more freedom to create interesting battles. It is also much easier to control the information available to both sides, and therefore the effect of ignorance and FOW.

    Fictional battles are just that, and give the scenario designer a lot more latitude to make things up to suit the battle they want to create. However, I firmly believe that fictional scenarios should be grounded in historical reality. For example, the location can be set roughly were the front line was at that date, and it’s easy enough to use real (or at least realistic) names for force elements. In a WWII US Army infantry regiment E, F, G, and H companies are always in 2nd Battalion, armoured infantry battalions were never organic components of an infantry division, and the weather in north-west Europe in late December probably isn’t going to be warm with dry ground and the sun rising at 0500hrs. While ”B Company, 2nd Armoured Infantry Battalion, 32nd US Infantry Division are fighting in the blazing heat of a sunny New Years Day in Poland” is certainly fictional, it isn’t a plausible briefing. I assume stuff like that sets player’s teeth on edge.

    If the fictional back story is weak players will fill it in themselves, and if what they come up jars with what’s in the scenario they’ll be taken out of the moment and lose some enjoyment. But as long as the briefing and scenario are consistent it can make telling the story easier, since there’s less need to explain every element of the scenario – reasonably informed players will already know about standard company naming, and the climate in winter. Patrick’s Epic Mockumentary video AAR is a brilliant example of fictional story telling.

    I tend go fictional when I have a definite idea for a particular tactical problem in mind, and don’t want to cast about to find something real to fit my circumstances. This how Platoon Patrol and 18 Platoon (in CMBN and the CW module) came about. I’ve little doubt that there were thousands of actions in Normandy that would broadly fit the setting of each of those two little scenarios, but finding detailed descriptions of battles that small is really difficult and I really didn’t see the point in even trying. I had a clear conception of what I wanted to create, and from there it was mainly a matter of setting it in a realistic context.

    Bois de Baugin (on the CMBN release disk) is a completely fictional scenario, but one that I like to think has credible setting. That scenario started off as a simple idea: "how would a mostly foot-based defence holding some hills do against a mostly mechanised attack through low ground?" It was based on some overall impressions I'd gathered about the 1941 Greek Campaign(!) and something I vague recall about the US Army being caught out a few times early in WWII because their doctrine called for the weight of an advance to be made along valley floors where mobility is much better, while German defensive doctrine called for the main weight of defence to be up on the hills where cover, concealment, and dominating ground are all prevalent. So that's what I made: a wooded hill on either flank with a low saddle and small hamlet in the centre. The US objectives focused on the mobility route, while German objectives focused on dominating ground.

    It was only towards the end of the design process that I looked for somewhere to situate the battle. Since the action was broadly part of an advance against collapsing - but not yet collapsed - defence, it had to be shortly after Op COBRA started, but on a flank rather than directly ahead of the steamroller. A notional spot south-east of St Lo was selected, and some actual town and forest names chosen for landmarks. It was then pretty easy to pick some units that were actually in that area at that time using the 12th Army Group daily intelligence maps. All of that was then fed directly into the briefings and graphics.

    For the CW module I created a set of fictional British (The Loamshires) and German (The Kingdom of Hannover Grenadier Regiment, a name recommended to me by a native German speaker) unit names, re-using then wherever needed. That saved time since I only needed to research the unit compositions once, it provided continuity between battles because the same names were being recycled, and since the Loamshires were always fighting the Hannover Grenadiers there were no issues about “but, actually, this British battalion never met this German unit, and on this date they were both 100 miles further west.” Also, since the higher level brigade, regiment or division to which they belonged are never described, I could freely - but plausibly - mix and match battalion types. (See the scenarios 18 Platoon, Loamshires and Valleys of Decision in the CW module.)

    Despite all those fictional examples, I tend to create historical or semi-historical scenarios more often because I do enjoy broadly accurate scenarios based on real-ish events. It’s also easier in a lot of ways to create a compelling narrative based on real units and events, even if the story gets massaged to make the scenario I want.

    So, what I look for when researching depends a lot on the type of battle being created. I find that ‘research’ tends not to be a single discrete activity, and instead gets tackled in layers – fairly shallow initially to get a broad overview and the main moving parts, then increasing in detail as time goes on. Sometimes, it’s incredibly narrow and focussed as part of another activity, like map making or force development. What is the name of this street or that farm? What letter sequence did this battalion use for its companys?

    The Sheriff of Oosterbeek is going to be historical, so I’ll need to do more, rather than less, research. That’s cool – I like this bit!

    For a historical a scenario I’m after details about the buildup, rather than course of the battle itself. That is; how did these forces get to be here, rather than what they did. This is because the course of the battle is represented by the scenario, and that bit is up to the players, not me. The designer’s job is to set the context and conditions at the point where battle is joined, and then step aside. The historical course of the battle should be just one of many possible outcomes when playing the scenario, it should never be the only one. So I look for forces, force sizes including anything that was absent for some reason, specific equipment used, any odd or unusual Order of Battle details, as well as specific times and locations.

    I also want to know the basic course of battle, so I can get a time-and-space appreciation of how I envisage battle playing out, from each side, in general terms. This is important because it will affect everything from map size to scenario length to the objectives for each player. Then there’s any key features to include in the scenario, such as the weather or time of day, significant terrain, or an important force element.

    Finally, I want to collect some mapping and relevant, important, or iconic imagery. The map is especially important. For Normandy we were spoiled with the excellent combination provided by the French Geoportail maps and the IGN 1947 aerial photo survey. Putting those both into Google Earth as layers provided an astonishingly good basis for any map, but neither extends its coverage as far as Arnhem. This is a basic truth for every theatre: each time CM moves location - from Normandy to Sicily to mainland Italy to Holland to Belorussia to the Ardennes to Germany - a new set of resources will need to be found and shared.

    The following is the list of resources I looked at for The Sheriff of Oosterbeek

    Digital Sources:
    * 1:25k maps of Arnhem and the surrounding area
    http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/gmdquery.html
    (Search terms: 1943 Holland. This collection of 1944 maps is gold! These are the actual maps used during Op MARKET GARDEN, so any grid references in war diaries can be plotted exactly. They are also sufficiently detailed to provide a great overlay to use in the editor. Curiously the main road bridge, where Frost’s 2 PARA fought and Gräbner met his maker, is not shown on this map.)
     
     
    * 1944 Aerial Reconnaissance Photos
    http://watwaswaar.nl/
    (Many thanks to Broadsword56 for bringing this site to my attention! It shows a reference map of Holland and when you zoom in on locations you can see the flight paths of photo recon sorties conducted in 1944. Click on the images and to enlarge the aerial photos.)

    * War diaries
    http://www.pegasusarchive.org/arnhem/frames.htm
    (Includes war diaries for all 1st A/B Div units and attachments. The war diary for 1st AL Light Regt includes report by LtCol Thompson, both of which have a lot of useful detail for this scenario.)

    * MLRS Books
    http://www.mlrsbooks.co.uk/bookstore/index.php/search?PHPSESSID=325fcf5c686cdd5e083f8004e6445eb6&qry=arnhem
    (Search term: Arnhem. Although these documents are highly interesting, they don’t tend to have the kind of specific detailed information that’s useful for creating scenarios. For this scenario, I could probably have got away without using this.)

    * US CGSC CARL digital library
    http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/search/collection/p4013coll8/searchterm/arnhem!market%20garden/field/all!all/mode/all!all/conn/and!and/display/200/order/nosort/ad/asc
    (Search term: Market Garden. Also try Arnhem. Mostly US, but does have a lot on the British forces too. Useful for some timings, but like the MLRS Books material, it tends to be at a level that’s not detailed enough. For this scenario, I could probably have got away without using these.)

    * Organisation of an Air Landing Light Battery
    http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/airborne-forces/28526-airborne-artillery.html
    http://nigelef.tripod.com/abnltbty44.htm
    (I’m planning on having at least one of the Pack How batteries on-map as the German’s objective. This will provide the information I need to have the complete battery – not just the guns - properly laid out. The WW2talk site has excellent, CM-relevant details on all UK TOEs for north-west Europe)

    * Google Maps:
    https://maps.google.com/
    (Arnhem in the area immediately around the bridge has changed quite a lot, but Oosterbeek less so, and G-Maps is really useful for road names, which are mostly missing from the 1944 maps)

    * Wikipedia:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnhem
    (The Arnhem article includes a highly detailed 2011 topographical map. Wikipedia battle articles tend to be too general to ever be of much use. They sometimes have some good maps, but those are invariably snagged from public online sources, and usually you’re better off using those directly rather than the filtered version at Wiki. Wiki articles can be good, though, as a pointer to sources.)

    * Royal Artillery Units Netherlands 1944-45
    http://www.royalartilleryunitsnetherlands1944-1945.com/index.html
    (Nice resource on gunnery in the area, including a number of US units. Contains war diaries for many artillery units, including 1st A/L Light Regt, and 2nd A/L Light Battery.)

    Books and Magazines:
    * Bradbeer “They stood to their guns” (World War II magazine, Oct 2007) (Pretty general, and ultimately not really useful)
    * Brooks “Black Tuesday” (World War II magazine, Sept 2004) (again this is pretty general, but it does have some really good maps)
    * Ellis Victory in the West, vol.II, the defeat of Germany (again this is pretty general but with some really good maps)
    * Kershaw It never shows in September (really good for the German side of the hill, with lots of relevant detail. If you can, get the hardcover because the maps are much better.)
    * Middlebrook Arnhem 1944, the Airborne Battle (Brilliant for the course of the battle from the British perspective. This book really allowed me to get a good grip on the sequence of events.)
    * Public Record Office Document Packs Battlefront: Operation Market Garden - The Bridges at Eindhoven, Nijmegen and Arnhem (some really interesting documents, but none were especially relevant to this scenario)
    * Reynolds Sons of the Reich (Reynolds isn’t my favourite author, but this was still useful for identifying units and to lay out the sequence of events on the German side)
    * Rossiter We fought at Arnhem (Has some fish tales, so needs to be treated with caution. Ok for the course of the battle from the British perspective, good for colour and some personal details. One of the guys, Pat Gorman, was in 11 PARA, and so was intimately involved in the background to this scenario)
    * Ryan “A Bridge Too Far” (dated now, and too general – it largely glosses over the British defeat on Tuesday 19th, and in consequence covers Thompson’s actions quite briefly, although of course it was the appendix in this book which was the ultimate inspiration for the scenario)
    * Zwaerts German Armoured Units at Arnhem, September 1944 (useful for confirming types and quantities of armoured vehicles present)
     
    (There is another book – Wilkinson’s The Gunners at Arnhem – which would likely have been excellent, but none of my local libraries hold a copy, Amazon and Book Depository are both sold out, and second hand copies are really spendy.)

    That’s already a long list, and there are literally hundreds of other books and websites on Arnhem I could have looked at. The ones I’ve listed here those that actually describe my battle in some useful detail – rather than just talking about MARKET GARDEN in terms of “this division moved here, then that division moved there” – and which don’t merely regurgitate what I’ve already read in other books. Also, I’m mainly looking for the build up, rather than detailed descriptions of the battle itself. For most of these books this means only a few, maybe up to 10 or 15, pages are at all relevant. Still, I do need to remind myself from time to time that I’m not writing a thesis, and if I had to fall back on just one resource for this battle it’d be the brilliant Pegasus Archive website.

    The main point to remember here is: Do enough, but know when to stop researching and start creating. As they say in my country, “less hui, more doey.”
     
     
    So, after going through all that, what did I learn? Well, the biggest thing I learnt was that my concept is flawed. Sheriff did stop the disordered withdrawal from Arnhem, and formed the paras and airlanding soldiers into a coherent defence in front of his guns in south-east Oosterbeek on Tuesday afternoon. But for various reasons the Germans weren’t following up closely and Thompson Force wasn’t attacked until some time the following morning. So as a strictly historical scenario, my idea of having the British appearing, setting up a hasty defence, then immediately fending off a German attack doesn’t work.

    On the other hand, I now know that:

    * the German force consisted of KG Harder, which was composed of 350-odd dismounted crewmen and administrative personnel from 9th SS Panzer Regt, supplemented by ~100 naval personnel, and grouped into three companies (plus additional increment of Alarm personnel on the morning of Monday 18 Sept). They were organised as a company of tank crews (high motivation, with low-ish skills?), a company of logistics folk (medium motivation, low-ish skills?) and a company of the naval bods (medium-ish skills, low motivation?). As an ad-hoc KG made up from non-infantry components, these guys will be very lacking in terms of heavier support weapons. KG Harder were supported by an armoured platoon with two StuG III and one StuH from the 280th Assault Gun Brigade.

    * There was an artillery regiment supporting German operations in Oosterbeek – ARKO 191 with 10.5cm howitzers and 21cm Mörser(!) – but these weren’t really in play around Oosterbeek on the 19th and 20th. Instead German artillery support will be 8cm mortars.

    * The British forces consisted of 1st Air Landing Light Regiment (23 x 75mm Pack How, in three batterys). Remnants of 1, 3, 11 Parachute Battalions, the 2nd South Staffordshire Air Landing Battalion, and maybe some Glider Pilots, all highly disorganised, and combined totaling less than a full battalion. Amongst this detritus was a platoon of Vickers MMGs (from the S STAFFS), three or four 6-pr anti-tank guns (probably from the S STAFFS), a 17-pr anti-tank gun, a bren carrier, and several jeeps.

    * British indirect support by a small number of 3-in mortars (on map?), and of course the 75mm Pack Howitzers of 1st Air Landing Light Regiment, on and/or off map.

    * Grid references in several of the war diaries pin the location down to a strip of terrain about 1km wide by 1.5km long wide along the Benedendorpsweg to the west of the rail crossing, which conveniently runs east-to-west.

    * in terms of sequencing, the British parachute and air landing battalions had made a final – futile - attempt to break through to Frost at the Bridge in the pre-dawn hours of Tuesday 19th September. This attack had collapsed by about 10am, and from midday remnants of the five battalions involved were streaming back towards Oosterbeek. Thompson organised them – and coincidentally created the first piece of the Oosterbeek perimeter – during the afternoon of the 19th, and the first real attacks on Thompson Force (soon taken over by Major “Dickie” Lonsdale, and re-named Lonsdale Force) occurred on the morning of Wednesday the 20th.

    I’m going to have to re-set my concept, but I’ve now got ample information to be going on with. I’ll do more detailed and focused research later as I need to.
     
    FUNFACT: did you know that the Dutch destroyed the Arnhem Bridge during the May 1940 campaign? It was rebuilt during the war, and only reopened in August 1944! That’s why there was the pontoon bridge between the road and the rail bridges – it was needed to carry all the road traffic between 1940 and 1944. This also explains why the road bridge isn’t shown on the 1944 map – it didn’t exist when the map was drawn! The bridge was destroyed again in October 1944 by the USAAF.

    I didn’t know that, until now. Research! It’s fun!


    Footnote:
    There is a good annotated bibliography for all of Operation MARKET GARDEN here

    Back to start of thread
  6. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to MikeyD in Shall try to start an unofficial screenshots thread?   
    I'll go first. I was successfully assaulting an American position with my Italians (to my great surprise) when I snapped these screenshots. The classic Breda "Red Devil" aluminum body hand grenade in action.


  7. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from dutchman55555 in CM Helper loading problem   
    Thanks PhilM ... by sheer chance I stumbled over this thread just now, and the quote you have given from Help is exactly what I would have said

    If problems persist after that, Help->BugReport is best, failing that a PM here at BFC can get my attention.
     
    Cheers,
     
    GaJ
  8. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to snarre in When should BFC start to develop a CMx3 engine ?   
    they are answered moust of what you asked on other topics all ready. several month agou then when you asked this same things first time
  9. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to George MC in When should BFC start to develop a CMx3 engine ?   
    As is your incessant banging on about this. I mean it's great to have an opinion and espouse it, but the great lengths you are taking this to is becoming - odd. And TBH I've had enough of this rather cringeworthy show of childish behaviour. So I'm out.
  10. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to PanzerMike in The future of user made scenarios – and the lack of community feedback   
    Another group hug! This time with Steve. And no a$$grabbing this time!
     
    Feedback or no, appreciation or no. Let's all just contribute. Why? Because we can. Onwards comrades!
    ....
    Okay that was kinda cheesy...
  11. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to Bud Backer in The future of user made scenarios – and the lack of community feedback   
    I find this discussion very interesting because it made me examine my own motivation and desires for what I create and share online. It's not just about scenario or map design, it's about anything one does without recompense and gives freely to others.

    I have yet to share the maps I've made but I intend to. What I have shared are my Comic AARs, which are each 100+ hours of work. I did them for fun, because I could. I did them because I genuinely enjoyed doing them. But were I unable to share them - say for lack of a venue - I doubt I'd bother after the first one, when the novelty is over. I do them because I do wish for reaction, feedback - not just appreciation, though of course this is most welcome - but because I want to have the feeling that the effort itself is in some measure appreciated or recognized.

    I can't speak for Umlaut, but he may feel this resonates:

    -it's not about getting $0.99 per comic or map or scenario. Sure if one could make a living off it legally it might be another matter but then it's a business and not a gift to the community or something done for oneself.
    -it's not about getting "ratings" such as a star rating or whatnot. Certainly getting a high rating in any system is a nice thing but if that was the limit of the feedback, I don't think I'd be as enthused as I am when someone asks me if my story is going in one direction or another, or that I changed some graphical style and why, or telling me my German was slightly off in a particular panel.

    What I think it's about - for me - is engaging with the community, having a dialogue about what I've done, offering suggestions, giving me something to think about. The appreciation certainly is a huge part of that, but if every person who read my comics were to say "nice job" and leave it at that I would be grateful but still feel something lacking. I do want to interact, and not just collect praise.

    I think this is something one sees when one is designing a scenario or map and posts WIP screenshots. One gets ideas, discussion and contribution and it's no longer simply a passive affair. Once the scenario is done, as has been noted, the interaction stops and I think it's natural for a designer to want it to continue.

    So it's not that anyone is right or wrong in this discussion - certainly designers want something in return for their effort because these creations are a huge amount of time and effort and thought. But those who say design for yourself and you'll be less disappointed are correct in part as well - I do make things for myself, but I'd likely stop were I to operate in a vacuum because how many times does one wish to repeat the same task.

    What this says to me is that I make things because I want to, I'm inspired, I'm curious, I'm excited to explore something and want to challenge myself, but that it does not end there. I share what I create because now I want to see if my vision, my creation, matters in some way to anyone else. Only the most dedicated and passionate about their craft will bother to work for hundreds of hours on something purely for themselves; others will stop, feeling that nice as it is, they have made a masterpiece only to shove it in the attic, and that is a pity and a loss to the community, in my view.
  12. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to PanzerMike in The future of user made scenarios – and the lack of community feedback   
    Making scenarios in CMx2 is harder than it was in CMx1 days. The bar has been raised considerably imho. It is a lot of work. A month for a scenario minimum in my case. Heck, I play very little. Design takes up most of my time. After havong made my first stock scenario in RT I was so excited. I made a lot more post release. I skipped BS and dedicated my time to beef up content for RT. Now I am making stock stuff for Bulge. I consider it a privilege. Doing what I can to make games likes this (of which there are very few) feasable. It is great to get feedback and perhaps even some appreciation. But I will make stuff and release anyways. Because I want this game to last.
  13. Downvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to MikeyD in The future of user made scenarios – and the lack of community feedback   
    Forget about feedback, forget sharing with the community and grand plans. I wonder how many folks posting here have made scenarios for their own gratification?
    Actually constructed a map, placed units on it, and got the AI to move them around in a coherent manner. I don't care if you shared them, if they were historical or fictional,  if the locations were real or even if the scenario was any good. All I care about is if you've made-your-own then had fun playing it afterward. If you haven't done that at the very least then you're just talk.
  14. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from JonS in The future of user made scenarios – and the lack of community feedback   
    An obvious thing that would go a long way to addressing a lot of the concerns here is a good "Scenario Depot".    
     
    For a really decent amount of time, GJK's Scenario Depot delivered the goods on providing a place where scenario designers could give each other feedback, and get input from users.    
     
    Unfortunately (to augusto's point) all good things come to an end.   GJK made a couple of unfortunate decisions in how the thing operated.   BFC's own repo started to draw scenario traffic away.  Downwards spiral.  CMx2 came out and GJK didn't support it.  The End.
     
     
    It is conceivable the new Repo might open the possibility of some of the features/benefits of TSD being provided again.    I have my eyes on this, as we are navigating our way through the Mirkwood of Initial Configuration.
     
    GaJ
  15. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from agusto in I hate artillery, I really do...   
    Well recognised!   It's Sheriff of Oosterbeek, and it's a fabulous map.    
     
    I was so struck by this little scene (regrettably off in the distance from my forces) it reminded me of your comment:
     

     
    ... what a beautiful row of terraced houses and back yards.   Not even near an objective, or especailly tactically significant.   Just artistic!
  16. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from JonS in I hate artillery, I really do...   
    Well recognised!   It's Sheriff of Oosterbeek, and it's a fabulous map.    
     
    I was so struck by this little scene (regrettably off in the distance from my forces) it reminded me of your comment:
     

     
    ... what a beautiful row of terraced houses and back yards.   Not even near an objective, or especailly tactically significant.   Just artistic!
  17. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from General Jack Ripper in CM Helper 1.6.1 available   
    I just noticed this one.
     
    CMH is basically an evolution of H2HH.   And it's only the first little step in the evolution: as you observed, it doesn't change much.   So as long has H2HH is working fine for you, there is no need to upgrade yet.
     
    FWIW, the main benefits of CMH right now are:
    All games on one tab Reports to you whether your CM versions are up to date It's supported.  If you have a problem with H2HH, the first thing I will ask you to do is move to CMH. GaJ
  18. Downvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to Thewood1 in What's the deal with the Repository?   
    I think BFC should just scrap the repository.  It has been a sorry stepchild since its inception.  Having it there just leads to expectations that it will work.  At best it has been clunky, slow, and hard to find stuff.  At worst it leads the community to believe that BFC is investing in non-revenue generating activities where the reality is that its not working...leading to disappointment.  Let the community work it out separate from BFC.  I think if BFC just expanded the storage for individuals and consolidated all scenarios and mods into a single thread, it would be better than what we have now.  Otherwise, people are just on their own.
  19. Upvote
    GreenAsJade reacted to agusto in I hate artillery, I really do...   
    I counted the crosses, there are 16 of them.
     
     
    Absolutely . Thanks for sharing this GaJ, your men died for a good cause...our entertainment.
  20. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in What's the deal with the Repository?   
    I got the title somewhat prematurely, as we (BFC and a couple of volunteers) figure out what is possible.   It has surprised everyone involved how long this has had to take - I know I can speak for BFC as well as me about this unexpected amount of time passing.
     
    The only thing the title currently means is "we're experimenting with enabling me to work on it".  
     
     
    The grand plan (speaking as me, not necessarily BFC) is to try to use the facilities provided by this new forum to make "the repository we'd all like to have" ... at least within the constraints of what you can do with this thing.
     
    A fall back (in my mind) is that if this thing can't actually do a decent job of it, then I may go back to what I was doing before this new forum and its repo capability arrived: a complete revamp of CMMODS.
     
    In the mean time, I have no insight what so ever into the operation of the old BFC repo: it's nothing to do with me.     
     
    GaJ
  21. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from agusto in I hate artillery, I really do...   
    After half a game trying to persuade spotters to call Fire For Effect ... this...
     

     
     
  22. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from waclaw in I hate artillery, I really do...   
    After half a game trying to persuade spotters to call Fire For Effect ... this...
     

     
     
  23. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from rocketman in CM Helper 1.6.1 available   
    ... knows about CMBS.
     
    http://bit.ly/cm-helper
     
    Thanks to Bud for digging out the info I needed.
     
     
    GaJ
     
    (Edit: it looks like its working OK on Mac and Windows)
  24. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from Haggard Sketchy in Mod wish #2: sparse bocage   
    It'd be great to have a bocage mod that lets you see where the gaps in the bocage are.

    GaJ
  25. Upvote
    GreenAsJade got a reaction from animalshadow in CM Helper 1.6.1 available   
    ... knows about CMBS.
     
    http://bit.ly/cm-helper
     
    Thanks to Bud for digging out the info I needed.
     
     
    GaJ
     
    (Edit: it looks like its working OK on Mac and Windows)
×
×
  • Create New...