stoat

Tough talk from a guy who lives in Frenchtown, Illinois. </font>

Tough talk from a guy who lives in Frenchtown, Illinois. </font>

No.

They have lots of gay bars there? Michael </font>

Sorry. I'm unfamiliar with the spelling idiosyncrasies of people from Kentucky. </font>

Been there done that, it was fun for about a year. Weather wise it sure is a a nasty place to live. </font>

When you purchase units in the unit editor, those in the "on map" slot will automatically appear on the map editor, while troops in any of the reinforcement slots will be represented by a marker, also visible on map. Setup zones are created much like different terrain types (like woods or fields). To "assign" a unit to a particular setup zone, all you have to do is move the unit within that setup zone via the map editor. The units will not have the appropriately colored bases in the map editor, but will during the setup phase of the scenario when it is openned through the scenarios menu. As has been mentioned, units are padlocked through the spacebar/right click menu in the map editor.

I may send out turns tonight. I may not.

I decided to take a look at the scenario since I didn't remember it off the top of my head, and found that I hadn't played it before. I played as Allied, and gave the AI a +2 experience bonus. B Company was deployed to the left of the road, 1st platoon, Ind., 3rd platoon, A Company, and all of the support weapons were deployed to the right, and the balance of A Company was deployed for a flanking movement through the low ground to the right while the other forces occupied the Germans in the town. I took casualties from long range HMG fire on the first turn, but my movements weren't affected much. As I moved B Company units through the scattered trees along the road towards the first two story house, the Brens traded fire with German infantry. I took the house and eliminated the MG-34, but it cost me 7 men from the attacking squad. After this my attack bogged down. I pushed units forward forward on both sides of the road, but took heavy fire all the while, and also scattered small caliber mortar fire. The flanking units progressed well until they attempted to cross the stone fences near the town. MG fire and infantry that had fallen back towards the objective incurred heavy casualties. I had been keeping the tanks on a short covered arc to prevent them from wasting their small ammo supply, but now sent them forward. They made good progress against the lightly armed paratroopers, but were soon out of ammo. The A Company units had enterred the two large buildings on the near side of the road in town, but several of my squads were entirely eliminated as the positions on the German side were reinforced. The battle ended with me owning the near side of the road, and the Germans the far. The flag was contested, and casualty rates were close to parity, though I had a slight edge and also had captured to Krauts. This battle is a very difficult one for the Allied player. Fire and movement works alright with Vickers and 3 inch mortars, but falls short with nothing more than Enfields at long range. I think that if I had sent more men on the flanking run, say all of A Company and the independent platoon, and just used B Company and the support weapons to tie down the Germans, I would have fared better. Reducing the AI experience bonus and better utilization of the light armor might have yielded more favorable results as well. It's a tough battle, but if you can overpower the Germans in just one area of the battlefield, you should be able to push them back in successive steps with just enough time to capture the flag.

In my experience, the game slows down primarily for two reasons. The first is map size. If the map is ginormous, the camera controls become jerky and the game slows down. This can be assuaged by reducing the horizon limit "Shift+H." The second game slowing factor is a large number of moving/shooting units. Stationary and non-firing units do not seem to reduce game speed, regardless of number. But when the units of both the player and the AI begin to move and engage one another, there is much more data to be processed, and the game slows. You can't fault BFC for this, as it is partly a user hardware issue, and partly a misuse of the game engine. CMAK was designed to be a company level combat game, with scalability up to battalion level. I've only noticed slowness in scenarios and operations with maps covering more than 10 square kilometers, and with OoBs in excess of brigade size on each side.

Maybe because that's what it means in German? I guess it is possible that Germans would call Bengal tigers "koenigs tigers," but "King Tiger" is the literal translation.

I'm not sure about the guns, but you can thank Mace for an increase in the cost of bread. It would make good business sense to buy American wheat futures, say for the second crop of einter wheat, and then give Mace five US dollars to play with sparklers in Aussie farm country.

I'm still waiting for you to send a turn to me, you girly-girl sport officiator-type person. </font>

The only complaints I have about cherry picking can be rectified by in-game mechanisms. The first complaint is about rare vehicles showing up too often in battles. This can be fixed with by setting rarity to standard. Almost all of the QB PBEMs I play feature StuG IIIs, Pz IVs, and Shermans. Cats don't bother to show up because they eat up way too much of a 2000 point allowance. My second complaint is about cross-nationality bargain shopping. For example, at certain times you can take a French 105mm spotter to support an otherwise American force. Same ammo loadout, both with radios, same number of tubes, same quality, but the French unit costs 40 points less. I've also seen 6 lb'ers supporting Americans because of a relative cheapness to 57mm ATGs. This can of course be fixed by limiting the nationality in the QB setup. The greatness of the QB system was that it allowed for a freewheeling, flying-circus-like, ecclectic mix of units while also allowing for more likely OoBs to line up against one another. Is CMx2 broken because of the absence of QBs? Not hardly. But QBs contributed immensely to the replayability of the CMx1 series. I'm sure that I've said nothing new, and that the user-purchase vs scenario edited OoB debate will go on for some time, as Combat Mission has always tread the line between a conflict's specific history and the users' more widespreads desires.

You no type good. You typing numbah bloody ten! Michael </font>

Boo! I'm testing out a new college e-mail address, but while I just sent you a file, you may not ever receive it. Let me know.

As I am typing this the sound of a disk drive installing CMAK fills my ears. This may mean that turns will go out tonight, or it may not mean that at all. Whatever the outcome, it should be known that no amount of begging on Boo's part for expedited turns, or gamey usage of large caliber artillery by the self-same lapidator will influence me in the least, nor stave off my opponents' crushing defeat. [ September 05, 2007, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: stoat ]

I don't see it as cheating at all. If you want to reduce the effectiveness of your AFVs and the threat to their commanders from enemy snipers in one move, why shouldn't you be able to? Keeping a vehicle buttoned up when in the line of fire seems like good sense to me, not a gamey advantage taken from a coding uniquity.

I get the desktop box back later this evening, and I may or may not reinstall CMAK on it today, given work and homework factors. You'll just have to retain your water a little longer, Boo.

You lose more and more with age as they become disinterested, discover marijuana, or move on to playing football. In Seneca the high school doesn't have a soccer team, and most of the guys play fall baseball or football and the girls softball in the years before entering high school. I'm on a club team that is in its last year because there is no one moving up to take the place of the players we lose to graduation. The lack of a high school team kills the sport for almost everyone, and seriously hurts the futures of athletes that deserve slots on college teams. Here, the experienced refs get the U-12 and U-14 games, while the new refs get the U-8 and U-10 matches. However, for the past two years it has just been myself and a friend doing most of the work, while a few others help out when they can. There are no adults in the system, and the only new ref we've had in the past two years we told not to come back, because he was that bad. We do have a different style in Seneca than you will find in most other local towns. We tend to let most things go, as long as no one gains an unfair advantage or does something blatant or flagrant. It really irritates the fans of visiting teams that we don't call much, but we don't call much either way. Let the kids play, says I. Referee is a great job for a youngin', and it increases your knowledge of the game, if nothing else. I'm also making more money for my work than I probably should be, given the premium on trained labor. What kind of training would your daughters be subjected to? I've only ever done the 6 hour SAY course, though I could have done the two day USSF bit several time if I had wanted.

I admire you for picking up two teams. Youth leagues are always short coaches, not to mention people with any kind of experience or knowledge, and the few individuals that stick with it year after year are probably worthy of canonization. I think policies like this are the absolute worst thing you can do to the U-12 girls. Someone had the great idea to segregate the girls from the boys, and then water down the female side of the game with smaller teams and/or fields. Then they reintroduce the girls to the boys at a time when the guys are beginning to bulk up and are coming into their own. It puts the girls at a serious initial disadvantage at the U-14 level, and unfortunately many can't make up the difference, or give up trying. Split them up permanently from the U-10 level, or don't do it at all. With that off my chest, I'd just like to say that things are well from the official's viewpoint of the game. There are four refs with experience in the local league, all under 20, and I'm the only one not playing high school golf, running cross country, or attending college. It makes for 6 or 7 game days, most by myself, and around 10 hours in the sun. But it's good for my cholesterol, and I am raking in the dough. The league will be seriously screwed next year when 4 of the five referees will be attending college, and the other will have only 2 years of experience.

It's little wonder that a State of the Thread post is never composed, what with half of the Pool leering at pictures of women one fourth their age. I feel like an unwilling visitor at a nursing home witnessing geriatrics badly in need of a new set of Depends ogle the young CNAs working their way through nursing school.

I´ve decided to crank a few turns out of my laptop just to keep you poor, deprived lads from getting big heads, which you would be sure to do if your pathetic attempts at virtual combat were not brought to the fore of your mind every few days.

I believe the MMG carriers have a crew of three while the ATR carrier only has a crew of two. Perhaps that would go some way into cutting down on passenger room?

My gaming rig is suffering from a malfunctioning network card. You lot will just have to get along with my posts here and abroad for the uplifting and enlightening experience that is stoat, instead of from the turns that I would normally send out like clockwork.