Jump to content

pkanarki

Members
  • Posts

    79
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Location
    denmark

Recent Profile Visitors

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

pkanarki's Achievements

Member

Member (2/3)

16

Reputation

  1. So nytimes is run by Russian board member? Who is that? Name of board member? I am very curious....
  2. You made a claim and were asked to back it up. How else should it work? Nobody denied that the pipe wasn't blown as is still intact. Solid facts, as you say. Your conclusion was what was challenged. But we don't have to. Sorry, but that is the established way of debating and gaining knowledge. The one who makes a claim has to back it up. Not the one who challenges the claim. You can make up your own rules but then please don't expect to be taken seriously. While your facts are solid, they are not conclusive for the claim you make. For once, it is not Putins pipeline but a Russian-German joint venture. I am not a conspiracy theorists but my government profited at least as much from the blown pipeline as Russia. In fact Russia didn't really profit much at all. The situation before was much more in their favor because Russia was able to blacknail Germany with gas deliveries and thus divide our society. Giving in to Russian blackmailing was an actually heatedly debated solution at that time. Sure, I'd still count Russia among the prime suspects just for their demonstrated preference to do things others find unreasonable. I'd even say they are one of the likelier suspects. But they are not the only one and your facts are not suited to shorten that list. That's a) whataboutism. We were discussing your claim, not someone else's. Your claim doesn't get any more credible by someone else making a claim he doesn't prove. And b) I don't discuss with the Russian public in general, I discuss with specific persons on this forum, so that's not a valid point. But if any Russian came here and made the claim the US were behind the blown pipelines I'd ask him to back up his claim, too. Call me pseudo intellectual, again, but that is yet another rhetoric method aimed at discrediting a person's opinion instead of actually arguing his points. You are constructing a false dilemma here: A position is either fair judgement or pro Russian bias. This is false because obviously there can be a lot in between and also outside of that spectrum (for instance I could just be biased towards my line of argumenatation instead of making a fair judgement and still come to the same conclusion). But this way you make it look like everyone who doesn't share your view must be on the Russian side. Which of course discredits the person without having to deal with their points. This deserves a quote...Well spoken Butschi. Thank you
  3. This is very easy to reproducere in any of the combat mission games: Just did quick test in red thunder: 2-player-tcp-lan-game: Host: buy anything Client buy: some infantry, buy some trucks and or halftrack. In setup place infantry inside truck. After first round, the client infantry loose weapons (see picture). It is wrecking the tcp playmode. Please fix
  4. This bug has been around for many many years, atleast since 2008. It is NOT related to brz files not being identical. This bug ALWAYS exclusively manifests itself on the client-side. Host is unaffected. Tcp/IP lan/internet game. Please can we finally have this fixed:
  5. I agree that it is very much a mental thing playing this game. And yes, youtube does not serve the game justice, unless you have played the game yourself, I see that now. Maybe I can persuade my friend to try the demo. My backup plan is to have him come to my house, and I will have the game ready on two computers, with a pre-choosen scenario, and see if I can make him try. Any good suggestions for a battle? We wish to play cmrt tcpip Lan game, where it autopauses once a minute. I think it atleast has to be a very small scenario with not to many units
  6. It is as Erwin says because of the ai bug that we want to avoid the 4.0. Unfortunately my friend is not interested in the game. I thought combat mission would be something for him. He is interested in ww2 and plays pc games. But he just looked at the game on youtube and complained that the graphics look old etc. Basically it did not seem to catch his interest. I was surprised, cause I thought he would love it. I will have to find another friend/person. So unfortunately I/we never got to try and see if it is possible to do what my original post-question was. I really expected my friend to like the game, he is very much into ww2, and I thought I might finally have found someone who I could enjoy tcp lan games with. Too bad
  7. Thx for reply Erwin. I think you misunderstand what I mean: I am sure my original dvd, which is from pre-order is engine 3. What I want to know is if my friend can go to battlefront website today and buy red thunder base game, and then use the serial he gets to install MY dvd engine 3? I am asking because he has not bought yet. we dont waste the money in case it is not possible! When I look today at battlefront website, it says that red thunder is now base game engine 4!
  8. Disregard double post mistake
  9. I already own original dvd with red thunder and have I have re-downloadet red thunder from my battlefront account. I do NOT want to upgrade to upgrade to engine 4. My friend wish to play against me from his own pc. He does not own the game yet. Is it possible for him to buy new download version of red thunder, to acquire serial code, and then he uses my downloaded red thunder engine 3 to install and then activate with his newly bought serial??? We are basically trying to avoid engine 4! Best regards
  10. That is how war is. Thats why combat mission is like that. Its all under the hood, an abstraction. There are so many million if not billions more cpu cycles/calculations going on in this game compared to other games, every bullit is accounted for. If you dont like it, its beacuse you dont know how war really is. There are no limits to what is abstracted in this game, not to forget the hilarious "we-are-so-realistic-cooperation" with the New Zealand military. Back to your question, in regard to shooting blanks: yes they are blanks, just check your history books. There was a period during the war, when germany suffered heavily from sabotage within they're industrial production(Australia probably did as well). So as always battlefront has made this part of the game, just like the famous "you shoot at me, then I instantly charge/flee against you" thing they added.
  11. Yet another mindblowing example of russian greatness. According to my private sources within the former kgb(behind triple vpn, 1024 bit military grade x encryption, i still use the same licence from my retirement from the NSA, just for keeping contacts etc), Stalin much preferred the Arisaka over the Mosin. Best regards
  12. Wow, just wow. I am blown away by that( no pun intended). Suffered the same. Was looking for the length of the Garand, believing it to be 1,105 mm. I failed miserably. but then i found it, and was completely taken by surprise, this weapon which was used in the pacific theatre had a staggering lenght of, just wait.... a mindblowing 1,107 mm( and that is without the standard edition bajonet). And that is MILLIMETERS my gents. I was chocked. yours sincerely
  13. But why don't you find the joy in that offcourse BF has fixed the bar rifle graphic where the magazine was slightly positioned maybe 0.002 pixel too far to the left, which almost ruined the whole gaming experience. To be honest. CMBN is a serious joke and wreck by now.
  14. I used to play alot with a friend of mine, but must admit I have not played for long now(atleast 1 year). I lost interest because of too many bugs. Bugs like: Americans and british in Cmbn have serious bugs with AT-guns disappering(being under the map itself). And weapons disappering from soldiers etc. It was just too annoying, so we lost interest. We always used to play tcp Lan-turnbased in my house. I reported the bugs, but most of them did not seem to be fixed. And I must admit I am not willing to pay for upgrades anymore in "hope" that BUGS should be fixed. And the way the updgrade/update part works at Battlefront, that is what one would have to do. Also some solution like trenches, mines, fortifications seem like halfway-solutions, so they are really not working well. It just seems that lan tcp gamemode is not something alot play and therefore it is low on Battlefronts list. Most people seem to play pbem. I understand that Battlefront is a small company, so so be it. Maybe I will start playing pbem a bit. But must admit I am turned very much off by the whole upgrade/update mishmash. Sorry to hear the playmode tcp-lan is messy. But doesnt surprise me the least. I still read on this forum once in awhile. But my cmbn and red thunder have stayed untouched for very long. Now come and beat me/my post all you fanboys.
×
×
  • Create New...