Jump to content

Online magazine posted BF's game screenshot


Recommended Posts

On 8/1/2019 at 5:48 AM, Battlefront.com said:

Oh, and for those who are curious about the business side of things, a lot of resources, persistence and patience is needed to land a defense contract of this nature.  It also takes the right product.  Slitherine has spent years working hard to break into the defense contracting world, Battlefront has spent two decades developing Combat Mission.  Partnering together on military contracts makes sense.

Steve

It does. We can all forget about a release of the CMRT module this year, but it does. Perhaps you could consider developing CM in partnership with Slitherine as well. That way we don't have to wait for modules so insanely long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

I think that you'll find that it was Atlee who ran Limeyland during WW2, and it was Eleanor who ran USAtia. Meanwhile, Elizabeth says I can't even run a whelk stall down the Mile End Road

We share a common language and yet I almost never know what the hell you are talking about.

 

Mord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Erwin said:

That's an interesting proposition.  Where is the evidence for that (or maybe it was a joke - wasn't sure)?

This is a game forum, so let's keep it both simple and relevant. The answer can be found in tank names.

Cromwell - Great war leader, useless as Lord Protector, and loathed by his own comrades such as the Diggers and the Levellers.

Churchill - Great war leader, the worst occupant of No. 11 ever, and as a floor crosser loathed by many in both the Liberal, and Conservative parties.

We don't have a tank called the ....

Atlee - Christian cadet corps leader, coalition builder, defeater of Halifax's attempts to bring down Churchill in 1940, and as Lord Privy Seal and de facto Leader of the House of Commons he "ran" the country, leaving Churchill free to run the M.O.D. and boost the morale of the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Churchill - Great war leader...

Actually, I am not at all convinced that his reputation as a great war leader is entirely deserved. For instance, he had a bad habit of committing the Army into operations it had no reasonable hope of winning when the shrewder strategy would have been to husband his forces and commit them when they had a reasonable hope of victory. Greece and BATTLEAXE come immediately to mind and SHINGLE might also be mentioned along with come other actions. As a consequence, the Army lost thousands of men fruitlessly thrown away and not available when a genuine opportunity arose.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Labour party won an unprecedented landslide victory in 1945, put Atlee into office for the next 6 years and unceremoniously kicked Churchill to the curb. Thick historical treatises could be written about why that occurred. I'm reminded of that line spoken by john Huston in the film 'Chinatown': "Politicians, ugly buildings and wh_res all get respectable if they last long enough."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said:

It does. We can all forget about a release of the CMRT module this year, but it does. Perhaps you could consider developing CM in partnership with Slitherine as well. That way we don't have to wait for modules so insanely long.

An amazing jump to a conclusion from someone with no actual information to make that call from, but hey some people like to always see a potential negative. They make drugs for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

Actually, I am not at all convinced that his reputation as a great war leader is entirely deserved. For instance, he had a bad habit of committing the Army into operations it had no reasonable hope of winning when the shrewder strategy would have been to husband his forces and commit them when they had a reasonable hope of victory. Greece and BATTLEAXE come immediately to mind and SHINGLE might also be mentioned along with come other actions. As a consequence, the Army lost thousands of men fruitlessly thrown away and not available when a genuine opportunity arose.

Michael

I was just suggesting why he would have had a tank named after him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, sburke said:

An amazing jump to a conclusion from someone with no actual information to make that call from, but hey some people like to always see a potential negative. They make drugs for that. 

An amazing jump? 🤨  You guys finishing a module in less than 5 months? Don't make me laugh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As to the question of whether Churchill was a competent military strategist, well he was and he wasn't.

The invasion of Greece was a disaster, except... ...that it and the revolution Yugoslavia delayed the start of Barbarossa by just long enough to prevent Germany from winning in 1941.

The invasion of Italy, likewise, was a pointless, bloody adventure except... the collapse of Mussolini's government came at just the right time to break Hitler's nerve in the Battle of Kursk.

For a lousy strategist, he had an uncanny ability to choose strategies that had unpredictably beneficial outcomes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Freyberg said:

As to the question of whether Churchill was a competent military strategist, well he was and he wasn't.

The invasion of Greece was a disaster, except... ...that it and the revolution Yugoslavia delayed the start of Barbarossa by just long enough to prevent Germany from winning in 1941.

The invasion of Italy, likewise, was a pointless, bloody adventure except... the collapse of Mussolini's government came at just the right time to break Hitler's nerve in the Battle of Kursk.

For a lousy strategist, he had an uncanny ability to choose strategies that had unpredictably beneficial outcomes.

That's an interesting perspective.  B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there any historical characters who used to be thought of as heroes or brilliant who have not now fallen from their pedestals thru revisionism?  Monty seems to be reviled today as too slow and cautious even tho' his main task was to minimize British casualties as Britain had lost so many in WW1.  Are Patton, Lincoln and Washington today similarly recognized as being "lucky" altho' inept?   Am genuinely curious.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...