Michael Dorosh

You can judge any leader by the help he hires. Hitler hired the likes of Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, Hess and look where it landed him. Bush on the other hand seems to have made some great choices - Colin Powell in particular. I understand there were even a democrat or two included. Those of us who comprise your closest trading partner are also watching with interest.

You can judge any leader by the help he hires. Hitler hired the likes of Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, Hess and look where it landed him. Bush on the other hand seems to have made some great choices - Colin Powell in particular. I understand there were even a democrat or two included. Those of us who comprise your closest trading partner are also watching with interest.

Canadian ones are done (sigh) - click the link. US ones would be neat, too, but with the shared sleeves, I think all you can do is paratroopers... ------------------ http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbits.htm

Hey - if there are any of you guys not actually out on a date tonight (I feel the need to stay home and watch my Flames get beaten up on by Vancouver, but that's another story!) and you are interested in British mods, I'm putting up some British infantry insignia. They are a bit oversize and a bit too bright, but I like 'em and I think they add some colour to the uniforms. I hope the links work; if anyone gets a chance in the next couple of days to try them out, I'd appreciate some feedback. Thanks! The link (I hope) is - http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbrit.htm ------------------ http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbits.htm

A good way to improve modelling skills is checking out the work of others. Try this - http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/britain/britain.htm (heehee) ------------------ http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbits.htm

That sounds right. Garfield makes the same error many Americans do, however - the Canadian Army was never granted the prefix "Royal", and it was definitely not applied to field formations either. In fact, the Canadian Army was only known as the Canadian Army between 1940 and about 1967. Before that, it was the Canadian Militia, divided into the Permanent Active Militia (or Permanent Force, the regular army) and the Non-Permanent Active Militia (or reserves). In 1940 they were renamed the Canadian Army, divided into the Canadian Army (Active), Canadian Army (Reserve) and Canadian Army (Overseas). In the late 1960s, all three services were unified into the Canadian Forces. We've only just recently begun calling ourselves the Army again in the last few years, though officially I think we are also still known as Land Force Command of the Canadian Forces.

I'll take a WAG and say Ardenne Abbey in Normandy, near Caen.

Extremely good point. Patton slapped those kinds of men, but by 1944 they were considered in most (western Allied) circles as legitimate casualties. The Canadians and British called it "Combat Exhaustion", I believe the Yanks called it "Battle Fatigue." Evacuation to a safe position for a few hours or a day (ie the rest of a Combat Mission game) was the initial prescription.

I've read several accounts of Canadian water trucks (every infantry battalion had one) being named GUNGA DIN in honour of the real Gunga Din. When the I Canadian Corps headquarters arrived in Italy, they ordered the truck drivers of the 1st Canadian Division to paint out the names on their trucks - didn't look "military". The 8th Army had always been rather informal in manners of dress and appearance, and under British Corps commanders, the Canadians got away with a lot of non-regulation "uniforms." One exception was in Sicily, when General Montgomery drove past a truck belonging to the 48th Highlanders of Canada. The driver, who was wearing a top hat, didn't know if he should salute, and instead doffed the hat politely. He was also stark-assed naked from the neck down. (It was quite hot in Sicily in July of 1943) General Montgomery shortly after issued the only dress regulation he ever personally promulgated. "Top Hats will no longer be worn in 8th Army."

Some of my Canadian Para buddies will be there doing battle. Watch my website for their photos - http://members.home.net/canuckmain/

Joni Mitchell said "you don't know what you got til it's gone." Sad but true - well stated David. Generally speaking, if I see someone lock up a thread, I get the feeling the moderator has had enough of the topic and I refrain from mentioning it. Other people feel the burning need to start a new thread to apologize, or even continue the subject, or start talking about censorship. I don't know about any of you, but if my grandmother breaks wind at the dinner table, we all pretty much ignore it and change the subject and the moment passes quickly. What possesses people to immediately start up new threads concerning locked ones is beyond me. This is BTS' house and we are guests - not rent payers.

I agree with many of the points raised above. One suggestion that others forums have done is to have a free fire zone, or bar, or whatever you want to call it - a completely off topic forum to discuss all the stupid stuff in.

Check out the bombardments at the D-Day beaches, or Monte Cassino, or Operation Veritable - and see how many men came out of it ready to fight. I can't think of a single instance in history where a bombardment - no matter how heavy - produced a majority of fatalities among the casualties it inflicted. You proved something the manual already explained - that the number of KIA is picked randomly. The number of killed to wounded in engagements have always seemed right on the money to me, and I have modelled one or two actual historical battles - the casualty ratios seemed very close to historical. You admit yourself your test was not a fair one. I think the great thing about CM is that it is HARD to kill infantry. Everytime I see a squad charge at me over open ground, I get scared - the same way the guys doing it for real do - cause there is no guarantee they will all be shot down. It makes for very interesting game play and some tense moments. And I think it is very accurate. To further your example, as stated before, open ground is seldom billiard table flat, and an infantryman can dig a decent shell scrape in a few minutes with his e tool. You say you had many batteries of 155s laying waste to the area and perhaps every man suffered a direct hit. I don't see that ever occurring in a regular game. I agree that lightly wounded guys would be interesting, but how do you model their effectiveness. Slow the whole squad down when they are on the move? Presents a lot of problems, and I think it is out of the scope of the game - the battalion commander usually leaves the care of the wounded to his RSM and the Medical Officer and concentrates on fighting the battle. Neither the RSM nor the MO are simulated in the game, and for good reason. What would they do? Just more to worry about and get in the way of fighting the battle. You make strong cases for historical accuracy, but I personally would find the inclusion of medical units as at best interesting chrome and at worst a pain in the neck when I'm not only ordering three companies of infantry, plus tank support, plus offboard artillery, but now have to keep my ambulances safe from harm and tell wounded men where to collect. A real life commander would delegate those functions to others, and in the game, so do you - by "letting" the computer handle this. You do make one excellent point - that of shelling areas where you know wounded men to be because the game doesn't model them. Did you know that it was standard German practice to have their own positions pre-registered, and the second they were lost, they bombarded them with mortar and artillery fire as a prelude to their counter-attacks? It seems to me that these preplanned fire missions were not cancelled in order to spare their own wounded. War is hell. ------------------ http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbits.htm [This message has been edited by Michael Dorosh (edited 01-27-2001).]

The one at CMHQ isn't very good. I designed my own as well which is a bit closer to the movie. Email if you are serious and I will send it to you - madorosh@home.com

If they did so at the time, more power to them. That war is over, time to move on. Let me put it this way - and I know you won't have an answer. How would YOU have stopped the Holocaust without resorting to killing Germans in order to do it? I await your words of wisdom.

As opposed to British Parliament?

I think all the Canadians went to Kiska. I really don't know much about him, or the campaign there - except that 13 Canadian Brigade was stationed there for about 6 months IIRC before coming back to Canada. I don't know if any Canadians went to Attu or not.

Right click, select properties, highlight the URL, paste it in the Address window, and hit enter. Angelfire will not let you link to their pics, cause then you don't have to read their advertising. But this is a way around it. Looks not too bad - needs dirt on the windshield though. ------------------ http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbits.htm

Fishing for compliments, Rommel? LOL! It really is a very handsome picture. Nice work!

Okay, I'm at home now and can grovel! First, thanks for the links, very kind of you to take the time. I am really with you guys on hoping that graphics improvements are made along the way - and of course, other games are going to surpass CM if CM stands still. I've already posted that in 15 years, CM, or games like it, will be able to host all kinds of features impossible to host now. Compare CM to the like of M1 Tank Platoon from 10 or 15 years ago. Didn't mean to offend anybody here - I did want to label certain (non-specific) people as blockheads though - mainly the ones who will buy a game based on how much it resembles Castle Wolfenstein - ie on how little they have to think, or on how God-like their powers will be. Perhaps that's not fair, either, I mean, to each his own. My thinking on this goes back to my Squad Leader days in high school. We had started a scenario and one of the players went to use his flamethrower and rolled double sixes. This was turn one. You can imagine the debate. "How can it be out of fuel"? he demanded. I offered that it had been used before the scenario commenced. "But this is turn one, what are you talking about?" Etc. I was always firmly in the realism camp, and quite frankly enjoyed when things went awry - some surprise or little nuance that forced someone to change their way of thinking. My favourite response to their questions was "It's all factored in." My friends were graduates of the King Tiger School of Indomitability. They didn't want things "factored" in or explained away as being akin to real war - they wanted total control of their forces. Which was their right. But it caused a lot of friction. Playing games of Sniper by TSR, they couldn't figure out why I divided my teams into historically accurate squads and gave them realistic names while their playes were named "Doctor Death" and the like. I don't think anyone here really wants the graphics sets to stay the same for the life of the CM series - we've all downloaded too many mods to convince anyone that that is so! I can understand the concern of people who don't want to have to buy new computers though - I have been frustrated beyond belief many times over the years, getting great new software that I didn't have the machine to play it on. It sucks. Big time. And that was before my internet days, so I didn't even have rave reviews of a product like CM in my face rubbing it in that I couldn't use it. Just the box and the knowledge that I had spent 60 dollars for a glossy looking paperweight. (Impulse buyers don't always check the minimum requirements on the box top!) Anyway, this whole conversation is just us talking through our butts anyway, so no harm is being done. The designers will make their decisions on what hardware will be necessary, and we will make ours as to whether or not it is for us, and that will be that. As it stands right now, I have a pretty good machine, will probably upgrade by the time CM2 comes out anyway, and whatever they decide to do I will be able to live with. Not everyone here is in that boat. I would rather see more people included than fewer - if that means lowering the bar as far as graphics goes, and maintaining such a large, diverse, and interesting community of game players, I am all for that. It has been great getting to know some of you fellows - interacting with you is far better than having a game so hi-tech that I am restricted to playing it by myself because there are so few others who have a P500 to run it on. And I don't mean to sound elitist or snobby, but the truth is a lot of companies put up slick screen shots (some of which are title screens and not even part of the game play!!) and sell their games based on that alone. That really annoys me. CM has the most realistic and truthful advertising I've seen. At least these days most games come with a demo so you can test it out yourself. If anyone wants to provide a link to a DEMO for Battlefield 1942 or the Cold War game, that might be a better way of making their case. Sorry to be so wordy. I think we all want good things for CM, so let the discussion continue.

It won't let me in...wahhhhhhhhhhhh [This message has been edited by Michael Dorosh (edited 01-26-2001).]

I think the Japanese and Germans got everything they deserved - they certainly asked for it. You forget that they are the ones that started it. And committing giant acts of genocide (the Japanese were murdering Chinese civilians by the tens of thousands) all the while. I really don't see that firebombing their women and children in an attempt to get them to stop is in any way morally wrong or inexcusable. I think someone should lock up this thread before it gets even more silly. If anyone wants to continue the debate further, come over to http://network54.com/Hide/Forum/60599 This isn't the place for this.

Thanks Goofy - I think you need a new handle, this one doesn't do you justice!

Cool - a blacked out star is a good idea. btw - is that also "your" Kangaroo? I like the subdued stars and I see tac markings on there - had me confused, cause I remember making Kangaroo tac markings seperately, since it is not a shared file with the Shermans (I never put it on my site, though). For a moment I was worried that it was in fact a shared file. [This message has been edited by Michael Dorosh (edited 01-26-2001).]