Bullethead

In addition to what CivDiv said, there's also the "feature freeze". No sense talking up things you'd like to see if the time for getting them in the game is over. But OTOH, with the recent example of Los and his rifle grenades, perhaps there are a few knowledgeable guys who are sitting on their hands to keep from posting. They don't want to delay the game by convincing BTS to add something else at the last minute, for fear of getting lynched by the rest of us . -Bullethead PS: I'm really glad we're getting rifle grenades. But I got my rope ready for the next guy

Zigster said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A gun uses a fixed amount of propellant<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have to disagree. Like our Finnish colleague noted, a weapon is called a gun or a howitzer based on the length of its tube (although different countries have different dividing lines). There have been and still are quite a few bag-loaded "guns" with the capability for varying the powder charge each shot. Today these are almost exclusively heavy artillery pieces, although *most* naval guns above 6" were also of this type. Some forces also use the term "gun-howitzer", which means a medium-length tube somewhere between a howitzer and a gun. The current US M198 155mm is an example (and this piece is also bag-loaded). -Bullethead

Compliments to Wild Bill--should be a terrifying scenario Question: shellbursts in the water use the same graphics as those on land. Do they also use the same physics, or does the water change their effects? -Bullethead

Rob Deans said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Would it be possible to build some sort of ambiguity into the ground features that could only be clarified with close inspection?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've suggested Fionn implement this type of recon mission into his CM Meta-Campaign system. It would work in that because it would be handled by players instead of the game engine. For instance, your map shows a bridge but you don't know whether it will support your Tigers. Before you can plan in confidence, therefore, you have to send somebody to take a look. The true state of the bridge is known to Fionn and the recon mission gets played out by the CMMC players, to decide whether or not they get the answer, or get it right But I ain't heard back from him on this, so I don't know if it'll be in CMMC. I sure hope so, however. -Bullethead

MichaelU started this thread with: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Seems like everybody on the board is obsessed with age, so let's find out whether people think the experience of age or vigour of youth are more important for a general.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, before we can do this, we need to define what an "old" general is. Keeping in mind that folks following the standard career ladder don't become brigadiers until early middle age, and don't reach corps command until even older, the vast majority of generals are and always have been "old" in absolute human longevity terms. So, when you talk about a "young" general, do you mean somebody just a few years younger than his contemporary generals but who came up that way, or somebody who, through special circumstances, vaulted over many intermediate grades and reached high command while still the age of most of his company or battalion commanders? In the former case, I don't see there being much difference in performance, because all of them have about the same amount and types of military experience. In the latter case, however, I really think the older guys have the edge, due to superior experience. It's like how you should never play poker with graybeards--they know everything instinctively from long exposure and stomp you with things that are obvious to them but you never thought of . True, there have been some successful "young" (as in special circumstances/political stroke) generals. Alexander the Great and Napolean spring to mind. But the former was essentially in staff college from the day he was born, so had 30 years of military experience when he took Persia--he was an "old" general in everything but absolute age. And Napolean was an outlyer, a genius who saw new ways to do things. This worked until he'd taught his enemies these tricks, and then his methods couldn't overcome sheer numbers, besides his other problems. So I think context is more important than mere age. If the rules of the game don't change, then the guys who know the rules better win, and that comes from experience. If, however, the rules can be changed, then experience under the old rules can be a handicap inhibiting understanding of the new rules, and thus lead to defeat. Napolean's early enemies had this problem, but after 10-15 years, they'd been replaced by guys brought up under the new rules, and Napolean didn't have any more insights. Sic transit gloria. OTOH, Alexander was doing the same old things, he'd learned from good teachers, and he'd been doing it all his life. Thus, he is "the Great." -Bullethead [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 01-14-2000).]

Zigster said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Start with a drumfire, then a pepperpot. Alternate back and forth for three days... Found a new town where Reisberg used to be... Tanks? What are tanks?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is my perspective also, but then I'm an old cannoncocker. So-called ground-gaining forces exist either to be cannonfodder or to occupy the blasted area and get a body count for the arty -Bullethead

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>By the way, I CAN get the demo to run in 1600x1200 32bit(just did it to check)if thats what you were referring to BulletHead, at least with my TNT2 Ultra card and .368 reference drivers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, maybe it IS working in 16x12 for me. It sure looks and sounds like it shifts gears on my monitor a couple times before the title screen comes up, though. -Bullethead

>>>>>>>>> Sounds like a freak occurance to me. I cracked my "fritz pot" pounding a tent stake in... something I could do with the old steel pot. <<<<<<<<< Yeah, and you could cook in the old steel pots, too But the fritz will stop bullets. It DOES crack and shred and become useless in the process, but it keeps them out. -Bullethead

FWIW, 1600x1200 doesn't happen in CM anyway, or so it seems to me. That's my usual desktop resolution (I have a TNT 1 card) and CM always shifts me to something considerably lower when I play it. -Bullethead

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I personally don't think that there is a jacket, let alone a helmet that could withstand a high calibre shot.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The current flak jacket won't stop bullets but I owe the continued existence of my left arm to the jacket's ability to stop big hunks of 122mm . The kevlar "Fritz pot", however, will stop bullets. It will even stop a 12.7 at long range. Remember them showing one off on TV after Grenada, when they were first used?. The wearer got a concussion but the helmet kept the 12.7 out. -Bullethead [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 01-13-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The battle ended in the village later in the day, oddly enough when his tank was disabled there.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks for the info. For some reason that last part never registered with me. -Bullethead

I wasn't aware Villers-Bocage was a strasseschlacht. Maps and photos of the victims all look countryside to me. -Bullethead

Steve said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I'm not really sure about the details yet. Too new. But Charles intends to weigh them more towards AT than HE.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That would be cool--give US squads some organic AT capability . But a frag version would be nice, too, if you get around to it. I'm really glad you all put this in the game, even if it means a few more weeks of dealy on getting it to me. Just in case you were wondering. NOTE TO SELF: quit posting when drunk -Bullethead [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 01-13-2000).]

Damn Fester, I hope you took down everybody's name so you could get them their Iron Crosses -Bullethead

JonS said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Or a general screenshot with some, wait for it, ... DEAD BODIES !!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehehe, I was thinking the same thing. Something like a bunch of transparent dead guys lying around, and some live troops fumbling around amongst them looking for weapons and ammo. And a caption sorta like, "Damn this FOW model, I can't find a damn thing that don't move or shoot!" -Bullethead

Make a shot of the Louisiana National Guard. A halftrack cruising down a creek (bayou) powered by a big outboard motor, with guys fishing out the back and tossing grenades in the water. Be sure there's some beer in the "bass boat" Or a World Cup soccer game between US and German troops, with the crowd brawling in the stands with fully auto weapons -Bullethead

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Their use is, like the Dog Which Is Kwazy says, exactly like Panzerfausts in terms of game mechanics. Each squad will have a certain number of rifle grenades. The TacAI will decide when they should be used.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks for the info. Can you give us a bit more of it tho? Like are you using them primarily for anti-tank weapons or do they have some frag effect instead/as well ? -Bullethead

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Madmatt out and free-balling it!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's just cuz they've all been under your bed for Gawd knows how long, and you're afraid to reach under there and drag 'em out -Bullethead

I was spit out of a volcano at the creation of the world -Bullethead

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"a 1500 ton superheavy tank, cased in 250mm of armour, armed with an 80cm gun and two 15cm weapons, and powered by four U-boat diesels."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehehe, I'd settle for some of those 170-ton fusion-powered hovertanks in the "Hammer's Slammers" series . -Bullethead

I bet Madmatt's always wanted a router. He should check under his bed. Every time my cat catches something, she only eats about half of it (unless it's small, like a shrew, say) and leaves the rest rotting under my bed. So I figure Madmatt's now got about 3/4 of a router down there . Scary thought. When was the last time Madmatt cleaned out under his bed? Anybody want to start a pool on how many pairs of dirty skivvies he finds while looking for router parts? My money's on 18 pairs -Bullethead [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 01-12-2000).]

Yeah what Pheonix said!!! And thanks, Los -Bullethead

Hehehe, I likes, especially the fuzzy dice . But we gotta make one of those tanks a low rider -Bullethead

Major Tom said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I am not sure if the trinity concept is by rule for every formation... Many British/Canadian forces used the trinity idea up to the point of Company's.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, a US rifle company was usually 4 platoons: 3 rifle and 1 weapons. But the weapons platoon was generally broken up as teams attached to the rifle companies (that's where those MMG, HMG, and 60mm mortar teams in CM come from). So the tripod nature remained. Same a battalion level, where there was often 3 rifle companies and a weapons company with more MGs, the 81mm mortars, and the bazookas. Plus some towed ATGs attached to BN HQ. As for company names, in US forces the companies were lettered within a regiment. So the 1st Battalion would have companies A-D, 2nd BN would have E-H, and 3rd BN would have I-L. This is why you sometimes see a unit referred to as "I Company, 25th Infantry Regiment"--the BN number is redundant because you know it's 3rd BN from the company letter. As for Germans, HOOOWEEEEE. You need a book to really explain them . -Bullethead [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 01-11-2000).] [This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 01-11-2000).]

Fionn said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Whenever I try to negotiate for my SMG squads to port more ammo around all I hear from the unions are equivalancy arguments about artillerymen and how if THEY get Lorraine Schleppers to carry all that ammo around that my SMG squads want organic Lorraine Schleppers too..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Heheh, this is great Hey, we should save this sort of stuff in a joke FAQ. You know, kinda like Mad's "Snappy Answer..." feature. And con somebody to post it on his site -Bullethead