Dar
-
Posts
359 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Dar
-
-
<pointless anti-Schrodi diatribe voluntarily removed>
Welcome back, Fionn.
Dar
[This message has been edited by Dar (edited 12-14-99).]
-
For God's sake, please say pre-millenium, since it starts Jan. 1, 2001! I can't wait another year!
Seriously, though, I am so wanting to see this before Christmas, but... *sigh* I imagine it will be February at this rate--with the new features (like artillery spotting rounds) being added and the required regression testing.
Dar
-
Varsity was the biggest one-day airborne operation of the war, involving over 3,000 transports, over 3,000 fighters, and over 20,000 troops from the American 17th and British 6th Airborne Divisions. They dropped on strategic points to support operations crossing the Rhine River near Wesel on 24.March.1945.
Allied casualties were roughly 500 KIA and 1,250 WIA. However, all objectives were taken by 1400 and link up with ground forces near Wesel accomplished.
Dar
-
Fionn,
If you leave the forum, then your detractors/attackers have won. Is that what you want?
Dar
-
Fionn,
I'm sorry you feel so emotional about this issue. However, I have to point out to you that it takes two (or more) to engage in these fights you mention.
What do you care if these people disagree with you? Do you think everyone else on this board is an ignorant schmoe that can't read and decipher the truth for himself? Let your posts speak for themselves--the factual ones, not the emotional, retaliatory ones!
You are gaining integrity and respect everytime you post a factual and enlightening article. You are losing it whenever you fight back with the same tactics your accusers use.
Worse, by responding as you have you've let them know that they can get under your skin and it's encouraging them. Lay off the rebuttals, keep to the facts in your replies or don't reply at all and let the thread die on the vine on its own. You're only feeding the fire and appeasing their egos.
Dar
[This message has been edited by Dar (edited 12-09-99).]
-
I've been impressed by the level of restraint and maturity that most people have displayed on this forum in general. It's tough enough to try to communicate conflicting opinions and views through a text-only medium, but when you consider how many nationalities are represented on this board in which English is not their native language, it's even more challenging. I do have to commend the majority of the posters here for being so well behaved.
I can't, however, look at anyone involved in these recent flames and say, "X is obviously a victim here," because there is a lot of give-and-take on this board. There are some serious egos at work and I'm really getting tired of this "I've read it, therefore it's true" or "I've experienced it, therefore it's true" being expressed along with a personal attack on someone. There's a real lesson to be learned here by many in having some tact and not saying "you're wrong and I'm right!" with every dissenting opinion but rather something along the lines of "I don't agree and here's why."
Dar
-
Just an addendum to our Pearl Harbor discussion--I noticed on CNN's page yesterday that they removed a body from the Arizona in 1942--apparently while removing some powder bags from one of the turrets--and are in the process today of using DNA to identify the remains according to the article.
Also, the son of Adm. Kimmel is working to clear his father's name in another <A HREF = "http://cnn.com/1999/US/12/07/kimmel.pearl.harbor/index.html">article.</A> Adm. Kimmel and Gen. Short were commanders at Pearl Harbor who were demoted and discharged in '42 after the Japanese raid for allegedly ignoring warnings and failing to prepare for war.
Renaud:
Thanks for the posting on the French military observances! I am curious, though, is there any day marked to celebrate the revolution? Isn't "Bastille Day" that celebration?
We Americans celebrate July 4th as the day the Declaration of Indepenence was signed. However, I'd be hard-pressed to say what day we actually won our independence (I believe this was the Treaty of Paris--or you could arguably suggest the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown).
Sten:
That's very interesting about the Swedish nationalists. I'm certainly very familiar with what a military power Sweden was in the 1600's--much to the chagrin of the Catholic European powers!
Does anyone know if Norway celebrates an independence day? Weren't they part of Sweden's empire for centuries?
Also, is 20.July.1944 officially recognized in Germany (the day of von Stauffenberg's unsuccessful assasination attempt on Hitler)?
Dar
-
Actually, I would like to make this an international thread--I'm quite aware of the American holidays we have to honor significant military accomplishments and veterans, but I'd be quite interested in hearing what days other nationalities observe.
For example, we remember the last Monday in May as Memorial Day, to honor those who gave their lives while serving their country. Like many other nations, we honor Nov. 11 as Armistice Day (now commonly called Veterans' Day), or the end of World War I, to honor all servicemembers. I would be interested in hearing what days you Brits, French, Swedes, and everyone else observe.
Dar
[This message has been edited by Dar (edited 12-07-99).]
-
I think "Sid Meier's Gettysburg" has shown that it's quite possible to make a feasible RT wargame. However, that era in which large formations lined up and shot at each other en masse lends itself quite well to the game, preventing it from becoming the "click-fest" that so many other RT games become.
The CC series (ahistorical fantasy aside) seems to work well, too, because the scale is limited to a few hundred meters.
How would you expect to port such a system as CM over to RT without it becoming a click-fest or becoming terribly abstract? Or without delegating so much decision making to subordinate AI commanders that the fun and challenge is gone?
Dar
-
Much as I agree with the sentiment for our American sailors and soldiers who died at Pearl Harbor on this day in 1941, I find it somewhat ironic that this thread is started by "SS-Panzerleader" and immediately followed by "Rommel"!
Any "von Rundstedt", "Wittman", or "Guderian" out there who wants to contribute while we're at it?
(not a flame--just a comment on the irony of the situation!)
Dar
-
I would prefer to use buildings instead of walls (especially the short walls) to simulate a larger building with wings, like an abbey or monastery. Alas, I guess I'll have to wait for CMII -- I explect we'll have more complex buildings then or how else are we going to simulate the battle for the Tractor Factory?
Dar
-
One thing I'm curious about for you Beta testers is if it's possible to simulate a larger complex or factory using collections of buildings. E.g., I want to put a monastery on top of a hill. Can I put a ring of stone buildings around it that serve basically like one walled complex? Can units fight from one building to the next as if they were one contiguous building?
Dar
-
Now that we know you're into wrestling, you realize your credibility on this forum is totally shot!
Dar
-
We've covered this already in several different threads, so I don't understand how it can keep popping up again and again, but it is not necessary to have reduced security (much less no security) and still do a turn in 2 emails. The only difference between the current scheme and the scheme several of us have proposed is that when Player A generates a film and sends it to Player B, Player B doesn't just watch it and send it back but watches it, appends his orders to it, and then sends it back. Player A would then watch the film, issue orders for the next turn, generate a new film (since he already has Player B's orders) and send it without viewing it to Player B. And the cycle continues.
No compromise of the current anti-cheating measures, just a reduction of steps from three emails/turn to two.
Dar
-
Oh, and of course Arnhem and Nijmegen!
Dar
-
Aachen, Brest, Caen, and St. Vith are a few cities where Germans and the Western Allies fought. However, even a place like St. Lo is big enough to fill most of those maps or would have some industry where it would be nice to have some factory and warehouse building types.
Dar
-
I would like the "Pause" order key to take effect *before* you enter the next order and *after* the order you've just entered, to get this same effect you describe, Bill. I.e., I tell an AFV to "Fast" move to point X, hit "Pause" twice, and then "Reverse" behind an obstruction, in effect causing it to race to point X, engage any targets spotted for 30 seconds, and retreat before getting plastered by return fire. While I imagine I can get the same results roughly by first "Pausing" the order to fast move so the AFV arrives at point X near the end of a turn, and then entering orders to retreat after a 30 second pause in the next orders phase, I would still prefer the former case.
I would prefer that to the "Hunt" and "Retreat" method you suggest, Fionn, because the vehicle will continue to engage until all visible targets are knocked out or it is knocked out itself, and I may only want it to expose itself long enough to get off a couple of shots and beat feet before it gets overwhelmed.
As a side note, has anyone had an AFV stopped and engaging with "Hunt" orders get a hit that knocked out the gun, causing the AFV to resume following the "Hunt" path? It's not a very easy scenario to repro, but it's happened to me a couple of times, and I consider it buggy behavior. After all, if you're being engaged by a target that's strong enough to hurt you and knocks out your main weapon, I'd be for backing out of there instead of advancing along the "Hunt" path with a useless weapon.
Dar
-
From my experience, rubble does obstruct LOS at the same level, i.e., you can see into it but not through it. However, I'm not sure what the height of the obstruction is.
Dar
-
Well, let me clarify:
I want CM to be a financial success, because I want to see CMII, CMIII, etc., and I want to see the standard for wargames in general rise. I do not want CM to be the most popular game of all time because then Steve and Charles will have enough money to buy Tahiti or Aruba, and we'll never see them again!
Seriously, though, I still maintain that this will be a popular game. It does have the eye candy and sound to catch the eye of any gamer; it has the easy interface so you can get started playing right away; and they have the demo to let those people who want to try before they buy do so, even if they can't get it in stores.
Dar
Dar
-
Hunter:
I understand that you can model trenchlines and AT trenchs by creating slopes impassable to vehicles when designing a scenario. However, you won't be able to place them during setup. In other words, you have to build them into the scenario and there they will stay.
I imagine since buildings are the only terrain that can be reduced (aside from terrain that can burn), you won't be able to breach the trenchline by collapsing a side or using bridging equipment, etc.
Dar
-
Hey, can we drop this thread and get back to something a little more productive?
How about we start by realizing that it's hard to communicate exact emotions (like sarcasm and humor) and intents through the written word (since we're not all Shakespeares), much less if English is not your primary language, grant each other a little slack, let a little air out of our egos, and move on!?
Dar
-
Hey, one squad took out an MG42 with a frontal assault in "Saving Private Ryan"! If that doesn't prove to you it can be done, what will?
Dar
-
I'm sure Jason mean's "they're insane" in the nicest way possible.
Dar
-
I think one of the best ways to simulate those advantages of optics and accuracy will be using better crew quality for the Germans when you create scenarios. Making the German crews "Crack" or "Elite" will give them a marked advantage over "Green" or "Regular" (or even "Veteran") US crews.
Dar
Pre-millenium or Post-Millenium?
in Combat Mission Archive #1 (1999)
Posted
I rather object to the idea of this place being as democratic as many people claim it to be. This is Battlefront's board, and they have every right to handle it as they see fit. It's nice that everyone has an opportunity to voice their opinion here, but I certainly do not agree that everyone has the right to say what they want--especially when it's maliciously intended to harm or misrepresent someone.
I would much rather see anyone blatantly abusing other folks in here and displaying a complete lack of maturity be banned outright by Battlefront/BTS. No vote and no general consensus needed. Battlefront provided this forum and we're all guests--we do not have any inherent "rights" to post whatever we want with impunity.
I think any more voting sets a bad precedent--it turns this board into a popularity contest instead of a forum where mature adults can post conflicting opinions yet still display some respect towards each other.
Trooper:
Your post got me to thinking about our beloved "democracies". Funny how both Greek and American "democracies" allowed slavery. As I recall, just as in America originally, Greek democracy only applied to free, male citizens.
I, for one, hope we never become a true democracy. I can just see everybody in the US with an Internet-wired voting box hooked up to their TV voting on incredibly complex issues they don't know the first thing about. When they elect Jerry Springer president and Ricky Martin vice-president, I'm fleeing to Canada!
Dar