Mark IV
-
Posts
1,993 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Mark IV
-
-
I have come to agree about the separate forum. However in the meantime (Steve and Charles ar hopefully occupied with more important things) I suggested the following in the other thread about this, and will repost here for maximum exposure:
Why not draft a standard notice here and now, with a suitably grabby headline, that we can easily send back to the top?
Like:
"WARGAMERS PLEASE READ!!!
"PLEASE do NOT post any specific scenario information to this board without clearly labeling BOTH the message header AND the beginning of your text as SPOILER INFORMATION!
"A 'spoiler' is anything which gives away information about a scenario that no honorable wargamer would want to know in advance.
"Many of us are playing "blind" Combat Mission scenarios for the first time, and do not wish to accidentally get any foreknowledge of enemy forces.
"We welcome your questions and comments, but if you wish to talk about specific scenarios, PLEASE put "SPOILER" somewhere in the message header (its title), and put "SPOILER" followed by several lines of empty text in the first line of the actual message. Use the X and Enter keys to create extra lines. For example:
"SPOILER INFORMATION FOLLOWS:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
'While assaulting the beach in blahblahblah (text body), etc.'
"Combat Mission has created a very dedicated and honorable online community and this board is its focus. We welcome you to our lives and our game and APPRECIATE YOUR COOPERATION."
Something along those lines, edits or suggestions welcome. Once it's created, any of us could send it back to the top with a keystroke.
-
Why not draft a standard notice here and now, with a suitably grabby headline, that we can easily send back to the top?
Like:
"WARGAMERS PLEASE READ!!!
"PLEASE do NOT post any specific scenario information to this board without clearly labeling BOTH the message header AND the beginning of your text as SPOILER INFORMATION!
"A 'spoiler' is anything which gives away information about a scenario that no honorable wargamer would want to know in advance.
"Many of us are playing "blind" Combat Mission scenarios for the first time, and do not wish to accidentally get any foreknowledge of enemy forces.
"We welcome your questions and comments, but if you wish to talk about specific scenarios, PLEASE put "SPOILER" somewhere in the message header (its title), and put "SPOILER" followed by several lines of empty text in the first line of the actual message. Use the X and Enter keys to create extra lines. For example:
"SPOILER INFORMATION FOLLOWS:
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
'While assaulting the beach in blahblahblah (text body), etc.'
"Combat Mission has created a very dedicated and honorable online community and this board is its focus. We welcome you to our lives and our game and APPRECIATE YOUR COOPERATION."
Something along those lines, edits or suggestions welcome. Once it's created, any of us could send it back to the top with a keystroke.
[This message has been edited by Mark IV (edited 06-14-2000).]
-
November or early December, I guess. Made up my mind to as soon as I saw the beta (read about THAT on Usenet), but I had to clear the moths from my wallet to actually part with the $50.
-
Chilling thought for the day: There was a post not long ago (possibly a non-native English speaker) asking in all seriousness, "what's a spoiler?".
So just floating this thread back to the surface periodically may not be sufficient for those unfamiliar with our jargon.
I would search for it, but I'm in trouble with Maximus for CMing at work...
-
Ooooh, remember the Oscar statuettes?
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus:
Ummm, EXCUSE ME??
But something doesn't make sense here.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Key thoughts, embedded deeply in the first post:
a) CM
laptop c) travel
Ponder.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka kingtiger:
(yelling), you should never be installing personal programs on business systems. I am sure your corporate IS department would frown on your installing personal programs on the company equipment.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
They frown on everything and rule through terror and intimidation. This is why I use a nick- they might have a reward for turning guys like me in.
Buy a spare drive, format with legal copy of windows 98 SE, install combat mission and away you go.
That's the best idea I've heard yet.
The thing came partitioned into c: and d: with NT and various apps on both. It is a very lopsided partition, like 2Gb on c: and 14Gb on d:, plus a network card, the quasi-viral Lotus Notes, and some octopus named Novell. They can't make Partition Magic work on it for some reason related to the above.
External drive might work... off to the web to window-shop.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Screaming Demon:
I bet Hitler was pissed when the japs' attacked Pearl.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
SD, this was exactly what Hitler wanted, and had been trying to get the Japanese to do for some time.
The Japanese had indicated that they wouldn't be really interested until 1946, when the US was scheduled to leave the Philippines anyway. Hitler wanted the Japanese to offset the US surface fleet (he supposedly had considered a surprise U-Boat attack on the US Navy in port).
The Germans also gave the Japanese a captured British Cabinet report (November, 1940) that proved that the Brits would not send a major fleet to the Pacific, even if the Japanese attacked. They were begging Japan to attack Singapore, and knew this meant war with the US.
From Hitler's point of view, the US was technically already at war with him anyway, and the only thing stopping him from shooting back was the lack of an adequate surface fleet, which the Japanese could bring to the party. The formal German commitment to declare war on the US was made to Japan in April 41.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Commissar:
Hope the Japanese can learn to speak German really well. They would need to learn it<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Maybe, but in December 1941 Germany did not exactly have a right-of-way to the Japanese land mass.
Sailing there would also have been problematic, since England was annoyed with them. If they made it through what was at the time, the world's foremost navy, they would then encounter the Japanese navy, which was up there somewhere. If Sea-Lion was a problem, how easy would a German invasion of Japan have been?
Given the state of the world in December 1941, the Japanese would still have been better off learning English, American edition.
-
Fionn had mentioned a while ago that he thought some beta testers were running in NT (Lorak, might have been at your chat site).
But I don't see how. It's service-packed to the gills (oops- not authorized by IS!) and of course, nada. And yes, it was already partitioned.
Hmmm...would it be worth paying retail for W2K and a potential corporate court-martial just to play CM? Hmmm... gotta be a way...
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also, if you post to a non-spoiler thread with information you think might be spoiling it for some people, put the same info at the head of your post and leave a lot of space below it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
In the text body of any spoiler post, you should also post "Spoiler!" followed by a lot of space. Some people read with the "Next Newest Topic" feature, which takes you right to the text of the next message. If it starts with "So, the 3 Panthers in Cursed Encounter..." then it's already too late.
By the beginning of next week you'll have to post this several times a day.
-
There have been persistent rumors that CM can somehow be adapted to NT 4.0, but I cannot find a workaround for this. Any new ideas?
My company laptop is NT (466 MHz and 128Mb, video sucks but it should at least play) and is going to stay that way for some time, so please don't bother suggesting Win2K. The I.S. folks are recidivist troglodytes, but cursin' it won't change it.
PLEASEPLEASEPLEASEPLEASE if someone has a real answer, tell me/us? I have travel coming up, and this is too cruel...
-
"The only other recoilless anti-tank gun which showed any originality of design [after a discussion of other designs] was a Japanese experimental model of late 1945. It was intended as a one-man portable system and tried to combine the best features of the then current German weapons. It was a cross between a Panzerschreck and an LG43 and with luck and some sensible development might well have become a useful weapon. The calibre was 82mm which was just about adequate for the time, and the weight of the experimental model was 90 lbs., which again was reasonable. The breech was almost an exact copy of the LG43 with a central firing pin and a short venturi cone. Maximum range was quoted at 850yd, but for tanks it would have been much less. There was a light tripod and an optical sight and although the general standard of engineering and finish is nowhere near that of the American 57s and 75s the principle seems to be right and perhaps the US Armour [sic] Corps can be grateful that only one was made. No ammunition survived and so no firing was done by the US Army." - from "Men Against Tanks: A History of Anti-Tank Warfare", John Weeks, Mason/Charter, NY, 1975.
-
MacDonald again, "A Time for Trumpets".
-
Maybe "Tank vs. Tank", by Macksey? Kind of a coffee table book in layout, but really good "3D" watercolor perspectives of actual battlefields, and a fair amount of detail on developments. It started with WWI.
-
"Communist"-as-term debate milestones:
Hakkio: "I'm not talking about communist vs. capitalist, but rather that almost any other country ...I probably should have picked a non-Communist country ".
von Lucke: "I'd like to point out there has yet to be practicable government based on Marxist theory enacted on this planet, and that the use of the term 'Communist' when describing a Military/Socialist dictatorship is also incorrect."
Durruti: "It always amazes me how many people use the term 'Communist' without the slightest idea of what it means. Also that none of the state-socialist regimes in Russia, China etc. ever claimed to have achieved Communism."
Hakkio's meaning was abundantly clear to any reader. There is reasonable consensus among informed people on what constitutes a "communist" country, or a "communist" bloc of nations, in the spirit in which it was intended. A non-democratic regime ruled by a party which calls itself "Communist" may be reasonably construed as a "communist country".
The rest is a semantic flanking maneuver. Communist utopias don't and won't exist. We still know who he meant.
-
Mikester has nailed it pretty thoroughly, IMO.
As with the last time this came up, I feel that the turning point was the German failure to take Moscow. I really do think they had a chance, but they blew it. From December 1941 on, it was all numbers and the Russkis were bound to grind them down in the long run.
If they had taken Moscow, the command and control networks would have been seriously disrupted, the will to resist seriously damaged, and the Soviet ability to sustain large counter-offensives seriously jeopardized. Many Russians would have fought on, but they could have been isolated and destroyed. The emergency would have passed for the Wehrmacht.
The German nuke program was operating on a mistaken calculation regarding critical mass. They would eventually have found the error, but the program was never given very high priority by Hitler (probably rightly so). With relative calm in the East they would have had access to the results of the somewhat promising Russian research (on hold for the same reasons as Germany's) as well as more time and resources, and "might" have caught the error sooner.
The US only had 2 bombs in August 1945, and the delivery system was propeller-driven airplane. So being deep into what-if territory already I conclude with the thought that 2 15 kt. nukes would not necessarily have been war-winners in the scenario above, given German victory in the East.
-
Nice find, Naja.
Heavy water plant was somewhere in Korea, I believe.
-
My source was "Men Against Tanks" by John Weeks (of Hogg and Weeks fame).
He went on to say that no ammunition for the device was captured, so the US Army was not able to test fire it.
Germanboy: "You should have thought they would have been able to throw a Schreck, a Faust and some blueprints on one of the flights". Entering the realm of pure speculation here, but it sounds as though they did. The mechanism of Leicht-Geschoss 43 was a little too unique for the Japanese to have come with it on their own.
I'm not sure what combining the 'faust and LG43 means, exactly. Presumable they copied the inertial, static charge, Venturi effect from the 'faust, and the loading, firing, and optical systems from LG43? If you're interested I will post the few other technical details when I get home.
The little Jap antitank guns did a bang-up job on the riveted Stuarts in the Phillipines, too. I believe that experience was the impetus to going to welded turrets.
-
No copies. Again.
I will go a couple steps further:
1. Try to sell as many additional copies as I can (via BTS, natch).
2. Recommend that my current PBEM opponent have HIS copy removed.
(just kidding)
-
Durruti and von Lucke: I am well aware of the name of the country.
Now, what did the ruling party call itself (in Russian as well as English)? What was the derivation of "Comintern"?
The rulers of the Soviet Union didn't play word games with THAT word so we shouldn't, either. There were Communist Youth organizations and Communist organizations throughout the Soviet era. Communist workers and soldiers are honored throughout Soviet literature. Looks like a duck, calls itself a duck...
-
They were working on it. In late 1945 the Japanese built an experimental prototype of a one-man portable recoilless antitank gun, that combined features of the Panzerfaust and the German LG43.
It was 82mm, weighed 90lbs., with a max range of 850 yds. (couldn't have hit a tank that far out, though), and came with a tripod and optical sight. Only one was ever built and a good thing, from our army's opinion of it.
The supply lines between Germany and Japan were a little iffy by the time the Panzerfaust was developed so they had to roll their own.
-
Murx, Somalia was of no vital importance to the US, and the idea that Yugoslavia is some kind of bastion against Russia is really odd (we were fine without it before, and we would really like to leave again). And despite being an imperialist I don't think we belonged (or did much good) either place.
Desert Storm was about oil, but the naked aggression aspect of it was kinda there. I can't think of too many land grabs that blatant, in recent years.
We do apologize for using troops to force the sale of MacDonald's and Coca-cola at gunpoint to third world slave laborers. Maybe we should take a look at that in future marketing plans... but the numbers are up, and that's all that matters to us imperialists.
Have a Marlboro, crack a Bud, relax. Can we interest you in some Infantry Fighting Vehicles while you wait?
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by patboivin:
How do I set that up?
I don't remember it coming up when we start a new scenario.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
When you select the new scenario, right after the initial scenario briefing, the Choose Side & Game Options window appears.
Beneath are about 3 option selections, with little down arrows to display the choices. FOW can be Full, Partial, or None. (Gawd, I've been writing manuals too long).
laptop
Printing maps
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
Print screen is only going to get what's on the screen. If you paste it into Paint or something, and you can't see everything that was on the screen when you took the shot, you need to enlarge the application window, or look at the right and bottom for scroll bars so you can pan around the shot.
There isn't any utility in CM that I'm aware of that will print out an entire map for you, so the Print Screen method will have to do for now. You would have to go to Views 7 or 8 to get a whole map, and the detail would suffer.