Mattias

LOL.. C in C out, its just natural... "Mein bein", in whatever language you prefer, would seem an appropriate comment if a flamethrower hat set one of your lower extremities alight M. [ May 05, 2002, 04:39 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

Scipio, It is all subjective of course but in my book your issues are listed as nit picking There are tons of abstractions in the game and these are just a few of them. You seem to agree on the basic idea behind BTS decision, but you would like it done some other way? Personally I think BTS solution works well but I am sure there are other, perhaps better, ways to approach the "problem", what do you propose? M.

They are generally considered very gamey. Not because they weren't used in a direct support role (which they were), but because BTS made a mistake when they were coded. It's one of the few real weak spots in CM but as it is now they are ridiculously hard to kill. AP doesn't kill them for example... M.

Your not alone out there Skipper! My StuG IV missed a Priest twice at 250 meters and in plain sight, needless to say the Priest killed me with his first shot. And in the same minute another StuG IV crept into hull down position and acquired a Sherman that was busy hosing my infantry. That is, before he cranked his turret 90 degrees right and killed me with one shot Then another threadfull of innovative posts to top it off.. lol.. Cheers mate! M.

[ May 03, 2002, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

Mail in the mail.. M.

Autumn '42 to Spring '43 and Autumn '44 to the end sounds like period with the kind of situation you are looking for. Personally I think there will be excellent opportunities for ME's between the summer of '41 into spring '45. It was not on the tactical level that the war was won or lost and when equal buy point are available to both sides, both sides will be equal unless BTS has miscalculated the system. That is the advantage, and a bit of the disadvantage, of ME's. M.

A) Finland has nothing to be ashamed about with regards to the presentation of reality in CM:BB. If the Finns feel bad about the continuation war it is a fart in the universe compared to the Germans do about WWII, and CM:BO has done fine there ones the legal requirement has been fulfilled. I too come from a country with a fetish for self flagellation, so there is no need to go all national. A great number of people request localized versions of games, that is why there are localized versions of games. Obviously, naturally and absolutely it is a matter of cost effectiveness if CM:BB should be one of them. But there is a market for them, denying that is futile. C) I am not questioning your knowledge in details, I am reacting to your apparent unwillingness to extend a modicum of understanding to other posters and solely basing your responses on your own perspective. -- M. [ May 03, 2002, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

Gee you are a barrel of laughs Tero .. Instead of picking on details all day long please consider the wider perspective. Your input is valid insofar as BTS asking the forum what "you" think about a Finnish version. But.. What bugs me is the way you, seemingly, go out of your way to ridicule the position of other members and, in this case, the general public. Your opinion is duly noted and arguing with others is one of the functions of this forum. You, however, are not doing much to further a dialog. Seemingly preferring to resort to argumentative sniping at anyone who thinks differently and not bothering much with trying to understand the way others perceive the issue. Your reply to Tuomas for example, is bordering to the ridiculous in this respect... -- M.

Well, the main thing time teaches you is that you will never know everything. This is especially try with a subject like this where you can almost feel the historical facts running like sand through your outstretched hands... In the case of the German light tank it was not for lack of projects that the type was dropped. Pz 38 N.a., the 50mm Armed Pz II and Leopard are prime examples of what could have been, had there been an interest in it. In real life however a "sporting chances" does not cut it. You need a damn good reason to jeopardize thousands of marks or dollars worth of materiel and men and the development of vehicles and SOP's reflect that (more or less). The lack of light tanks was not an oversight it was just not a kind of vehicle that the German forces needed in the second half of the war. M.

Eh, you are not exactly bending over backwards trying to understand my post Tero, are you.. I was thinking about a simple modern day Finnish flag slapped on the box or the plastic wrapper. That is something that does draw attention to it. It says, this is a game made with a Finnish audience in mind, go ahead and take a look, it's easy... It never even entered my mind that there would be issues of "historical" and "geo-political" nature. Apart from adapting to German law, CM is not taking any particular standpoint with regards to guilt and blame. And if you think being called a "German Ally" is bad, imagine what it is like to be called "German". My point is that as long as CM keeps on providing a realistic backdrop/simulation there will be no cause for hot blood. National legislations must be provided for but beyond that I am hard pressed to see what could get into CM:BO that hasn't already been featured in CM:BB. Sonderkomandos, Commissars shooting their own men and all sides mutilating their opponents is outside the scope of the game after all... -- My point regarding customers that normally do not buy war games is that there needs to be something drawing their attention for a while, in order for CM to have a chance at changing their preconceptions of the game. If you decide in advance only to market your product to only one section of the market you are unnecessarily limiting yourself. Your tactics need to be cost efficient of course but it is a fact that one of the main reasons CM:BO was so successful was because it managed to widen the appeal of a wargame. But there are thousands and thousands of customers out there who still do not know how much they would like it. These are the people, big, small, young and old that needs a little help finding CM:BB. M.

illo The poor taste aside, how does the analogy work? Is it some kind of word game? M.

Does anybody know for a fact that a HQ is more resilient or effective than a four man squad (in command of a HQ with equal bonuses), or is it just speculation? M.

I'm willing to bet that if you manage to make the box stand out as a "Finland friendly" product you will get more buyers. One way is to translate the game, and be sure to slap a Finnish flag on it. This will draw attention to the game and give it a shot at catching people who would otherwise have passed it by. "Elderly", "juveniles" and parents being obvious target groups. Another option would be a box cover that sports a prominent Finnish national symbol like the flag or the Finnish lion. The heraldic shield with the Lion standing on a scimitar, for example, is suitably martial and stylish. One current example is the Swedish flag incorporated into the cover of Europa Universalis. I don't have any numbers to show but I know for sure that I was not the only one that noted it because of this particular detail, insignificant as it might seem. -- In any event, CM:BB would well served by a better box cover than that of CM:BO. Though colourful and relevant it was pretty bland and failed to convey the, well, revolutionary and exhilarating playing experience that awaits inside the box. M.

I second Wolfe's suggestion. The most "meaty" AAR's will be those giving insight into the new commands and special rules that are new in CM:BB. The command functions for tanks being an example of the latter. I like the free form of writing AAR's but there is this constant urge for information. The size of the engagement seemed fine to me though. Not too big to write, not too small. The MG was able to pin the attacking platoon is one way of saying it. Describing in detail how the MG rapidly shifted fire from squad to squad as the attcker entered the covered arc and finally managed to repulse the last remnants of the assault by opening close range free fire is another M. [ May 01, 2002, 01:54 PM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

TB.. Reading my post again I realize that it might sound like I am complaining. That, however, is not the case Firstly I was wondering why you couldn't just switch places if someone wanted to play another side. Something you explained here. Secondly I was wondering what Cogust meant by saying that I would be at a disadvantage, or indeed advantage, by playing the Germans three times. -- In any case.. No problem M.

Does any of you know that this MG assistant thingy is in fact a design feature of CM or are you just speculating wildly? M.

Missed some of the finer points of that as I took it from memory... Fleisher/Eiermann claims in their book "Die deutsche Panzerjägertruppe" that the 75mm L/70 mounted on the JgPz IV/70 had 80-90% chance of hitting a 2,5 x 2 meter target at 1000 meters under "kriegsmässigen Bedingungen", combat conditions. That was the quote I was thinking of.. M.

Makes one wonder what the JgPz IV/70 crews meant when they reported 80-90% first shot hit chance against tank size targets in combat conditions... M.

Textures is what you "wrap" around your 3D model. If you didn't put textures on the models they would be invisible or, as in the case with CM, just a bunch of white surfaces shaped like, say, a Tiger. Textured tracers mean they will have a "wrapping" around them unlike the ones we see in CM:BO that are simply the 3D model with a base, hard coded, colour. This is a good thing since they will most likely look better and if your taste is different from that of BTS it can be modded. M.

Hey, lets confuse the matter some more!! This AAR clearly shows that Maxim MG's can run because of the little wheels. And not only that, they get a special movement bonus when under mortar fire! And all crews that abandon weapons can re-crew them again! Hey, logically that means that squads that get casualties and drop an important weapon can go back and pick them up again! Now, that's a real neat feature, great job, thank's BTS! etc etc etc.. -- Sometimes it seems at least 50% of the posts on this forum are made solely to correct erroneous assumptions M.

I don't follow one bit... If you wanted the players to play both sides why didn't you just manually switch my side in one of the games? How could it matter which side I play if the Nabla system works as it is supposed? And since when did playing the Germans yield an easy victory or improve a players quality? Doh...? M.

It seems to me that the MG units left their hole and then returned, just as they do in CM:BO, it doesn't say they abandoned their weapon after all M.

Overlooked?? How about this version... They themselves choose not to (very) actively purse the development of this type of vehicle. Or, if you prefer, in the prevailing situation their priorities were elsewhere. M.