Ron

Looking at something three times and basing your conclusions on that doesn't seem very representative, even if that turns out to be the general trend.

I'm having trouble trying to think of any niche wargame companies that delivers a good game then chases the broader audience and fails. SSI and Talonsoft failed spectacularly but they did so for different reasons and they definitely weren't "niche". With your history, it's easy to assume your veiled post as another shot across the bows, though I'm positive you will claim otherwise. ShiftZ: Gotta love Caddyshack!

Wow, good to see the long range plans. Personally I am more looking forward to returning to Normandy than the Eastern Front again. If I was to gauge my playing time with the CMx1 series, it would be something like 50% CMBO, 15% CMBB and 35% CMAK. I really liked the core simulation refinements in CMBB then CMAK, but could never really get into the whole Russian thing. I think I realized I like reading about the Eastern Front, lots of books in my library, but not enough to get into playing it - cultural I guess don't know. I am all for more depth up front and then more breadth in time with modules. Where do I sign up - let's go

Hardly interesting or harsh methinks, and not even a relevant analogy except to those disenchanted 'few' I guess. I wonder about all this fascination and speculation about sales etc. Unless you're privy to insider material, the only facts to consider are what BFC says and does. I would take them to be reasonably intelligent people who know what they are doing and the direction needed to be taken; nothing that has occurred since CMBO has contradicted that. Just as the facts speak for themselves in regards to many of those at the site where this came from.

You know after watching it in the theater, that's exactly what I thought/felt. Casino Royale was a great Bond movie and I was really looking forward to Quantum of Solace, and in consequence was disappointed with the second effort. However, after watching Quantum of Solace again last night my opinion is completely reversed. Yes the three first non-stop fight scenes are over the top, but after that it is all Bond, a much more ruthless one but Bond nonetheless. One of the other posters felt Craig as Bond was unapproachable emotionally in the film; I personally think he is the best take yet and am appreciating the character's 'development' and am looking forward to the third installment.

A very interesting AAR, I like your line of reasoning! I tend to agree that without artillery the woods around the VF may be hard to clear but I think it is entirely doable. I think if TaskForce B on the overlooking hill is concentrated to attack the woods, the AT gun repositioned to cover the road coming out of the woods, TaskForce A stays viable long enough to pose a 'threat'... you may get those Tigers as they come up the road. I doubt they would go all the way around and risk bogging so the road would almost be a sure bet, and they will come if you make a concentrated effort with infantry and armour from the hill. I don't think I would worry about a flanking force - I would concentrate now and move "quickly" with TaskForce B. If your opponent does have a flanking force(which I doubt-more likely he may have a reserve force following up - not sure with a 1000 points) it is probably too far out of position to influence the coming battle. Anyways looking forward to the rest. Thanks. Ron

And an even more successful attempt at having the original post sail completely over your head.

And how is that my dear sir? The "screw me" part that is, no lurid details just a general description will do. And better yet, care to elaborate on the 'fifth column' aspect of this venture? Yes I thought not, feign ignorance instead. Ron

You know, it's almost like some are just not happy people in general. So what do we have here? A hidden program that installs itself without the user's knowledge? Nope. What we have here are two check boxes that the user can leave as is or uncheck. What, is that too much responsibility? Hmm, fret frap, the toolbar got installed, what to do? Hey I uninstall it! But wait what about all that other stuff left behind? Well what other stuff? It's uninstalled period. Must be a slow news day or the TV isn't working, or something, I don't know. Ron

I don't know the review seemed overall very positive to me, at least that's the impression I first got. The reviewer still misses some of the features from CM1 and definitely doesn't like the Syria setting, but apart from that it was kudos to BFC sticking it out and making the game better. The only quibble I have with the review is it was very short on substance. In the end BFC is still the only game in town for this market. Now where's WWII again? Ron

Thanks for that article. That's something new, I always thought the older OS had to be installed first. Yes, I am definitely NOT interested in going back to older cards now; I am really happy with the 9800 GTX, initially it was price/performance but now I am really appreciating that it is so damn quiet. Phil, which card(brand/model) do you have? Using HW Monitor, the max temp on my card has been 60-65 C also, playing Fallout 3 or SH IV, pretty good I thought for stock. Ironically after *trying* to play CMBB I noticed it never goes above 43-44 C, barely above the idle temp of 37 C, so for sure the program isn't running the hardware. Ron

Hmm , yes I am coming to the realization of that, albeit reluctantly! I didn't really want to dual-boot with XP but I guess I will have to it seems if I want to play CM. I didn't know that the newer ATI cards would work properly with CM under Vista I had just recently put together my system and had got a good deal on a 9800 GTX, not sure I am willing to get another at this point and time. I had in the past tried installing CM on my wife's computer which has an older ATI card, a 3400 series I believe, but it didn't work properly either and I *recalled* from previous threads here that ATI and CM didn't mix. I will have to investigate if newer ATI drivers solve the corruption. That may be pointless anyways as 'what's hers is hers' Getting back to the new ATI cards, which one do you recommend? I had heard that they run hot, is that true? Ron

That's the way it should be no? That's the way the process works in RL from what I have seen.

Well I finally got around to reinstalling CMBB and CMAK on my new machine. At first it was unplayable, then simply setting the AA to 2X in Nvidia's Control Panel solved that issue. However the frame rates seemed pretty low so I used Fraps to start monitoring that. I found out it doesn't seem to matter at all what settings I set for CM in the control panel as the frame rates remain the 'same', regardless of scenario size or 3D settings. What 'seems' to affect the frame rates is what unit I happen to be clicked on! Does that make sense to anyone? For example, not on any unit then framerate is about 15-18, a tank about the same, an Infantry in a foxhole about 2-4, and an Infantry in the open 26-29. I have tried this in several scenarios of differing sizes and what I said above seemed to stand out. It is Greek to me. For those in the know, what settings should I use with CM in Nvidia's Control Panel? I have little idea what most of those things actually do. In my random changes it didn't *seem* to make any difference though it does in other games. I have a nagging feeling though that those settings represent something! Ron

Ah Road to Moscow, another dream that vanished. I have nothing but the deepest sympathies and respect for Hunter and his efforts for CMC, it's heartening to see you have moved on. I am not sure about Grigsby's Russian Front, I am sure many will love it but I am not too enthused. To be honest, I would like to see something akin to Panther's Highway to the Reich/Conquest of the Aegean expanded strategically and then we may just have a real 'Road to Moscow'.

I had just gotten a new system these past holidays after a lot of researching and 'deal' waiting also. It took over 4 weeks to get all the parts I wanted and then an afternoon to put it all together! Pretty similar price point, I have been very happy with it. FYI if the Vista 32 bit is a retail version and not OEM, you can send MS another $10 for a 64 bit version, same key and only one copy installed of course! My PC Gigabyte EP45-UDR $145 Intel E8400 3 Ghz Dual Core $190 Muskin Redlines PC 8000 $76 Noctua NH-U12P HS $55 Antec P182 Case $150 Corsair 750W PS $114 Extra Fan Free EVGA 9800 GTX $190 w/ some free game WD Caviar SE 16 640Gb $75 Samsung TruDirect 22X DVD Writer $35 Scythe 18-1 Floppy Drive $20 Saitek Eclipse Keyboard $20 Logitech Cordless Mouse Free Samsung 2253 LW monitor $180 Vista Home Premium 64 bit OEM $125 Total $1375 with another $65 in MIRs which I haven't seen as of yet. This system is suprisingly fast after struggling on a PIII for the past ten years I don't know about the Quad 9550, but the E8400 is easily overclockable to 4Ghz with minimal overvolting and never over 45C stress testing with the Noctua HS/fan. I don't know if I will keep it at 4Ghz though, may shorten its lifespan.

I don't have Vista but it was my understanding that DirectX 9 and 10 are both installed together, and that there should be an option to enable one or the other for the program. Can anyone confirm that?

Hi, I had a chance to play some more this morning up to fall 43. Some interesting play in Russia less so from the UK/US. I was mistaken earlier, it was Kharkov I took late 41. Anyways spring/summer 42 saw Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov fall though not easliy! Two German Armies were destroyed and for several months it was all I could do just to reinforce the main combatants. There was no extra for research or rebuilding the destroyed Armies. At this point the Germans had IW3/HT3 vs the Russian IW3/HT2. By late 42 Moscow was screened from the Russian build up north while the bulk of the Germans surrounded Voronezh from the north and south to cut off about a dozen Russian units. It wasn't easy but Voronezh was finally captured spring 43 for the loss of 2 more German Armies and the FJ. These were some tough battles. That seemed to break the Russian back as the Germans then went on to capture Vologda, the city north of Moscow and the two cities before the Urals. Stalingrad was defended by about 6 units but fell easily to the German Tanks(HT4). Another ~6 Russian units are trapped in the southern oilfields. Not sure what the Russian can rebuild now but they are pretty much finished. The Italians with 3 Armies and a Tank slowly ground into Egypt for most of 42 and finally surrounded Alexandria which was defended by the UK HQ. Several turns of attrition finally saw its capture. Bad for the UK AI as the MPP drain also saw the destruction of its Home AF and Bomber. The Italians then carried on through the MiddleEast and now in Fall 43 they are into southern Russia. The UK still did its usual bombing forays until it lost its Bomber and AF. I had operated back the German AFs(3) to France earlier. The US entered the war in Spring 42 but has done nothing of note. Once I had the MPPs I began to rebuild the Subs and they went raiding, suprised to discover 2 US Corps, 1 Army and 1 Tank sitting near St.John's Newfoundland!! Anyways I will play a few more turns but I think the game is in hand. Ron

I downloaded your mod this past weekend Timskorn and have had a chance to play Axis to early 42, Expert/+1. Thanks for your great work. A few comments thus far. France surrendered ~ July 40 two turns after I captured Paris, the entrenched tank wasn't a real problem. I didn't see the BEF but the UK sent in an upgraded Corps which was destroyed. UK then did the usual round of attacking French/Belgian ports/cities. I left 2 airfleets to cover until Barbarossa so damage was minimal. UK has Heavy Bombers 1 but hasn't upgraded yet, the fighter is 1/1 same as me. Sub war has been a total fiasco even with ASW 0, lost all three Subs early so am now building up a new Sub fleet and waiting for better tech - no luck thus far. The UK sent chits to Sweden and I lost their MPPs for awhile but invested myself so have turned them back. In the Med the Italians invested in IW/AT and Mot and have bought an HQ, Tank and Corps. They destroyed 2 Battleships and the Carrier for the loss of 1 Battleship. The UK AI seems determined to send its forces against the Italians one unit at a time. Thus far I have destroyed the UK tank, 1 Corps and 1 upgraded Army. The Italians are finally advancing and I destroyed the UK airfleet which was alone half way between Tobruk and Alexandria! The BEF is in Egypt. I captured Yugoslavia and Greece early 41 before attacking Russia in July/August. Russia had IW2 and HT1 initially to my IW2 and HT2. Apart from the garrisons, Russia has not really tried to defend Odessa - Kiev - Vorenzh(?) - Minsk - Smolensk - Riga and as a result I have captured them all by the winter. The Siberians have arrived now and probing from Smolensk I see a massive double line defending Moscow - should be fun! Germans have been consolidating the last couple turns, sending in more arriving reinforcements and now have IW3/HT2 to Russian IW3/HT1. The Russians appear to have as many troops, if not more, than the Germans though the Germans have to garrison a lot of places so the Russians really have the advantage. I will play more this week and keep you updated. Ron

I don't think SC2 fares too badly in simulating the historical aspects re the buildup of the Russo-German war, ie German is free to attack when she is ready during 41 and Russia will have achieved her 'war preparations' by 42 forcing Germany's hand. The Soviets were fully aware of German intentions from the start. They were designing and wargaming plans in 1940, both offensive and defensive. The idea that Stalin wanted to go to war in 1942 is questionable however it was very clear the Soviets would not achieve their military preparations until 1942 at the earliest and Stalin wished to delay/stall any German aggressivenes until then. Soviet intelligence was detecting German offensive preparations as early as April 41. To say they never knew what was on the border is not factual. Between April and June the Soviets accelerated their mobilizations and calling up reservists. Yes the Soviets were poorly deployed initially but that was due to Stalin's fixation on keeping the peace.

No doubt adding fuel to the fire but this is too funny. A poster comes and registers a valid complaint and gets dressed down by personal insults because of the low number of posts!? Like that makes his views invalid? Someone should know better and hardly encourages the growth of a community. This forum and SC previously has to its detriment been 'bullied' by a bunch of hoodlums. The whole past goings on is there to see. No matter the hoodlums 'belief' they have carried the game, they have been and are only a very small minority. Their views and actions do more harm than good in driving away potential contributors IMO. The reason why I and a couple others I know, owners of SC and SC2, rarely if ever post here. About time it is brought up, though I doubt matters will change much in the end. Most of us have regular lives/jobs/family and neither the time nor inclination to persist. As Markpoll says why continue when the experience is offensive and unpleasant. Another drop in the bucket I wager. Ron

Hmm, I haven't been playing in awhile but just ran through a few missions versus the Bots(my Pilots 8500 to 14500 points) and would have to say they are still as easy as ever to beat. I agree with the poster above in that it was actually harder a few months ago. Sometimes you have the cards and sometimes you don't, and whatever the case, you have to play smart with what you have and understand the situation - the option of buying or not buying IMS2:D has little effect on this. There is no hard-and-fast rule for play in this game to guarantee the outcome. I haven't lost a Pilot KIA in a looong time because, as I have learned from playing some good opponents, it is better to run/play defensively than to force the issue. Ron aka Zonso

Well it's the gift that keeps on giving as there are still '568' Pilots floating around. Ron

Yes me too. I wrote Brian about it last night. Those Aces had more skills and the difference was the 'Eagle Eyes' skill I believe. Ron

1.- A welcome change and looking forward to it. I woold think this alone would faciliate more player vs player matches. The current system makes it very difficult for players to match pilots to get a game going. Another idea that was floated here was to make the players offering a game visible above the chat window. Is this being looked into? 2.- I'm ambivalent about this one. I understand where you are coming from, but I think it would detract unnecessarily from the roleplaying aspect and seeing your Pilots progress. As is stands now it is virtually impossible to get another skill past 8 or 9, in some cases even 7 depending on your purchase order. My top pilot accumulates over 300 fatigue every mission, worse if he gets shot down, and the next possible skill(Starting Energy) is a whopping 8000+ points - the highest 35000+ points. Obviously with the fatigue rotations of the other 3 Pilots, all very good now also, it is impossible to go any further. He won't be getting any better and as it is I am flying him fatigued regularly without ED!! With a variation of 7-9 skills my Pilots are all sufficiently different and I fly them accordingly in style and missions. A reduction in skills to 3 permanent ones will probably make them all clones, as there are some skills that are 'must-haves'. A huge negative IMO for replayability. What about a compromise if that is the direction you think is best, ie 5-6 permanent skills? 3.- An excellent idea. A big playability plus. 4.- Don't really care about this either way, though some simply like to play the AI I assume and I don't know how that would be good for the game. 5.- Yes a much needed change. The main reason I fly Escort missions is so my Wingmen usually get some XP. I agree with the poster above who said the Leader should still be getting a little 'more' - he is the Leader afterall! Unrelated to the proposed changes, but something you changed awhile ago in the Higher AI skill set was good in some aspects but not so good in others. The AI Team really suffers from not having the 'Spoil Aim' skill and I think the Leader would be better off with the 'Stay with Him' skill instead of the 'Shake him Off' one given the AI trait of almost always following the Player altitude changes. 9 times out of 10 I let the AI go, for obvious reasons! Ron