Echo

Ok, I tried assigning one machine a "hard", in house IP#. I lost connection to the internet by doing so. I went back in and configured it to automaticaly assign IP#, and my net connection came back up. I'm finding tons of info on how to rig up isolated LANs, but nothing I've found so far addresses this damned router I've got. How does one confiure an internal LAN with seperate in house IP#s while maintaining comms. with the router? I pinged both machines through the net, and each machine seems to have its own IP#. Sure enough, I fired up CM, and connected TCP/IP. I suspect I'm not playing through the LAN however, but through the internet. (which is good enough I suppose if I cant get the LAN to work).

I just networked my house.(Can't beleive I got it to work). I have a DSL Cisco router from my IP provider feeding a 5 port hub. Both computers are comunicating correctly, and both are accesing the internet. Now I want to LAN with CM via TCP protocol. My (internet) IP# changes from time to time, and I am not behind a firewall. Now, If I assign in house IP#s for both machines, is this going to effect my connection going out on the net through the router? Or does the router ignore in house IP numbers and do its own thing?

I have built the altar. The living-room has been cleared and I have stacked all three boxes full of my new system in the middle of the floor. Combat Mission, in its jewel case is placed mightily upon the entire heap. I shall dance naked feverishly about the great totum, and pray to the gods of MHtz. that no ill thing like bugs or crashes shall impedede me on my quest for gratification. My alcohol imbued veins will not rest until every cord has been laid, and every connection in its place, and my eyeballs are basking in the warm glow of the promised land, Gigahertzdom. Then I'll get back to my usual routine of wooping the snot out of you bastards. BURP!

Alot of die hard gamers go for the Athalon for price and value. No sweat there. Money wasn't a big deciding factor for me. If I was on a budget I would have gone the Athalon route. What sold me was the 400Mhz system bus that provides 3.2 Gbyte speed between the CPU and the memory. This has always been the choke point for 3D software (games), and no other system can beat that. There are also new commands on the CPU that arent optimized in todays software yet, so I wont have to upgrade again for a couple of yearsb at least. Now you all drink some friggin beer and calm down.

The BARs strength was in its penetration power. A plaster or wooden wall was not effective cover against it, so it was not only good for suppression, it was leathal to those hunkered down in cover.

I have fired the M60 from the hip, and shoulder. Its really not as heavy as it looks. You can put down good area fire from the hip, just walk your rounds into the target. (This is easier when firing at boats in the water, you can see the water gout from every round). I found firing from the shoulder to be nearly as accurate as firing the M14 the same way. Short bursts that way. You haven't seen anything till you've witnessed 6 .50cals , 2 M60s, and a 35mm chain cannon blowing a boat out of the water. The volume of fire is friggin unbeleivable.

BREW HA HAR HAR! Just kidding. Actualy, I'm wondering how many games it'll fire up simultaneously. Now I can kill all you bastards more efficiently.

I didn't consider them that much of a missing item till I read up a little bit, saw a few documentaries, and then called my uncle who was a Ranger in New Guinea. They were better armed, carried more ammunition, and better trained than the average riflemen. The Sturmkompanies were included in the unit line-up, I think the rangers should have been in there too. My uncle said every other man had a thompson, BAR, or a bazooka. They armed themselves add-hoc. Thats why they were always called to the front of the position to bust up strong points. Thats kind of inherent firepower isn't modelled in any of the allied units. Bad move leaving out the Rangers.

I nominate Paton for the Rob/1 award.

Gimme.

If you want to see those horrific results of early allied armor against the panzers, set yourself up in a QB (or any other battle), in June of '44. You will not have the luxury of 76's or tungsten there. Sounds like you in a 76 rich enviroment with that scenario.

This guy is friggin GOOD. I hope he's making textures for CM2.

I've solved the great "when to open fire" debate. Drink a hell of alot of beer before you even think about playing, go to the chat and chalenge some poor unwitting schmuck. Open fire with ECERYTHING you've got as soon as you see the poor bastard. Overwhelming force, BEER, and ego win 90% of the battles. Half your opponents will cower and run if you show too much confidence. I've never seen my men shoot better than when I'm loaded. Further more... I swear, I've never seen so many panty wearing wussy's offended at a little foul language in a WAR game. Drink some beer, relax, and if I curse and yell 'cause I get excited, don't go skulking off to your mommy's about my foul language, or disrespect. You are my mortal enemy as long as the turn counter is rolling, and I will humiliate, defame, and yell "NUTTS" at you until the deed is done. Where the hell are the real men here???

I prefer my Gyros with a little sour cream and a side of fries.

Hey Kwazy, Be sure to put the standardized beer holders on all the commanders copulas. Its a real pain in the ass they were left out of CM.

4 good cigars, and a 6 pack of Warsteiner.

Looking at it objectivley, there is one huge difference between a rifle and an MG. That is its RATE of fire, and its volume of fire. Indeed, the whole reasoning behind the MGs developement was based on higher rates of fire. The tactics and employment methods came later. The modelling in the game now presents MG teams as slow moving rifle squads with a higher ammo load out, and a limited area effect ability. (And thats pretty much how I use them with good results in my games). The firepower rating of the MGs in the game is adequate, and effective. But the one thing that seperates an MG from a rifleman is his rate of fire, and as it is, a rifle squad and an MG side by side will fire at roughly equal intervals to each other (in the game) I'm not talking about spraying till the barell melts. A constant stacato of 3 or 6 round bursts lays down ALOT of fire, and its continuous fire until you have to change the drum or belt. I dont see continuous, pinning fire in the game from an MG thats any more effective than a rifle squad. Because this has been abstracted into the firepower rating of the MG (70 or 80 FP is real good for just 1 gun), the continuous fire isn't manifesting itself in real time, when you have 3 or 4 seperate units (waves) moving in on your position. So your over-run, sometimes doing marginal or no damage. If you just increase the number of bursts an MG gets off in a 1 minute turn (I'd say at least double them), you'd see a huge difference in the outcome of wave attacks, single MG vs. 1 squad, or any other test you can come up with. This wouldnt upset the balance of MGs either. The firepower rating of the MGs would remain the same. So as long as your in adequate cover, those extra bursts are more likely than not going to pin you, but really not be any more lethal than they already are. (Unless your running around in the open). I wish BTS would code that up on their machine and just see what it looks and feels like. Its a simple solution to a complex, abstract problem.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think CM1 will produce a somewhat WWI type result *if* the designer really does lay out a WWI type situation as best as CM1's constraints will allow. But there are subtle differences that make a DIRECT comparison impossible. CM1 was not written to deal with Human Waves because they rarely, if ever (using WWI definitions) happened in CM1's simulated scope. As I said above, CM2's scope DOES include human waves, and therefore we do need to make sure that the cause and effects are adequately in balance. Steve <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, this is ridiculous, and the first time I've found myself at odds with BTS's point of view. Why does (and will) an MG on the western front perform diferently than one on the eastern front. Does this mean I'm going to have to re-learn tactics and expect different results when engaging MGs in CM2? If this is true, then one or the other MG models is flawed. (Personaly, I think if you just increase the burst rate/turn of MGs they would work better.).

I play for the simple pleasure of killing. Of driving my enemy before me, and hearing the lamentation of the women. Ladders are out of the question. ------------------ As I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear nothing, for I am the meanest mother*#*#** in the valley. (George S. Patton)

I play for the simple pleasure of killing. Of driving my enemy before me, and hearing the lamentation of the women. Ladders are out of the question. ------------------ As I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear nothing, for I am the meanest mother*#*#** in the valley. (George S. Patton)

I counter battery them with Thompsons and M-1's at close range.

Yup, there it is. Here are some other small arms missing. (Dunno where the hell I was when this was posted). Big Time Software Moderator posted 09-13-2000 12:23 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just some quick points: FG42s - rare. Only 3000 or so of both types were ever made and by 1944 it would be pretty rare to see one in combat. Sturmgewhr - listed as earlier designation "MP44" MP28/34 - phased out long before this. The Waffen SS used them earlier in the war because they had to procure their own weapons and that is what they could afford. When they were assimilated into the Wehrmacht they then had access to standard weapons, like the MP40. MG34 - long debate about this a couple of times. For frontline infantry units this weapon was not (in our opinion) around in any significant quantities. We will certainly model it in CM2 though. Magnetic mines - Germans were very short on magnets by 1944 so they were largely not present on the battlefield. Rifle Grenades (German) - we are still having a spirited debate about this internally. The research that has been done (by someone who wants them in ) is mixed. We are therefore erring on not including them for now. M3 Grease Gun - pretty close to the Thompson from CM's point of view. The benefit of this weapon was that it was cheap and easy to manufature, as well as more reliable under battlefield conditions. So we decided not to complicate things G43 German semi-auto rifle - We found this one a bit tough to leave out, but we also couldn't really figure out how common it was to run into one of these on the battlefield. So we left it out because currently if we put it in there would probably be too many in the game. Krummlauf - "exotic" to say the least Various forms of AT weapons - both sides had many types of hand held AT weapons, but of course the Germans had more than their fair share We simply couldn't simulate them all, so we abstracted them to some degree. Captured weapons - the Germans put into service nearly every weapon they captured. And they captured a LOT of weapons Therefore, we had to draw the line somewhere. That line was drawn at "standard issue" equipment. Steve

The M3 was made late in the war to replace the heavy and expensive to produce Thompson SMG. They looked similar to the British Sten, all stamped metal, and I believe over 500 thousand were made. I checked all the late 45 infantry types and didn't see it. I wonder if it was left out for simplicity, or because they were not standard issue. (The Thompson also was not standard issue.).

Whats the BMP# on that. I'm trying to change mine back to the original.

I usualy start off with heavy strategic bombing of their Uber-tank production facilities. I quickly follow up with commando raids aimed at filling their fuel tanks with stale, overpriced German beer. ------------------ As I walk through the Valley of Death, I will fear nothing, for I am the meanest mother*#*#** in the valley. (George S. Patton)