Andreas

I had so much fun beta-testing, I had to post this twice.

It does have its moments Stefan, and those make it worth stepping out when asked. One reward you get is the satisfaction of having helped and influenced (if only in a small way) the further development of what in my biased opinion is the best wargame there is.

That's correct.

Quite apart from what it does to the morale and willingness to make the extra effort of those who are witnessing it.

Thanks a lot Redwolf. What does this Toshiba look like to those in the know? I will use it as desktop replacement for my G4/400, and keep the iBook I currently own for portable use.

Thank you for that piece of unfathomable wisdom. Say, you are not in Bangkok in mid-September by any chance, so that you can buy me a drink? </font>

Anybody got any views on Toshibas? Redwolf - what tech forums are you talking about?

Mies - the first one looks great. Regarding the scope - those of us who have been around long enough know that CMBO (and by implication the following titles) was designed for a 1,000 point force level, IIRC. Quite below battalion, and Mike is quite right that Battalion organisation/CoC/etc. is not properly modelled (IIRC full battalions as purchaseable units (with support coys) did not exist immediately?). Despite this, it can be argued that CM1 is flexible enough to do reinforced battalion actions reasonably well. I draw the line beyond that, regardless of what some people say. I have tried larger battles, and for me they, as a general rule, suck. The latter is a statement of taste, but that CM1 was never meant to model this high level and does it poorly from a simulation perspective is a statement of fact. So far I have not seen anything to indicate that Cmx2 won't be able to work on larger formations than it is designed for, in the same way that CM1 did, even though these may then be proportionally smaller than in CM1. I have not seen anything about restrictions to maps that would make battalion actions impossible (and Mike is again right when he says that many battalion actions are in fact 1-2 company actions, so they would be fully in the core design as Steve has explained it). I also do not agree that company level fights are somehow irrelevant. Even when packed thickly, companies still need to work through their tactics to produce success. Finally, I think it is necessary to wait a bit and see what BFC offer. At the moment the section is the smallest infantry unit, but you can not really do a lot with it, also due to the terrain. In CMx2, it maybe more interesting to work on the platoon/section level, due to the much higher detail in the terrain. If it is possible to create environments in which section tactics matter more than they do now, this should keep us all occupied.

Thanks to both of you. I have heard exactly what Schrullenhaft said about Dells. Some love them, some hate them. I'll check out the IBM and Asus models. All the best Andreas

When Robert Graves wrote his autobiography in the 1920s, the section on his experience in the trenches carried quite a bit of 'effing this', 'effing that', when he quoted NCO/OR types. Took me a while to figure it out. All the best Andreas

And CMx2 runs sosoish on it.

I'd buy that if it has a realistic Hollywood rendition of cheer-leaders.

Morning For various reasons I fear I may have to bite the bullet after all and get a PC (again). I would like a laptop, and I like the looks of Sony's Vaio range (edit - following Redwolf's advice I now consider a Toshiba). Which one is recommended (office apps and gaming rig - should be able to run IL2 - Shturmovik), or would anyone with knowledge of these machines recommend not to get them? Cheers Andreas [ September 01, 2005, 01:42 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

The closest I can think of are some instances where German planes threw hand-written messages to spearheads of the nature 'there are tanks on yon hill'. Briefing in CM, and presumably in CMx2. It certainly was not 'there is an HMG at the little copse half-right 500m ahead, and a gun emplacement behind the big red-bricked farmhouse next to the pond 800m to your half-left, while a platoon position is spread out along the ridge line 750m straight ahead, and five tanks in reserve assembled around the town square, not the big one but the smaller to the west at the intersection of Fliegerallee and Adolfstrasse.' It's not the Pizza Hut delivery service.

Good write-up.

So either way, what's the harm in asking for it? Either they will do it or they won't. But if no one says they want it, it's a lot more likely they won't, neh? </font>

Which is why the whole production gets transported.

IIRC for that site the nationality stuff is from a presentation given at some wargamers' convention many years back?

But it maybe much more complicated to create a code that lets you edit it only for scenarios, and not for QBs. There is no point arguing about it here, since neither of us knows. It maybe dead easy, it may not be. I was quite involved in CMMC as well until the point when the lack of non-user edited rules did it in for me with the development of CMMC2.

Those Brits are suckers for 'tis true, but I never pictured Soddy as an opera-goer.

Steve It's a 'minor' feature when BFC says it is, since they do the coding. From what you are asking it looks not minor to me, but I would not presume to know better than Charles what qualifies as minor. You are also presuming that BFC are going to repeat errors in TO&E that they made in the past. Maybe. But there are two things I would hope work against that happening. First, it has been rumoured that even Steve is capable of learning from mistakes (the jury is still out on Matt, but he is more skilled in the use of the BAN button, so let's not go there), and secondly, with a much reduced scope, there is more of an opportunity to get it right. So instead of having to research the Romanian Mountaineer organisation of early 1943, Steve and others can go to town on the exact organisation of US squads in the assault on St. Lo.

Right decision not to allow modding of TO&E.

Stefan Great job in translating this stuff - very interesting! All the best Andreas

Thank you for that piece of unfathomable wisdom. Say, you are not in Bangkok in mid-September by any chance, so that you can buy me a drink?

And about 5x the size of a number of PBEM files of those scenario PBEMs I currently have going on, and less than 2x the size of some PBEMs I had in the past, so it can very easily become a problem. I think we have gone round that particular block, and by now I would expect that whatever BFC have decided to do they have coded. They have also said that they want to keep some form of asynchronous file exchange mode in, IIRC. Maybe looking at HistWar can give us a clue as to how that is done.