Andreas

Real men don't use anything but artillery.

I am quite sure Steve had mentioned this possibility before somewhere. Although that may have been in an email exchange. All the best Andreas

Thanks, pictures are from before 1944, near Leningrad. Larger version on Beobachtungsabteilung, under 'Tanks and Guns'. All the best Andreas

But those were really just armoured assault guns for infantry support?

Sounds excellent.

Mr. Reid - let me be the first to toady up to you and point out how much I enjoyed your book. I hope you sell enough copies of it to get just rich enough to want to publish the already eagerly awaited (by me at least) follow-up on TRACTABLE, but not rich enough to quit researching for a retirement of leisure, as that would deprive me of another probably excellent read. Welcome to the forum. With kind regards Andreas

Obviously, I am not that well-versed in compatibility questions. Thanks for setting me right. The two glasses of Brouilly won't have helped either. I blame it on posting under the influence...

Thanks - one thing I wanted to avoid was bumping that thread in the wrong forum. All the best Andreas

Okay, let me clarify this. I have no idea if they will be compatible, but given the nature of the software we talk about (niche 3-D application), I would not bet any time or money on them being compatible for my product if I was the developer, especially given Apple's history in this respect. Secondly, if BFC decides to go for the universal-binary (so that is what it's called?) route, it will not be backwards compatible. But OTOH, it is not at all clear to me if all Intel machines will be delivered with OSX, or whether you have to purchase it additionally as the owner of a new rig. If so, would you do that just to play CMx2? How annoying would that be if you have to restart into another OS just to play the game - oh wait, I know... So technical compatibility is not the issue as I can see it. The question is whether BFC believes that the existing population of OS X users warrants the effort to produce an OS X product, or whether that is not the case, and they should go for the UB market, which may mean not having a Mac product at all, initially. In which case I would have to buy a PC, but that's really besides the point. Total speculation, all of this at this stage, hence the question. No need to answer it now, but I thought there is no harm in asking, seeing that we already have at least three spam threads on this forum. This one is hardly any worse. All the best Andreas

I agree with you on that, but I think it depends on what you play/design them for.

July is a long time ago. It will be a difficult decision for BFC I guess, since they have to judge whether their old Mac customers will buy the game if it is OS X. So it relates to the stock of older machines that will be around compared to the build-up of newer ones. I would have thought that if it is not too much effort it will make commercial sense to publish for OS X, since not everybody will ditch the system, and it will be around for years. It might be interesting to get an indication on who plans to keep an OS X machine for the foreseeable future, and who would purchase CMx2 for OS X. Depending on the time between publishing modules, it could also become an issue of backwards compatibility. So let me start - I would purchase an OS X version of CMx2, and would not mind buying another game when I switch to PC or Intel-based Mac at a later stage. So essentially BFC would generate two sales from me if they start publishing OS X and then went to Intel-based Mac.

I have to go to Washington next year in March. To avoid this, I have decided to blow it up in a PBEM against Elvis (who I met in a supermarket in the 7th Arrondissement).

Which version is this then?

Great maps Steve!

Steve, Charles Any update on the situation with the Mac OS for the projected release would be useful. With the impending change of chips, will you still be releasing an OS X version of the first version of CMx2, or will you go straight for the Mac Intel version? Thanks a lot in advance Andreas

Good site.

Your memory is tricking you, that was all about pointed sticks. The Blackadder however clearly outlined why to massacre natives attacking His Britannic Majesty's glorious forces with sharpened mangoes was preferable to going over the top in Flanders fields. All the best Andreas

I like PIATs. They are... quaint... Sometimes they even work, and if they do, they do so elegantly. Obviously both parts of this design principle were kept by British car manufacturers after the war. All the best Andreas

He was an acting battalion commander when he died. I think what Gpig means is that it was not known to the Commonwealth unit that bagged his Tiger who they got. That does not mean that Wittmann was a complete unknown in the British Army, since e.g. his Signal article may well have found its way into the foreign press. All the best Andreas

Not a chance I am afraid, I live in Paris. All the best Andreas

Paul I right, those two DLs are not related to Sealion, so just ignore them until I take them off. Thanks to his help I will be able to eventually publish four battles, instead of two. Two operations did not work due to re-supply issues between battles, and Paul has converted them from ops maps to battle maps using Pyewacket's map converter. The four battles maybe ready by early September, otherwise it will be mid-October. All the best Andreas

Matt, once you give a sh*t, will you move all the CMx2 threads from the CMAK forums over here? If you don't feel like it, give me mod privileges and I do it. All the best Andreas

Change: 1) Improved Battle Editor 2) More detailed terrain, in particular integration of buildings (sloping etc) 3) Improved artillery system (including direct-fire airbursts) 4) Add pioneer battle (if appropriate to scale) 5) Add .txt output file for battle results to allow umpired multiplayer campaigns Don't change: 1) WEGO system 2) Bias towards realism over gameplay in design 3) User modability (scenario editor, graphics mods) 4) Availability of hard-core realism options (casualties, extreme FOW) 5) Open-ended game scale (i.e. though designed for battalion combat team, ability to simulate larger scale action) All the best Andreas [ August 25, 2005, 06:16 AM: Message edited by: Andreas ]

NP Stefan, I just wanted to make sure they did not end up in the spam filter. The last Panzer IV is holding out valiantly, and Mark is making slow progress (he probably thinks otherwise). But if you are sick of the terrain, I'll hold off from sending you anymore. Good to see that my incessant whinging on the Panthers seems to have had an effect Regarding your calculations, it would also be necessary to add Nashorns, Marders (probably few by 1945) and Hetzers to the calculation. The funny thing is that some of the Stugs in 1945 would be the early type with shorrt 75s, coming from training establishments. All the best Andreas

But that'd only make them even MORE susceptible to air attacks - not only by FB's, but fighters too. And if that 20mm gun can't kill a Panther from above, from below... </font>