Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

David Aitken

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,256

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Posts posted by David Aitken

    CM2

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Speedy wrote:

    I have heard a story about an escaped Australian POW taking part in the Warsaw uprising. Supposedly he was killed while close assaulting a German tank.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    But tanks should be easy to take out when you get up close! BTS, fix or do somefink!!

    0

    RTS version of CM ever?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Jeeves wrote:

    I feel it would be prudent if someone were to bookmark this thread. Then it can be quickly whipped out to extinguish these *cough* discussions *cough* before they get out of hand.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    This is exactly what a number of us have been doing in this thread, and in every other thread which turns into the hundredth argument on a given subject. It makes no difference.

    A long time ago someone made the observation, that every couple of months a point of contention such as this resurfaces, and people chip in with exactly the same arguments that were offered last time, and people start claiming they know what BTS can and can't do, just like they did last time, and the argument will never end until BTS takes the time to lay out their point of view for the hundredth time.

    No matter that other forum members have directed people towards the previous discussions on the same subject, or said exactly what BTS's position is. No-one cares, they just claim they have the right to argue, when in reality they're hoping that everyone will become convinced of their argument and BTS will cave in and do the impossible.

    It reminds me of an occasion I read about where a journalist was interviewing Sean Connery's double, and someone appeared and started taking photographs of him. The lookalike, in his native English accent, asked the photographer to stop, but he took no notice. Then the lookalike put on his Sean Connery impersonation, and the photographer immediately apologised and disappeared.

    People won't listen to the facts until they hear them straight from the mighty Charles or Steve, regardless of the fact that BTS are busy on CM2 and don't have the time to trawl through every single thread on this forum.

    0

    The Twelve Step Program to the PENG Challenge!

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Monty's Wurlitzer wrote:

    the poor lad's only 15 years of age<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Now look here matey, I was 15 once, and when I was 15 I was, well, a pathetic excuse for a total reject of a human being... but damnit, I at least liked to think that I was capable of functioning as at least a trainee doormat to society! This young fellow will be – god forbid – allowed to drive within a year, so the government must at least credit lifeforms of his ilk with some kind of sensory apparatus... not to suggest that the government would be in such a position of intelligence as to be able to distinguish a genius from, say, a lamppost or a large pile of bricks... but I suppose I shouldn't ridicule him too harshly, as there is a distinct possibility that he is blind, or has some kind of freak learning disability that renders it impossible for him to understand that fresh air, well, doesn't do a particularly good job of stopping bullets; and that yes, he does actually need to do something more than put his units on the map and claim that they are übertanks and übermensch in order to win. Mind you, that never stopped Panzer Leader...

    0

    The Twelve Step Program to the PENG Challenge!

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    PBEM Update

    The reasons for Fieldmarshall needing a 50% points bonus has become ridiculously clear. Not only is he using partial FOW, so I can see clearly what units he's attacking with, but in case I should miss anything... he laid out all of his units on the open ground above my positions whilst awaiting his 150mm rocket barrage.

    Needless to say, I swiftly introduced him to the joys of 4.2in mortars, knocking out one of the four 75mm 251's I can see and severely upsetting a couple of his platoons. He passes along this message:

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>DAMN YOUR ARTILLERY< WELL DONT WORRY YOULL GET YOURS<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Like taking candy from children...

    0

    The Twelve Step Program to the PENG Challenge!

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    PBEM Report

    Armornut has just found himself a new job and returned to the land of the living. Last I checked he was gamily refusing to die despite me killing of his two StuH42's and shelling his infantry to bits with 3in mortars.

    PawBroon has temporarily disappeared, but last I checked he was creeping around in the erroneous belief that I actually hold the VLs in rune's Caen Mutiny, and whenever he would grope a hand towards the cookie jar I would chop a finger off with a metaphorical flanking meat cleaver.

    Leeo is making a right meal of crossing rune's river in Wide Front. So far I have upset lots of infantry with my 3in and 4.2in mortars, and taken out two armoured cars, a halftrack and a gamey indestructible Sdkfz 7/1.

    All Stalin's Organ has needed to do is position his troops somewhere on the map, and sit back and watch. I am now confident that my men would have panicked and run away even if there had been no enemy troops at all.

    Panzer Leader's assault against me is going to be very interesting. The tension is, well, tense.

    When I asked Fieldmarshall to send me a setup of his choosing, I wasn't expecting him to give himself 50% extra force strength. I intend to kick him 50% harder for his blatant cowardice.

    0

    Sdkfz 7/2

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    The only things that can kill it are artillery and small-arms fire. It is invulnerable when it's moving. Some say that the crew cannot be picked off, although others claim they have experience of this happening.

    I am trying to find the thread about it, but so far all indications suggest that it has been either lost or deleted. I keep coming up with a single thread with a blacked-out title box. When I look back through the archives, there seems to be a page where several threads are missing.

    0

    RTS version of CM ever?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Stacheldraht wrote:

    The more options the end user has, the better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I mentioned core concept. Everyting BTS decides to do or to avoid with the game is affected by their core concept. Every feature is tuned to work with all the others to make the game as true to its concept as possible – and therefore as logical, efficient and enjoyable as possible.

    Options are not necessarily good, because changing fundamental features affects the way the game works. It has been discussed here how turn length has been chosen to strike a compromise between allowing the commander an unrealistically fine degree of control, and overstretching the capabilities of the TacAI. Allowing players to change turn length would produce different results, and this would automatically generate demand for fine-tuning of these results. For every option that BTS provides, they have ten, if not a hundred, other interrelated issues to consider. They are left with a choice between providing lots of options and releasing the game as-is, with the door wide open to resultant problems; or spending their time readjusting things to make the new options work, instead of spending their time adding new features or improving on what's there.

    CM is a controlled environment. This is the only way to keep it realistic. When you start changing things around, you start getting undesirable results. By deciding which parameters will keep the game truest to their vision, BTS can keep everything tight and ensure that what is there remains excellent, instead of allowing us to play around with the parameters and wreak all sorts of havoc.

    0

    RTS version of CM ever?

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Stacheldraht wrote:

    What on earth do the Peng threads have to do with the details of CM's game design, or what we might expect in future CM games, or how to improve your tactics in CM? Nothing, but who cares?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The Peng Challenge Thread is a place for banter between people who are actually playing Combat Mission, enjoying it for the groundbreaking achievement that it is, and – heaven forbid – not agonising over every minute facet of both the game's design and its representation of reality.

    Strangely enough, I love this game, and when I see something odd, I don't go "oh my god, this is an inexcusable coding oversight, I want a fix immediately!" – I just think, what the hell, it's a game – if it were fictional no-one would ever care, but because it's fact-based BTS lets themselves in for a world of crap about people's expectations of what it should be like.

    Even more strangely, I am happy with BTS's design decisions. I think the 1-minute turn length works very well. I don't think the interface needs to be augmented in any major way. I enjoy working with the commands available to me – I don't expect BTS to program my troops to be able to skip gaily and every 20 yards do a triple-somersault whilst placing suppressive fire on suspected enemy positions. I think the icon-to-squad representation works well. The lack of photorealism doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the game.

    I am just amazed that, out of nothing, BTS have created an extremely slick, accurate and enjoyable reality-based wargame. I greatly appreciate how well it all comes together, and I understand why the decisions made about each facet have knock-on effects on other facets, and therefore why it is not necessarily possible to make changes without upsetting the balance of the game – the intuition which makes it work and makes it enjoyable.

    The core concept matters. All the discussions on this board are about the external features – the command interface, the graphics, the 'wego' system, the spotting system, penetration algorithms, etcetera – but what matters is what the game is, and what it's trying to be. BTS are the keepers of the core concept. We are perfectly at liberty to make suggestions to them about what we would like to see in the game – although even this is a privilege. They have their work cut out just listening to us, let alone doing the work which earns them a living and provides us with games to bitch about – but they do listen, and they go out of their way to satisfy us – instead of just churning out moneyspinners which are nevertheless the best available, and refusing to hear our requests because they know that most of us will buy anyway.

    However, we do not have the right to tell them how the game 'should' be, or what we 'deserve' for the cost of the game. This game is so good that it's the only one I still play, and I've played it more than any other game in my life, and I never get sick of it. If it were an arcade game, or if BTS were doing a Microsoft-in-5-years and charging subscription, they would be very rich and I would be very poor. CM version 1.0.0 was amongst the highest quality recreational software available, but yet BTS spent months after its release improving on it and – significantly – delivering on their promises (ie. TCP play), and delaying their assured moneyspinner CM2 in the process. I might add that in the few years prior to release, they had negligible income, so they have gone far beyond the call of duty, and possibly risked their continued existence and hence that of CM.

    I am amazed with what BTS has produced, and I recognise their expertise, and am very happy to trust them to make CM 'the only game I want to play' ten times over. Their motivation is not just to make money, like sundry other software companies. They want the same thing that we do – to see CM become even more realistic, and accurate, and enjoyable. There are plenty of things that they simply didn't have time to incorporate into CM, and I'm sure that their to-do list for CM2 was full up even before we started nagging. At best all we have achieved is to readjust their priorities. Discussion is good, and suggestions are good, but vehement criticism and insistent demands are bad. BTS is breaking ranks with the industry in even listening to us – let's not make them regret it.

    0

    trash it madmatt it aint going anywhere...

    in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)

    Posted

    Who really has the time to be playing CM, when there are so many more beneficial things to be doing?

    Who really has the time to be arguing about the penetration of the 132mm KwaK 69 wasserwerfer, when they could be playing CM and having fun, which is surely the whole point?

    Who really has time to be posting completely pointless threads about other threads on the forum which they can't seem to ignore, when they could be arguing about the 132mm Kwak 69 wasserwerfer, an infinitely more productive pursuit?

    In the spirit of the almighty Peng Thread, Fieldmarshall, you are a pathetic excuse for a wannabe untergrognard. By the standard of your logic and reasoning exhibited here, I can imagine your troops doing nothing else but laying down their weapons and marching towards enemy lines with their hands up upon hearing that you will be their commander for the upcoming battle. I would be surprised if you can identify the business end of a tank, let alone a rifle. Send me a Quick Battle PBEM setup – whatever parameters you like – and I shall show you what the Peng Thread is all about.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...