David Aitken

I recently ran a test for other purposes, and saw an enemy squad firing at one of mine, and inflicting casualties on another of my squads about 15-20 metres away (perpendicular to the line of fire). As far as I am concerned, there is nothing wrong with cramming squads together, but they will be less effective. Further apart, they can fire on the enemy from a wider angle, and will not suffer collateral damage. Jason's example it interesting, but somewhat irrelevant. The battle in question was a strong infantry force with very powerful support weapons at its disposal, defending by necessity a small area, against infantry attackers with apparently little in the way of supporting fire. If the Vietnamese had had artillery, the defenders would not have lasted long. In CM, I keep my squads as far apart as command radius will allow.

Let's see... the PPD-34/38 was designed for a box magazine, but was then changed to a drum. the PPD-40 differed mainly in being specifically designed for a drum. These two guns have a short, tubular barrel and receiver and a wooden stock. The PPSh-41 apparently replaced the PPS-40 to enable the use of either a drum magazine or a box, which is simpler to manufacture. I assume the PPS-40 looks the same as the PPSh-41, with a longer, squarer barrel and receiver than the PPD and an angled muzzle. The PPS-43 is an exception due to its manufacture under siege, presumably the reason for the lack of wooden stock, and the use of a box magazine (again, simpler to manufacture). I think the reference to the PPD in the text above is a mistake.

Mind you, I have mention of various different PPD's and PPS's... PPD-34/38, PPD-40, PPS-40, PPSh-41, PPS-43... they all seem to follow the basic half-carbine half-SMG design (ie. wooden stock instead of pistol grip), with the exception of that pictured above, which presumably incorporated no wood because, as mentioned in the text, it was produced under siege.

This from Jane's Guns Recognition Guide:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Peruvian Lapdancer wrote: Sir, that is my wife you just insulted!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What, the small furry witless creature?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Lord Sean wrote: i asked where do other cm players live chat, what a jerk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I beg your pardon sir, you essentially accused all forum members of being cavemen.

Not snipers, but marksmen (sharpshooters) are modelled in CM as individuals. I have a feeling that SMGs became more prevalent later in the war, but someone with the appropriate data can give you a better idea.

You are mistaken, this typing is for people who have a grasp of proper grammar.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>jdmorse wrote: Now Stop it! Marcel you really need to keep this boy on a better leash w/ a pooper scooper handy, he'll dump anywhere.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think pooper scoopers were invented to prove just how distorted animal lovers are. 100 quid/bucks/francs/deutschmarks/etc. + food + toys + veterinary bills buys you a small furry witless creature which lines your floors with hair, craps either on your carpet, in your garden or in the street, drools on your shoes, chews up anything that it can get its evil little paws on (the more expensive or irreplacable the better), and requires to be taken for a walk twice a day. Now just to add insult to injury, you're expected to pick up its crap and bring it home with you! And these people don't even think twice. They must be getting something in return that we don't know about. Aha, Mace has the answer!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Panzer Leader wrote: YK2 your smallest peep becomes my fervent desire!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Now look what you've done Emma... <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Now after those giant (and pointless) pictures appear in my little innocuous internet window, causing me to do the annoying right/left scroll dance, let's get this damn thing to the next page.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Pointless? They are entirely necessary to immortalise my crushing victory over the inept Mr. Dalem. Anyway, what are you browsing on, a PalmPilot?

Achtung Herr Lorak! First things first... I think you overlooked my 67-33 loss to Abbott. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>dalem wrote: Dame Achin' spanked me senseless with heated snowshoes without even breaking a sweat. Senor Lorak please punch in David Aitken's Frosty the Hun-Men: Win dalem's plodding body bag ballast: Loss I will attempt to reclaim my honor in our jungle rematch.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It's true, all true. I didn't know what a killzone was until dalem skillfully maneuvered all his men and armour into mine, and then drove them back and forth a bit to make sure I noticed. My two Marders didn't last long, but a 75mm infantry gun made short work of several Chaffees, a halftrack and an M10 TD. The score was 77-23 in my favour.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Panzer Leader wrote: In a recent thread, Madmatt wrote:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are a sick man, PL... I love it.

If your member number actually means anything, then you should be aware of the many people who have asked this same question before – some very recently – and you should be aware of BTS's response. Otherwise there's no point using it as some kind of rank. The Peng Challenge Thread represents people who do not wish to query the penetration values of a late war 256mm cowpat launcher against reinforced German field grey combat clothing at an angle of 56° in damp conditions when the firer has the sun in his eyes and 28.5% of his brain is occupied devising the most combat-efficient way to construct a decorative daisy chain out of French flowers while under an 81mm mortar bombardment. It is just a place to challenge people to a game, pretend to be tactically competent, and employ the humour which is so often lacking in other parts of the board. Some long-standing and rather knowledgeable board members number amongst the Peng Thread regulars. BTS allows the thread as a single place for the less-than-serious stuff on the board. It does not occupy any significant bandwidth, or slow the search, or crash the forum. There are many more threads which come and go, whereas the Peng Thread simply looks big and overbearing because it remains on page 1 until it reaches 300 posts or so, when a new thread is created. You would be best advised to simply refrain from starting up new threads to complain about the Peng Thread, because these are in themselves causing far more forum clutter.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Flipper wrote: sure would be nice to NOT know when a building is about to explode<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 1) Buildings do not explode, they collapse. The 'explosion' is just a graphical effect. 2) Are you referring to the asterisks after the name, ie. light building* meaning 50% damaged and light building** meaning 75%? This feature was added due to strong demand. It is realistic because troops would be able to assess the condition of buildings. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>an while yer at it give infantry A little bit better chance of surviving.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> On what basis? That falling masonry doesn't crush people? I suggest you have a look at this thread: Building Destruction damage to units.

Looks like a bit of data corruption somewhere. I doubt you can resurrect your current game. If it happens again, you might post about it in the Tech Support forum, but otherwise I'm not sure there's much anyone (ie. BTS) could do about it.

Did you get a "Reinforcements Have Arrived" message?

MadMatt has previously made a better effort to ensure that only ONE person starts up a new thread. The first thing to do would be locking the current thread straight away, as when he announces a new one should be created, this will inevitably happen without much delay. I am sure that after this farce, we will be able to ensure that future transitions are better handled. For now, the last thing we need is another Peng-related thread. I am doing my best to clear things up in BTS's absence. Can we please let this one go as well.

Emma, I have apologised twice, and I apologise again. I am being completely impersonal and arbitrary in an effort to clear up this situation. Berli, that is exactly the problem. Out of the four current Peng Threads, everyone has their own preference. We can't each have our own thread. As Joe's thread was first and is now biggest, it makes sense to continue with it for the time being. I am all for Emma hosting the Peng Thread, but I'm afraid this isn't the best time for it. Remember, as I have said before, this forum is BTS's shop window. We have no right to clutter it with multiple OT threads, and we run a good chance of harming their business.

***THIS THREAD ENDS HERE*** Thanks for your help Iskander. As far as I know, BTS totals four people. They are working hard not only to get CM2 out the door before the end of the year, but to keep this forum running for our benefit. This is no mean task. Could we please stop creating unnecessary work for them. The last thing they need is to waste their time clearing up the forum because we're so immature we can't help but mess the place up with unnecessary and duplicate threads, and can't allow them to disappear before the lock is clamped down on them. This is their shop window. If we create a mockery of this forum, we create a mockery of their game. Stop being so childish. Please move along to Joe's new Peng Thread.

***THIS THREAD ENDS HERE*** In my efforts to clear up the superfluous Peng Threads in BTS's absence, it would also be very helpful if we let this one go. Please relocate to Joe's Peng Thread for the purposes of casual discussion.

I'm sorry Emma, but in all seriousness, that attitude isn't very helpful. There are a lot of people on the forum who dislike the Peng Thread, and we simply can't have four of them going at once. Let's exercise some maturity and not have to wait for BTS to lay down the law.

***THIS THREAD ENDS HERE*** Enough is enough. Let's not be so childish as to need BTS to force some common sense upon us. Please relocate to Joe's thread.

***THIS THREAD ENDS HERE*** In all seriousness, I am trying to sort out this farce in BTS's absence. Please do not post anything more here. Joe's thread is the new Peng Thread.

***THIS THREAD ENDS HERE*** My apologies for being so arbitrary, but we need to give BTS a break. Kindly relocate to Joe's thread, which was first and is now biggest.

You may have trouble with common sense, but I'm quite accustomed to it.