David Aitken

The Cesspool has been discovered! To be continued! (ie. I can't be arsed doing any more right now). ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

mensch, you twit, they've all left for Sweden without you. ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

Blackthorne wrote: > It's going to take a year just to learn a thumbnail of the capabilities of all of the units involved. This is why it's so important that the information is from Real Life™. Alpha Centauri is complex as hell, but all that information is just boring. You could get immersed in it, but what for? It's just fictional nonsense. When you're wracking your brains over CM, you're thinking about real-world equipment and tactics. If First World War generals had had a contemporary version of CM, that war would have been nothing like the slaughter it was. Lessons learned from CM are real – not just applicable to the game.

SMG squads are not to be fought at close range with rifles. ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

CM is the only game I play, because all the others are either repetitive or pointless. The point I see in CM is that it's based on reality, so what you achieve in CM has some bearing in the real world. This also means that, instead of the game itself being everything, you can apply your knowledge of history or military technology to the game, so there is no limit. The game requires thought. You're not adhering to a set of guidelines dreamed up by the programmer – you're just given a bunch of military units and you've got to work out what to do with them. The more thought you put in, the greater your chance of success. And, of course, it is extremely well designed and programmed. David ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

Old news, but hey, the General Discussion Forum (aka The Dungeon) is a rather timeless place. "Blleeaarrgghh!!" goes the troll! STOMP goes the Steve! i am the HARDMAN ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

And in reality, how would you know your unit is completely under cover? Furthermore, how would it have got under cover in the first place? Did you stash it there before battle commenced, or did you ask the enemy to ignore it while it drove up? What I'm saying is, you never have any guarantee that the enemy can't see you, can't shoot you, or isn't going to shoot you before you have the chance to shoot back. That's war. David ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

Are you suggesting this is unrealistic? ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

Only 60 grand? Golly, two of each please guv. ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

Tell them to shoot at the bad guys. Okay, well, Cromwells and Churchills are infantry tanks. Challengers and Sherman Fireflies are for killing enemy tanks. Daimler Scout Cars are also very nice for killing armour. A lot of people also seem to like the Wasps (flamethrower mounted on a Universal Carrier). Sextons blow stuff up. Comets are good all-rounders but only appeared at the end of the war. David ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

I know your 'standing behind trees' example is just a figure of speech, but I think you'll find that LOS in CM isn't quite as dodgy as this. LOS blocks in CM are areas, not objects. In woods, you don't need to worry about specific lines of sight, you just need to keep in mind the uniform degradation that CM models for LOS through trees. Also consider that the graphics in the game are just a representation. By this I do not mean yes, you should be allowed LOS tools because the graphics are unreliable – I mean that in the game you don't see woods, you just see a few trees, and might expect to have LOS when in reality you wouldn't – there is simply a limit to complex and accurate the game's modelling of terrain can be. Have you considered that in reality, your FO might have no idea what you're talking about? Floating above the treetops, you can see that building a few hundred yards away – but down on the ground it's a different story. It's not simply a case of telling your FO to get LOS to the building. And even if he knows where it is, how does he know where he can get LOS from, and how long is it going to take him to find out? In CM it is rarely a matter of 'standing behind trees'. If you are used to the way terrain is modelled, you know where to put your men to get LOS. David ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

I have a few links on various issues... Discussed in this thread: Feature Request: Point Line-of-Site BTS: The Hull Down Move Go to this page and scroll to the bottom. David ------------------ where's the BAR? – ColonelSquirrel Where's the Bar? This is the most important and critical question I've ever seen on a thread – Rex_Bellator

I was advised that skirts are properly modelled a while back by Those Who Know.

mensch, you are a genius. I would kiss you if only you would put your rickets away. The only pointless thing which survived my Life Purges of a few years ago was my collection of Commando comics. Finally I have a purpose for them! I don't know about the one in the middle, but I'm sure the effects of hanging out with two of them will probably lead him astray into the same profession.

Fake? FAKE?? Hah, okay, I'll take it as a compliment to my Photoshopping mAd sKiLLz that no-one believes my contribution is actually me. Don't make me pull a Rommel22 (ie. post a real picture and endorse it with "ha ha, I m younger and much more beautiful than all of u!!") =P ------------------ Maybe its time BTS published a CM:Lite to go along with Quake 3? – JunoReactor

Andreas (Germanboy) plays CM on an iBook, and I get the impression it runs well. New iBooks will certainly run better than early iMacs. David

I'm afraid I'm not too knowledgeable on this particular subject, but I suspect that as the British Army's main infantry AT asset on entering the war was the Boys anti-tank rifle, then an AT gun would similarly be designed for maximum penetration and tank-killing. I could, however, be completely wrong. =) Units 'in' a wall will be as their location suggests, and thus will afford no protection from the wall. Fight from behind walls, say 5 or 10 yards in real-world terms. David ------------------ Maybe its time BTS published a CM:Lite to go along with Quake 3? – JunoReactor

Wow Russell, thanks for knocking this one up to the top. A true classic. =D

Oh get it right or I'll stop paying you. Peter Tyson presents... A David Aitken film... Based on the award-winning book "Why Them Limeys Were Dead Meat If Patton Hadn't Wasted Hitler" by Stephen Ambrose... Nominated for several BAFTAs (ie. we lost) Starring Jon Koltz... Andreas Biermann... Peter Tyson... Robert Shaw as a murderous rapist Nazi German E-Boat captain... and Mufty the Sheep as herself... ANALYSTS' DAY OUT IN HASTINGS

You are right to be cautious, I have a global copyright on broken image links. See you in court, punk!!

Maybe I lied. Or maybe I have not a clue what I'm talking about. A few weeks ago I downloaded the 75Mb Oni demo on a 56K modem. A few days ago I bought Alpha Centauri. Today I deleted them both. Combat Mission resumes its rightful position as the only game worth the attention of a single one of my neurons. I also bought a new drawing pen. It has a 0.8mm rounded fibre tip. This is a Good Thing. Actually, drawing is nothing about ability, it's about how expensive your pens are. Now I shall return to wondering why Errol Flynn was pretending to be English in the cinematic version of the inspiration for the current incarnation of The Only Bloody Thread That Matters. Best wishes from the land of rail disasters and farm crises. Ooo, and that reminds me: PS. MARTIN ROWSON IS A JAMMY GIT Thankyou.

securityguard wrote: > SMG's are good at almost any range, Wrong. > and it doesnt really matter if rifles can shoot across the map, because you're not going to hit anything anyways. Wrong. > OYU JUST NEED TO BE BETTER AND LEARN HOW TO USE THE ALLIES Right. SMGs are close-range weapons. Click on an SMG squad, hit Return and look at the effectiveness values. Next time you engage an SMG squad, stay outwith the effective range, and your riflemen will have a field day. David

MantaRay wrote: > oh yes, I stand corrected. You had them right where you wanted them. Sorry for my lack of respect for the great military might of the UK. Why does it have to be black or white? No single country won the war. The US didn't win the war. Britain didn't win the war. Russia didn't win the war. These countries, and all the other Allies, won the war by working together. What is unwelcome is the suggestion, as you made earlier in the thread, that any one country was overwhelmingly responsible for victory. Tanaka wrote: > In the late 30's and early 40's most of the Germans were very "patriotic"... That way it was very easy to make them accomplice of systematic civilian mass murder. Well said. Shatter wrote: > I do not remember thousands of Americans being catured at a single battle because they were surrounded. Unless you are omniscient I think such comments are inadvisable. > If you think your country is better than why are we Americans number 1 now. > Ha can't beat that. What makes the US number 1, aside from a huge national ego? > I was just trying to defend the Americans MantaRay wrote: > I grow tired of people dismissing our large contribution It amazes me that we get Americans first making brash claims about being responsible for winning the war, and inhabiting the best country in the world and such, and then when challenged, whining about being belittled. Maybe what the US has is not an ego but an inferiority complex – hence all the Hollywood movies trying to convince Americans that they're the saviours of the free world. Rupert_2 wrote: > I was voicing a personal opinon about Patton in rommel22's picture Rupert, I think you can stop apologising. You haven't done anything wrong. =) The Commissar wrote: > The USSR contributed to the war by not selling or giving stuff to other countries, but by taking brunt of the German attack. Was that before or after you invaded Poland? =) David

MantaRay wrote: > Don't forget us letting Monty take Palermo too! Oops, we beat him there did we? You're right, of course, Manta. From the very beginning, the US was willing to hold off and allow its allies to take the credit. Just think of those first few years, when you could easily have marched in and crushed the Axis war machine, but instead you generously allowed Czechoslovakia, Poland, Belgium, France, Britain and company a piece of the cake. When your determination to crush the perpetrators could be restrained no longer, you finally joined the fray, coincidentally around the time that Japan gave you a sound kick in the teeth. Your entry was not a moment too early – you almost allowed us to rob you of the credit for winning the war! What would we do without the US, eh? Rommel22 wrote: > If people want American images I'll give it to you, but I am NOT doing any other ones. So you keep saying. Are you expecting someone to get upset?