David Aitken

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>xerxes wrote: Is the vickers mg really as weak as CM models it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The main asset of the Vickers was its non-stop firing ability. This would not mean you hold the trigger and don't let go, but it does mean that you can fire longer and more often. Restricting it to the short, intermittant bursts of the air-cooled machineguns in CM is arguably unfair. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Pak40 wrote: I'm sorry, but I fail to see how the BAR and Bren are different in their rolls as a squad support weapon. They are BOTH mobile light mgs that support the squad with automatic firepower. Just because the Bren team has a 3 man element doesn't make it's roll different, it's still a squad support weapon.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You might as well argue that the way an MG42 is set up makes no difference to its role, it's still an MG42. Very wrong. An MG42 with a two-man team is a light machinegun; an MG42 on a tripod with optical sights, a few more men, and as much ammunition as they can carry, is a heavy machinegun. By the same token, just because both the Bren and the BAR are magazine-loading automatic weapons with bipods which fire rifle ammunition, and were used as squad support weapons, does not mean they are both restricted to this role. Their design dictates how they can be used. The BAR was designed as an automatic rifle. Originally it was only semi-automatic, and the small magazine reflects this. It is a one-man weapon intended to be fired as a rifle from the shoulder, and indeed the bipod was also a late modification. It lacks a quick-change barrel, the location of the magazine is less than ideal, and the gun was poor in the role of light machinegun. The Bren is a purpose-designed light machinegun. Pistol grip, bipod, quick-change barrel, large magazine. It starts where the BAR leaves off; only through modification could the BAR approximate the role of light machinegun, and not very well. The Bren is first and foremost a light machinegun, and is suitable for many roles, from a squad automatic, to medium machinegun on a tripod, to vehicle machinegun. Give a BAR a second crewman and there's not much he can do. It's awkward for him to change magazines. He can't change the barrel. If he carries lots of extra ammunition, the gunner won't be able to fire it all because the barrel will overheat. No point putting it on a tripod. With a second or third crewman, a Bren can do all of this. So you are correct only so far as that the BAR and Bren were used in the same role, as squad automatic. But if you think that configuring it differently does not change the role, you are wrong. The Bren can do much that the BAR cannot, and this is why we are discussing the possibility of having this modelled in CM.

The British airborne troops in CM have berets I think just for the recognition value. Polish troops have the normal helmets.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Monty's Double wrote: one assumes you are paying for their spotting ability.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> When you buy transport you pay for exactly that: its transportation effectiveness. You don't use trucks as spotters, you use them to ferry your units around the battlefield. Your HMG or 3in mortar is no use half a mile away from the enemy without LOS, and it's jeeps and trucks that allow you to get your slow-moving units where they need to be to make a difference.

What is this, CM Graphics VII: The Hardware Bigots Strike Back? For those of you wishing an answer, it would be somewhere along the lines of "BTS will improve the graphics of CM incrementally, but will remain somewhat behind the leading edge so as not to cut out the bulk of their user base who do not buy a top-of-the-range new machine every six months". And here are a couple of links to previous incarnations of this argument. I would be very surprised if anyone manages to say anything here which has not already been said ten times before. CM Graphics - Room For Improvement BTS - Is it time for a separate CM II forum?

PondScum is correct about BTS's take on the matter. I would ask, if you suggest splitting squads 3/7, which part do you use for recon? The part that's almost as big as a full squad, or the part that has the LMG? This is not something I would like to see changed. However, it is currently the case that you can get a German LMG as a two-man team. I believe this is because it is part of the TO&E for AT detachments and such, which also happens to be one of the reasons cited for inclusion of a two-man Bren team. The Germans have a light and a heavy. The US have two mediums and a heavy. The British only have a medium. There is not such a good argument for providing BAR teams, because the BAR is strictly an automatic rifle and a one-man weapon. The Bren is a light all-purpose machinegun. The suggestion that there would be calls for SMG teams is a bit out of hand. So the question I would ask is, why is there no light machinegun team for Commonwealth troops in CM, while the other two main armies have an equivalent? [ 08-21-2001: Message edited by: David Aitken ]

If you think about it, a railway has all the elements of a tank trap, but scaled down. A big train is fine on a railway because its wheels interface with the rails and it travels along the metal bit. Tanks aren't designed for railways and railways aren't designed for tanks, so they could cause a good bit of trouble for each other.

British/Commonwealth Infantry weapons...poor? I present for the benefit of the outerboards (as if they'd care to come in, or we'd care to let them), evidence from my recently concluded scrap with MrSpnky. MrSpnky's Fallschirmjäger, gamily using CM's FOW to disguise themselves as regular infantry, jog across open ground with the wind blowing through their hair, and Vickers .303in rounds and 3in mortar bombs blowing through everything else. MrSpnky's veteran übermensch decorate the ground as they are enveloped by my regular rifle troops. MrSpnky's secrets revealed! Pictured is half the force he managed to save, by virtue of being exactly 2.731 inches from the map edge. Here his last surviving field gun is saved by a gaggle of Panzerschrecks(!).

PBEM Report Lawyer and PawBroon are MIA. Germanboy, Fieldmarshall and Meeks are presumed KIA. armornut has recently been sighted. I am running away from Panzer Leader, when his computer works at least. This battle was over by turn five, when my make-or-break counterattack broke. I blew some more stuff up when Kampfgruppe PL advanced faster than I could withdraw. He blew some more stuff up when he advanced into his own rocket barrage. MrSpkr stopped gloating a while ago about the surprises he had in store for me and the close-range firepower of his überfallschirmhamsterjäger. Half of them are now decorating the ground and the rest are legging it for the friendly map edge. Leeo is manufacturing cyborgs and throwing them across the river towards my positions, and I am dispatching them on arrival. Every so often one of his tanks blows up. He has a plane which is punishing my three abandoned Wolverines, which arrived on the map under the gaze of his Tiger. Of the three flags on the three hills, he has picked the one on my left as the real objective because it looks less strongly held than the other two. Pity his troops have to run the gauntlet of tanks and MG carriers to get there.

I doubt there will be any major changes in CM2, as this falls into the category of Engine Rewrite. Your mortar crew is supposed to have ammo. It is vehicle crews that abandon their ammo because they're in a hurry to get out before they are incinerated.

That reminds me, the repair people have had my old monitor for the past few weeks. Months. Maybe I should call up and ask whether they've fixed it yet, or at least how much they made from tightening the screw that was causing the problem and then selling it as new on the black market.

I am knackered, having spent several days marching around Edinburgh and not sleeping much. It is the Edinburgh Festival, that time of the year when the city is swamped with Japanese, Americans, Russians, Polish and probably every other nationality in the world, in addition to the usual majority of English and Australians. These are not to be confused with the Kurdish asylum seekers, who we deport to Glasgow to play Dodge The Bottles And Knives with the neds. I have been to see some fine Polish comrades from Theatre Provisorium, a top Aussie feller called Mark Little, a cool American dude called Rich Fulcher, some more American dudes from the Reduced Shakespeare Company, and some splended English chaps including former Dr Who, Sylvester McCoy. I shall soon be seeing several more English chaps and American dudes, the latter from LAByrinth and Boom Chicago. I missed the opportunity to see some singing Swedes who get naked, but there is one show in particular, performed by a nubile young Englishwoman without any clothes on called Ursula Martinez (the woman not the clothes), which I intend not to see because it might corrupt my sensibilities. What this all means is that any turns I send at the moment will display the tactical competence of a tired, cross-eyed llama, as opposed to my usual standard of energetic, cross-eyed llama. And Germany should have won the war, because then the trains might run on time. And I've worked out why Elvis uses DeclanMac for his e-mail moniker. Sounds like an unhealthy obsession to me. If Rich Fulcher ever puts on a show near you, go see it. His current one is called Mom, I'm Not A Lawyer, so he should already have a few interested parties in the world-renowned Peng Thread. PS. You all suck, but you don't need me to tell you that. Aussies get mild dispensation for Mark Little, aka Joe Mangel from Neighbours. PPS. I'm typing and I can't shut up. I could save someone the cost of a few monkeys.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>CMplayer wrote: not a message, not a turn<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Evidently the gits all have some kind of life, or at least a nagging SO that doesn't let them sit in front of the computer at weekends. Let's see what happens when their bosses work out that they've spent the past working year on the CM forums. Recession m'dears, you'll have to start pulling your weight, or it's out the door with you... <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Colonel_Deadmarsh wrote: Actually, this whole thread has made me realize that I don't really know the game that well<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> In other news, Gerry Adams, leader of Sinn Fein, announced that the IRA would surrender its weapons unconditionally, with immediate effect. Mr Adams commented "Oi soodenly realoised that t' oi-RA is moid up of nuttin' but teenage boys wit' nut'in better t'do than shoot people an' blow stoof up. We've joost been arguin' for t'sake of arguin' fer t'past few decades an' oi realoised that we really should stop bein' so choildish an' start workin' t'make Ireland a peaceful an' democratic coontry." A leading political analyst commented "Blimey! Did god find a stash of mislaid brains?"

The bases are supposed to be bright. If anything the German bases should be colourful rather than grey, which can be overlooked very easily, especially in urban terrain.

Got to say it: Will CM2 model the BT-7 Fast Tank differently, in that if it loses its tracks, it can still move on hard surfaces?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Scipio wrote: And the most gamey of all is : telling other people how to act on a free forum.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't recall telling anyone how to act. I do recall making a few commonsense points about how a discussion ought to be conducted. If you want a free-for-all, where no-one considers what has been said, and everyone just throws their ideas into the ring and walks away, that's up to you, but in that case there would be no point in the forum. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Louie the Toad wrote: If there is a big hill in front of me I should not be able to see the terrain behind it unless I get one of my units in position.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You should not be able to see activity behind the hill, and this is how CM works. You would, however, have a good idea of the terrain behind the hill, through maps and pre-battle reconnaissance. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Could it be that you are arguing from the perspective of a larger battle?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So you are saying that "realistic" play only works with small forces, and not with bigger ones? My point exactly. It is inherently impractical. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You get your information about the battle and the battle field by observing from each unit's position, just as it should be, not from the god's eye position which I think gives you more information than you should have or especially by being able to fly like superman over to an enemy position and check it out from 10m away.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> As I have said, the information you get in CM by viewing the battlefield from your soldiers' perspective comes nowhere near approximating the understanding of the scenario you would have in reality. There are numerous ways to acquire information in reality, whereas in CM the information is provided visually, laid out on the battlefield itself. Therefore you are making things very difficult for yourself by following the "Ironman" rules, and not 'difficult' in a realistic way. The way you acquire information in CM may not be visually realistic, but it comes much closer to approximating the level of information you would have in reality, even if it looks unrealistic. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>How much fog of war should there be?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This would be the question to ask if CM portrayed the battlefield and the sources of information available to you as commander with 100% realism. That will never happen, so a more appropriate question is, what kind of information should CM provide, and how should it be portrayed? This is one of the main questions BTS would have to have contemplated when designing CM, and we can see what their conclusion was.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Colonel_Deadmarsh wrote: The "Search" button doesn't work anymore, remember?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Has it broken in the past few days? I've been using it on a regular basis.

If you listen carefully when you get a ricochet, you'll hear that the crew have exactly the same feelings.

I did a QB against the computer with low-quality troops, me on the attack with green troops, and it chose conscript Sturmkompanies, Volksgrenadier SMG troops, Motorized troops, and 105mm howitzers. Gamey bastard!!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Louie the Toad wrote: There is no excuse to be allowed to mouse around the battlefield and scout out terrain.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> CM does not present you with a realistic view of the battlefield, and never will. It does not provide you with all the little cues you need to understand a situation in reality. It does not allow you to converse with your subordinates to work out what is going on. It cannot present you with pure suggestion and leave you to work out what is going on on the basis of your prior knowledge of the circumstances. Very often, due to the shortcomings of the graphics engine, and the simple fact that this is a game and not reality, you cannot see from your mens' perspective what you would realistically be able to see; for example, trees get in the way, objects are modelled abstractly to an extent, squads do not visually cover the area they would in reality, and so on. Therefore it is necessary to use the graphics engine to its optimum, moving around the battlefield and looking at things from different perspectives, in order to approximate the level of knowledge you would have in reality. The fact is that in CM you do not play the role of your men, you play the role of each of the commanders on the battlefield, as well as the overall commander, and you should have an overall understanding of what is happening which cannot be provided by viewing the battlefield purely from the perspective of your units on the map. The "Ironman" rules seem realistic, but only because it makes sense visually. It does not make as much sense in the wider context of the role you play, or in the context of a computer game, where it is necessary to issue orders in a "gamey" way because you can't speak to your subordinates and tell them what to do. People are constantly clamouring for greater control over their units, because in reality you would be able to issue detailed instructions about where to go and what to do – but if you use the "Ironman" rules, you cannot even use the current interface to its optimum, so your orders are going to be very clumsy. Again, it may seem realistic, but it's not really, it just looks that way.

Aha, you made the fatal mistake – having a younger sibling. My sister did this too. People should be more careful about when they are born and who their families are.

The MG42 light and heavy are the same gun in different configurations. The MG42 fires the 7.92mm x 57mm Mauser cartridge. Its power is derived from its rate of fire, 1200 rounds per minute, as opposed to the 450 of the Vickers and 500 of the Browning M1919 and M2HB.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>MrSpnky wrote: All learned folk know that the earth resembles nothing so much as a giant teacup<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which is unfortunate proof that the civilised world really was created by the English. It should be noted that NASA always takes its space shots from the top or bottom, and airbrushes out the handle, to make the planet look round. With all the cheese we need on the moon, all that's missing is someone to go out and fetch the crackers on the great Biscuit Belt between Mars and Jupiter, and finally our afternoon cuppa will be complete, and we shall build Jerusalem there, in the green fields of Tau Ceti!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Danzig wrote: is there anything I should know about the mods that isn't widely known?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It doesn't appear to be widely known that modifications are optional and do not necessarily improve the graphics so much as change them. You might like to give the supplied graphics a try for a while before you go changing things. BTS and co spent a lot of time producing them. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Are there things I should know that aren't in the game manual?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Have a look at my "CM Thread Archive" page linked below. It contains many of the most oft-discussed topics concerning the way CM models its subject matter. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And what the heck is the PENG challenge?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The thing in question was originally a challenge to a PBEM game made by Seanachai to MrPeng, made public through a thread on this forum called "Peng, I Take Our Challenge Public". The thread soon became the biggest on this or any other board, reaching around 2000 posts. It then imploded, but forever since has lived on in a series of threads which have been forbidden from exceeding around 300 posts.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Louie the Toad wrote: Using view levels 3 and 4 is the gamiest of all.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is the best example of an unrealistic aspect of the game which is necessary to make it playable. There are few aspects of the game which are as totally removed from reality as the omniscient camera. This does not, however, justify all other possible unrealism, as people have claimed in the past in discussions similar to this.

Okay, this Sand Paper fellow seems to be Perco Lator with a wide-brimmed hat and maracas. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I am also sweeping up (now on turn 15 or something) after a furious 2 turn battle with Dame Achin'.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> PL informs me that he is sweeping up his own forces, and in an impressive display of German ingenuity (Vorsprung Durch Technik and all that), has used a 300mm ricket barrage to kill off his 150mm ricket FO's (four of them he says). I took seven infantry casualties. This was after he had assaulted my positions with another FO (at the same time as he maneuvred some light armour into my killzone and sat still for my PIATs' benefit). Leading with FOs, it's all the rage... Edit: It's late and I missed the obvious comic potential of leading with FOs. Punchline: They're not supposed to be THAT far Forward Observers!! Boom boom. [ 08-09-2001: Message edited by: David Aitken ]