David Aitken

An interesting article in today's Scotland On Sunday newspaper: You can read it here. (184K JPEG) David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Scott Clinton wrote: > While the other issue (the one I am addressing) is the accuracy and lethality of the M2 against INFANTRY while the M2 is mounted on top of a MOVING/FAST MOVING vehicle. Okay, I get the idea. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

BTS would doubtlessly love to do (1) and (2) if (a) they had time, and ( it were possible. (3) sounds a bit superfluous. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

ACTOR wrote: > David BTS's reply to the thread you mentioned was on 8-10-00 and the 1.05 patch came out on 8-25-00. Was it included? I just re-read the Readme file and I did not see mention of it. Okay, how about 1.04? The info for that, dated 8-17-00, includes the following: * Armor penetrations by MG bullets and small AP shells are somewhat less likely to knock out the target (no change for 75mm and up). And crews of struck vehicles are less likely to bail out when no serious damage has been suffered. * MG fire against vehicles is now less effective (i.e. less accurate) if the firer or target is moving. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

As far as I know it was addressed in 1.05. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Read Cornelius Ryan's book. It's all there, and I don't have the inclination to type it out. I can tell you that he reckons a grand total of about 12 Americans died in the drop, which might put things into perspective for you. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Okay, I thought there might not be enough for high-res textures. I'm afraid I can't help you any further... David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Your Lynxes do have a chance of killing the Sherman, however small. I would ask: If they hadn't engaged it, would your Mark IV have had the chance to kill it? Even if the Sherman can pop the Lynxes easily, the Mark IV has a chance to pop him while he's doing it. The problem is usually that tanks are too keen to get the hell out if they encounter a bigger adversary. How experienced were they? Better experienced crews are less likely to bug out. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

How much Video RAM do you have? David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

I'd sooner have ten Veterans than fifty Greenies. Each skill increment is significantly better than the previous. Furthermore, the skill advantage is exponential - say Veterans were twice as good as Greenies, you couldn't achieve with twenty of the latter everything you could with ten of the former. More experienced troops are just far more reliable and efficient. Take note, however, that it doesn't matter how experienced your troops are if you don't know how to use them. Elite troops won't fare any better than Conscripts if you expect them to charge prepared defences across an open field, for example. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Some people have been looking for this feature in CM2, but apparently the tactic wasn't very successful - the dogs would attack any tank. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

I think you can make an estimate yourself which would be no less accurate than any of your TCs would manage. ETA for short distances is just meaningless on a battlefield. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Does this thread mean anything to you guys?: 50cal Too Effective? David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach." [This message has been edited by David Aitken (edited 09-16-2000).]

One of the American chaps in The Thin Red Line uses a shotgun (and that's a Hollywood movie, so it must be right). I used to think pump-action shotguns were a relatively new invention, but apparently not. You'll find pretty much any kind of weapon being used in war, especially by special forces. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Big Time Software wrote: > I made the mistake of looking at a Vickers Mk3 LMG instead Oh no, it's Attack Of The Curvy-Top-Mounted-Magazine Light Machine Guns! A Vickers-Berthier (designed by a Frenchie): It should be noted that the Bren in the top picture is chambered for the NATO 7.62mm cartridge. The original Czech VZ26 has a straight magazine, whereas the British wartime version, chambered for the .303in cartridge, has the curviest magazine: David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Ben Galanti wrote: > why is the M1917 displayed as a Vickers... At least they got the side right. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

You said that in order to watch the turn again you'd hit Start? I assume you mean Play? David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Xavier wrote: > Is it so important ? Party pooper!! Notice I didn't insist BTS model the Bren properly, I just thought I'd point out the error. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

jshandorf wrote: > I am not suggesting a new movement order. I was addressing kip's comments... kipanderson wrote: > Tweaking the sneak command in such a way that it becomes a genuine "movement to contact" and then adding a skirmish command to the list would keep everyone, or most people happy. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

kipanderson wrote: > The problem is that we want to tweak it in different directions. I think this is a good reason to leave it the way it is. Having a command for every different possible kind of movement is just going to make the game unnecessarily confusing. Five different movement orders (Move, Run, Sneak, Crawl, Withdraw) is quite enough. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach." [This message has been edited by David Aitken (edited 09-15-2000).]

Is skirmishing a tactic you'd expect Second World War line troops to employ? To return fire and press on regardless would require a lot of training and a lot of guts. Anyway, when sneaking troops encounter the enemy, does their 'sneak' command disappear? Will they never resume their advance unless ordered? David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Well, first we hear the Besa has been 'abstracted'... (A Couple Of Questions On Vehicle Mounted MGs) And now it turns out the Bren Carrier... isn't! Here's a Bren: And here's a Bren Carrier: It's not a Bren, so what is it? Here's a Japanese Type 96: Or even better, a Type 99 (notice the straighter carry handle): It's a Type 99 Carrier! Maybe this means BTS are eager to do CM: Beyond Midway after all! (beyond mid-way... joke... oh never mind) Actually, it looks more like Steve was a bit too full of the festive spirit (or the festive spirits, such as brandy) when he did the model (Update on model progress). I demand an explanation!! David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

If Charles comes up with a Carbonised OpenGL version (for Mac OS X) sometime soon, I'll buy two more copies. And you can hold me to that. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

Panzer Man had already expressed the fact that he no longer had a gripe with the Peng thread, and requested his thread be locked up, for the reasons mentioned by howard - and it was. I would suggest you don't start bitching about the Authorities, because Big Time and friends are extremely generous and fair to this community. David ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach."

I don't have time just now to check if this has been discussed before, but I endorse the issue. If you kill a unit or knock out a vehicle, suddenly you know exactly what and where it is. Say you knew the enemy had a Jagdpanther, and by a fluke you immobilised it with artillery and it was abandoned, you would know this without being able to see it. That would be a bit unfair, wouldn't it? David *** Correction *** It seems the issue is that if you have some contact with a unit, you'll know when it's KO'd, but if you have no contact you won't. ------------------ They lost all of their equipment and had to swim in under machine gun fire. As they struggled in the water, Gardner heard somebody say, "Perhaps we're intruding, this seems to be a private beach." [This message has been edited by David Aitken (edited 09-15-2000).]