David Aitken

TeAcH wrote: > You know, the only part of you last comment that gave me gas, was when you insinuated that those of us who favor this fix must be dumb and you'll be happy to play our inept butts all day. Sorry, I'll refrain from making any jokes in future, in case I hurt anyone's fragile feelings. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

TeAcH wrote: > Why is it so hard for some folks to understand that once the building collapses, the tank will now be released from the rubble fire (locked area fire) to target enemy still in the rubble OR enemy fleeing from the rubble. Why is this bad?? I miss the point? When a building collapses, you're not going to get any units fleeing from the rubble, because (a) they'll likely be shaken, and ( the rubble provides very good cover. Neither is your tank necessarily going to target units still in the rubble, because that assumes they are visible, which in most cases they are not. I didn't say the new behaviour in 1.05 is bad. But if I had infantry in buildings defending against tanks, this patch would sure be a benefit to my defence. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Shep wrote: > Perhaps for CM2? This is correct. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Apollo11 wrote: > I completely agree that "Roster" is not for CM but such simplistic "OOB" IMHO is... This is pretty much BTS's point of view. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

A ceasefire is by definition a mutual agreement, so I don't think it carries a penalty. When you're playing the AI, and you request a ceasefire, the AI will oblige - but if you're playing against a human, you must both file for a ceasefire before one happens, and you don't know whether the other guy has done this or not. Of course, you can always suggest to him in person that a ceasefire would be in order - but if he's winning, he probably won't agree. =) ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

The normal way to stop units firing is to tell them to Hide. It may seem funny to issue a 'hide' command instead of just 'hold your fire', but it does make sense - if a unit isn't allowed to fire, they'd want to minimise the chances of being fired upon, and therefore they'd want to hide. Don't take the graphics too literally - a hiding unit will lie down, but this is just to indicate they're hiding, it doesn't mean they would actually be hugging the ground in reality. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

jim crowley wrote: > 1. British (and Polish and Canadian, I think) ranking puts companies in the charge of a Major; battalions in the charge of a Lt-Colonel. I've been wondering about this. Can't give you any evidence, but it does seem that British formations carry the same rankings as Americans, which I suspect is inaccurate. > 3. In the QB generator it is possible to choose, or have chosen, conscript troops in every category (including parachute troops, although the manual suggests otherwise). I've noticed that you can't choose Allied conscripts. I would agree that you shouldn't get conscript Fallschirmjäger. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

I haven't heard anything about this before - either in the manual or on the forums - so I doubt it's in the game. I think a tank with men on the back is just giving them transport - it doesn't otherwise benefit from their presence. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

I think bunkers have been made more difficult to spot since the original release of the game. You've just got to make sure they're not facing off against the enemy from long range - for example, try putting them in a position where they'll hit the enemy's flank, but the enemy doesn't have LOS from a distance. I don't think the game models them unrealistically - you've just got to deploy them with their weaknesses in mind. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Besides that, the graphics are generic. If you add stripes, they'll appear on everyone. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

I set up a test map during our original discussion, to see just what effect a collapsing building had on the units inside. I went back to this map in 1.05 and tried it again. On this and other evidence, it strikes me that destroying a building doesn't have as absolute an effect on the units inside as people seem to think. I do like the tweak in 1.05, but more from an aesthetic than a tactical viewpoint. I'll just be glad to play against anyone who thinks a unit in a collapsed building isn't worth worrying about. =) David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

deanco wrote: > Ummm...the roster is by no means 'dreaded', David. The discussions are at times, I meant the discussions. ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

To be more politically correct, I reckon they should replace the soldiers either with undead zombies, or brightly-coloured Pokémon-type cartoon characters. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

I suppose there is a tradeoff here. In CM, the orders phases usually account for about half to three-quarters of your playing time, so once you've completed a battle, it will have seemed to take a lot longer than the actual total of the action phases. If we were able to save the entire battle and play it back (a much requested feature), we would be surprised at how quick it was. For the purposes of gameplay, however, I think some of the orders phase time is factored in - so the action phases are maybe a bit faster than they really would be, to ensure that the game doesn't take forever. CM battles may be quicker than they would be in reality, but playing the game is slower, so for the overall experience it pretty much evens out. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

This is an excerpt from an e-mail discussion with pcelt: The problem with this, is that CM currently allocates building textures randomly. You have small light buildings, small heavy buildings, large light buildings and large heavy buildings. There are a few different textures for each, but they are random - so load up the scenario once and a given building will have "large light building, texture 1", but the next time you load it up, it'll have "large light building, texture 2". These stay the same throughout a game, but they change when you start a new game. So before anyone does any modification to the appearance of buildings, BTS will first have to create more building types. They'll probably need factories for the Eastern Front, so we'll see what else they come up with. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT [This message has been edited by David Aitken (edited 08-26-2000).]

I think we could do a lot worse than play a computer game, regardless of what it's based on. We're not actually harming anyone or any thing. If anything, Combat Mission gives us a greater understanding of the war. It's not an arcade game. It doesn't glorify violence. It doesn't encourage any misconceptions about war. What it does, is plainly illustrate how no battle can be 'won' without great loss to both combatants. A while back I posted about how, when battles got underway, it bothered me that my men started to get killed, and even if I 'won', I could have taken as heavy casulaties as my opponent. Better pretending to kill people than doing it for real. And better understanding the realities of war, than just playing shooting games like Quake, which do glorify violence. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

If anyone doesn't know about the dreaded roster, please read the following threads: Interface needs work. I want a roster, a roster !! Vote ! Roster War, ceasefire David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

First thing you should do is organise your forces before you start. Lay out your men in their command order, then look at the terrain. Place your platoons in appropriate positions, then your support units. Then, once the battle is underway, you should remember where everyone is because you put them there for a reason. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

This is something that bothers me a lot. If you're involved in a war, even if you survive uninjured, there are a lot of physical problems which are par for the course. Besides deafness, I was reading about a fellow in the British 3rd Royal Tank Regiment who was trying to escape at Dunkirk, and he took a few near misses from artillery, and he was talking about his eyes going out of focus, just off-hand. If my eyes went out of focus I'd freak out, but I suppose in war you don't worry about that kind of thing. I haven't experienced war myself, but I think it wouldn't be too far off to say that things that matter to you in peacetime cease to matter in war. They say war is hell, but much as I want to, I can't understand that without experiencing it first-hand, and I'd rather not. My faculties are invaluable to me. On a side note, those people who frequent nightclubs with loud music playing are basically asking to go deaf. And as for concerts... I went to an R.E.M. concert last year, and I forgot to take earplugs. Unforunately the support band we got first was LOUD. I think my ears survived without any permanent damage, but I wouldn't do it again. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Hakko Ichiu wrote: > And they have enhanced penetration ability too. Ummm... exactly what does that mean in the context of Hamsters? On second thoughts, never mind. I don't want to hear about the depravity rife within the echelons of the HLF. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Das Hamstertruppen sagt: Sqveak! ----- Sorry, I've drawn a picture, and I'm gonna use it. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

If an HQ unit panics, the squads under his command will be more likely to break. You'll notice that the command lines disappear in this case, because the HQ has no effect. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

> Must be great for the tax payers of Scotland to know their money is well spent on important science. Hello? Wakey wakey? Anyone actually read the article? Anyone actually read my last post? David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Lorak wrote: > example: In CM your guys are comming under fire in a house. So you decide.. they should move over here. click, click, done. > Real Life: tom: damn sarge they are hitting us hard. [...] But you can't "click, click, done" until you get to the next orders phase, which could be anything up to a minute. Then you have to wait out the command delay. The command delay simulates the time it takes for soldiers to do what you've given in your "real life" sample. If they're Crack troops they get moving quickly, and if they're Conscripts they take ages. Michael emrys wrote: > At the platoon level, if a squad wasn't within shouting or hand signalling distance of the command group, it would entail sending a runner, or the lieutenant himself, to convey the message. Which is simulated by out-of-command squads taking longer to do anything. Consider that CM simulates small-scale engagements. All your men are going to know their objective, and they're on a combat footing, so they're not going to be that slow. It's not like they have to wait around to find out what they should be doing. Sure, they do have to wait for specific orders, but they'll still have a general momentum towards the objective. We've got to distinguish between levels of combat here. A battle can take any length of time (as I've said), depending on the forces involved and the nature of the objective. CM simulates smaller forces and smaller objectives, so it's not unrealistic for battles to be relatively short, and for cohesion to be relatively high. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Were the troops the same experience level? David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT