Dick Reece

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by silentsniper: I just read the thread "What's up with the smoke" and went to the 3dfx site and updated my driver. It installed great, but when I rebooted my computer it came up with a large and very obnoxious black border all the way around the screen. It's even there when I'm playing a game. And the CM graphics are abominable!!! When I started the game up it asked me if I wanted to run in software mode or something, (weird because I only have the demo,) and I hit ok thinking it would be better. Now I get blocky graphics and everything jumps around. I tried rebooting and I still get the border, I don't know what to do. Help!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sniper, You may have to adjust your monitor settings again as well as your display resolution,by that I mean the push button adjustments on your monitor.Sometimes loading new drivers screws up the desktop and the monitor has to be adjusted.FIRST do the display resolution thing! Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by John Kettler: snagdad, Glad you enjoyed the book! Now if I can only get people to respond to my original thought! Regards, John Kettler<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hi John, I bought the book too, on your recommendation, it is an excellent read, as snagdad said! I am about to finish it. What was the original thought you wanted people to respond to? Dick

Currently an operation I did involving H-39's and Stuarts is being playtested.If any of you Hotchkiss fans are interested in helping with it, give me a yell via e-mail and I'll send it to you when I get off work.

West Virginia, USA here, the mountain state

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn: Well, personally, I think that everyone is born with an innate ability to be moral ( according to the definitions of that term within society and excepting certain congenital or acquired brain disorders). Anyways, I think that society shapes us and determines what level of morals we have. The power of those elements in society to determine moral outlook is proportional to their distance from our inner family circle AND proportional to the amount of time of both direct and indirect interaction we have with those elements. I don't believe that some people are born intrinsically more capable of discerning moral rights and wrongs but I do believe that over the course of time some people accept society's moralities more completely and easily than others. Of course, not all societies actually have moral moral outlooks. At one stage slavery was quite accepted as being reasonable and moral justification was created for slavery and taught to youngsters. So, we come to the interesting quandary whereby when we discuss morality we are discussing a culture-defined entity BUT the culture's definition of morality may not actually be very ethically or morally correct and the "rebels" who do not accept culture's morality may be seen, in coming years, to be more moral than society itself . Of course, I should explain that I hold this view because I believe that one of the most harmful things any human can do is accept the morality of his/her culture without question. I believe we should all look at the moral rights and wrongs as put forth in our respective cultures and then decide which to accept and which to reject ( and hope we accept the right ones and reject the bad ones). Just call me cynical when I see society making crimes and/or labelling as unacceptable behaviour so many things which are quite acceptable and welcome IMO.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which brings us full circle, back to Futbolheads statement that his conscience was his guide, and not anyone elses expectations of him. Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: Interesting comments. But the man is not going hunting! He clarified that he is interested in long-range target! So, with that in mind .30-06 is overkill, painful, and expensive for bench shooting. Stopping power is of zero concern (60 rounds of .30 for a grizzly? Ugly story.). I like the BOSS system and muzzle brakes in general. I believe it is available on the Browning bolt-actions as well. No way is the auto-loader gonna keep up with a tuned 700 or any other good bolt at the range. "Black" rifles (modern military "assault" type weapons) are at the top of every gun-grabbers hit list. They are expensive, accurate, fun, and a high risk investment in Canada. Argie: My host also had an FAL (you need back-up against the antelope, they'll tear a man up! ), but I opted for the traditional elegance of the classic bolt. No president was ever assassinated with a .30 cal. rifle, and only Kennedy was shot with a rifle- a WWII military Italian 6.5mm Carcano. Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley were all killed with cheap handguns; Reagan was the only one to be shot and survive, and that was with a .22 with exploding bullets.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Try it, you'll see that gas recoil and BOSS system combined make the BAR as accurate as any Browning bolt action.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar: I'm going to buy a rifle. I don't know much about the available brands etc. I've basically taught myself a lot about weapons and shooting techniques based on interest, but have only shot once in my life. I'm living in Canada and plan to get my Firearms licence this year and buy a rifle. I'd like a recommendation from anyone here who knows anything about guns on what good accurate rifle is for civilian use. I'd prefer something with a large round too (not a .22 calibre rifle). Thanks for the help. PS -- Any Websites I should look at? PPS -- I already tried to buy the PSG-1...Unfortunately, my government doesn't trust us with it Thanks again, Pillar<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Pillar, If you've got the money for it, the best rifle by far, value wise and for sheer firepower and enjoyment,as well as ease of use, is the Browning Automatic Rifle in 308 caliber with the BOSS [ballistically Optimized Shooting System]system attached.I have killed a few deer, turkey as well as a coyote with mine, hunting these hills of WV for the last 25 years.Of all my guns I loved it the best. Dick

Agreed with the Bill Gates thing, I was using him primarily as an example of someone being driven by greed [how many billions does one man need ? Why fight the courts with his wealth,especially if they are so obviously right?].I was pointing out that there are many people of all levels of society and all walks of life who do not base there life on other people's expectations OR there conscience,but merely on meeting there perceived goals [ now defined as values as well by you] in life. As to the values, you are right.But I believe as we age,our changing morals give us a new set of values or a new type of value system.Criminals and others, on the flip side of the coin,base there morals or lack of them on whether they hinder or help them meet there value system [goals].I believe our morals give rise to our virtues as well.While we can have one without the other, they are usually not nearly as pronounced or effective in our day to day sociological interactions when by themselves. Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by guachi: I have a complete unit point cost chart updated for v1.03 if anybody wants to look at it as well as a unit availability chart (by month). If you look at the numbers long enough, you should be able to come up with a good idea of the weighting of various factors for point costs. Jason<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'd like a copy too Jason, at warmeister@inetone.net and thanks! Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BorderBill: U.S. Army Infantry Officer 1884-1989 197th Inf Bde (M)(S) and US Army Infantry Training Center, Ft. Benning,GA 1990-1993 6th Inf Div (L) in Alaska<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Bill, you are one old dude So what part did you play in the Indian wars ? Dick

OLD FOGIES ;D !!!!! I resemble that remark deeply ! Actually, I'm proud to be an old fogie, and did I tell you I was also born in a town named Muskogie ? I fear you are right regarding current trends in society, and the cyberworld seems to encourage that "in your face" behaviour that FuTbOLhEAD spoke of earlier.It occurs now even in the Older generations, you and I are proof of that. Dick No bets on the other thing, no sense encouraging any in your face behaviour on anyone's part

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killmore: Ok - Lets have a qiuck Poll - How many of you think Fionn is a woman that does not want to declock? (No insult intended toward Fionn !)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No way Fionn's a woman, he talks too much like a marine !

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dick Reece: I would,however,like to expand upon one comment which I agree with: I could give a rat's behind what other's expectations of me are, I have to live with my conscience and what I do. Their hangups are their problems. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is the quote I was referring to, don't know why it didn't cut and paste the first time. Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FutbolHead: In so much as I could hazard to guess the ages of other online opponents (sometimes difficult, sometimes not), I would say that a fair lot of them were not very nice. The ones that I would guess were younger would want the game conditions a certain way, or they would get mad, and "take their ball and go home." Rebellion was a prime example in my experience. I could not play the game fast enough for lots of people. I always thought they must be on speed. Rebellion has adjustable time lengths for turns so that you can take more time during the more strategic elements or busier parts. I'm guessing they wanted to play it more like an RTS. At any rate, when you didn't play like they wanted, they got bent out of shape. I would also agree with another poster who stated that the anonimity provided by the online experience tends to bring out behavior that would not normally be present in face to face encounters. The only addendum I would add would be that it is more and more common for people to be "in your face" these days. The cyber-experience may be eroding people's real life inhibitions. People who tend to push the limits of the rules, usually continue to do so when reinforced by desirable results versus consequence. Those "raging hormones" tend to make them as aggressive and competitive (chest beating) when dealing with guys as it does make them "wanting" of the female persausion. I would suggest adolescent years tend to offer a period of time at which the behavior and character of people tend to tested a little more (by biological means over which no one has real control). This offers no real excuse for bad behavior, at least in my opinion, because in the end, in a civilized society one is still subject to the consequence of choices they make and the resultant actions they take. I might suggest that we may have different tolerance levels of what we consider "reasonable" behavior amongst these young males. Maybe not, but I wouldn't consider my exposure to the "reasonable" ones within the realm of a plethora. I am strongly of the opinion that common courtesy amongst strangers is the hallmark of civilized society. Please note that I don't use the word "respect" in any way synonomous with the word "courtesy". Many people whine about wanting "respect". Respect is an earned quality which (IMHO) no one has earned by default on first meeting. However, they do deserve courtesy until their behavior dictates otherwise. As a another issue of thought, in as much as we would like this to be as free a society as possible, I believe people in general have to accept some responsibility for the situations they place themselves in. As an example, if a female walks into a strip club, she has to expect that she will raise the attention (probably undesireable attention) of the patrons. In an ideal world, it would be great if she could walk in without problems. Likewise, if a guy walks into a meeting full of feminists, he may not be the most welcome person either. A particular case in point was a nice couple who had a very nice house built in a really bad neighborhood. After they moved in, they complained about how bad the neighborhood was. A little diligence and research on their part, would have easily revealed the status of the said neighborhood before they "leaped". At any rate, when all is said and done, I hope the women in this forum are treated fairly, but in kind, they need to act the same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> FutBolhead!!! , I have to tell you, this is the best thread I've read on this forum to date, mainly due to [iMHO]and thanks to your contributions as well as a few others [ Fionn,etc.].Very interesting, enlightening reading, and I see many of my own ideas and thoughts expressed in your words.Thanks for the good read. I would,however,like to expand upon one comment which I agree with: <I could give a rat's behind what other's expectations of me are, I have to live with my conscience and what I do. Their hangups are their problems.> I agree with this totally.The problem then boils down to values and morals within ourselves.I used to wonder quite often how in the world people could shoot others in cold blood while robbing them for 2 dollars and 20 cents,or how they could con old people for a living? It finally dawned on me [ so I'm slow, so what ]that these people have no morals or values, or at least not a valid set, and that's why they're able to do what they do.They have no conscience they must listen to, no inner voice other than one continually spurring them on [ Bill Gates comes to mind, or some of the Talonsoft "brains" behind the resale campaign series "add-ons" ] to do whatever it takes to "get ahead".They answer to "self", just as we do,only there "self" has no checks and balances, no roadmap of morals or values. And how was our conscience first formed? By others [parents,relatives,teachers,friends] who explained there "expectations" of us, to us.They also taught us what society expects.The problem is, many weren't taught, and many who were had no guiding inner voice willing to listen,or taught themselves to deny it's existence and obtain there goals by any road possible.The cyber experience is making this much worse I believe, for the reasons you've stated so well in all your prior posts above. Anyhow,again, thanks for a good read . Dick

Would any of you gentlemen be interested in playtesting a 6 battle 15 turn per battle operation I've finished except for playtester recommended refinements? Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Grognerd_Fogman: I jus changed the scenario to a night battle with the editor. Took me a while to find it as I was looking for a "Pegasus Bridge" file...lol. Then I went to the description an noticed it's Ham-N-Jam. Nice work DR.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks, you guys be careful or my head'll explode Man,nothing like the praise of your fellow wargamers to make your day, thanks guys,much appreciated

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dutchman: I think you did a fantastic job designing the scenario Dick. I just finished reading a book about the bridge and was anxious to play the game and see how close to "real" it would play. Except for the night thing ( I believe they landed before 0100 and the whole thing was over in 15 minutes or so. The counter attacks went on through the night and the next day.) I was most impressed how the 2 tanks never made an attempt to pass the T junction of the two roads.( at least my game ). Historically well represented. The author of the book explained had they made the correct decision with the tanks and attacked the bridge area the Germans most certainly would of regained contol of the bridge. Most everything else was historically correct as far as I could tell. The book mentioned a nasty German sniper that caused a bunch of problems and the fact that the British actually used the 75mm AT gun after they took the bridge. Anyway, thanks for the pleasure of playing out a historically well presented scenario.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dutchman, That is the absolute finest compliment I've ever,ever received for a scenario.I thank you so much for it , it really means a lot.I won't forget it,it's inspiring to say the least. Many,many Thanks

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: 2) The hill supposed to represent the water tower didn't seem to be there. David<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Play it as the Germans and you'll find it !!! Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dutchman: I was using the orginal CD version, however I was not aware that you could edit/change the settings of the game. Just started exploring CM...there is so much to know. Thanks a bunch. Will try it out tonight....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Glad to help,hitorically most of the action took place at early dawn.I remember pondering whether it should be a day or night scenario when designing it, but can't remember 100% what I decided.I think at the time I was of a mind to make it nighttime for the sake of LOS and a more interesting battle,but forgot to change the setting to nighttime after playtesting.I also remember,however, thinking that by the time they landed on the ground [ taking into account when they left and how far they flew]it was awfully close to daylight anyway.This is what happens as you age, the mind gradually turns to lumpy oatmeal with no sugar added .At any rate, most likely the scenario should historically be set at night, so I've offered a corrected version at the Rugged Defense website.If you have more questions, just holler in my direction ! Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dirkd1976: Thank god I'm not the only one to experience this problem. I though I was missing something, or I was being an idiot. Thanks Mikeydz for explaining that a little better for me. I am still at work, I was gonna check it out after work today. Maybe someone should post this as a bug alert on the board (me?). I'd like to hear if more people have had this problem, and then maybe alert BTS if it turns out that it is a bug. Thanks for your help guys, at least I know I'm not crazy anymore!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dirk, I'll test this myself when I get home.If it's as you say I'll notify Charles that it's a possible bug, ok? Meantime you can post it here as a bug report, I'm only offering to make sure they get it [ as a buffer]? Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dutchman: I played the Pegasus Bridge scenario and my graphics did not show a night time situation. Do I have a setting wrong?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which version did you play? Load the original CD version into the games scenario editor, and change the setting in parameters to night, that should fix it.Or,you can go to the Rugged defense website and download the revised version.Or , I can mail you a revised version when I get home.How's that for trying to correct the problem ??? If all this fails,and you still see no night, it may be a video card issue. Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: [bYeah I thought it was a bug too when I first noticed it but I was gently informed that this was intentional for just those reasons. Madmatt <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hehehe dededede-dededede[ twilight zone music] That's how I found out too

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dirkd1976: Hey MERC, Thanks for the offer. I'm at work right now, but when I get home I'll try it out and write each step down and we'll see if you can replicate my problem. I appreciate your help. This is really bothering me, its also a pain in the ass when I try to play PBEM. Talk to ya soon. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Dirk, If I setup a DYO PBEM, I'm allowed to set preferences and pick my forces, that's all.I then have to send the turn to my opponent.He picks his units and sends the turn to me, at which point I can place my units within my setup zones.I then send the turn to him.The perceived problem may be that when the PC is allowed to pick, it automatically puts you in setup mode? I don't know, I haven't tried letting the PC pick my forces [ I don't trust it ]. Try this.Go ahead and setup a game as you describe, pick your forces and save the turn when it prompts you too.Mail it off to your opponent.I'll bet when it comes back you are then in the setup phase.Apparently it works differently if you allow the PC to pick your units? Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Freyland: If this old news, my apologies. Small bug with the editor. Set the scenario date to say, March 1945. Go to units, and the Americans can pick late model tanks, like the super pershing and they appear in the right column. No suprise there. But if you select these late model tanks, then go back to parameters and go to an earlier date (like November), you still have these previously selected tanks in the right column. You may now make scenarios with Superpershings in July 1944! Just a BTW. Jonathan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This isn't a bug, it's there deliberately for those "what if" scenarios! Dick

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dirkd1976: Hey Dick, If you want to play a small PBEM battle give me a yell. I could probably do a turn every day or two (we got a whole new phone system going in at work, and its getting kind of hectic). My email is dirkd@mint.net If your interested let me know!! Dirk, I'll holler bach atcha in a few days, got so many PBEM's going right now I need to clear them up first!I also still have some work to do for JuJu,Andreas and another friend as well.They may have a scalping party out looking for me now , it's been so long since I responded........ Then there's this person in the house who claims shes my wife ......shes always got me doing things like mowing yards,replacing chimney's,etc.Wargaming is a tough job, somebody has to do it that's why I keep plugging at it Give me about a week and give me a yell ifyou don't hear from me,ok?? Dick <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>