chrisl

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbott: ook ook ook<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That was a little better, but you still need some work. Try again. Put a little more feeling into it.

Wire. Minefields MMGs (or MG42 if you're playing german) Arty Plus infantry to pick on the attackers after they get stuck on the wire or channeled by the minefields. If you can put the wire where it won't be seen until the attackers already are on top of it then it's even better-- they'll get chopped up in the open on the wire. If they've just come through a minefield to get to the wire, they'll be even happier.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbott: [QB] I'm a lamer and can't even insult Aqua Velva man effectively<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Abbot. Abbot. I don't know what to say to you. Sure, you've been around a while, and may even be a reliable opponent. You might even play well with others. This is a problem-- if you play well with others you clearly don't belong here. I don't particularly like it that AquaFresh keeps hanging around here, but at least he's annoying. You're just some main board wanker who got burned out on the ladders and came slumming in here for a rest. You're way too bland, and not in a "I'm a polite little Hiram but WHOOOSH I can cut loose with the flamethrower more viciously than Peng when you least expect it" kind of way. I demand that Aquaman not sent you a setup until you can at least be a little abrasive.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PawBroon: [QB] Cyrano of Bergerac <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It takes a frog...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jack Arilliac: blah blah social behavior blah rant oook ook<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> One of the more important purposes that the thread serves is to provide a reliable supply of opponents who will finish games, even when they are on the wrong side of a grossly unbalanced match, and preferably finish them with quality play or an honest surrender. It's valued more to play well (or even a little badly (yeah, jd, I'm talking to you)) and lose in a hopeless scenario or QB than to play the same set of parameters over and over just to get another victory on the ladder.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASL Veteran: About the only thing I would be (mildly) curious about is whether either Peng or Seanichi are even still posting in the "Peng" threads.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They are indeed still posting to the threads. And the name is spelled Seanachai. Also, though I just signed up for a non-pool team game (involving one other pooler and two normal people), the Pool does not typically involve team play. There is a strange hierarchy that we mostly ignore, but sometimes appeal to when it serves to irritate.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dunnee: nukes. just wanna see a couple battalions instantly incinerated.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They're already there, but you can only get them as allies in June-July 44 (14" guns have much the effect you want, especially if you get a treeburst). I'd ask for an AI that can give and receive taunts. That's right, a TauntAI. I can't play against the computer because it doesn't squeal when I kill its tanks, and doesn't mock me when I run a bunch of infantry into an ambush. I don't care if the AI can or can't beat me, I just want it to be more fun to play against. [ 05-06-2001: Message edited by: chrisl ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by harpooner: Mr Spkr, Haroog Texan swine...challenge expected and accepted. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Let me know if you need a scenario, young squire. And lay off those smilies-- they'll draw a Penging. I must compliment you on the nice job you did on the MrMouthpiece. Please do as well at handing him his ass.

The peng threads are all about playing the game. Nobody argues about running with MG42s, nobody worries about the thickness of the mantlet on the KT, unbalanced force selections are de rigeur (often set up by a third party). It's not whether you win or lose--it's how well you taunt your opponent in the process. The taunting is pretty much the same thing that went on over board games 20 years ago, but now it's on the web.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by R_Leet: [QB]Mensch, that is an evil trick.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What do you mean, evil trick? It worked when I tried it, except the time when I accidentally made the stats screen come up six times and it changed the unit name to Bambi, instead of Rambi, and the little 3-D man turned into a deer and got shot by a sharpshooter. I think the deer was made from the horse model that they put in and didn't use, but we'll probably see it in CM2.

It's come up a few times, and if you do a search and wade through the responses you might find it, but IIRC, the special units (rangers, SAS, whatever) were too small a fraction of the available forces to justify the time necessary to put in a well researched implementation. There seems to be a general philosophy in the design of CM that it is built to model things in a pretty generic way, with enough variable parameters so that you can create forces that give good approximations of the expected results. Modeling every last unit that got used probably wouldn't be cost effective. I also forgot to say that when you design the Rangers in a scenario you should load them up with extra ammo, rifle grenades, and the occasional demo charge. There is probably hope for what you are asking, if you can wait a few years. CM II is likely to be more of a game engine with unit and map editors. If you ask now, and make a good case, BTS might be convinced to add a squad editor (if they haven't got it on the list already) that lets you add men armed with various available equipment to the squad (like make a US tommy-gun squad, or add a captured MG42 to a Brit squad). I would bet that they won't let you edit the weapon characteristics, but you might get them to let you pick and choose squad composition.

There are a couple of ways that you can sort of simulate this-- the one already described is to let the move orders end (or cancel them at the start of each turn) and use that time to fire. I like to plot orders for my tanks that are all fast orders from one bit of cover back to safety (a few turns later) with a large number of waypoints. Interspersed will be very short segments of either move or hunt, depending on what I think the targets will be. If the tank will only have one target and it's likely to kill it, then I'll use hunt. If there are multiple targets that will be shooting back, I'll use move. The difference is that with hunt, the tank will usually stop and shoot until the target is destroyed, and with move it will just slow down. If there are a lot of things shooting back you don't want to come to a full stop and park there. If a tank stops in hunt and you want it to continue, you can always change the waypoint to fast at the start of the next turn. Not exactly what you were looking for, but it works well.

You can't buy them in a QB, but you can make them in a scenario, except for the special equipment parts (climbing, skis, etc). Take rifle platoons, make the troops a mix of cracks and elites, give them lots of support weapons (bazookas, mmgs, hmgs). They won't have quite the level of squad level auto weapons that you want, but they'll do pretty well.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elvis: I am not losing it I blame either rune or society. They are to blame.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> While I agree that blaming it on Rune will get you sympathy from many quarters (jd in particular), I think that society is a better choice-- it would also allow you to rationalize your impending loss in our quick-battle. You could also blame hiram/Phil, for breaking your concentration by unexpectedly beating you (and winning against you at CM once, too).

As above, you should probably contact BTS. If you send them an email and don't hear back right away, don't worry. They're a very small company but very responsive to customer contacts. If you don't hear back in 2-3 days, send them another polite note-it's unlikely that it will take longer than that, and if you send a lot of emails it just fills up their in box and makes everything slow down.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by harpooner: My sqire match with LEEO has turned into a raging circus with armored platoons popping up right and left from the far corners of the battlefield. I've bagged a couple of trucks and a jeep and two greeyhounds. He's knocked out two Pumas. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's it? How many reinforcements have you got so far? That map is too small to have that little destruction. I want to hear about blood and gore!!!

I just got the rules in the email and this one bothers me a little: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Player b: Anything that doesnt have an internal combustion engine.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Does this mean that Oddball gets all the leaf-blowers, air-compressors, and power-washers? Bastards. [ 04-29-2001: Message edited by: chrisl ]

Uh oh. It appears that the cesspool has sprung a minor leak. Do you non-pooligans want to take this in there (where it's wet and dark and smelly, and the rice most certainly isn't white), or are you too afraid of the abuse? Foobs is a permanent member of the lower class of the pool, so it might be unseemly for me to be seen fighting him, but so long as he dies quietly it's probably fine.

Lorak -- get some soft chalk or water soluble poster paint and mark lightly in the tome: chrisl: tactical loss scum sucking, beltway dwelling, hot air spewing, about the parameters lying, sherman dying lawyer: barest margin of tactical victory.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lawyer: so you haven't heard that he was beaten so badly that he offered to surrender two turns ago?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And more amazing how you'll pull a draw out of a sure victory. but it's never over until the AAR screen comes up. An offer of surrender isn't a surrender until the cmd-U is confirmed. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> How many of you expect to lose a Sherman to potato mashers? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think the potato mashers got any of the Sherms-- two to flamthrowers though, a couple to the pillbox, two immobilized by on-map mortars, a couple to the KT, and one to the 105. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Anyway, I own ALL the flags<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Are you sure about that? You still don't seem to grasp how FOW applies to the flags as well. But given that it's an armored attack against basically AT weaponless old men, the immortal words of OldGrumpyStumpFetishist quoted in my sig apply. And if you can't win handily on an attack, you ought to be playing hiram/Phil.

Oh, almost forgot-- I vote for (.

It's starting to make me think of Bolo, which you probably only know if you're a mc user. It was a tank game, with a top down view, where you drove around a little island and captured supply centers and pillboxes (which could be moved to defend your supply centers). There were hooks for the development of things like AIs and mapping tools, because it had full FOW. It had the advantage of 2D, and very simple units, but people built some fancy plugins. I could imagine there will eventually be a CM where you have control over your own units as now, but essentially full FOW on your flanks with respect to your partners' units. Not in CM2, but maybe CM53 or so.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by *Captain Foobar*: I am leaving for May 2-6th to washington DC. We have a couple options, and I need a vote from the 3 of you on what you want to do. d) buy a laptop for the trip so I can play on the road <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I like (d). Any of the options is fine with me, as long as Rune doesn't get to pick the units.

Game updates: Lawyer: Jake just sent me what may be the among the funniest streaks of bad luck I've ever seen. He's basically obliterated my defending force of old men with demo charges and flamethrowers (defending on an open map where half the flags are in the middle of nowhere), and immobilized my KT a long time ago (only mobile AT weapon (of three total) against an armored attack), and while delivering the coup de grace, his luck turned to moldy jello. One sherman toasted by an FT(catastrophic explosion, but the full crew of 5 got out safely!!! LOL), his only 76 suffered a gun hit, and the Greyhound that was occupying one of the flags managed to hurl itself in front of a PF-30 fired by half a rifle squad that was out of C&C with a global morale of 16%! I don't know where those guys got the nads to get that close, but what a surprise. I was expecting them to get hosed by the flex mg but was trying to put on a good show for jake. I suspect he might have gotten a PBEM file editor and tried to cheat, but it was one for 1.05 and doesn't quite work right on 1.12. If his luck continues, he may only squeak out an allied tactical. Serves the lying bastard right- here's how we started: Jake: "wanna play an armored attack?" innocent me: "sure" Jake: "Here's the file. Oh, btw, I think I may have messed up the force selections" (it turns out he selected for me "useless wanks with no AT capability beyond 30 m on a map where half the flags are greater than 150 m from cover and there's a big ass armored force on the way") me: "wow, that force looks like crap. What a scumbag, but what the hell, it will be an interesting way to die" Elvis: he started having file trouble just when things heated up. Moderate damage on both sides. Mostly an arty exchange so far, but he sure does like to remodel villages. I did get revenge on his sacrilegious priest that blew up the church. He also just threw away a full platoon probing my front lines. Big thrills on the way, much blood yet to be let. Oh, and I almost forgot-- an almost full rifle squad of Jakes just surrendered to my immobilized KT. I'm going to start calling him boxcar jake.

Oddball - send me a note. Your email doesn't seem to be in your profile. I'll play either grunts or tanks, but one question: are halftracks part of the armor force or the infantry force? May as well play them as armor for this kind of thing, since they're less valuable for transport during a battle unless the map is large.