tar

I think the real problem with "heat" in laptops isn't the cooling, but rather the battery life. Producing all that heat requires power, which is always in short supply in a mobile platform. The more energy the chip consumes, the more heat it will produce, and also the more electricity it needs to run.

I thought it was related to the destroying the gun and not harming the crew part of the thread.

OK, it's a bit beyond the time frame of CMAK, but...

I would expect that the only real advantage infantry enjoys in morale recovery from hiding comes from a reduced volume of incoming fire (as they may drop from sight, or at least be worse targets). I would not expect the same benefit for vehicles, since you have to get them out of LOS to reduce the incoming fire. Having them hide with enemies about that have LOS just reduces their return fire ability and is thus not recommended. In fact, I don't find Hide to be a useful command for vehicles in any game except perhaps CMBO in connection with Ambush.

Well, one way that gets better initial fire results is the difference in unit exposure based on their posture when fire is initiated. As long as units in run or walk are more exposed than when taking cover or using a command like advance, then all is well. Shooting at targets unexpectedly usually means that you catch them all standing instead of using cover. After all, if they are using the available cover, then they aren't really walking into an ambush, are they?

I remember GRUNT. I also recall that it was one of the few tactical games that emphasized line of fire problems with friendly units getting in the way and limiting firing opportunities. If that makes it into CMX2 that will profoundly affect the tactics. One would need to keep open fire lanes for support weapons like MGs and the overwatch groups. It will also make firing on a line of enemy units much more devastating. [ June 19, 2005, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: tar ]

OK, you don't get ammo, but the other information you ask for is shown in the log/info line at the bottom of the screen when a unit is selected. It shows for both friendly and enemy units. P is for people and S (I think) for vehicles.

The size of the units that you actually maneuver is typically about a platoon for infantry units and most vehicles. Support weapons tend to be maneuvered in smaller units like sections or individual weapons. Some vehicles are also deployed as individuals. A lot of this also depends on the particular size of the engagement. In a regimental tank battle, you won't want to maneuver individual tanks, but in a smaller, company-sized engagement you will want the flexibility. This is all user-controllable, so pretty much everything from squad size up to company size units can be maneuvered together.

I managed to get CMAK running at 1024x768 on the ATI Rage 128 card. I had to do some experimenting with trying different color depths (Thousands vs. Millions) but one of those choices made it all work.

Well, I would guess not "buy", since Xcode is distributed for free.

Well, I finally managed to use trucks effectively in CMBO. I was playing the Germans vs. AI in the Carentan v2 campaign. The trucks were part of my one platoon mobile reserve force. I had them set up for the 2nd (night) and 3rd (day) battles. In #2, the reserve wasn't needed as the front held. In battle #3, the reserves were instrumental in throwing back the American attack on my right flank. The trucks ferried the reserves to woods and pines along a road from whence they proceeded to reinforce the original platoon of defenders and throw back the enemy. This was so successful (on top of really devastating panzerfaust actions in the first two battles) that the game ended at the end of the third battle (of 9(!) scheduled). The nice thing about this map was that it was actually large enough that having a motorized reserve made some sense. There was also enough covering terrain that allowed a dismount while still out of LOS of the enemy, and then rapid movement to contact. It was also a bit shocking, returning from CMBB and CMAK, to see how rapidly infantry can advance. I had one of my HMGs overrun by infantry before they were finally destroyed. It was a bit discombobulating after getting used to the more effective suppression model in the newer editions.

Well, in fact the usage panel from the American Heritage Book of English Usage (1996) reports that 66% of panel members had no objections to the expanded meaning of killing a large number of. Only 26%, though, found the expansion to inanimate objects to be acceptable usage. The OED (Oxford English Dictionary) lists four word senses, the first two of which are labeled obsolete: And finally, for the metrically inclined, one could consider it 1/10th of a spouse.

OT: "native Austrians". I suspect that the phrase is just meant to underscore the fact that the Austrians are the people at home. Perhaps best translated as "einheimisch". This is to distinguish them from the tourists. "Zugereiste"? Or is that just a Bavarian term?

I guess you need to look for either a wired version of the wireless mouse you have or else try to find another suitable mouse with a tail. Hmmm. Shouldn't wireless mice be called hamsters?

Well, there are people who do lots of things with computers that aren't games. Actually, depending on the device and the newer Windows operating systems, you need to do a dismount before removing the device anyway -- for example, the little USB memory sticks. At least with the Mac it is a consistent interface: All removable media has to be dismounted before removing. And this is enforced by the operating system for most devices. I'm not completely sure I like the eject button on the keyboard either, but that only affects certain models. The new iMac G5s have slot-loading optical drives, so there isn't any tray to open. I'll grant you the standard mouse, but it's easy enough to get a 3rd party multi-button rodent, and the latest OS has plenty of support for it. In addition to the much nicer integration and consistency of the interface, Macs have the wonderful feature of being effectively virus and spyware free -- at least as long as you exclude things like Microsoft Word macro viruses. Leave it to Microsoft to pioneer cross-platform virus vulnerability...

Base gun armament was two 7.9mm MG-17 machine guns (500 rounds per gun) and two 20mm MG 151/20 cannon (125 rpg). Well, this may not match the description in the unit screens, but the Hs 129B-2 could be configured with various gun-packs in the centerline position, instead of bombs. Popular fittings were a single 30mm Mk 101 or Mk 103 cannon (30 rounds) for anti-armor use. Alternately, four 7.9mm MG-17 machine guns (250 rpg) could be carried. A centerline gun would preclude most of the bomb load, although it was possible to carry 2xSD-50 or 48xSD-2 bombs on wing racks. Some other interesting armament options were a 37mm BK 3,7 antitank gun (which required removing the standard two MG-17s). The Hs 129B-3/Wa had a 75mm anti-tank gun, usually a PaK 40 with 12 rounds, but sometimes a BK 7,5 instead.

Or if the threads are old enough, the images that are referenced may not be around anymore. This shouldn't happen to fresh threads, though.

Of course, part of the problem is that NOBODY actually TRUSTS the briefings.

I think you are being a bit unfair in your complaint Toad, especially since you seem to be complaining both about (1) Lack of support for OS X. (2) BFC spending resources to write a new graphics engine that WILL support OS X. Far from abandoning the Mac platform, it seems BFC is trying as hard as they can (economic realities permitting) to get a new game out that works on both windows and OS X. Although I also lament the inability to run CMx1 under OS X, I understand the problems. The only thing I found a bit odd was that I've never seen any description of precisely which of the unsupported RAVE calls (in Classic) the CM series relies on.

Hmmm. In CM, on the rare occasions I've had one, I never had a problem with MG jeeps running out of ammunition. I always seem to run out of jeep first.

Of course one has to remember that soldiers who "decide to sit out part of the battle" is modeled in CM by casualties. I'm not sure if any of the casualties return between operations to reflect the rounding up of stragglers. The decision to remove these troops as casualties is a reasonable modeling decision, since they no longer contribute to the effective fighting force, and there is no provision in CM for splitting up squads (automatically). One certainly wouldn't want to give theplayer control of such combat ineffectives, since they would certainly be used in a gemey manner.

But only between battles during operations.

Actually napalm is still in the active inventory (Mk77). It was reported used in the 1991 Gulf war by the US Marine Corps. More details: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/mk77.htm

Hmmm. So should machine gun jamming be on an optional switch as well? It isn't something that can be practically avoided by the players. There isn't anything a player can do to influence the chance of jamming. It sounds an awful lot like the bogging issue, only it happens to more common, less valuable units. But is seems to be in the same general category.

Well, sure, but I think the key point is "stay together until they make it out of trouble." I can easily visualize informal form-ups as they withdraw to a rally point or other area out of combat, there to await the reorganization that Brent describes. I doubt that they would reform "in the heat of battle" into effective combat units except in the most rare of cases. Now part of this is likely to be one of perceptions. History more often records the heroic exceptions of ad hoc groups coming together rather than the more common, but mundane reality of straggling in small groups back to rally points. I would expect that the only fighting such ad hoc groups would be likely to do would be that which was unavoidable (for instance if they were being overrun by attackers). I doubt they would go out on their own looking for trouble.