Harv

Can you please clarify a few things that come to mind from your post... Why doesn't a 5 point system discriminate between scenarios enough? From my perspective as someone looking for something halfway decent to play, I would say anything rated at 4 or 5 should be good enough for me. Having something rated at 8.01 out of 10 doesn't make it any better than something scored as 4 out of 5. Why is a score of 3.2 meaningless? To me it means the scenario is considered average, just as a more defined score of 5.23 , or even a range from 4-6 would in a 10 point system. Not trying to start an argument here, but as I'm (obviously) someone who firmly believes that a 5 point system is much simpler, clearer and easier, and would increase the number of reviews posted because of those points, I'm interested in knowing why people in favor of a 10 (or more) point system think it would work better in the long run? Harv

One thing about Top Ten lists and the like...they only really work if the scenarios are scored using a system accurate to 1/100. A five or even ten point grading system won't allow enough discrimination between scenarios. For example, if 60 scenarios are scored at 4 Stars, or 45 are rated at 4.5 out of five (9 out of 10), which ones should be in the top 10? If Keith moves to a "less precise" system of rating scenarios, the lists are essentially worthless by default. Harv

Alright Keith...why do you insist on interrupting us while we decide what you're going to be doing with your website? I'm not sure if having different options for different review system types is a good idea, as it may become somewhat daunting for us dumb dert farmer types to figure out which scenarios we can review, and then which system we should use once we get past Step A. And then we'd probably have to type sumfink after Step B. Or C. See, I'm confused already. I also (and I can't believe I'm saying this) agree with Rune's ideas he managed to blurt out with (onto?) his keyboard. And without lists and rankings, a logon system might not even be necessary. Just more thoughts in any case. Harv

Ah, poor choice of words on my part. Replace "gravy" with "mostly unnecessary fluff and stuff". The text reviews were an impediment when looking for a scenario, as I had to be very careful not to look at any spoilers while scrolling down the page to look at the scores. The averaged results are fine, but I prefer to see each individual score. As someone who was going to review a scenario I didn't like text reviews simply because sometimes I just wanted to score something, but not discuss it in any way. Some scenarios are just worthy of an "It Rocks!!" or "It Sucks!!", and some just need a score and nothing else really needs to be said. Either way, a separate optional page would solve both concerns rather nicely. I do think you've hit the nail directly on the head with your thoughts about using the Proving Grounds as the test site and the Depot as the "finished" location. That way the designers get what they need from the Proving Grounds, and the players (at least this one) get what they want from the Depot. Harv

Well, after watching all of the discussion so far, I figure it's time to weigh in with my five canuck bucks (or 2 cents US)... {Warning: the following is my opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.} First of all...why do we even have the Depot? What is it? It seems to me that it exists simply to have a central, searchable location for all CM scenarios. Period. Anything else is gravy. What I think it is Not is a place for designer feedback, ego-inflating/deflating ratings, flamewars over subjective scores or opinions or anything else that might interfere with the simplicity of the site. As a player, I could really give a hoot about weighting, numerical score vs stars or what kind of feedback the designer might get from the Deopt. What I want is to be able to quickly find a scenario that meets the criteria that I'm looking for at that particular moment, whether it be a huge fight with Finns in the snow against the AI or a quick tcp armor fight in the desert. As an added bonus I'd like to be able to see at a glance what other people thought of the scenario so that I could be reasonably sure that I would be playing a (hopefully) high quality scenario. So, if there is to be a change, in my opinion it should consist of the following... 1. Be simple for Keith to implement. Nothing else matters really, because if he can't or won't do it, it ain't gonna happen. 2. Use a 5-Star system with the checkboxes as has been mentioned. Why? Because it provides useful information at a glance. I do Not want to read through 15 pages of numerical scores accurate to 2 decimal places, spoilers, reviews, designer responses and flamewars just to find out that approximately 90% of the people who played it liked it. 1 5-star, 8 4-star, 1 1-star and 1 3-star ratings will tell me the same thing with a lot less anguish for everyone involved. All I (remember me...the player?) want is to know if it's crap or good. Again...simple. 3. Include the date/time the score was entered, and log the IP (if possible). If a flood of good/bad reviews come in at the same time, or occur at the same time every day, or originate from the same IP etc., then there is probably some abuse happening. No system will be infallible, but simpler is still better. 4. Lose the text review & author's response, or move it to a separate page like the AAR's are now. They generally have spoilers in them, and I'm also incredibly Not interested in reading a designer vs player flamewar while I'm quickly trying to find a scenario for a tcp game in the chatroom. I just want to see a page that shows if the scenario is generally considered to be good or not. See the trend here...it's simple. 5. Make it easy for me to score a scenario. I don't want to have to decide if I liked the briefing 7.5 times out of 10, worry that the designer will send me hate mail because I didn't like the way the map looked, or be concerned that if I don't give constructive enough criticism I'll be condemned to playing mediocre scenarios for the rest of my life. I just want to score it from Flushable to Frameable, and if there is anything that stands out (good or bad) I'll let the author know about it. Or not. That should be my option, not requirement. I fully understand that there is very little (or better yet none at all) feedback for the designer in what I have typed here, and that is intentional. I personally don't think that the Depot is the place for it, as it does nothing for me when I'm trying to find a scenario, which again (in my opinion) is the whole point of the Depot. Harv

MrSpkr... 1) Yes. 2) None I think. 3) Think brush-like, but different. Kinda. Different graphics for the seasons, but that's all I believe. 4) Good question. I've never noticed, but it'll be worth watching for now that you mention it. 5) I don't think so. dalem... I'm not sure, but I think Shocked worked this way in BB also. Much the same as how a Panicked squad can pull off a heroic feat, I think Shocked AFV's can still function normally on occasion. Or I could be wrong. Something else to keep an eye out for. Harv

Very good question, as I don't recall ever getting a gun damage with a Lee/Grant when I used them. However, after pinging a (seemingly) few thousand smallish caliber rounds off an M3 I finally got a gun damage result and... it looks like they both are damaged. I assume this is an engine limitation still, as the guns are listed as a 37mm + 75mm, and are almost treated as a single gun. Harv

You mean you've actually been off of it? I need pictures, or I write it off as just another rumor. Harv

So That's how you deal with those rocking horse men of the apecos. Or whatever. Thanks Jim. I owe you one for that. Harv

Alright Famine, that is bordering very closely on Grog-Talk and we'll have none of that here, unless we need some. Or something. Anyways, the answer to your question is...no. Harv

Sandbags... Sandbags are handled as a terrain feature by the game engine, and it can be assumed that their presence is always known due to advance scouting, aerial recon, prisoners etc. They represent a prepared fighting position, and can be used by any unit including vehicles. Harv

Here's a little information about some of the new things you'll be seeing in the CMAK demo, but were afraid to ask about. To begin with, we have some more detail about multiple gun tanks... The two guns are Not able to engage more than one target at a time. Only one target can be engaged, although either or both guns may fire throughout the turn, at the TacAI’s discretion. Multiple gun tanks can only be given One Cover Arc command, which includes both guns A Cover Arc command will Not cause the hull to rotate in the direction of the arc, but the turret will rotate normally (as in CMBB) in the direction of the arc. A manual Rotate command must be given if you want the hull gun pointed in a given direction. There are different ammo designations for multiple gun tanks now… “Normal” numbers, such as 116HE and 54AP refer to the ammo count for the turret gun. Numbers that end with a “7”, such as 20A7 and 32H7 refer to ammo remaining for the hull gun. HE will be H7, and AP shot will be designated A7. More to come. Stay tuned... Harv

This is one for the FAQ I think... Q: Will CMAK include the Fortifications = Casualties bug? A: Yes. CMAK will still include as many bugs as possible. Harv

*snicker* Like you've ever had {chortle} a good day [hysterical laughter] in a CM game. You're funny Lurk. Very funny. Harv Ps. I'll get that setup away shortly. Possibly. Pps. This wouldn't have been our game that you died-a-lot in would it? Or just every game you have armor in?

...and one (kinda) for Saskatchewan. Muahahahaha Loser Texans. Harv

{sigh} Yet once again, poor Olde Gnome-Like One, you are a dollar (5 bucks Canuck) short and a day late. As I am now semi-gainlessly employed once more for the near future, I must take a rain cheque (check? Czech?) on your offer of allowing me to be your own Personal Stalker for the next while. As I am a firm believer in doing a job right, or not doing it at all, I would hate to take on the job of being your Mortal Enemy and then not be able to follow up with threats, abuse, and suitable amounts of hatred on a regular and timely basis. Might I suggest, as a temporary solution, getting 66Cabride's phone number and asking him nicely to continue where he left off. You should be able to get a couple of days worth of abuse from that (at least until he gets banned), and you might even get to replace one of those fool horsemen (hasn't anyone heard of the horseless carriage yet?) as an added bonus. My apologies for leaving you in stalker limbo, but as soon as I get fired (shortly, I'm sure), I'll try to victimize you in the manner which you so richly deserve. Harv Ps. Looks like the Saskatchewan sneak preview is going to have more attendees than the Omaha {snicker} event. But that really isn't a suprise I suppose. Sure does suck to be in Texas (on so many levels) though.

Omaha? Hmmm Omaha? There are probably more people in Skerat... Sasqua... Serscratch... this desolate province I live in than Omaha. Omaha. Now That's funny. Harv Ps. Wed afternoon we can continue your humiliation as I snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Or something.

Yes Harv Edit: Dust clouds (vehicles, muzzle blast etc.) Will show up correctly. Dust "fog" will not. [ October 11, 2003, 02:17 PM: Message edited by: Harv ]

Kewl! Did ya read where good old carboozle66 refuses to participate until he gets an apology from Steve? All we need to do is snip that 200 mile modem wire (quote) Mr. Grammont (end quote) has running from his cabin in the middle of nowhere back to civilization and we'll never have to hear from carbohydrate66 again. And as an added bonus I'll get to stalk Seanachai by default. Now if only Wildman would fall face first into a food processor I'd be able to die a happy man. One thing I gotta know from his complete, total and embarrasingly public meltdown...if I repeatedly insult his (italics added by author) country, but that is also my (italics added by editor) country, and/or if someone insults our (italics adde...nevermind) country and I ask/provoke them to do it again, is there a problem? The lives of thousands of mosquitoes (and a couple of sheep) depend on the answer. Harv66 - Now accepting donations for the Stalk Seanachai fund

Send you A Turn!!! Who cares about your stinkin turn? I'm trying to get him to let me stalk him and you're worried about a turn? The smeely feelow seems to be ignoring me though. I dunno what it is...perhaps it's because I neglected to send him a postcard and/or one of his beloved loonies for the Save Seanachai Fund. I don't mind being ignored so much, but I really hate it when nobody pays attention to me. Oh well, his loss at any rate. Maybe I'll stalk Grog Dorosh instead. He is from Alberta, so he truely (falsly?) deserves it. Harv66 - Professional Deranged Canuck Stalker looking for victim...apply within.

Bah and feh. He can proclaim all he wants about what he might be, but I can tell you that he is definitely, most assuredly, positively a [sneer]eastern canadian[/sneer], and nothing better. I would be willing to bet (monopoly) money that he attended (or worse, was on the faculty of) one of those Morally Superior higher (socialized) learning {snicker} facilities like {gak} McGill or sumfink. However, I see no reason why we can't take a little trip to the stenographer's office just the same. All in keeping the records free of errors and whatnot of course. Harv66 - Acclaimed author of the #1 bestseller "Care and Feeding of Your Deranged Canadian Stalker - 2nd Edition."

Lurker? You're still here? I figured by now you would've taught your cat to play CM so you might actually have a chance to win a game. Do you still have that sticker on your bathroom mirror that says "Caution - Losers In Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear"? But, if you still want me to (insert verb) you around like a (insert noun) again, I challenge you to a U-Pick pure armor QB in North Africa, 1940, with me as the Allies. Everything else will be set to random. Sound good? Good. But more importantly...JOE!!! You're leaving again? Excellent. Look me up when you get back. I won't be here, but don't let that stop you. And to all the rest of you lewsers, slackers and lowlives...Bite me. But not there, I'll need that for later. Harv66 - Order your own personalized Deranged Canadian Stalker today. Supplies limited...Don't Miss Out!!

So here I am (over there), minding my own business, whining about stuff n things, and Berli gives me an idea. Well, maybe not just Berli, possibly Seanachai and his Eastern Canadian Mortal Enemy were in my brain (not literally) at the time also. But anyways, I decided I should probably stalk someone this winter. Not a lot of course, just enough to give me something to do and make sure that the victim keeps his doors locked and his gun in his hand (no, not that g...nevermind). I asked Rune, but he claims to have his own Personal Stalker already (where does JoeBob go on these "business trips"?). So then I thought maybe Seanachai would like a new Mortal Enemy for a few months. Seeing as 6 Carbohydrates (per serving) has gone AWOL, I figure he should have first right of refusal. So I'll ask you, you Canuck lovin' Olde One, the same thing I asked Rune...Waddya think Seanachai? Looking for a Mortal Enemy for the next few months? I eagerly await your reply. Harv66

Unless told otherwise, always play the attacker </font>

Naw, just the fashionable 3" standard heels. The stiletto types don't fit in rubber boots all that well I've found. Mace did warn me, but I had to try it for myself. Well, I will be in Edmonton on Oct 24 for about 4 hours with CMAK on a laptop, so technically [sneer]Alberta[/sneer] will be having a sneak peek. Unfortunately the only people who will have time to see it will be me, and I'll probably be too busy. Sometimes it doesn't suck to live in Scratchnwin. Not often, but sometimes. Harv