sage2

I think that being forced to think tactically in such a f***ed environment would be an absolute blast.

What about MOP gear for the initial invasion? Will US Soldiers be forced to fight in (and suffer the resulting fatigue) MOP gear?

Given the option between riding around Iraq in the most recent up-armored vehicle, wtih the most recent body-armor, and last year's model of each, I'd generally choose the former option.

"Abrams moving up the slope did look a little strange." I saw this at other times as well. It looks like too much of the weight is being shifted forward onto the front suspension of the abrams, as if it was decelerating, when it appears to be moving at a consistent speed or accelerating.

I really, really like the German movie 'The Bridge'. It's about some conscripts defending against an armored attack at the end of the war. The last battle scene from SPR 'borrowed' some aspectss.

Sniff. Man, that makes me nostalgic. I'm sad that I lost my original tag (sage) and member number (180?) when the board crashed just before CMBO was released.

Another vote for 1900x1200. I pretty much won't buy games that don't support my display in native mode -- they just look like c*** otherwise.

Is the AI smart enough to come up with its own plan if needed? By that I mean, can the scenario designer not fill in a plan OR use 1 or more of the slots for 'AI plan'? I ask because this system sounds similar in someways to the scripting in Steel Beasts PE, which I am not a fan of (the game rocks, but I don't like the scripting system, as the variation in a few 'plans' doesn't really give the AI opponent the more fluid, if sometimes braindead, feel of a more dynamic AI). [ February 13, 2007, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: sage2 ]

IRT 'looking dirty', it seems to me that there would be good milage in working on the textures to make the buildings and pavement look cracked, dusty, peeling and stained.

I wasn't real thrilled with MTW2, even after the first patch. It's still quite broke, IMO. However, I'd like to recommend the Europa Barbarorum mod for RTW. These guys have done an amazing amount of research and created an entirely new game -- much more accurate, thoughtful and interesting. Whoops, wrong cut and paste. Regardless, someone else posted an link to EB. [ January 05, 2007, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: sage2 ]

Actually... once the CM devs implement a text-based import / export system, the problem become technicaly simple. You could modify the text file in a spread sheet, with java script, using an online web interface, an exe -- whatever. For a solo dynamic campaign, an exe or java might be a good way to go. For an online operational campaign, an online web submittion system might work well. Yes, it's highly insecure... But I think people would accept that and institute other controls. For example, and operational campaign could compare the submitted values between the opposing players submitting results for the same battle. It would add some nice freedom to the game, and as long as the produced text files are © Battlefront games, and "No modification is allowed with intention to sell" Battlefront could keep comercial control over the feature. Sage

Why not have CMx2 engine allow a tab-delineated text file / spreedsheet import to create a battle and peramters, and then export results at the end of the battle? There would need to values for date, conditions, units, kills, damage etc... This would allow 3rd parties to create applications that would support operational+ level games OR a dynamic-persistent campaign system. It's clear that there's an interest in this from the number of folks that have hand-built dynamic-persistent campaigns and operational+ rules. If there are licensing concerns, make it clear that the exported or imported file can't be used or modified by any system or application that is not available for free. I think this is my first CM post in years. Sage

"It's the Shinnin'. D'ya wanna get soooed boy?

There was a post about this elsewhere. Essentially, this Op is broken, causing it to end prematurely after one battle. Hopefully, it will be fixed in patch. Sage

Freakin' bleedin' hell... The evil bastidge the design this Operaton should burn in torment for a good chunk of eternity (half?). The Stuka that showed up dropped a (500kg?) bomb plop in the middle of a tank formation that had momentarily clustered to get through a bottle nectk. I lost 3 tanks destroyed and 3 imobilized and had about 80 infantry casualties. The surviving tankers were cleaning the gore off their tanks for a week afterwards. Okay, I don't think he (Berli? Rune? I don't remember) should really suffer. It was great fun to play. :=) Quick feedback: I really enjoyed this op, but found it too easy. Despite being brutalized by the Stuka, I won a total victory the first battle, without needing recourse to the following battles. It was actually pretty easy -- I saved my arty fire, moved infantry up each flank, dropped the arty fire, and hooked around each flank with my infantry (1 battalion to the left, 2 on the right). The anti-tank guns of the defenders were almost useless -- I infantry rushed them from different angles and took them all out with only a few casualties. My tanks provided a base of fire in the open area in the middle, but were unecessary to win the battle. I think a 25-30 minute time limit per battle in the op would work a lot better. This would keep things a little more nerve wracking for the soviet player, and make such a slow and methodical approach useless. Aside from the casualties I suffered from the frickin' stuka, and a platoon that got beatup by arty fire, it was almost bloodless for the soviets. Sage

"Is Diesel vs Petrol a real issue, you ask? It is according to modern weapon designers. You'd be hard-pressed to find an armored vehicle today that isn't diesel-engined, and petrol-engined vehicles (mostly small armored cars) make designers cringe with worry." I feel like I'm picking on MikeyD... but doesn't the M1 use a gasoline turbine powered engine? Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not sure the designers cringe with worry. They just put a lot of armor on it. Sage [ October 03, 2002, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: sage2 ]

Finally something I know a little about. "Higher octane = more explosive." <--- This is not the case. In fact, the reverse is true. Octane is a measure of a fuel's ability to resist knock, i.e. predetonation. Higher octane fuel is necessary in high performance, high compression engines -- such as an aircraft radial engine. Otherwise, the fuel will detonate before a spark has been applied -- robbing performance and eventually destroying the engine. In other words, higher octane fuel is LESS explosive, is HARDER to combust, and, incidentally stores less chemical energy. Why do folks -- me -- spend$5/gallon race gas for a race car if the increased octane isn't strictly necessary to avoid predetonation? Because it's not full of state mandated emission reducing addatives, like chewing gum, that reduce the proportion of stored chemical energy. Unfortunately, this doesn't explain why Shermans zippo'd, either. Sage

Assuming the painful scream came from the crewman that was hit by the 88mm shot, it seems unlikely he was beheaded. On the other hand, the scream might have come from the fellow that covered with the mushy bits of the actual victim. You'd be surprised what CMBB models. :=)

Damn. There goes my life. :=)

I'm 90,000+. How long do you think I'm doomed to wait for?

I'm in Redmond -- never heard of you guys. I think that's totally cool, but don't know if I can on such short notice. Is there is a club "contact list" I can stick myself on? Thanks, Sage

Hmmm... the leaf was a bit smudged... yeah, that's it... couldn't tell whether it was silver or gold... Sage

"When Trumpets Fade" Acting: mediocre SoundFX: mediocre Music: mediocre Everything else: great. It's worth a video/dvd rental. The main character is morally complex. The story is ambiguous. I found the level of realism is the wounds to be striking, especially considering the movie's obviously low budget. It lead to great immeseriveness. There were other small things as well: the fact that planes are only heard when the weather is clear, the combination of mortar, and direct fire artillery used to break up an infantry attack (exactly what I would have done). It was not preachy at all. It captured a small piece of the hopelessness that must have been present in the Hurtgen forest. Finally, the movie (without ever using a map), had what I would call "tactical consistency". Rather than being episodic, with battle scenes that fall more into the needs of the story than, the places where fighting occurs make sense given the tactical context in which the story is told. I felt like at all time I knew where the soldiers of the story were, and why they were doing what they were doing. Lastly, it's a war story with no real heroes, but one in which extraordinary actions, fear, luck and hopeless all come together to guide the events. Some may critisize the character of the major, however, when his character is viewed in the context of the Hurtgen forest and the lense of the main charcter, he seems less cold blooded and simply interested in ending the fight as soon as possible. Besides, everyone who watches Hollywood movies knows that all majors are assholes. (j/k) I recomend this film. Sage

One always heres it in reference to modern assault rifles -- but this doesn't make any sense as one loads and THEN chambers a round, which is what the phrase is presumably in reference to. I was wondering if it was in fact of older derivation: to "lock" or half-cock a muzzle loading rifle in preperation for loading powder, place a cap on the nipple etc... As I understand it these older mechanism used "half-cock" as a safety mechanism to assure that the weapon would not fire accidentally -- my presumption is there was some sort of detente. Regardless -- does anyone have knowledge or sold evidence to back up the root of this phrase? I am quite curious. Thanks! Sage

I'm waiting for TCP/IP...