Hamstersss

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: Well I guess what could be a problem aer QBs in which you suddenly only encounter Rangers/Commandos if they are better equipped. Bit like the German players using a lot of FJs and GJs. But other than that... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes but those people are prats and will always make stupid prattish decisions. For the rest of us, the option should be there, it'd make the game more fun. Ha HA, take that BTS! More work for you! Yahahahaha! And while you're at it, model the bovine MG42 sponge! Is prattish a word? Doesn't matter, the argument still works. Disclaimer: I love Charles and Steve, these guys are, quite possibly, the closest things to the embodied spirit of early computer/board/RPG gaming. I demand they work 23 hours a day so that they can revolutionize other fields. Afterward, they will be deified and will reside somewhere beautiful (Buenos Ares is good, I hear) as god-kings. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PeterNZer: Got something against Bs As? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No but I do have a serious problem with your insistence on making off topic posts. It is rude. Please keep your personal life personal and if you want to discuss Buenos Ares, your PBEM battles, your Counterstrike proficiency or any other rambling thought in your head, do it elsewhere. There is a reason these threads have topics and this one's topic is not, "Gee PeterNZer, what's on your mind?" ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Good god, would you BA people get a room or go to AOL or, here's a strange idea, not post on this topic?!?! Is this the only place you can find people to talk to? ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Oh, the 10th'll be there for the Italian campaign (CM3, right?). Right, BTS? Right! ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

By absolute sighting I mean that you and I, playing the same side, see everything, when we should only see what OUR troops see. And I think that 4-player PBEM CM (I've tried it) makes drunken Sumo wrestling look like playing checkers with Uncle Moe. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-19-2000).]

Something tells me you guys aren't serious. You know, not to defend an unpopular position but, there was more than one reason BTS went from 2D to 3D. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

You're right, Madmatt, we got some new ideas out there and rehashed some old ones, there's not much left. I'll bring this up again in three or four months but I'm satiated now. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-18-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: From there I would have to part company because I cannot see how an open API could be made fiscally feasible. Oddly enough, I want creatives to reap nice fat rewards, and I hope Steve, Charles, Matt, and Dog get to roll about in great heaps of money.B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I respond only to this point as it seems to be misunderstood by the CM community. Modmakers make money for the original designer (In this case BTS) because, and this is the kicker, if you want to play the mod you still need CM. This is why Half-Life has sold over 2 million copies and continues to sell briskly. I argue for this because it is a win-win situation for me. If BTS never, ever releases anything to allow mods for the game, then I still have a kickass game to play called CM (Not to mention CMX+1). That said, I think there would be benefits to the community and benefits to BTS if they allowed and supported mods. The model works perfectly for FPSs and other standard games with standard marketing and distribution models, plus it increases community loyalty and interaction, which are very important for entertainment software. BTS may have looked into it and decided that their distribution and marketing won't benefit enough from it, as CM and BTS are definitely not standard. They may also think that their rabid fans are loyal enough, thank you very much. In either case, though I will still lobby for this well into CM13: Beyond Manchester United, I respect the company, their product and their business practices. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

It is a well known fact that Peng expirimented with smilies in his youth, haven't we all? I find this Smilie McCarthyism disgusting and without a doubt, un-cesspoolian. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Madmatt, Are you saying that BTS never developed any tools to place objects within CM? They have to reinvent the wheel every time they wanted to add a new object? ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

It is a good idea Peter and BTS has said they won't do it but I think this is a mistake. Now, as Slapdragon has pointed out, their not doing it is canon, and I have an extremely difficult uphill battle to convince them otherwise, that's why I've stripped down the proposal to the tightly reined one it has become, so that the realism of CM does not get compromised nor do any changes occur that BTS does not explicitly or implicitly approve. And David, there does need to be a delegation of authority for this to work. I don't see a problem with this and, if we make sure BTS doesn't need to touch anything but the best objects, than they won't be swamped by the approval process. Yes, if BTS had to respond to every crappy tank or stupid commando squad but, it would be an incredible hassle, but if the vast number of competent people here could create an infrastructure to lessen that hassle to a bare minimum, than the return on investment would be high enough to warrant the effort. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-18-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PeterNZer: Poor old Colombia! Another three special forces battalions. Why bother, a couple of decades and neither side has won. I guess just throw more money at the 'problem'. PeterNZ<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> CM23: Beyond Colombia! ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Hey Peter and Chup, this is a serious discussion, stay on topic or move on. I think we've crystallized the proposal at this, and correct me if I'm wrong: 1. BTS releases an API allowing for the design of objects within CM. 2. Mod-Making community creates models, skins and stats, testing them with the API. 3. Community review of models and statistics. This would be informal at first but eventually some people would stand out and this process would become more formalized. Noone gets paid for it, they do it because of their love of CM. 4. If any armor or troops pass the rigorous testing, they get passed to BTS, who, if they approve it, would implement it in a future 1.0X patch. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-18-2000).]

CM2 ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Excepting those people who continue to think mods are used for cheating, which they aren't cheaters exist right now and will exist forever while modmakers are hard-working SOBs that feel realism is as important as you do, I agree with everyone on this topic. Therefor, given the hard-compiled nature of CM and the emphasis on reality, I throw my support behind Dalton's method of BTS releasing a vehicle or soldier API and then vetting any submissions. One's first reaction is that BTS will get a lot of "Cool tanks" that have nothing to do with anything. Well, they look at a screenshot and read an E-mail and they reject it. Or, better yet, we look at a screenshot and read a description and reject it. The community can easily expend the manpower necessary for the first phase of weeding out user submissions. Somebody thinks they've got the perfect SturmTiger? Nope, nope, you've got the exhaust system all wrong. Hey look, when I run the armor API, it reports no penetration by Tungsten equipped 90mm. Next. Need I mention the guy who wants to submit and OGRE? Wow, dude, cool, two 60cm railguns. Um, next. But then there's someone who puts together the Brumbaur, models it perfectly, gets the armor right, the ammo load right, the penetration, the profile, everything. And you know this guy is out there, heck, there may even be two of him. And so we say, "Ya, kick ass." And the next patch of CM has the Brumbaur. How much work would that be for CM? A fair amount. However, the reward would be geometric. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-18-2000).]

Some of these arguments are just silly. If anyone looks at the Counterstrike Beta (Yes, beta), you will see that the mod is incredibly realistic, especially compared to the FPSs out there but even on its own. No big nuclear bombs or other crud, just weapons with recoil, realistic damage, no respawning, etc. Also, it would not throw the multiplay out the window, because you would play multiplayer only between the mods. eg Noone expects or can play multiplay between Counterstrike and Half-Life or Team Fortress Classic. If someone made CM:Korea, you would not expect, nor could you, play multiplay against CMBO. Finally, the core executable is compiled in such a way that it cannot be added to. However, this can be changed. And anyone who tells me that a bunch of you grogs couldn't get together and make sure all the stats weren't spot on totally accurate should have their head examined. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

I hear the elite ones have Jaguar suspensions. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Bullethead, Anyone who has tried that knows that it is too unwieldy to be tenable. This, coupled with the absolute sighting, makes for a flawed solution. Thank you, Schrullenhaft, for pointing me to BTS's comments, that was pretty much what I was looking for. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-18-2000).]

Ah yes, a rehash of an old, evil topic. I have brought this up, thrown my support when it was brought up but have yet to hear anything from BTS (It could be I missed it in the large number of multiplayer related topics I searched through). So, has BTS commented on implementing cooperative multiplayer in CM, CM2, et cetera and if they have not commented, would they? ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Poor Steve has no heroes or culture. That's ok, Steve, we could all bow down to the glorious Yankee achievements of McDonalds and Pepsi. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Juardis: True. But in order to use good tactics, one must first know the capabilities of ones opponents and his equipment and the limitations of yours. From "Juardis' Art of War" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Also true but if you think your post is anything but a string of unlucky circumstances, your play will be flawed and overly cautious. Nasty luck, mate, but not regular combat occurences. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

The only thing I've learned: Sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you don't, for those times in between, tactics count. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

When I opened up the most recent thread on full squad representation, I felt that a lot of people were negative toward the issue for no good reason. Many of the responses were of the, "Why would you ever want that," catagory and that bothered me. It was not, however, unexpected or something that caused significant or lasting damage and I'll tell you why. In a debate, the burden of proof is upon the challenger, not the status quo. Anyone who wants to challenge the way CM does things has all the work and if they fail to do so, it's their fault. If their case is only a little less convincing than that of the status qou, they have still failed. Many people start these debates with the idea that it's civil court, he who provides the best argument at the time wins. Well, it's not, it's criminal court, with the burden to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt your case, because Steve and Charles have all ready created the status quo. We are not equals here and it's more than a little childish to pretend like we are. Those who stand up and demand change had sure as hell better have compelling evidence to gain it, otherwise Steve and Charles, and the old-timers (The brown-nosers) will say, "Sorry, don't buy it" and be perfectly justified in doing so. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

I'd like to reply to one last point and that is the argument that these arguments will never come to a conclusion that, as one of you put it, one man's truth is another man's poison. That argument is wrong. Why? 2 + 2 = 4 If you told me 2 + 2 = 5, you would be wrong. Poison or not, there is a right answer to that and a wrong answer. If you try to build a plane and ignore physics it will not fly. If you run a particle accellerator and predict the results based on your gut instinct, unless your gut has a PhD, you will be wrong. There are right answers and there are wrong answers, this is the basis of science. We have always had unanswerable questions get answered and this will continue, regardless of how complex they are, until we answer everything there is to be answered or the human race is destroyed. ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein

Wow, now this is a mutha beautiful thread. First, to say that we will never understand the human mind and that computers will never be complex enough to do ignores one fact, that the mind is material. If necessary, we will build our own brains to understand them, though I think that is a little farther than 20 years, it is neither impossible nor improbable. Second, to say that a simulation must do everything everything correctly to be correct is a trap. If you want 100% simulation of WWII, that is far into the future, if ever, and has the likes of Schrodinger and Heisenberg standing in your way. These guys are the Bruce Lee and Mike Tyson of physics, so this is no mean feat. 99.99999% accurate, however, allows you to use some tricks and some caveats to achieve your result. While this is ugly when predicting the future, it is quite reasonable for understanding the past. We might not get the individual soldier's reactions right a lot in 20 years, but we will be damn close. As to the whole "Q-computers are only good with prime numbers argument," I agree that it is true now but I think that their basic design is such that they will move beyond that. It isn't very romantic but it will work, barring disasters in human society that prevent the expenditure. Like I said, my timeline may be off but the basic concept is just that, basic. People are not unknowable, rather they are complex, and complex systems are what Chaos Theory is all about. Remeber, Chaos Theory does not say that anything is unknowable or even chaotic, rather is states that complex systems with more components than can be tracked produce results that are inherently unpredictable. Once we have enough of the components, the system is no longer complex and chaos no longer describes it, much like simulations used to design new cars and planes. I will offer one line of retreat and that is the existence of something unknowable in humanity. If each of us has a soul or aspect that is greater than our parts, then this situation is moot. I don't believe we do but we might, as something like that, that is something outside our physical world, is inherently unprovable. The romantic in me would love for these simulations to always come up wrong and be unable to understand character, honor and duty but history has shown that humanity has an amazing ability to figure things out. Back to you, Scout. And by the way, I've been scared to all hell in my life and I've been in a couple amazing situations and if they manage to do these things I predict, I'm going to put together a terrorist organization and go Dhostyovsky all over their butts. Edited because, "Brain must slow down, typing must catch up" ------------------ Did someone compare this to the Ealing comedies? I've shot people for less. -David Edelstein [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 10-13-2000).]