Priest

(Ducking for cover over that last statement!) [ 08-17-2001: Message edited by: Priest ]

Voodoo 3 2000 or 3000 PCI. I have one in my secondary PC and it works like a charm. $60 nowadays!

This is what MaddMatt is hearing on the bridge of the USS BTS "Captain I doon't ha'e the power!" HI MOM! CHA CHA

Sorry! Oh yeah forgot HI MOM!!!! [ 08-17-2001: Message edited by: Priest ]

Corn, This is the standard way that internet business is done. Have you ever bought from Ebay or Amazon or EB games or any other plethora of online businesses? I am sorry you are having such a bad experience with your first time buying (it would seem) from the internet but this is the way it works. Your credit card was processed at the same time the order was processed to be shipped. Now I do not know how experienced you are with business but let me explain how it works anywhere (online or not) in the world. You the customer pick a product in which to purchase. Then you the customer pay the seller of the item to aquire it. Then the seller processes the transaction (whether it be a ring up at a cash register or a credit card charge) and then you the customer receives the item. You chose to purchase Combat Mission, you then made BTS aware of your intent and provided your credit card number to purchase the item. BTS has processed this order by charging your credit card and at the same time sending your purchase order to the company that handles shipping. Now your order will be shipped and you will receive it as fast as the US postal service can get it to you. This is how the world of business (especially online business) works! Period. End of discussion. It seems odd to me that so many people have had great experiences going through the exact same situation as yourself and yet you see it in a different light. I suggest that you be patient and preserve the right to participate within the community that supports this game as you will find the group not only to be helpful but entertaining. I doubt you will be given many more friendly responses from the members of this board. Please email MaddMatt directly as the only person you are hurting is yourself here and your chances in being able to use this forum, which is a wonderful resource.

Oh btw Lewis I like the CA personal attack it seems to add something. Hmmm showing your true colors are we?

Hehe I would but you keep speaking to me about unrelated issues from your very first post. And if you notice I am speaking on the subject to everyone else, but seeing as you could not keep on target for more than a couple of sentences throughout this entire thread since posting in response to my original very non-assuming simple statement it seems it is you that needs the luck And I would not worry about my "attention" given to you when actually you are more of a distraction. Also do not accuse me of putting words in your mouth, instead think before you speak. You said you were impressed with no one who likes things the way they are, I simply asked if you we then not impressed with BTS because they seem to like the game the way it is? What is so wrong with that? Answer the question instead of trying to back down with a big bunch of machismo for a shield. Just my thoughts.

Remember that playability plays a large role in the decision that BTS made for the 60 second turn. 5 minutes may be more realistic (maybe) but it is a lot less enjoyable for the average player and induces a lot of sit around time. The goal is to mesh the player input and balance it with the TacAI. 60 Seconds seems at this point to be the magic number. Just what I think and what I have read from BTS in previous posts.

reword the briefing and call it something else other than the name it had in ASL and then do not label the mission in the "ASL PACK" or anything to that effect. You should be alright then (but I am no lawyer)

Oh yeah and thanks for the good words Tripps. I do try to hold a discussion whenever possible. Understanding others and their ideas can only enhance the community. [ 08-17-2001: Message edited by: Priest ]

You are right Lewis and I apologize I was wrong. You never mentioned respect and I am sorry. So you saying you are not impressed with BTS then? They do seem to like it (they defended their position in other threads concerning LOS) and as far as I can tell no change has been scheduled for CMBB so you are not impressed with them. Good to know. Oh yeah and you responded. Hmm! For the record I am very impressed with BTS and the work they have done. Considering the size of the team and the product produced it is an amazing project indeed. [ 08-17-2001: Message edited by: Priest ]

Just to clear something up I am not in favor of a "remote LOS tool" but in favor of what we have now. And I too am against people who say do not discuss this but in this thread I stated my opinion and Lewis chose to attack the thought and then get personal. Fine whatever that is old. More importantly I find it disturbing that Lewis stated that he has no repect for those of us who agree with how it is now, so Lewis do you not respect BTS? Hmm but then again you will not answer. Again too bad. Tripps As I have stated I think that any game can be inmproved but I think this should be low on the totem pole as the system in place works and I do not think we can implement a system that will work without hurting another area of the game at this point.

I agree with you on the whole "change" issue, my statements were to prove a point that change is not always good, and of course no change is also not always good. The games you point out are excellent examples. One note is that i am talking about sequels though, CMBB, CMII engined games based in WWII, and such. As always a game (and many other things in life) can become better but I believe that the Combat Mission series is already so good that I would hope for evolution not revolution in the development of the game.

Triumvir you have a good idea there but I think it takes away from the skill of the game. The fact that it takes some "skill" but not too much is a nice balance in the current LOS system that I like. I feel that if you use the system you describe you are giving it away somehow. It would not prevent me from playing the game mind you but I would feel it lost an inherent good quality.

The reason it gave them away was that the gases escaping from the muzzle brake would stir up a large dust cloud giving away the position of the Panzer IV/70. This was because the gun was so close to the ground in normal firing position. The dust cloud would also hamper the aquisition of targets as the commander and gunner could not see through it also. The muzzle brake itself was to ease the action of the gun during firing so that re-aquisition and re-alignement would be faster.

Uhm you started this line of discussion Lewis not me. I stated I like the LOS how it is and you choose to disect the idea. I replyed and by your third post you were attacking my character not my idea. Also after re-reading your posts you did not once say "limited". You did imply it but it could have gone either way. Also I never said "never". I asked questions that you did not answer. Instead you state that this whole discussion is stupid and you are no longer going to participate. Well for the last two posts I have been trying to discuss the LOS issue and you have seen fit to instead try to insult me and then back out of the discussion. The fact that you only "sped read" through the thread should have prevented you from commenting to harshly to anyone on the thread. Ideas are about presentation and yours in this case is lacking. You have yet to answer questions that I have brought up. You have wasted an oppurtunity to have another understand your ideas. Too bad. Here is another question, do you plot one or two movements (one pending and one confirmed) or do you turn the pending into the confirmed? Is the rest of the map greyed out? These are legitimate questions because unless they hide the map a great deal I am sure many players can judge terrain and layout of the land as I have stated before. How do you plan to stop people from using grass textures and other sources (gridded lines) to manuever around this (if the map is not "greyed" out). The point is to stop "terrain scouting" is it not (it is the only thing this would hinder)? Am I missing something? Instead of trying to put me down how about explaining it. Oh but that is right you are no longer going to answer me or anyone else you feel is.....what intelligent and will challenge your ideas. Lewis in the majority of the posts I have read after searching the archive it seems that a good deal of them deal with complaints with the game as it stands and changes you wish to impose. Also in many posts you are aggressive towards others who question you. Do not know what is up with that but it is interesting that you blame me for the similiar things when it is quite the opposite it seems. In retrospect I think the splode line in the third post (i think) was funniest. Lewis feel free to send me that setup file and you can start taking pictures of your tanks sploding from any level of viewing or LOS you want. Hey Germanboy I think I found my Tero

You know it is funny that you say that, seeing as I am one of the folks who has started many a thread about not flaming and also have strived and apologized many a time for my errors. Labeling me as a flame war particpant is really sad as many long time readers know that I am not. Too bad you missed the boat on that one too. Hmm and the "WE" statement that I am referring to is us, the forum community, as a whole. If you were to read many of the early (demo) threads you would see that the greater majority of folks (that is the WE I am referring to) did praise BTS's efforts. Next I already stated that BTS takes it's customers very seriously but as I said it is still a business. Also I said your idea is fine if it is optional (did you even read my post)unless it impacts the game in a poor way. And what is really funny is that I do have Quake III on loan from a friend. Of course it is to play two mods that use the Quake III engine and have nothing to do with Quake at all. In fact I have never even started up Quake but am an anime fan so I am waiting for a DBZ and Gundam mod. Both of which have a complete physics re-write of the engine. Finally and probably most hilarously is that you state that one should not be able to issue orders outside of LOS. Now if I understand that correctly that means that if I have a tank and I want to move it over a hill I have to move it to the crest of the hill first? Then next turn I can move it down the hill because I can then see it? So instead of cresting the hill I simply move up it and then stop and then move down it? Because if I issue move orders over the crest of the hill then I am issuing orders out of line of site aren't I? That is what you said isn't it? LOS from a committed move? So I can look from waypoints after I hit a "confirm" button? And how does this help the fact that already if I order my troops over a hill and there is a COY waiting hidden on the reverse slope hidden my troops get cut to shreds. The fact is that even enemy troops in LOS properly positioned (hidden) are still out of sight. More importantly when did we start trying to outmanuever terrain instead of the enemy? Many commanders knew where good ambush spots were within an area but did not know if the enemy had taken advantage of those spots. It is up to us as the player to find those spots. Does this mean that we zoom around at level 1, well maybe, I know I do not but it is possible. Is it worth changing and possibly mucking up the game (u think this system will fit right into the game engine or even be executed properly)? I doubt it seriously. Username I did a search on the many other threads that you have chimed in on from way back in the FIONN days. Ahhhhh the good old times. Anyways I am still trying to look for the response on one thread from Steve who told someone (just who was that?) that if he/she did not like CMBO's presentation to go make their own game and the person said they would or something to that extent, of course up until that point they said they could make a better game. Hmm still waiting it would seem! So in summary (because it seems you did not fully read my last post) 1.) Your proposal saying that I like to flame folks is laughable considering my history on this forum. 2.) Still have not heard a solid arguement of why this LOS/Committed orders optional rule is so needed or special. 3.) I am a very picky game player and choose few games in which i play which span a number of genre's none of which is FPS unless you include mecha tactical combat and fighting games along with Rogue Spear to the FPS genre. In fact the only games on my PC right now are CMBO, Max Payne, and Day of Defeat. Really if you think my "gaming" background is suspect please feel free to send me a setup file. This "Quaker" would be happy to entertain your superior "Grog" intellect even though I probably research and study WWII as closely or as much as anyone on this board. [ 08-16-2001: Message edited by: Priest ]

Actually User I have played very few of those games at length but I do happen to know quite a bit about games and do follow the market. Hmmm so username you do play Combat Mission right? So when you draw little lines for movement on the screen is that realistic? Did folks string out colored rope before they moved in WWII? Hmm did not know that. Well I guess you learn something everyday! (note sarcasm!) And your reality setting is fine if it can be implemented without hurting the rest of the game and/or impacting BTS's goals for system requirements but I would put it down very low on the "things to do" list. While it may be unrealistic what really do you gain from doing it. Also as long as you can "fly" all over the map I can tell contour and such from level 4 most of the time so big deal. Heck if you use certain grass textures you can tell contours in even the top down views so do not give me a speech on how not using view 1 has anything to do with "scouting" a maps "sweet spots" because it does not. So to achieve your non-gamey totally realistic LOS rule we would have to program an entire system, not allow a free roaming camera, and lock the mod community out of terrain features. Yeah sounds like a well thought out super idea. (again note sarcasm) Sorry Username but your idea does not wash. Too many other factors can achieve what you are trying to change and you are targeting the wrong culprit as view one is a "fun" view for watching explosions and taking screenshots (all I really use it for) and the LOS tool which is simple and easy and wonderfully informative. Now I agree using the LOS tool anywhere is ludicrous you need to have a unit there to use it. So Username let me clear up one last thing. CMBO is not your game, it is not my game, it is BTS's game (as I stated in my post) and my only concern is that Steve and Charles do not listen to such ignorant posts and comments from folks such as....well lets not start a flame war!

Username, First off saying change is "good" because it is change is really a lacking statement. Hmmm Hitler changed Germany, Hussien changed the status of Kuwait, hell Coca Cola changed its formula and it was all bad! In fact this reminds me of X-COM. You all remember, one of the best games ever made. Many have called it the best game ever made. Well after the first one (the first "sequel was really an add-on pack) the whole franchise tanked. Why? Because people said "Whoa that was great but I wonder if you could do it in Real-Time? Change=X-COM Apocolypse. Then they said "Gee whiz that Wing Commander is a great game!" Change=X-COM Interceptor. And finally they said "Gee Duke Nukem kills aliens and X-Com guys kill aliens soooooo..." and we got the latest trash which I and many other do not know the name because we stopped caring! Now lets look at some successful games as of late... Baldurs Gate I ---> Baldurs Gate II Minor changes to the system only. Mechwarrior III ---> Mechwarrior IV A new engine but an evolution of the old one that except for the build process of mecha played exactly as the old game. Diablo I ---> Diablo II Uhm same game. At least that is how I felt, maybe with some better graphics. Actually this is a good example as while I was a little disappointed in the game others madly flocked to it, so the company made the right decision it would seem. Quake I ---> Quake II ---> Quake III Same game better graphics and each one has sold better than the last Rainbow Six ---> Rogue Spear Same game with different graphics and sound and some extra options. See what I am getting at? Guys I am all for realism but this is a game. I repeat this is a game. And BTS is a business, a business with the customer in mind, but a business nevertheless. What you folks are suggesting is not good for the game (makes it more difficult) and not good for business (detracts from the experience of the non-Grog). Combat Mission can be played at a very high level and knowing the velocity of the US 76mm can and does make a difference in the game. That being said, anybody can play the game and enjoy it because it boils down to, find it and shoot it. As long as you have a grasp of basic tactics you can play the game. These customers do not want to sit through countless setup maps and intel. They do not want to flip through screens of text and pictures. They want to play the game. It is not a simulation to them. They are part of the community (a large part) and BTS would be wrong to alienate them. Lastly the LOS tool as it stands now is not a tool as much as a balance device. The LOS tool can show you what your troops can see which if you were actually there you could do. For a myriad of reasons the graphical engine cannot resolve LOS well enough without it so it is there. Lastly your level one arguement also is lacking. First off what is the big deal about level one, last big gamey thread said that anything above level two was gamey, so which is it. Maybe BTS should send you an airplane ticket to France and a tent and you can sit in the tent with a radio and wait from comms from you troops (expect a long wait as they do not exist!) You know it is amazing to me that back in the day we all praised BTS and CMBO. We said it had a great AI. We said it's interface was a great revolution of ease of use and depth. Now it would seem is that the lot of you can only complain. Beg for patches and demand changes that have already been said no to or do not look at the larger picture BTS has to look at. Wasn't someone going to design there own game "fixing" what BTS did wrong. Was that you Username? Where is the game? Where can I buy this piece of perfection? It only took two guys to make CMBO together and if this other persons idea was sooooo good then it should have been easy to bring people aboard. Yet I still have heard nothing about it. You want more realism then try CMMC or another in depth operations game. Then you can be spending many hours a day looking at maps and considering logistics. Hell the rulebook is hundreds of pages long so go to it. But do not spread meaningless baseless drivel and try to influence BTS to do something fatal to the game. If you have a good idea fine but so far I am still waiting. BTS remember X-Com's plight and stay the course. [ 08-16-2001: Message edited by: Priest ]

Here is an idea.... Leave it the same. It works. It is handy and takes some amount of skill. Really the graphical engine is good enough that by simply going to a position and going to view one is more than realistic. Please going to any spot on the battlefield and using the LOS tool smacks of C@C and Starcraft quality handicaps. I would like to think that we are better as a group. Germanboy you have an ally here, and while you are pompous , you are pompous in a good way

I agree with Germanboy (don't hear me say that often ) People can play with any rules they want but it is when folks start making wild claims that worries and frustrates the rest of us.

IIRC the Porsche turret was more rounded and was thought to be more apt to deflecting shots down onto the hull top. Also by this time Porsche had fallen out of favor of the Riech High Command. As far as the Tiger I goes, again IIRC, Porsche's attempt at an assault tank for the Germans was turned down for the Tiger I design. The chassis made for the Porsche design became the Elefant. Again I am away from my sources and I could have some stuff backwards. I have been doing a lot of studying of the Allied tanks as of late. A quick trip to "Auchtung Panzer" should clear it all up!

Louie, I am not sure what you wanted me to look at in the "LOS" discussion. Seeing as Steve nor Charles posted and the fact that as long as the current targeting tool is used then the LOS tool can be whatever it wants to be because both tools are similiar. Personally I would keep everything basically the way it is because it works well.

Actually talking to many Allied survivors of the war and how the outcome was very much different than what was thought possible even 3 years previous one might say that the "angels" did publicly announce their allegiance.

Photos taken by aircraft in WWII actually produced many high quality (for the time) information rich photographs. Also CMBO does not "simulate" the French resistance efforts to inform units of land characteristics. Although i believe the largest drawback to the Ironman rules is the limitation to unit choice (300pt games) and thus the tactical choices presented in such games.