Terence

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: I am certain the German Sonderbreakfast 1299 was far superior to any breakfast the Allies could field.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Probably bulletproof too.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: Kippers, Spotted Dick, now the only thing we need are Bangers and Mash and that cabbage/potato concoction whose name escapes me, and we are firmly in the centre of the desaster zone that is English Cuisine. Got the mail Terence, just been busy. Will reply tomorrow.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Aaaah... English Cuisine. Someone once advanced the theory (was it Douglas Adams?) that once the English had turned the Catholic church out of power during the days of Henry VIII, they still found they needed absolution for sins. So they turned to the execrable food as a sort of culinary scourge. Someone else once said of England that they did not understand a country with 87 religious sects but only one sauce. All British Friends: Please note I admitted the culinary shortcomings of the US in a previous post and am just taking the piss out of you guys a little bit. For fun, like.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: However, and let me make this clear, I will never eat a pudding called "spotted dick" no matter how much the limeys like the stuff. Having eaten blood sausage and blood pudding, and discovered they tasted like (you guessed it) blood, I have no desire to try my luck with the other concoction, just in case.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think that is actually called Spotted DOG, but the basic principle holds. There is also a British "delicacy" called Drowned Baby or sometimes Boiled Baby which you might also want to avoid. Also in that category you can put Toad in the Hole, Dog's Body, and some archaic thing called Soused Hogs Face which they reference in the Patrick OBrian series, but I have no idea what it is... It probably involves suet. And yes, I know, the Americans put syrup on their bacon sometimes at brunch and are responsible for inflicting the horror known as Jello Salad on unsuspecting world cuisine. We are a nasty bunch.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: Why did Yom make war on Kippers? Did he not believe in a hearty breakfast? They are good for you! He must be an evil agent of the Kellogs Foundation... Hmmm, Caster Kippers...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Even in Evil America where we heap scorn on all things Commonwealth (from bolt action rifles to bridge building tanks) there are a few among us who wolf down kippers. Yea verily. And mightily do we soak them in HP sauce as well. Did you get my email, Andreas???

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M Hofbauer: I am CONVINCED that if you can modify a *LAV* to carry and fire a 105mm, and from a turret at that, then it should be possible to modify a Bradley to do same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I usually operate from a position of blissful ignorance, and now is no exception. Still, I wonder if this statement of yours is true. I suppose that it is, in the sense that you can modify anything into anything if you work at it for long enough -- turn a tricycle into a B-52, a shovel into a steam ship. But I suspect that the changes you would have to make to the Bradley to make it mount and fire a 105mm gun would be substantial enough that it would no longer be a Bradley, but some other thing. On the list of things you might need to change could be such diverse elements as: turret, turret ring, battery and electrical systems, hydraulic systems, drive train, transmission, suspension, engine, (these last three to account for extra weight perhaps) ammo storage, crew positions, targeting systems, armor(?). If you change all that stuff, and maybe more besides, is the thing still a Bradley? or some other thing that you might as well have designed from the ground up... [ 09-26-2001: Message edited by: Terence ]

maybe there were axis bonus points in the scenario. is that possible?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killmore: I have lost a Tiger to Daimler at 650 meters. Front penetration too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I once lost a Sherman in the living room. But I found it again when my mom vacuumed behind the couch.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vergeltungswaffe: The AI will likely not pursue. One possibility would be to set it up so that the reinforcements come in on a side well past the objective, so that they will, in effect, be counterattacking the objective (by now controlled by the player). That way they would have to go through the defenders to take the objective. Just a thought. I will be interested to see how you work this out. It is a wonderful idea.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think that is what I will probably have to do, although I really wanted the AI to mount an aggressive counter attack. Although, when you think about the scope of the game and the time limit, perhaps a very local attack from reinforcing units is more realistic... Anyhow, I shall see what I can manage, and Ill post in this thread when the scenario is ready...

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Keith: I see your problem. On the one hand you can place the objective well behind the hill crest and the AI will defend in place on the reverse slope. On the other hand, if you place the objective on the hill crest or on the forward slope the AI will abondon its positions and try to take the objective. My suggestion is that you place the flag well behind the hill crest and have reinforcements arrive which will attack and most likely push through the objective hex. You need to time the reinforcements such as they arrive when the objective is in danger of being captured by the opposing side.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thats an interesting approach. Will the AI pursue if the player controlled units pull back, and make it a real counter attack? Or are you in danger of having a reinforced defense?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by c3k: Gentlemen (and the rest of you), I've been playing around with making up my own scenarios and have run into a problem. How do I set the units up in a "default" position? By this, I mean something similar to regular scenarios. When you play versus the computer, you get an option for unit placement to be either computer selected or "scenario default". I cannot find out how to do this within my own scenarios. Units are always bunched up in a setup zone. (For the terminally smart-ass: search didn't work, I did read the manual, I tried every button combination within the scenario editor.) Ken "helpful answers are best, but funny ones will be considered as well" McManamy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You can click on the units, hit space bar to bring up the orders menu and then use the move command to put the units anywhere you want.

I was playing against my dad the other day in a PBEM scenario when I saw the most amazing thing. This is in no way a complaint. I scooted my US M3 halftrack around behind some buildings to find a German Puma lurking there. Well, I knew he was there, but it sounds better that way. To make a long story short, the halftrack ended up about 2 meters away from the puma firing its .50 cal the entire time. The Puma exploded and caught fire, knocking me off my chair. It occurred to me that the way to explain this was that the .50 was high enough up and close enough to the Puma that it penetrated the top armor on the back deck. What do you guys think?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence: How would I set up the Flags and board edges so that the AI will execute a reverse slope defense, and then counter attack (if possible) into what was enemy held territory. I have no problem setting things up for one or the other, but both in the same scenario are giving me fits.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> shameless bump

Dear Dad-Person, I bought CM over a year ago and loved it. It came right away, and there were no problems at all with the credit card ordering. I also bought a copy for my dad, for his birthday and had it shipped right to him. He got it about 4 days after I filled out the online form. No credit card problems there, either. Now the real point of my email is that ever since my dad installed CM on his hard drive, we've had a PBEM going. As soon as we finish one, we play another. Its great fun for us both, and we haven't played games like this together since I was in junior high school. Not only is it a great game, it will be great for your relationship. Hope you get it, its first class. Terence

How would I set up the Flags and board edges so that the AI will execute a reverse slope defense, and then counter attack (if possible) into what was enemy held territory. I have no problem setting things up for one or the other, but both in the same scenario are giving me fits.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eumundi: It makes me wonder if all Americans are communists. [ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: Eumundi ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> DNFTT, But I have to say... HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE. Eumundi, you need a role model or a hug or something.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeyD: I'm reminded of when Churchill wrote about his time as a young man fighting in S. Africa. He found the sound of bullets wizzing overhead to be immensely exhilerating. This trick was to not get yourself killed in the process.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Churchill was a reporter, as I recall, not a soldier in South Africa. And it was George Washington IIRC who said there was "something charming in the sound of whistling bullets." I think Churchill said "nothing is more exhilirating than to be shot at without result." Happy to be corrected on any of that.

I shake in my designer cowboy boots when I ask this, as I am about to invoke the dreaded medium of FILLUM, but didn't they set up a Bailey Bridge(that marvel of British engineering) in "A Bridge too Far"?. Now watching that movie is as close to one as Ive ever been, but if that portrayal is accurate, (and Im assuming everyone on this forum has seen the movie) then it doesn't look like something you could do with anyone shooting at you. Even one or two snipers could screw that up... If that wasn't a Bailey Bridge in the movie or bears no resemblance to one, I'll shut up now... [ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: Terence ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mensch: So who are we waiting on well here it is: ECHO Nord Philistine (Allies) vs. SuperSlug (Axis) Jadayne (Allies) vs. Ace (Axis) FOXTROT Süd von shrad (Axis) vs. Terence (Allies) Terence (Axis) vs. Arien (Allies) what does this mean? Well the deadline for the second round falls eactlly Sept. 24th 23:59 GMT. So, you lads listed above have to get done on that date. If you send your files to late, well it's considered a "0" score. Now unless you can't find your battle partner because of sickness or holidays or Alien abduction, send in the last file you can access with your password on the deadline and I will review the file and take that score on the last movie/order phase. REMEMBER; WHICH YOU PERSONALY CAN ACCESS.. don't send me a file for your opponent because I DON'T have his password and I am not a Hacker that I can open the file or Telepathic (maybe Pycopathic) to read his mind. yours druggy NSSB II moderator menschy check out the standings here on the second round NSSB II SECOND ROUND STANDINGS [ 09-10-2001: Message edited by: mensch ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> i haven't heard from Arien in Weeks. I hope he's ok. George! email me if you get a chance, ok?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jwxspoon: I love these gamey threads! I think we each have our own definition of "gamey". The key is to set the ground rules BEFORE you play your opponent. Some people are ticked off by the flak wagons; some don't like the wasp flamethrowers. [ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: jwxspoon ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I just killed a wasp flamethrower in a pbem, so they are not gamey. if the wasp had eluded my attack and flamed my troops, it would be very very gamey indeed. see how simple this is?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by 109 Gustav: Wow. Sounds like quite a lot has happened. Too bad about Tiger, CM won't be the same without his mods. .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> welcome back!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lord General MB: Sir, I find this hard to belive. Why would tiger take this drastic action unless he REALY belives that it is the right thing to do? ... . They are his mods anyway. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm rather surprised by this move, but I will not add my voice to the chorus of "No, Tiger. Don't do it." If he wants to go and leave not a trace behind, he should do so. I enjoy his mods and respect his ability as an artist, so the last thing he hears from me on this subject will not be a whining attempt to change his mind.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: As far as I know, casualties use the same bitmaps as active troops, not a copy of the same bitmap. So if you replace the bitmap, it's used for casualties too.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oh drat. And there I was hoping to be the One Just Man, again. Thanks for the responses, guys.

I have to ask. I read the thread (all three of them) and I know Ill regret it, but I have to ask. Is it possible that Tiger wanted a mod-able dead body icon NOT because he wanted to add blood, but because he wanted to make it consistent with uniform mods on living soldiers. Perhaps some people are bugged when they see living soldiers in one uniform and dead soldiers from the same unit in a different uniform. Is that at all possible, that this inconsistency motivated his request, and NOT the desire to see blood?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Agua Perdido: I'm sure I'm playing some other folks who are undoubtedly loathesome, gamey bastages and I hate them as much as any of you, but I don't recall them off hand. Hate you all, Agua Perdido<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Me, for one. You are skulking up on your rock in the Navarone scenarios with the pigeons and the mountain goats. Don't know what you are doing exactly up there, but you are losing guns at a steady rate as my troops move closer and closer to their objectives. Meanwhile you dither and whine that one platoon is in good cover "too close" to the board edge. Nyah ha ha.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Warmaker: I would put the gun behind a wall IF the terrain it rests on is HIGHER than your planned killzone. If it's fairly level, it's kind of iffy... I'd have to see it for myself to decide. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I had no idea there were so many variables. Has anyone ever tried putting a wall next to some forest tiles and setting the gun behind that? One scenario I played even had a gun in a church, exploiting one of the vagaries of the scenario editor. It survived long enough to use all of its ammunition, even.