I/O Error

Great, we all learn to preach Marx and like it, and the Danes now live in a charred parking lot. Daaaamn... Who was playing whom? Did you win, or were you one of the poor sods bludgeoned into submission?

Just as a grammatical nitpick: The title should be "Your". What is the file size in question? Many free e-mail addresses have an upper limit on the size of incoming and outgoing file attachments. (Sorry, just asking in case zipping the files was a option you thought could help.)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lindan: <LI> leave emotion out of the debate and stay with the facts <LI> leave everybody his opinion <LI> listen to other posts and evaluate them before you start to "flame <LI> separate "people" and "opinions" It's very simple to do if you don't take another opinion on a topic as a personal insult. This forum had problems with it from the start, and I never really understood the general inability of MANY people on this board to discuss without flaming. Lindan HI MOM!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> *sneer* Well, where's the fun in THAT?!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gremlin: "Pyrrhic" derived from Pyrrhus, the king of Epirus in Greece. He defeated the Roman armies in 280 BC but couldn't go on to attack Rome since he lost too many troops. Hence, "Pyrrhic victory."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Um... Gremlin? I think I knew the history. I wouldn't have used the word if I didn't. Thanks anyway.

Also, for battles/operations that imitate real life events, there can be POLITICAL effects to consider. (The very word lodges in my throat. )

*sniff* *sniff* Hey, I'll bet at least one of you guys actually looked it up. Considering I guessed, that ain't so bad!

Stacheldraht had mentioned at the end in the (fortunately torpedoed) thread about KIA uniforms (and don't ANY of you guys mention that EVER again! ) about the idea of unacceptable casualties, borrowed from William Trotter's opinion piece in the new PC Gamer. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Btw, there's in interesting column by William Trotter in the latest PC Gamer about the idea of increasing wargame realism by factoring (un)acceptable casualty counts into final scores, something real leaders deal with on political, practical, and moral grounds, particularly when the media are watching.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's something that's always been on the back burner of my brain, almost afraid to raise its voice. I do find this to be a very interesting idea. In the context of CMBB (just as an example, I'm not trying to say this should be a feature... so back off with that club. ), imagine how that would change the very attitudes of the commanders. I imagine a Russian commader would be authorized to go to ANY lengths in some situations to stop a German attack, while a German commander would be restrained by worsening supply lines and a slow drip of reinforcements and replacements. I find the idea of what Trotter terms, "Casualty Budgets". We've all heard of Pryhric victories, right? (I'd also like to point out that it would be darn-right mean to point out my spelling of "Pryhric". I tried, okay? ) You might "win" the battle and take that one critical hilltop, but what if you simply can't push on? If your troops are exhausted and ammunition is low, you've just singlehandedly slowed an advance to a crawl, if not a stop. The time needed to send up reserves to keep pushing could ruin an offensive operation. I would also like to close with another quote from Stacheldraht: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I am disappointed, though, by the tone that some posters adopt in this forum, making this a frequently inhospitable environment, particularly for newbies or those just voicing a dreamy "what if...." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So remember, I am weak and easily ignitable, so do not flame me too hard for my thoughts.

Yes, the on-going verbal struggle. *sigh* I agree with your sentiments, guys. That thread got a wee bit too hot, too fast.

Eek! Thanks BTS, although I feel a little hunted now, I do thank you. I figured as much, wanted to be sure.

Hmmm... seems logical. Sorry folks, didn't want to start any trouble. Question: I cropped the big screenshot of the T-34 tank. Technically, would that be considered the property of BTS, or PC Gamer? Just wanted to show this image, unless of course that would be illegal. (It's a shame how hard it is to really know what copyright law is these days, all rather confusing... )

P.S. Someone please warn me if PC Gamer could sue me for this...

Ummm... I can scan some nice pictures of the T-34 and KV-1 from the screenshots, although that could take some time. (I would need to go out and use somebody's scanner. What a mooch am I. ) Hopefully before 9, I can post a copy of the page. (I'll make it a link, as I expect even a .jpg of the entire page will be a large file. Don't worry, I won't leave it as a .bmp! )

Sorry folks, I kind of assumed somebody else would have an issue. There is no link, to the best of my knowledge. (Print only) They placed it on page 22, so they're pretty excited about it too. (22 out of 136. Nice, huh? ) However, here's a list of unveiled details: (You ****ers owe me for typing all this... ) <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>PC Gamer CMBB Preview (Verbatim): New movement types: Move to Contact, Assault, Human WAve, and Hull Down. A new in-game graphical interface. An "Extreme" Fog of War option: You get even less information about enemy units, and even when you get close, the information still won't be complete. Variable battle-length options: Battles can last a few turns beyond the "stated" ending. Furthermore, if victory flahs change hands shortly before the battle is set to end, the battle automatically extends several turns --- the old "end-game-flag-rush" tactic (which was always a bit too "gamey") simply won't work anymore. Purchase Point Rarity Option: "We looked at the historical availability of units in the games, for every month from June 1941 to May 1945, and the rarity option now applies a multiplier to the point cost for all units, with high costs for the less common ones. This leads to much more realistic force allocations. Panzer IV tanks are common, so their multipliers are low. King Tigers are rare, so they're much more expensive, even beyond the price you already pay for the extra combat power." Most Vehicles can now be purcahsed in platoons, and they're subject to the same command and control rules as infantry. Tanks with radios now become very advantageous. (Further down the page) --> Most exciting of all, though, is the nature and scope of CM2. It will be an "East Front" game, and it will be huge. "It will cover Barbarossa to Berlin, from the German invasion in June 1941 to the fall of Berlin, with every campaign in between."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> *WHEW!!!* Okay, those are the major bullet points and end summary. (Direct quotation, all spelling errors are my own.) "Now, doesn't that just make your [blank] get hard?!" Must... Buy... CMBB...

*soft sigh of contentment* Well, I'm happy.

I have never run into a vehicle by that name before. I would venture as a guess that it was just a nickname for a vehicle, and nicknames are notoriously hard to track down.

"You blooody, bloody, stupid BASTARD!" "Oh shut up, ya damn kraut! Like I would know ahead of time?!" "Come here!!!" *punches fly*

"If it's stupid and works, it ain't stupid."

Okay. I admit it. I know we've all seen this many times, but I still get a kick out of it whenever I see some fool do this to himself: I was replaying an old "base" scenario as the Germans, and a bazooka man decided he just HAD to fire off a shot while in a building. He turned into barbecue. Exhibit A: You see the plume of smoke ejected from the rear of the weapon, and the resulting firestorm within the building. I can only imagine that the platoon leader who shared the building was very pleased. One minute, nice cozy building, next minute it's a towering inferno. Damn shame. Exhibit B: The brave bazooka man fires his third or fourth round at a Stug III, which was stupidly giving him a perfect side shot. (The gunner missed everytime. I chuckled and wiped my brow at the same time.) I checked the replay three times, just to be sure that some other shot or explosion hadn't been the one responsible for the fire, but no, the bazooka gunner with bad instincts apparently decided he just HAD to start up a bonfire right then. My little amusement for the day. Tee hee.

Yes, DirectX 8.0 causes no problems. (Curiously enough, Microsoft actually did something RIGHT when they coded in the backwards-compatibility into their new version of DirectX. )

I can't believe it... *sniff* You mean I'm NOT the only one who reads GRC?

:eek: WOW. Hey Dogface, what did that look like? I can't even imagine, but the mental image IS rather interesting...

Remove CMBO from the list of programs and let ZA detect the game again. ZA has my full support. It's free, it's safe, it's secure. Used it since it first came out. MikeB: Nobody's going to mess with your computer unless you give them a reason. IT would be pointless for a hacker to get into your machine, unless you are his direct enemy or he knows you have important/valuable information. You're safe. Even with no security, it's still a pain in the ass to bother getting some guy's IP address and gaining access to his 'puter, and is almost never worth the trouble.

Get the real version of the game, ya bloody vagabond!

Thank you, I'll try the things you suggest. (With the exception of mouse trails... ) I had dropped down to 800x600, and wasn't quite happy with it, but it's perfectly acceptable. Thanks for the tips though!

Speaking of which, it would help if you told us about your machine.