Binkie

I just think "load of crap" is strong language when referring to the work of a professional military historian/consultant (and a tester who has played hundreds of PBEMs). If Kiwi speaks that strongly about it, then he must feel that the Germans have a huge advantage here and I would be intrigued to hear if he felt the same way after playing Germans against Fionn. Point of interest. That's all. As for the Hetzer debate, this is what he wrote me about it last month when I asked him the same questions: "Ah well that list isn't the list I came up with. Folks went and changed some of my 'what is and isn't allowed' by mistake. Here are the reasons the Hetzer is allowed: 1. It CAN be killed frontally by a 75mm ( you have to get close but it has only slightly better ricochet potential than a Sherman 75). 2. It can be killed by a top hit from a mortar round. Most of mine die to mortars. 3. It can be killed by a 0.5cal HMG to the side or rear ( I've lost several to MGs). 4. It's ROF and penetration is pretty poor. It's ROF is one of the slowest in the game, it is virtually helpless against anything flanking its position and is especially easy prey to Stuarts or Greyhounds. In essence it is eminently killable by a large portion of the US armoury. Sherman 75s aren't so good at killing it but Sherman 105s and Brit 95mm-armed tanks have a better than even chance of killing it if they hit and fast-moving light tanks and recon vehicles can rip it apart PLUS if it exposes its flank to a 0,5cal HMG team within 300 metres that HMG team can kill it. I think they outlaw the Sexton (25 lber gun) too when the Sexton isn't even an anti-tank vehicle. IOW it is full of errors." And in fact, in the game we were playing at the time, I killed one of his Hetzers with an area target by my Sherman 105...not even a direct hit. [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-28-2001).]

Hey Kiwi, I think you should challenge Fionn to a game (you can find his email at CMHQ). He is plenty willing to take allies, and I'm sure would play you under the old 76 rules, i.e. no Jacksons for him. Then you have to come back here and report what happened. Leonidas, Fionn has not gotten around to updating the rules, at least as of a month ago. If enough people email him, though, maybe he would. Another error to the current web sheets: the Hetzer is actually allowed under the Short-75 rule.

Just played Bruyeres TCP/IP as allies, enjoyed it, Wild Bill does it again! But I have to take issue with some of my troops actions. On at least 3 occasions, different squads were engaged in direct fire fights with enemies no more than 60m in front of them. They turned their backs to known-position German soldiers who were firing rifles and machine guns at them, so that they could shoot their own men who were walking in a building in a non-combat area 100m to their rear. These friendly troops were simply moving, not even firing. I can accept men getting jumpy and misidentifying troops in front of them, even to their flanks, even to their rear if they were in a far forward position. But directly behind them in friendly-held turf, while already fighting for their lives? Maybe I'm missing something, I'm not much of a war historian, but it just doesn't seem realistic. There's been lots of talk on the forum about why won't my unit shoot at my manual target, he keeps auto-retargeting this other guy who is shooting at him...or, my tank won't stay facing the way I want, he keeps targeting that Stuart...and the answers come flooding in: of course he's targeting the guy who's shooting at him, wouldn't you? That's the known threat! Have to deal with that first. I understand and agree with this logic. It just didn't seem to be applied in the "misidentification" fuzzy logic routine. Does this need to be fine-tuned?

Did a search, couldn't find specific info on this. Does anyone know how much less (if any) accurate mortars are when the HQ is spotting for them? E.g., is it even worth indirect targeting with a regular or lower mortar? Thanks

gaffertape, that is a fine beating you've taken there...i say you and Spear get the creative awards thus far -- thanks! I can't take any credit for the riding sheep, one of my racer friends sent it to me. But what's with all the John Hough abuse? I suppose he took his chances with his first photo on the same page as a bunch of tanks, but sheesh. I'd say he's a lot more secure in his masculinity than most to make such a brazen post...just enjoy it. [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-20-2001).]

Yeah, he's a graphic designer, I think he did this at work "on a break". [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-18-2001).]

When you spend more time talking, reading, and downloading for it than playing.

You know what, I don't ever want to catch up with this guy, or even know where he "goest". I believe he's one of yours... MACE, CAUGHT LEAVING HIS LOCAL TAVERN LAST WEEK WITH NEW ACQUAINTANCE [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-18-2001).]

So where does the nuclear wasteland copter pilot fit in? Does he deliver new code drops to all the team members? Or did you sign him to reprise his role in the upcoming sequel, Madmatt: Beyond Combatdome? [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-16-2001).]

Here's one of my PBEM buddy Joker. Rumor has it that he was second on the list if Jack Nicholson had turned down the part in the original Batman.

On the heels of the popularity of the "Explain Your Username" thread, I offer something that requires a bit more work, but possibly even more reward...something I've been milling over for several weeks, and just got the go ahead from the BTS staff to start up. Ok, so we've seen what Charles looks like from the CGW article (and I would've lost a bet that he was a big, gruff, bearded, 50s-something, groghead-looking guy). I say it's time to step up to the plate and share your mug with the forum groupies. These are the folks that you argue with, play against, and rant about, so matching up a face with a (newly explained) username is bound to be a hoot. In order to participate, you need to put a digital image of yourself on a web server that can be linked to. If you check out this page, it explains the details: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ubbcode.html . If you give it some thought, you're bound to come up with someone you know (or work for) who has a digital camera or scanner that can get you started. And your ISP most likely already gives you some free web space. No doubt some will not want to give up their online anonymity...fine, nothing to see here. No doubt some will post images that aren't themselves, and that's bound to be fun, too. I would only ask that people only post one photo each, in order to keep the thread somewhat manageable. So if you want to do a fake one, great, but that should be your only shot. Also, if you can keep the photo under 75K, it will help this page to load faster. To reduce an image's size, load it into a graphics program and crop it, and also choose a lower quality when you resave it. Again, we have permission to do this...it's not a problem for the BBS server because the photos are stored elsewhere...and the OT police shouldn't come a knockin' because I cleared it first (although we better see hair.jpg out here pretty soon, Matt!) Here we go (guess which one is me): [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-15-2001).]

No relationship to my son's pacifier. I've used various player and posting names until my Quake days, at which time I settled on Binkie. I was getting very fatigued by other players' references to blood, killing, death, etc, in their names and felt that it was time to promote a softer, gentler participant. It had the occasional (intended) side-effect of causing some to dismiss me as non-threatening. Heh.

Just saw this story on Wired News: http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,41753,00.html Anyone know more about this? [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-12-2001).]

I am in a small defense QB and don't want to blow my mines before my opponent gets all his guys in there. Does arty set off mines of any type?

Did I forget to mention Corporal Pierce? He gets a commendation too, but no ticket home. His talents are still needed on future combat missions. Pierce took out the offending Panzer with his bazooka on the following turn. Then he turned his attention to the SPW/7 that had just crashed the party, and dispatched him one minute later with the classic "Burn, you mother!!" war cry.

This one's for you, Mace...true story. Got a veteran M3A1 halftrack in an auto-pick QB who goes by the name Corporal Mace, right? So I figure "Oh man, I better keep this guy hiding way in the back here out of trouble." Well, my infantry gets into a really evenly-matched close-quarters blood fest in the deep woods near the flags, 2 vs. 2 platoons. I think I have a slight edge but am not completely sure, and if I lose the fight, I probably lose the game. Even though there's a Panzer lurking around up there, I figure I need to gamble on Corporal Mace getting involved. So I send him up behind the enemy HQ and sure enough, the Panzer is already coming down the hill and proceeds to blow the M3 into scrap metal. Mace and his partner hop out into the forest and take cover...the third crew man is dead. The corporal sizes up the situation and realizes he must act, for if he doesn't, he may soon be surrounded by angry Germans. The very next turn, he recovers from his panic and start putting pistol slugs into some SS Rifle Squaddie's back, freaking him out. The rest of my boys start to make progress and the enemy begins to route. Now Mace's target is under fire from four different directions and decides enough is enough. He sprints for the rear of the trees and as he passes by, Corporal Mace stabs the bastard good! Thuk, thok! Two more squad members are left after that, but they are cut down as soon as they break into the open. I guess Corporal Mace was packing his own insurance down on his ankle, because his stats only showed "2 pistols"!

Listen, Babra...drinking while playing is only part of my problem! And thanks for the tips, gang, those are some good ones.

It goes something like this for me...I'm browsing my favorite sites and notice a picture that I'd like to see a little closer...so I immediately reach for the '3' key! Doh! Why can't real life be more like CM?

It's about my only serious gripe with CM and I'm playing a snow scenario that forces me to stay on the roads. As he is want to do, Wild Bill has given me plenty of fun armor to play with, but the collisions and ultra-conservative TacAI replots are driving me batty. Please share your favorite method or trick to avoid collisions with your own vehicles! [This message has been edited by Binkie (edited 02-08-2001).]

Michael, you posted at the same time I did my last one there...the halftracks were in motion at the time. Two of them, both getting red lines pretty much all over the place, but able to see a ways, to be sure. And one was merrily firing away at the target it was showing a red line for.

No bow MG, a flexible is its only weapon. M3 halftrack (of some sort) I think, and there's a gunner standing right there manning the gun, able to rotate at will.

I did a search and someone wrote that the maroon targeting line means that the target is within LOS but the unit would have to rotate to fire upon it. Now I've since seen the maroon line used when the firing unit is a flexible MG (no rotation should be necessary), and I've seen it when the unit was already firing on the target in question, so you wouldn't think there's much adjustment necessary there! So the question is, is there an alternate meaning? Something like "You can choose this target, but because of range/obstructions, it would be a waste of ammo"?

This is good news, Steve, and I had always wondered why the first viewer couldn't plot his moves at that time. I originally thought that it should be no problem to attach a move "addendum" onto the movie text file, so it would be available for the next movie generation after the second player made his move. My conclusion was that you wanted to alternate who saw the movie first. But I always figured if you took a poll, not too many people would care about alternating first viewings. Especially in the face of reducing their emailing by a substantial amount.

Not only will I bump this, but I'd like to pimp Kyle's other utility, CM Movie. Do a search and grab it, you can watch consecutive movie files with one click inbetween each one and a wait of as little as 5-10 seconds! I think it's the closest you can get to the continuous movie ideal, and is a great review tool in addition to the entertainment value.

How about the fact that the damn things are two dimensional??!?