dieseltaylor

I think you will find silly things happen in RL. I am not sure whether it is in the Companion or in a Divisional history I read but it relates how a tank squadron rested up allowed a german horse drawn convoy to pass through them along a road. Simply it was just too easy to have MG'ed it to death and simply no one had the heart to do it !!! And to be honest, rather like playing football between the trenches at Xmas, I find it kind of warming that these things happen.

Brilliant idea. A scale would be very useful on the map as the grid system seems too faint ---- and inany event on large maps 20m squares does not cut it : )

53

All of this debate without discussing the size of battlefield to force size! On 1000pts the size width can be 520 metres to 1100 metres which does raise the whole spectre of movement. Do infantry crumble quicker if shot at from several quadrants? Does occupying important geographic areas become easier if only one side has armour? And of course the type of terrain - as in lumpiness as opposed to trees and buildings makes an incredible difference to a forces efficiency. I am going of course with the assumption that the waether is OK : ) July 1943 for those who fight infantry heavy enemy - Flammpanzers : ) If you have the only armour in town ...... 80 bursts, two MGs with 150 rounds, if rarity is off very cheap french tanks as mobile MG boxes. BTW I have destroyed a T34/85 in a serious match head onish with a Flammpanzer

Russophile/Renaud I have plenty many battles TCp/IP, LAN and Pbem. I can agree that TCP is very intense and in most ways a better battle experience. It does fallover though with very large battles and where you have offense/defence. By fallover I do mean it is playable but you cannot do good orders in a reasonable time slot - 3 mins being bearable. Defence is easy peasy to play and attack has to be precise to work well so the stress level is very different. Also the chances of interruption I find mean anything other than a >2000 ME is not a rewarding experience. As for the hundred or so I have played of PBEM,[64 in the last 15 months], it can be very satisfying not to rush a game. However it is even more fun when using OBEMHelper where every e-mail is two order turns and two movies. If you routinely log in at least every two hours you can complete a 32+ game in 3-5 days without trouble. Very fast but without being tied to you computer for hours on end unable to do anything else. : )

I am not an expert on this but I do wonder that for all frustrated map designers there might be an advantage in setting up a form of shorthand to identify linking map sides. That is elevation for each side, roads listed as 200 meters along from top edge etc. If this could be agreed and refined then multiple maps by players could be generated that would fit together.

The CDV disk is a right bastard loading on some drives. If you are playing CMAK and CMBB games it is a serious pain in the butt swapping them over - particularly if you have ten games on the go. As I order direct from Battlefront, other than the crap CDV CMBB, I would happily pay extra to them for an official crack!. I am hardly likely to give the game away to people as I want BF to make money AND WW2 games : )

BTW I have had a sniper walk into a house surrounded by open terrain, discover an enemy unit after a minute , and then ordered him out again - safely. Very amusing.

I see we get a new exe. file. Will the undergunned 76.2mm be fixed at the same time? It is the biggest fault in CMBB.

When I see players complaining about the amount of time campaigns take I do wonder how many have tried out PBEMHelper in Fast and Trusted mode. A 32+ game in under 5 days without breaking sweat if both players are logged on doing other things, normal nights etc Anyway, as each e-mail is carrying two moves and two movies you can appreciate the huge difference in time compared to the current method. If there was ever a time to explore the possibilities of faster play it must be now with the likelihood of many campaigns to be played : ) It is here, two user guides exist for CM games. Helper actually works for 20-30 different games http://www.nic.fi/~fuerte/pbem.htm

Big Duke Personally I think it is bad form to surrender on the first turn.

My final game St.NAz against Stickkypixie has ended. I will e-mail results in. Thanks for the opportunity to play in ROW it has been a blast. : )

"Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: I just can't wait to see all the sad little CMers who whined their hearts out about lack of support or interest in WW II over the past few days. LOL." It is nice to have ones opinion of someone confirmed - especially if it is from there own writing. I am not sure if I came into the category of whiners but sympathy goes out to anyone who is subject to gloating insults.

Good of you Mc. I particulalryl like your idea of command maps for scenarios , large ones benefit from the extra oversightr it allows. I look forward to seeing the first one : ). If you want to e-mail the interested at the time ..... I will forget to frequent your site I know what I am like.

Sign me up!

Damm! I wrote a nice long piece yesterday I lost it!!! Gist of my idea was a flags point to point race across a large map with all types of terrain. Downloadable so people could claim exciting things like my Kubelwagen took 3:40secs from A to B, my Tiger took x:xx etc Now as frivilous as it sounds as every one playing would be learning about speed, acceleration for various units and specific terrain effects on speed etc. I personally think it a wonderful idea - but then I would wouldn't I : ) Expansion possibilities like do you dare risk the pillbox with the ATG or got the long way round : )

Good point Treeburst : ) BTW it is probably wise for us diehards to make sure that the games do not dwindle away. I am concerned that potential players having bought the game go to the opponents forum it is virtually dead. There purchase may seem a little hollow against the AI only. Any suggestions? If necessary I could say I will play anybody who posts there on 10th month etc. Ideally they translate into club players as I suspect with Les Grogs and particularly defectors to CMSF the potential for collapsing clubs - or at least fragmentation to less viable levels.

I think a hundred turns is a hell of a lot - but then it does sound like a puzzle rather than "game". I have often thought of the old race the British Army did against some rally club on roughish heathland terrain where the Army vehicles tended to cross-country whilst the rally drivers went via tracks. The relevance to CM being that by playing racing games of various national equipment a player would acclimatise to the speeds, accelerations of the vehicle and the effects of different terrain whilst having some fun. In fact with a downloadable map racing flag to flag could become a competitive CM sport : ) Comparing times would establish the skilful from the not so!!

Nice clear explanation JC. Are there any/many scenarios with this optimalised design for using exit points? Also the fact that it is as clear as mud to most players of the way the scoring with exit points work they simply cannot plan adequately.

But isn't that Sturmy?

Nice point Jack : ) I did wonder why they did not treat the thing as live war games so all forces in the world with their equipment being modelled. Laser sight and probability means your tank stops, the infantry walk etc. Ok nobody is dead and no nation gets offended .....

JC_Hare - an Arab paper reporting a story from an Israeli paper makes it no truer than quoting the two Israeli papers directly. The question has to be why the story was made public - who is to benefit and who is to suffer in this shaping of public perceptions. As to Syria being more interesting to do than Iran - which has mountains , sea, plains, towns, and cities could it just possibly be that no one wishes to piss off the Iranians when oil is tight. Syria does not produce oil and is of marginal importance in the world. I wonder if politics/common sense meant Syria. The idea that action would be taken against Iran building nuclear weapons is obviously too far fetched --- and would never garner the support of NATO etc. Huh! As for BFC Is a little daft really as who knows what might have happened in Grenada over the weekend. If the question had been " Given continuing US support for Israel over Palestine will there be an attack on US interests" I think most of us would have scored 100%. Would the use of aircraft/ships for a major attack be possible - no problem I would have said yes. Would America react with extreme force .... no-brainer.

Nope not according to the program : ) Looks like I better go in 2006 .....

There was an excellent BBC programme , in fact a series, called "Holidays in the Danger Zone". Amongst holidays in Iran, NK, on the Amazon, Congo, and Ganges, was Syria which came over very well. Lots of chat with the locals about things etc. Did you see the Krak? I wish to see it and had been mooting a Cypriot holiday with a side trip to Syria.

on another board someone put your finger on what makes me uneasy about moderns in general. Essentially if you look at warfare as history "killing" people is abstracted to modelling the ways things were. Improving your generalship against what happened. Here in particular we are being asked to kill people of another race/religion in a country whilst already in the act of doing so now. I feel relieved now that I have fingered the unease factor. I will not buy the game. I dread to think of the general publics view on this when it hits the general press. Having said that there are already some pretty objectionable games out but this is world political also.