CMplayer

Yes of course it should. Those two companies of infantry could easily be at the sharp end the the whole division.

Human vs human. pbem, some tcpIP. I only play against the AI if it's a scenario carefully designed so that the AI plays halfway decently.

Re: joining different scale simulations into campaign games, from another forum:

Lots of randomness is involved in the conflict resolution in CM as well. Every time a probability is called into play, you've got an element of randomness, that is to say, about 1000 times/turn. Risk just take the billions of probabilites in an army-sized conflict lasting weeks or months, and condenses them into a single die roll. But if you take an 'effects oriented approach' (as described in the original Squad Leader designer's notes) there's no a priori reason to consider Risk to be less realistic for its scale. In fact, randomness is more realistic in many ways for wargames than chesslike automation. What you are really asking for is for the randomness to be distributed at a finer level of detail. Why? Because it's fun (IMO). Apart from that, there's nothing especially wrong with quick and dirty combat results table which rely on abstractions. [ January 22, 2004, 05:41 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

I find that it's possible to use tricks like you describe, but that on the whole the problems can happen so often as to effectively block the forum.

It's doing it again, like clockwork.

That's exactly the right timing I believe. EST is GMT -5 right? [ January 22, 2004, 03:42 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

Have you tried it at the times indicated? Edit: the same goes for everyone: if you're going to post 'no problems' please indicate the time (forum time, i.e. EST), that you were using the forum. If it's not between 3:30 AM and approx 5:00 AM EST then it might not be especially relevant.

You could test by loading a halftrack to the max with a squad and a small team or whatever, and redoing the test. See if there are more hits to the passengers.

Thanks Michael. It'll be interesting to see if you notice the same thing.

Just as an aside question (though I realize your point was different) do you usually post between 3:30 AM-5:30 AM EST? That's when this stuff happens.

I'm not on windows at all. But tomorrow morning at 3:30 AM EST when it starts I could try using another browser. That sounds like a good diagnostic trick.

Even after yesterday's diagnostics, the forum is behaving strangely. It seems to start at about 3:30 AM East Coast USA time and lasts a few hours. Perhaps BFCs internet host runs some kind of automaintenance at their main site which is interfering? Have disabled cache, eliminated cookies, rebooted, all to no avail. [ January 23, 2004, 01:03 PM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

See-Mack here. CMBO I pronounced: See umbo (with very reduced u, the mouth being already closed for the m when starting the u) CMBB: See um bubba

Oh please, give them to me </font>

That would explain the premature capitulation. Kozure's troops had simply shot their wad.

BUMP

Oh please, give them to me

That's what I was thinking as well. Maybe it's some auto-archiving or something like that. I wish BFC would at least explain it.

Shouldn't reviewers have to be able to demonstrate that they're capable of writing before publishing a review? The fellow says, "I really don't feel like getting pummeled by a 12 year old military prodigy," yet I get the feeling he's not much older himself: 15-16 max. At one point he trips himself up with: Egad! Where's Mr. Picky when you need him? Sorry, but that's not a review; it's a glorified forum posting. Don't get me wrong. I like the kid and I like what he has to say. It's just that the piece isn't even edited well enough to turn in as a 9th grade book review.

Shouldn't reviewers have to be able to demonstrate that they're capable of writing before publishing a review? The fellow says, "I really don't feel like getting pummeled by a 12 year old military prodigy," yet I get the feeling he's not much older himself: 15-16 max. At one point he trips himself up with: Egad! Where's Mr. Picky when you need him? Sorry, but that's not a review; it's a glorified forum posting. Don't get me wrong. I like the kid and I like what he has to say. It's just that the piece isn't even edited well enough to turn in as a 9th grade book review.

Well in playing you don't really play the role of any single commander. Some orders you give might come from battalion HQ, some might come from the Coy, some from platoon HQs, some from squad leaders, and some might be individual vehicle drivers' or team leaders' inititives. So it wouldn't make sense for orders to propagate faster from the 'main' HQ honcho. Too many of the orders you give in the game actually represent lower level decisions. It would be totally unrealistic to have everything end if the guy supposedly representing 'you' were hurt or killed. Armies have to be based on redundancy, because a lucky artillery round could kill anybody at any time. There must always be someone able to fill every commander's shoes at all time.

Yes one can. </font>

Yes one can. </font>

So play on flat maps. No hills, no two story buildings. Suddenly all LOS becomes 2D.