Soddball

I will, if it's alright with everyone, put copies of these links in the FAQ thread.

Well, that's a new excuse. Are you sure you aren't just a sissy with a bit of a cold?

For me, it depends on terrain and ground conditions. I've lost count now of the number of StuGs I've lost in open terrain in wet or damp conditions. I would probably pick a Panther over a platoon of StuGs if the going was bad. It might only be one tank, but at least I could be sure I might get some use out of it.

Mr. Picky advises: That's not "redundancy", that's "re-use", which is the opposite. All the best, John. </font>

My favourite part is waiting for CDV to post the damn thing so I can download it. :mad: Can't wait to try out those new sappers.

If you know it's 'off topic', then DON'T POST IT IN THE CMBB FORUM. You cretin. The general forum is for this kind of stuff. Ye gods, when will you imbeciles learn?

YOU were partly responsible for Lords of the Realm 2? I curse you! I still have my copy! It was sort of good fun, primarily, I think, because my computer sucked and I couldn't run all the new games.

Ha! Goodale has experienced the wrath of the German army. After having crisped one of my halftracks early on, he has suffered the same fate, as I blew apart his M17AA halftrack with a well-placed 75mm AT round. His infantry and tanks are racing forward to cause much mayhem and death - mostly amongst their own lines. Teddy Windsor and I are having a ball. I hate this stupid map, I really do. Goodale, you arse. I do not like being struck multiple times by German rocket attacks.

It's hard for me to compare the two. Two good reasons are the Sherman and the StuG. Who would have thought in CM:BB that the StuG would be such a killing platform? Good armour, precise weapon. Who would also have thought that the Sherman would prove to be so good in CM:BB - sturdy, fast, and top armour for the early part of the war. I would love to return to the Western Front with the CM:BB engine. I have to agree that the British 6pdr and 17pdr solve any armour issues I have. For me it comes down to infantry staying-power. At very close ranges, British infantry is too vulnerable. That said, I think that the American organic MGs would swing my vote in their favour. I would love to see the impact of the new MG modelling with 30cal and 50cal mgs.

...and thought Ooooh, Deja Vu! Once he had reassured himself that all the parts of nature that God had granted him were still in place he... </font>

Why don't you change the thread title to "Where I think CM2 went wrong" or sumfink? You have been deliberately irritating and provocative and your actual point might be interesting but your silliness has caused it to be overshadowed.

I'll try to fish out a couple of my books on the subject. However, don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that if you speak Gaelic, you'll speak Basque or Cornish. For example, for someone who learns English, learning French, German, Italian and Spanish is comparatively simple. They use similar grammar and sentence structure. However, if that English person tries to learn (for example) Finnish, they will struggle more because Finnish is descended from a language which grew up in central Russia. Basque, Gaelic, Breton, Cornish etc - they are scraps of a language of common origins which was used by those people commonly termed the 'Celts' before the Romans swept them aside. The languages persist in areas incompletely conquered or dominated by the Romans by virtue of their terrain or remoteness. [ February 07, 2003, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: Soddball ]

One of the biggest issues I've spotted with the AI is its failure to deploy support units adequately. It doesn't use maching guns, mortars, or AT/infantry guns at all well, preferring to faff around and march them 100m across open terrain than let them sit tight and target the enemy. Flags are critical to making the AI attack in a particular direction. The larger the flag, the keener the AI is to attack in that direction. You can quite handily use water, bridges and flags to easily direct an AI attack.

Some of the Basque language's closest relatives are Welsh, Cornish and Gaelic.

One of my archaeology books pointed out the similarity in language, material culture and lifestyle of the Basque people to that of the people in Britanny, Cornwall, and Ireland - they're very closely linked and until Roman times offered the Atlantic offered the best trading route from the Mediterranean to Britain. (Facing the Ocean - Barry Cunliffe)

Both, I think - hence the use of the plural "players".

Tens of millions of viewers Steve </font>

That scrotal pus monkey Goodale has once again FAILED to deliver a turn. What's wrong with you? Don't tell me you have a job - nobody as dense as you could hold down any job more complicated than "Do you want fries with that?" :mad: :mad: MOVE IT FAT BOY!! :mad: :mad: Edited to add some rage. [ February 06, 2003, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: Soddball ]

I think the problem was that although you described a probable resolution you then went on to say (without being able to back up your statements) that the coder's assessment of how much time it would take to put into practice was wrong. I'm all for new ideas when they are well laid out and developed, but telling the coders how long it will take them to code something is the wrong way to motivate them.

Agree. I would guess two weeks max. </font>

Your AT guns have already managed to 'rework' enough of my T-34s, thankyou very much!

How thin does the armour have to be to see this effect? Are we talking halftrack armour thin (8-16mm) or thicker or thinner? How much of a difference do you think this effect you're describing (I understood about 1 word in 3 ) could make?

Tanks a Lot, that is a superb piece of work.

Well, the reason you "can't believe that this change is more difficult to implement than AI changes in CMBB" is probably because you didn't write the game and are thus pulling statments out of your backside. Let me see, who do I trust more to make valid statements on the design and structure of CM:BB code? 1) The designers; 2) Fuerte. Now, let me struggle for a moment. Secondly, just because you think that PBEM changes are more important than AI or vehicle changes, that doesn't mean that everyone else does, or that better PBEM is a vote winner. I can imagine the BFC boys sitting round, saying "Hmm. Check out these groovy tanks. Shall we put them in, or shall we spend a month recoding the PBEM system because half a dozen people whine and bitch because they have to send an extra email?" Another tough call - and another You're perfectly entitled to root for your point of view - which is that PBEM should be changed - and perhaps it should. What you should not be doing is telling the BFC boys that they should prioritise one thing over another and that they aren't making the effort. That's just foolish. Ideal solution: Fuerte: Lo, I have a mighty scheme for improving the PBEM experience, and here it is: *waffle* BFC: Hmm, good points. We like the idea and will consider it for implementation in the new version of CM. Fuerte: Hurrah! That's not what happened here - this thread became an excuse for more feeble whining from Redwolf about how his ubertanks don't uber the way he wants them to.

You'll have to wait until at least the weekend before I've finished playtesting it and refining it. It even plays well as Russians on the attack, I'm most impressed.