Peter Cairns

Bulletpoint, Actually this is a better example. I am doing a Black Sea map of around my own house, so this is a street view image and a I'll add a game image pdf roughly the same area in the next post. And yes I do live in a "Pink" house......

Bulletpoint, I remember a discussion years back where Steve, said that so that you could see your units clearly ground cover wasn't depicted as densely in the game as in reality. Things like VT grass look thin and spindly but they actually give quite good cover. I use the forest tiles because this is the fence line beside my house.

As Kenny Dalglish said when asked as Liverpool Manager; "Why do Liverpool get so many Penalties compared to other teams?" "Because we spent a lot of time in their Penalty area!" Peter.

Oh and Broom is a nightmare, but not as bad as Gorse...It's not me in the picture but it helps with scale! You can get whole forests of this stuff and it is quicker to go round it than through...it's like natural Bocage. Peter.

Another example of Russians Security prowess; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-37166353

BulletPoint, I am okay with theForest Tiles as they do represent well the typical terrain you get on a forest floor, that and I like to use them along road sides with fences and hedges (sometimes ditch locked a metre higher) to simulate that dense grass and weeds that never gets cut at field edges. Bracken and the like are for me something beyond that, not only do they provide the same or better cover than tallest crops but more than they do it would also impede movement. Trying to move through Bracken be it Ferns, Willow, Herb or being Scots, Heather is not only slow but tiring. Peter.

And this one is Bracken.... continuous dense ground cover, mostly ferns...

Again. not sure why people think these things are "deep in the architecture" The Thumbnail idea is effectively letting you see a unit panel when you select a unit. but that already happens when you select a unit in the game. It's really only having the image that is already available appear during the scenario builder or unit selection. Compared to the mechanics and graphics of the actual game real time, changes to the look of the UI shouldn't require opening up andy of that. Equally, moving the locations of terrain icons should be really about changing the location of the picture and the link to the game files. All the pictures already exist and all the game files for the terrains are already there. New content in terms of filling the gaps would need work, both graphics and working out the mechanics of it, but new content be it bocage, small trees or snow is regularly added (not to mentions dozens of vehicles,) Although it will always require work the process of making a denser type of ground as an example might only be starting with the closest existing terrain and then tweaking the values and refining it. New and different building sizes and and types would probably be the most difficult, but then we have seen windmills, canal bridges and even huge bridges added. On general filling the gaps, although I am wary of adding terrain for it's own sake, as an example I think there is a strong argument for some denser ground cover. Be it heather, ferns or just thick high weeds, like Willow herb.... it both wood add something and is a fairly ubiquitous terrain. Peter.

Pak40, I think that applies to thumbnails and filling gaps, but changing the positions of existing terrain items to a more logical order shouldn't require much work. As I understand it the big time and effort from CMx1 to CMx2, was going from a 20m to 8m grid, hugely increasing the graphic quality of the models and of course real time as opposed to only WEGO. The stuff for thumbnails takes more work but all the stuff for weapons is already there and pop up screen shots of buildings might not be that difficult. I do agree that new terrain presents problems because as every round is tracked it doesn't just need to be drawn but to be fully modelled for sighting, movement and penetration. Peter.

I am posting this here for a sort of CMx2 general discussion, as there isn't actually a place for that and we'll as the latest instalment this is probably the most active place. Firstly let me say that I love all the CMx2 games and have been a bit of an addict since the very first CMx1 BO demo. So what follows is in no way a criticism of the game, far from it. It's driven by the fact that I want me favourite game to be better rather than there is anything wrong with it. The reason for the Topic title is that most updates or additions to CMx2 seem to be in two type; additions, things like new scenarios, content, settings etc. and changes to the game mechanics, sometimes referred too as "Under the Hood". This sort of falls between the two, as it's more about things that I think are under the category of housekeeping than building work or buying furniture. Most of it covers the look of the UI and map design. So Her goes; Thumbnails; A hopefully simple addition would be to add thumbnail pop ups when making maps or choosing forces. Two examples. While buying a US armoured unit either when designing a scenario or a quick battle when a formation is chosen it moves from the LH formations side to the right hand side. At this point it would be good if a Thumbnail of the TOE appeared at the bottom of the page. You can go into a formation before or after choosing it by clicking on it but seeing it laid out would IMHO be better. Next, once a unit is selected and put on the RH you often get a series of options and defaults below. A good example is regularly seeing five or six different Sherman's to choose from. At this point when you clicked on a particular tank, if a thumbnail of the picture from the manual with it's details appeared you could make a more informed choice. I know this is all in the manual, but rather than have it to hand or opening another window to the online or PDF version, it would just appear. With Map making it would work the same way. Click on a particular building and a picture of it would appear, which would be particularly useful with Independent building in terms of the ridge orientation or door locations that can't be changed. Depending on what orientation you choose you would see a different angle of the building, but the front would always be towards the one you choose. Equally with Flavour objects, particularly when there are several options, in some cases up to nine, getting a picture of that roadside object so that you get a Gas Pump instead of a bucket would save either having to remember which is which, check the manual, or as most of us probably do, choose them all open £D view, delete all the wrong ones and move the one we want to where it's needed. With Trees seeing a picture of it, ideally with a man beside it for scale would make it easier to choose the right one for the right place. I know you get the hang of it after a while, but this would be more user friendly. Logical Grid; This might seem a bit picky but stick with me. When building a map there are a range of great terrain choices, and you can pick from a list of categories ( Roads, Foliage, Walls) and then options (Brick Wall, Wire Fence, Hedge) all of which is good. The is however no order to them and it would be more logical and perhaps helpful if there was a set pattern. Take foliage, the two key characterises for game play are, for me anyway, height and density. Height determines how it impacts on long range sighting and density how much cover it gives. Changing the grid so that density was left to right and height top to bottom would mean that the Top Left would be the smallest spindliest bush and the Bottom Right the tallest bushiest tree. There would be a logic to it. For fences it would be similar but in this case it is cover and protection, so it would start with the Wire Fence and end with the Tall Stone Wall. I know walls also block sight and that that there are some terrains that just won't quite fit but putting them in more or less the right place lets you focus quickly on what you want for that particular setting. For buildings it should be from smallest to largest and probably weakest to strongest, with Top Left a tiny wooded shed and Bottom Right a huge concrete structure. Flavour objects, with or without thumbnails should also be from smallest to largest ( or the other way round but with a logic). Equally modular buildings are classified by height but should they also be ordered by size and strength, with the Top Left the smallest and weakest and the Bottom Right biggest and strongest. I would also like to see the ground cover palates tidied up, with least cover to out cover and lowest to highest, but also as their are now more than three sets, recorded to things like Grasses, Crops, Man-made, Water etc. or Open, Wet, Rough, or perhaps Light, Medium and Heavy. Not changing the content as such just making the presentation more ordered. This isn't that different to the way that Independent buildings are ordered by class. Filling the Gaps; Although I said this isn't about content, if you order terrain by size or height you will notice gaps and that raises a question. Do you leave them or fill them. My answer to that is to ask is there something logical that fits there that is needed or would enhance the game or are we taking order too far and trying to squeeze nature into a gamers grid? For example if we take Foliage, the Top Left would be a spindly rush the Bottom Right a huge oak, but what about the Top Right, should't we have a dense low bush, something that isn't in the game, or the Bottom Left, is there a place for a tall thin tree like a Scots pine, hard to look over even if you are on a hill, but easy to look though at ground level? For buildings, Top Left would be or small hut. Right now the closest to that are the two one storey barns two boxes long, but what about one half the length that could be added to buildings as an add on or as a stand alone out house. What about Top Right, a small tough building to represent, like an industrial concrete structure. Then there is the Bottom Left, a small, tall weak structure, is there a place for the Water Tower or fire escape? For Fences and Walls what about railings, ditches and high chain link fencing, all of which fill logical gaps on a grid arranged around line of sight and protection and which exist in the real world. For ground terrain, do we need large crag style rocks like outcrops or is that best done by favour objects just for show or perhaps rock options like foliage. Is there a place for dense ground cover like Ferns or grass a meter high. There would seem three game options if we think this is needed. Add a heavy ground cover that covers the whole box, create a new type of stand alone thick dense bush in foliage that can be put in or to look again at Brush and change it fro On or Off to, Off, Light, Medium or Heavy. On balance I think the grid approach highlights where gaps might be, but you shouldn't fill them for their own sake as much as ask; How would they change the game?, would there inclusion be realistic? and does that gap really need filled? Well that's it folks just some thoughts for discussion on tidy up and possible changes that the might bring about that which, hopefully, BF could incorporate with relative ease over time to make a great game series even better. Peter.

Found this interesting and it might add to the discussion and give pointers to why people in Crimea had problems with Kiev and why Western Ukraine looks to the EU, it's GDP per region for the Ukraine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ukrainian_subdivisions_by_GDP_per_capita#/media/File:Ukraine_GRP_per_capita_2008_US_dollars_(nominal).png

"Send three and four pence we're going to a dance". I doubt anyone would be stupid or brave enough to lie to Putin, that's not how it works. what happens is that systematically at all levels information gets corrupted so that in effect it's GiGo' garbage garbage out. T's like Chinese whispers, what you hear at the end isn't the original message; "Send Reinforcements we're going to Advance" I'd disagree with that, from a diplomatic point of view, we sanctions hurting and world opinion firmly agreed that Russia is the aggressor ad another round of talks due, any excuse to portray Kiev as being as guilty as Moscow would be useful. In addition domestically tales of enemy agents and saboteurs fits in well with Putins enemies all around tactics and would be useful as sanctions bite and people begin to get weary of the war. Never let a crisis go to waste and having people fearfully checking under their beds and glad that the great leader is ever vigilant is straight from the Putin play book. doesn't mean it's what happened but it wouldn't be unusual. As long as those around him still run the show and their wealth ( Largely in foreign banks and property) is safe so is Putin. What makes it more than a house of cards is that that wealth and power is so intrenched that it is hard to see just how Putin could go wrong in Ukraine. As we are more or less a greed that firstly, only a disastrous major invasion would be enough to bring him down and secondly that right now Russia can't effectively mount a major invasion, then he's incapable of pulling off the blunder that would bring him down. In the End i see to routes out of this from a western point of view. Passive; We wait him out letting him keep Crimea, Lunhans'k and Donest'k but wait until his greater Russia shrinks to be less of a threat regressing to be a global supplier of cheap raw materials and less and less of a global player letting them go backwards until they are less relevant. Putin and his cronies stay in power and rich but they and Russia are a diminished threat over time. we can live with that and so can they. Active; As with Reagan, we tighten the economic noose, We let US and EU firms sell the Chinese better jet engines and we get India to go for something other than the PAKFA, a partnership with Turkey or Korea for a fifth generation fighter and it's next tank. Without exports to those countries Russia's ability to produce a next generation of high tech weapons would be dented. We need somehow to get turkey on board which is tricky given the Turkish president is mending fences with Moscow. Economically we would need to do more to freeze Russian banks out of the international banking system and probably stop all Russians buying property in western Countries and have much tighter visa controls on all Russians. If we hit their personnel wealth by hitting the economy and stop them getting it out of the country then it will start to hurt the people that matter. Both are long term projects both would have limited success because those at the top are so entrenched and rich they are difficult to hurt and both strategies would make the lives of millions of innocent Russian people a lot harder for a lot longer, something they don't deserve. whatever sanctions we take or route we take the people at the bottom we want to help will be hurt more than the ones at the top who are to blame. Much as a oppose what Russia has done and is doing, I am for long term passive containment as the least worst option. Sorry if this is a bit to political and way off topic but given recent mistakes over foreign policy I think above all trying to understand your opponent is one of the most important things you can do. Back to GiGo, if who incorrectly assess their motives or intent you'll make the wrong response. Peter.

Steve, I agree almost totally with your assessment of how the FSB tried to make this into something it never was, with one caveat. In a system where the truth is only ever what you want it to be and facts can be changed at will a culture developed that means even those in charge trying to from above to manipulate events have a distorted picture. In one respect you can see how those further up would want to hush up an embarrassing story but it is equally possible that those below feed them rubbish. One of the mistakes I think we made with Milosevic in Bosnia was to see him as being in full control, able to let lose the dogs of war at his command, when in reality I saw him more like an old man being dragged by his dogs. It wasn't so much when we attacked he let them off the leash and told them to kill, as when we hit him they broke free and went on the rampage. As with Yugoslavia under Tito or Iraq with Saddam and indeed Libya and Syria when a dictator who has ruled by fear weakens or falls the products of a culture of fear are all that is left to pick up the pieces and as we have seen there is all to often fragmentation around clusters of groups every bit as brutal is their former master. In Russia thank goodness it's not the terror and arbitrary violence of the Stalin years , but it is a culture where you say what needs to be said, do what needs to be done and evidence is what it needs to be to serve a purpose, as earlier the Ends Justify the Means and the Facts are what you require them to be. it's the replacement of due diligence with simple expediency. Whats in the Tin isn't reliably whats on the label This creates culture where at all levels no one can be sure what is fact or fiction and all sources of information become suspect. Putin might be pulling the strings but they are coated in treacle and he is doing it in the dark. In the same way I wouldn't rule out that some hapless right wing Ukrainian nut was trying to make some mischief in Crimea, but that is more akin to an ISIS lone wolf than a Kiev run operations. In the same way I actually think that despite their best efforts Putin and those around them probably have a blurred view of what is going on and less control that they and indeed we think over events. Going back to an earlier point it's also why figuring out what the Russian army is capable of is so difficult and why I still think they might be less capable than you think, if not by much. Peter.

Be honest Steve, You'd do what we all would; ask the guy with the gun which story he wanted you to pick, pick that one and sing like a canary.... A bit like the guys the FSB just paraded!

But, that doesn't make them spies....They are Ukrainians, but so are another 340,000 of Crimea's 2.3m population. They have a military background, but given that until recently like Russian the Ukraine had mandatory military service it would be odd if they didn't. So far those put on show seem to have more links to Moscow that Kiev and it's increasingly looking like some gangsters caught by the police have been "convinced" to say they are Ukrainian agents. This isn't fooling anyone...well with the obvious exception of you! So would we all, in a free and fair election held and overseen to international standards, with funding limits, fair treatment by the media and no intimidation. Voting to join Russia when that is what the State wants when the State can check how you vote and you work for a State or State supporter enterprise and live in a State owned apartment or have a State pension is a bit of a no brainer. It's bad enough you believe this saboteur nonsense, but you don't even understand how your own system works. No, but like pretty much everyone who has seen the way Russia deals with protests, from the Czars, through Stalin to today, that's a very quick way for nasty things to happen. Ukrainians are no more chickens than the hundreds of thousands of patriotic Russian POWs who didn't overcome their German guards. I think people have covered that, the FSB have beat up some punks put them in front of a camera and told them what to say, it's as believable as an American capture by ISIS burning the Stars and Stripe when surrounded by hooded men with knives. Contrast these people who are supposedly Special Forces with a young Female Ukrainian Pilot during weeks of trial. Given her defiance do you not think commandos would put up a better showing. You don't believe this because it's convincing you believe it because you want too. Peter.

Vladimir if you are going to quote an article at least read it first, particularly this bit; "No mention was made on how Ukraine planned to reclaim the Black Sea peninsula" Ukraine, and indeed pretty much the rest of the world don't accept it's your border. Even with a majority of ethnic Russians, a notion for nationhood most of the world now rejects, Russia's actions in usurping the democratic process negate it's claim. Three things the worlds leaders unite behind; Taking parts or all of someone else country, Overthrowing people like themselves and Leaders like them being killed. Britain spends a fortune defending the falklands, a worthless patch of moorland in the South Atlantic with more troops than civilians not because of it's value or imperial pretentious but because Argentina tried to take it by force. Most americans couldn't find Kuwait on Map (a lot still couldn't) but they went to war to liberate it. Few western Governments like the Turkish President but they all opposed the Coup attempt. Regardless of the merit of a claim using force unilaterally to solve it invariably undermines it. Putin seems to believe that the west lacks resolve and that possession is 9/10 of the Law, but he's wrong. he may believe in a form of the Brezhnev Doctrine; "When forces that are hostile to socialism try to turn the development of some socialist country towards capitalism, it becomes not only a problem of the country concerned, but a common problem and concern of all socialist countries." Not surprising given his background but the facts remain that that Doctrine was applied to justify the Invasion of Czechoslovakia, which is now part of the EU and Nato. As Steve has pointed out, in the long run Russia will lose. It might take 30 years, but when Putin is gone and things are so much better on the EU Ukrainian side the people of Crimea will turn to the West and for the same reason Russia will let them. It's like the Cold War we have all the time in the world to sit and financially stave you out. Peter.

Steve, As a lecturer of mine once said about the extremes ( and sometimes not that extreme) of left and right, it's not so much about ideology as means and ends, for them the Ends justify the Means, but for most of us in a democracy, the Ends and the means are One and the Same, we exercise the things we believe in. Free Speech; we say what we think and let others do the same, Freedom of Religion; we choose our own beliefs, let our kids choose theirs and respect other peoples choices. Freedom of Assembly; we march when we want to and protest against our government even when it's democratically elected if we don't like it and we let others do the same even if we don't like them. Freedom of Choice; we can be in any connecting relationship we like and so can others, we might not like their choices but we accept they are theirs to make not ours. The odd thing about these and watching the US election unfolding (unravelling is probably closer) is that the ones talking most about American Freedoms are the ones that want most to impose their way of life on others. Liberal might be a dirty word for many in America but it's mostly about individual choice and the more people have it the more diverse societies become which some people feel threatened by. That's really a big difference between US and Russian society and politics, Russians believe far more in uniformity and conformity, in being what your supposed to be. In America it's much more about being what you want to be!

Sburke, That's what you get for trusting Google. I wasn't quite sure how to spell Coen or Lebowski, so I put in my attempt and up came "Did You mean "Coyne Brothers in the Great Lewynski" so I just cut and pasted that.... Pretty slack seeing as i'd watched it on TV the night before and loved it but thought the language so outdated. Personally I blame Steve as he wrote "in English" as opposed to "as we Americans say", but then it's nation that's idea of Irony is saying what you don't mean and then putting "NOT" at the end! Mind you I am one to talk as Scots are arguably the worlds most sarcastic people!

Seriously Steve the last people to say "Dude" we the Coyne Brothers in the Great Lewynski......

Given that I think there is a consensus that what Russia is saying about Ukrainian saboteurs is bunkum, it does raise another question. Just what kind of intelligence gathering/Special forces do people think the Ukraine has inside Crimea; a) None, the risks of capture/provoking a Russian response outweigh what they might learn. Sympathisers who are mainly untrained civilian who pass on/ smuggle out what they can in terms of information. c) Actual members of their intelligence services including inside the Crimean administration and paramilitaries ( Crimean Russians who see Putin as we do) d) Dormant special forces who could act if and when needed to give real time intel or disrupt operations. e) active units either intelligence or special operations who are actively involved in sabotage. Peter.

Splinty, That's not being right, that's a statement of the obvious, Any country that had a weapons programme still has the scientists unless it shoots them.. As to Labs and technicians well you can make Anthrax or Sarin in a high schools so short of going back to the stone age that's not a reason to attack it's an excuse. On that basis Iran would have just cause to first strike Israel. As to making people believe he still had chemical weapons...eh yeah, like the ones he successful used against Iran when the war with got ugly. It's called "A Deterrent!" Even if he did move some stuff to Syria it never amounted to a threat to his neighbours let alone the West. For me Iraq is done and dusted and though I am interested in the combat side, the politics is the past and it should be left there as long as we remember that you start with the evidence and then make the decisions not the other way round. Peter.

Oh this should be fun, what exactly did he get right???? Peter.

And so it continues... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37062036 Peter.

Vadimir, Steve is right you should listen to him as your countries future is at stake and if people like you don't turn it around it will be a bleak one. You talk about sphere of influence with regards to Ukraine but does the US regard Canada or Mexico in that way... true we have the Donald daily doing his best to look like his disney name sake, but the US has good relations with it's neighbours because it doesn't treat them like client states not because it does. Putin is pursuing an age Old Russian tactic going back to the Tzars that has never served it's interests. Just look East to see how by working with the system and the international community rather than fighting it China has not just caught up with Russia but in almost every way surpassed it. Under Mao china suffered ever bit as badly as Russia under Stalin but in the last forty years it as strode forward while Russia has gone backwards. Actions like Crimea aren't a sign of strength and progress they are a symptom of weakness and decline. Regimes like Assad's or the Shah's that need to turn their arms on their own people are going down a blind alley and these endeavours rarely succeed. There are ones like Tibet where the size difference makes it practicable but even these can be a running sore for decades. worse still they like in the former Yugoslavia or turkey can go on for generations. Having fought a long referendum campaign and lost I am still convinced that a friendly neighbour and ally is inevitably better that a rebellious provence and enemy. That's why what Obama has tried to do with Cuba is the only way forward, being it back into the fold rather than isolating it because once the doors are open and people see both sides, hey will make their own choices and sooner or later those who want to maintain the barriers on both sides will be gently nudged away ro change to fit the new realities. Russia might hold the Donbass for decades but it can't afford to modernise it to compete with Chinese and India steel or Australian, Colombian and Canadian call or american shale gas. Meanwhile the Ukraine without a pro Russian rust belt, because that is what the Donbass will be in a few decades without billions (that Russia doesn't have) spent on it, will turn to the West, it like Turkey will take years to reform but like it, it will join the EU in time and at that point if it hasn't changed it's ways Russia will be a much reduced power. Within a decade China will not need to by Russian Jet Engines, India will buy Western or Chinese jets not Russian ones and without these Russian will struggle to keep up militarily. In the civil sphere Russia just can't compete with the west and the gap is widening. The future is clear to anyone that reads beyond propaganda or who can count...Openness, freedom and democracy or inevitable continued decline. The choice is yours! and like me Steve only whats best for Russia... and it ain't Putin!

Two interesting BBC stories; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37049313 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37058751 It takes something major to cause a split between two such close allies, like maybe the wisdom of widening an already un-winnable war! and of course the story of responding of "Incursions" with a convenient 40k force, well we've never heard that one before have we!!!!! Late summer in the Caucasus is a good time to move as by Autumn with Winter to follow is a hard time to take back ground. Just saying.