Jump to content

Scott B

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Scott B

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 03/24/1976


  • Location
    Hamden, CT
  • Interests
    Military History, Force Structure and Operational Art
  1. Thanks, guys. The prefixes for scenarios that I remember were B&T for general Boots & Tracks scenarios; RD for Rugged Defense tournament scenarios (there are some good ones there); and SP for the Stalingrad pack of scenarios that we released just over ten years ago. I'll recognize the Der Kessel scenarios I'm looking for when I see them. Germanboy and Berli always made good stuff and there was another guy that I think was already getting out of the game in 2002 that had built (for CMBO) some of the most innovative scenarios I've ever seen for any wargame - can't remember his name
  2. Hey all, Long time! I have been getting back into tabletop gaming and wanted to mine some of the old Boots & Tracks scenarios for tabletop scenario material, and will probably play a few just for old time's sake. I lost all mine in a hard drive crash a few years back and I don't even have my own work anymore. Anyone able to help? (Double bonus if you also have some of the Der Kessel stuff!) Thanks much! Scott
  3. I'm with MeatEtr - this is pretty much ideal in terms of my expectations. The naval battles look gorgeous, and assuming it can be properly modded, it could be the game we've all been waiting for.
  4. Oh, and I'd still go with an Intel motherboard.
  5. Hmm - in this article at Anandtech, they can get you sort of an apples-to-apples comparison. Basically, in multithreaded game performance (Far Cry 2) the Phenom II is a bit better on a clock for clock basis than Core 2 Duo, but still gets beat on in games like Crysis that don't use more than one or two cores. However, the Phenom II X4 920 is a 2.8 Ghz processor, and the E8500 is 3.16 Ghz; I would expect in pure gaming terms the E8500 is a better choice. Now, obviously gaming isn't everything - the quad core Phenom II is going to crush the Core 2 Duos in things like video encoding, but fra
  6. I've been running Vista Ultimate 64, and haven't had any troubles that I can pin to the operating system (did have some trouble with some Nvidia graphics card drivers recently, but I actually think they were beta drivers, so technically not something I can blame on Vista either). Recently I've had some issues with getting a Civ IV mod to run, but I couldn't get it to run on XP either so I don't know for sure that was Vista, either. I have a big pile of games, but depending on what you're looking for, some teething issues should be expected (they have compatibility modes and "run as administr
  7. I agree on 64-bit. Overall, your machine looks a lot better. How much does it add up to? When they list a motherboard as "Crossfire" or "SLI", that's just the capability - you don't have to get two graphics cards for it. In most circumstances, unless you have money to burn, it probably isn't worth doing that anyway. "Crossfire" just refers to Intel chipsets (for the most part) that have multiple PCI-express slots that can handle graphics cards, and SLI refers to Nvidia chipset boards with the same feature. That said, the MSI board you're looking at is decent. It's a little light o
  8. You probably already knew about them, then, but just in case you haven't, I'll toss in yet another plug for the Silent PC Review site. Obviously this is a personal choice, but I'm quite pleased with having built my machine last year. In my case, it's a no brainer - we have other machines in the house and I have redundant backups of data, so if it doesn't work I'm not screwed until I can get it back up and running. The things that irk me when pricing out a machine at another site are typically some combination of the following: 1. inferior selection of parts; in some cases you re
  9. Though it's fair to note I wouldn't buy that thing for reasons of case alone, but it looks like a comparable deal is at ibuypower, and you can pick a different case.
  10. Got it. Tried that out as an option, but never can get past the price premium of letting someone else do it. Also there's a personal pride thing, though that counts for less if you set aside an evening to build your new machine and then it turns out you got shipped a defective part. I haven't heard as much about the overclocking of the Q9550, but the Q6600 has been getting rave reviews in this regard. Doesn't look like it's on offer at ibuypower, which is a shame, since half of the advantage is it'd be $100 bucks less. You get what you pay for, though, and that Q9550 is going to be
  11. This is the way to go, in my opinion. When I want something, I usually try to take a couple months and scope out the best deals at places like Ben's Bargains and the like, get parts one at a time. I still lean toward the E8X00 dual cores, myself, but can't blame you for a Q9x series quad for "future proofing." Again Q6600 is the price/performance king, especially if you're looking to overclock, but I bet the Q9550 will be solid for you too. Assume you're just going with stock cooling? (No shame in that; the Intel stock coolers are damn good these days.) No experience with t
  12. Oh hey, I love these threads. Heh. A more snide person than myself might point to your graphics card as evidence. But you came here for advice, and different people have different priorities. You have a decent setup otherwise. It's not a bad time to go quad, but I think at the moment the best bang for the buck is still a Core 2 Duo E8X00. Got an E8400 myself last summer when I built my new machine. Lots of cache, overclocks like a sumbitch. Running mine at 3.6 Ghz with a Xigmatek heatsink, zero problems. If you do want to go quad, the budget monster right now is just a bi
  13. Ah, see you responded on the TO&E issue. So no tanks in the recce squadron for a heavy BCT. Is the perception that this is not needed? I guess they could task some for the duty from one of their two maneuver battalions. Man, these really are kind of puny brigades.
  14. Sure, we have ISR coming out of our ears; given how things are going, I'd be surprised if this wasn't the case. I was thinking of the more traditional cavalry role of screening/battlefield reconnaissance - i.e., that which was done with tanks, Brads, etc. What's the rough makeup of these reconnaissance squadrons and surveillance brigades? I do find a lot of things to like about the new structure; main criticisms I've heard were things like no more engineer battalion at brigade level messes with promotions, etc. Though really when you get down to it, I kind of liked great big brigades wit
  15. It also gets rough when you start designing forces around the idea of translating "information advantages" into combat power and trading off other capabilities. FCS, and if memory serves FRES (if it still exists?) are both examples. It is pretty easy to imagine that these "fast, nimble" forces may well end up sitting tight waiting for the intel picture to clear up before moving out, where modern heavy forces are already well prepared to just go out and find people. In the U.S. Army's transition to a modular division structure, one of the things we gave up was our division cavalry squadron
  • Create New...