rleete

Not just lame, but terrible. Poor acting, cheesy stereotypes, confused/boring plot, the works. I had to take three tries before I made it all the way through. Just because it's a war movie does not excuse it any more than the Hollywood love triangle crap made over here. I know I'm going against the grain here, but I still think it was horrible. I'm not disputing the message, just the delivery. You don't diss Shakespeare because the play you saw was performed by junior high school on amateur night. But that's no reason to hold it up as a shining example, either.

How does it compare to that steaming pile "Come and See"? Okay, or laughably horrible, with wooden dialog?

Thingy reference! Send him to Coventry!

I see they have the equivalent of J.C.Whitney type crap over there, too. Over here, Jap cars with this stuff are called ricers. So, what does that make you? What's Oddstralian for cheesy?

And, not only governments and car companies, but individuals. You know, the ones doing those custom made standalone ECUs, and turbocharging and all the other modifications that car guys do. These same guys that are squeezing 300+HP out of a 1.8 liter engine, and still maintaining CARB emissions. The reason they aren't doing it, is because it's just not really possible. Sure, you can get 200+ MPG in a 100 pound custom made chassis. But the acceleration is less than you'd get out of a 3 speed bicycle, and they won't meet any sort of safety standards. No lights, too low, no impact/crumple zones, etc. Not to mention having zero creature comforts. You know, those terribly wasteful ones like padding on the seat or a roof. It's doable, but only as an academic exercise, not as a practical vehicle. More reasonable is a 60-80MPG motorcycle, but once again you are sacrificing having a real car for the mileage. Who wants to get wet every time it rains?

You failed. I see no teeth.

Amazing how all those car guys, on all the various forums, and with all manner of make and model cars can't seem to come up with anything like that. They get more power, better mileage (but not by huge amounts) and better drivability, but no one gets 100 MPG. Must be every one of us is brainwashed.

Bleurg. the Cess looks as bad as it smells now. And you all still suck.

In other words, you're rasing a couple of sons, eh? Lord help the poor bastards that try to date them in a few years.

But I sent you mead. Any old wino can dig up a bottle of the grape, but you don't find the nectar of the gods on just any streetcorner.

The latest UK thread got me wondering. When playing, I often delay the final push on Moscow for a turn or two, in order for me to get forces closer to Stalingrad. That way, when the capitol moves, I'm right on top of the new one. Yes, a bit gamey. But it's also the logical step; after you take Moscow, you push south anyway. Consider that Stalin would know the current strategic situation, and probably would not move the capitol to a city that was under seige or soon to be surrounded. Stalin was a lot of things (most of them not very nice), but I doubt he was stupid. So, is it possible to have the capitol move be a player option? Some sort of popup on the next turn to allow you to select the city, in the same manner as reinforcements come in? It could also have the option (selected like the others at the game start screen) that cities could be excluded if there was already an adjacent enemy unit. So, for instance, you could be forced to pick a city further back from the front if the enemy had pushed a salient up next to a city. I would really like to see the UK have the option of using Canada, but there would also have to be some provision made so that you couldn't move it there straight away, say before Manchester was taken. Imagine the change in strategy it would require if the capitol was moved to Arkangel. Suddenly, the German player has to send units to defend the Swedes, Finns and Norway, or risk losing resources (convoys routes!). Maybe he's already started pushing south (as I tend to do), and now he is out of position to defend the north. That means lots of operating costs. If units are already understrength, it means a choice of reinforcing or operating with those scarse MPPs. So, would anyone else like this to be a player move, or keep it scripted?

No, you don't. We don't expect you to ever "get it".

Please don't talk about your pair.

Wallow in self pity? </font>

Must be quite the experience for a bottom feeder like you.

My word, MrSpkr you've gotten grey. Not keeping up with the hairdresser appointments these days?

C'mon, Lars. Get with the new OS already.

1945

You put your signature in twice.

Oh, look, Boo. You have a fanboi. Isn't that sweet.

Way to whore yourself out to the SSN, Knee-Dannnnnn

You should try those Toaster Strudels. Mega yummy.

Maybe not. But you know I've modeled all the faucets, sprayer attachment and soap dispenser. I'm extremely detail oriented.

"Kind"? Why, you scoundrel! You cad! You cur! A pox on you. A pox, I say. [do you think I should hit him with the wet noodle, or is that taking it to far?]

Sure, pad that post count, slacker.