Jump to content

Erwin

Members
  • Posts

    17,458
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Posts posted by Erwin

  1. What many of us have been requesting is an overhaul of the acquire/buddy aid system so that:

    1) You can choose whether to take the WIA man's weapon and also how much ammo.

    2) Units only have to be adjacent to other units or vehicles in order to be able to acquire (swap even) weapons and ammo.

    There should be safeguards built in to avoid one unit taking all the MG's for example. ie: limit to a reasonably realistic number etc.

  2. I loved the quote: “I’d love to sit at a cafe and just hang out. The last time I was there as a senator, I still had the option of wandering through the Old City of Jerusalem. That option becomes much trickier once you’re actually president. You can’t just slip out and interact with people without having a bunch of guys with machine guns with you.”

    Is it accurate when he said "machine guns"?

  3. I didn't understand much of this. :(

    Could someone please provide a crayon version interpretation? Many thanks.

    Permission? Where did you get that straw man?No. They are usually defined by series, I will assume you mean that.You came up with the rationals comprising the reals. Not me. The cardinality of Z reaches only Aleph null. You limit yourself [needlessly] into error.Bull. I refer to my earlier post.A proof that is not proof like enough? What I wrote is no proof. What you wrote was confused gibberish.Reality tends to be a bitch. If you're going to try to show off by using obscure mathematical expressions, you need to get them right. Cantor came up with his cardinality structure exactly because of the kind of errors you're making. And now you're using his jargon to make exactly those errors. It would be funny if it wasn't annoying.which you got wrong. Simple. Now you could bite your tongue and learn, and not be the same kind of wrong again, or you can rant and rail trying to put a shine on your failure, and set yourself up for the same failure again. I think I know which one you're going to come up with, but feel free to surprise me.
  4. +1 re making the arty tool more visible. I also find it hard/time-wasting to figure out what gun I am using.

    Re the FO, the game system should be making thing easier for us re LOS not harder. The FO should be in whatever position is best for LOS - unless an enemy is close or he's being fired at. If we're going to get into too much micromanagement we're going to end up with game that can only handle a platoon, or may as well become a first person experience (like the xnt Panzer Elite was for a tank platoon).

  5. "I wish they'd do even a cursory strategic layer though."

    +1 to that...

    Altipueri: IN CM1 the mods are the actual bmp's and they replace whatever bmp's you have in your BMP folder. If you haven't saved the default bmp's they are lost.

    In CM2 it's safer... All the mods go in a folder you create in the DATA folder and call "Z". They are loaded last and therefore show up in the game in ALL scenarios however created. You can also then remove those mods easily and replace with other mods, or let the game go back to default graphics.

  6. I still enjoy CM1 for different reasons than CM2. They are really quite different game systems that share a similar name for promotional/marketing reasons.

    CM2 is much more detailed than CM1, more like a simulation and significantly more work to play well. For those reasons and computer power, you rarely see large CM2 scenarios and nothing like the huge CM1 scenarios.

    CM1 is more of a game and is more fun for a quick session.

×
×
  • Create New...