Ruthless

Don't underestimate the ants in your kitchen or they will be your undoing...especially if you live in Texas... the ant AI in our apartment (my wife and I) was quite advanced. As soon as we figured out where they were coming in and sprayed that area with ant spray, they found a new way in. We figured out what they like to eat (sweets, especially honey) and made it unavailable (by putting it in the fridge.) They adapted and chewed through a plastic sack of rice to eat its contents, as well as a plastic spaghetti bag to eat the raw noodles. My suggestion is to lay down covering fire with ant spray while you call in artillery (the Orkin Man) and then make a hasty withdrawl while they are disorganized. [ January 02, 2003, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: Ruthless ]

Women: Can't live with 'em...that's pretty much it.

Alsatian, I had a similar "conversation" with my wife (no sleeping on the couch fallout, though) about my playing Counterstrike (which is the closest thing I have to a game addiction) too much. Since then, I have learned that she needs a certain amount of time with me to do stuff (take her out to a movie or coffee or bookstore or something somewhat social are good ways to make her--and probably most women--happy) and if that is satisfied, she doesn't care much about what I do elsewise. Sounds like you probably already figured this out. Unfortunately (or perhaps "fortunately"), CM is one of those games that makes you say "I'll quit just as soon as I do this one thing..." until it is 4AM and you've said that about 100 times.

(From Monty Python's "Upperclass Twit of the Year Contest") "Nigel has run himself over with the car!" <later in the contest> "Nigel's dead, but not necessarily out of it[the competition]"

Of course, you could also purchase a less-addictive product. There's certainly no shortage of sucky games on the market, guaranteed to make you want to stop playing them within minutes! LOL

Ok, a search produced no hits, so I'll have to start my own thread. Anyone know the optimum strategy for winning the Kommersheidt scenario as the Germans? My strategy was: I took my infantry forces that were in the woods on the East side and moved them to the far corner (Northeast end) of the woods as a staging area to assault the town. My armor and remaining infantry forces I moved to the small village on the road on the south end of the map that says "To Schmidt", except for two of my tanks which were on overwatch (below). That would be another staging area from which to assault the town. I left two of my tanks (Pz IV G's, I believe) in a hull-down position on a small hill to the southeast of the town and blasted away at anything that popped up. I left my 20mm flak guns hidden in the south east corner just inside woods to give AA protection to the tanks in the open. I took a few casualties from 3-4 turns of airstrikes, but for the most part I got off easy. No armor hits. It DID lose an arty spotter that was hiding behind a hill to spot rounds into the town, I lost a MG42 that was on its way to the staging area in the south, and a direct hit on a house in that staging area produced several casualties to a few squads, destroyed a Platoon HQ, and destroyed my 150mm spotter. So, air casualties were much higher than I would have liked, but I thought they were tolerable. I lost one Pz4G stuck immobilized in the south end of the map (which was too far away to do anything useful. He survived the game.) I used my remaining forces to assault the town, using smoke to cover the assault (pretty well aimed and timed, I thought) and having tanks in good overwatch positions to provide supporting fire. My assault went ok, but the assault on the northeast part of the town was met with fierce resistance from infantry and I had no tanks close by (although a couple did have LOS to that area and provided some support.) I thought I did fairly well, I eliminated all tanks in the town, I took out numerous enemy squads, etc. My problems were that my infantry just did not have enough ammo to take on so many infantry. After a handful of turns in the town, almost all my infantry were low on ammo. My tanks helped considerably, but not enough, and they, too, soon ran low on HE. Eventually, the scenario ended with a draw. I believe the computer retained control of all the flags, despite severe casualties. I simply did not have enough firepower left to dislodge all his little squads, which the AI deployed in depth in the town and surrounding clumps of trees. Mistakes that I recognize: Splitting my forces might have been a mistake. Losing two arty spotters hurt pretty bad, but air strike casualties could have been much worse. Leaving my guys bunched up in the house and grouped in the town was bad because we took a pounding from the air and from artillery. Still, I thought my casualties were "acceptable". I am wondering if I would have been better to move my entire force around the town on the south end of the map to the west and, clear the forest, and attack from the west (which the AI would probably not expect.) Does anyone have any ideas or AAR's which might suggest a better strategy than the one I used?

They are...{ahem}...burning with desire... [ December 01, 2002, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Ruthless ]

Starfleet Command was good, too. It didn't make my list only because some of the missions struck me as being impossible and, of course, no dynamic campaign. (Not really, anyway.) [ November 28, 2002, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Ruthless ]

Ok, here is an (incomplete) list of my votes for best games (I've played), based on how much fun I had with them (and some I still do): Best Console games first (in order of decreasing greatness): (1) College Football 98 for Sega Genesis (which I still have) (2) Road Rash for Sega Genesis (if you have never played this--original version on Sega Genesis--you need to stock up on liquor, find the game and a working system to play it, and kill an evening with your buddies that way. Funniest game ever made IMO. You get going on your motorcycle at 200 MPH and slam into a fence post and fly about 3 or 4 miles, hitting trees, cars, etc. on the way until you are finally stopped by hitting a house. Your guy gets up, shakes his head a bit, then runs back to his motorcycle.) (3) Tennis for Nintendo NES. Actually play (kinduv )like tennis. Best PC Games (in order from oldest to newest): Jedi Knight II: Once you get your lightsabre and force powers, this game is fun as hell and very addictive. Online play isn't that great. Counterstrike: Best online game of all time. Once you kill your first enemy on this FPS, you will be addicted...you have been warned... Half Life: Maybe the best game of all time? Immersive beyond belief, you will shriek like a little girl when a monster jumps out of the shadows...really! CMBO: I don't have CMBB yet but CMBO is an obvious one. CMBB will probably be added to top of the list once Christmas arrives and I can play what looks like a fantastic evolution in the series. Falcon 4.0 (with SP3 patch): Best combat flight sim of all time. If you don't have it--get it! IL-2 is very good, too, but the lack of dynamic campaign (and having to replay missions over and over again) nudges it out of the exception games category for me. If I get better at it, it might make it into the list, only time will tell. TOAW: Excellent, extremely flexible operational wargame. Not perfect, but very good. VGA Planets: Anyone who hasn't tried this one (multiplayer only) is seriously missing out on a great space X4 game. Fun and funny and a lot of strategy. Harpoon: (On my Amiga 2000) Excellent naval warfare game. Eagerly awaiting Harpoon 4! Perfect General (Amiga 2000): Abstract as hell, but a fun wargame (sortof) anyway. Dungeon Master (Amiga 500): Puzzles and monsters to fight and pretty immersive. A fun and addictive game. Microbes (TRS-80): Basically "Asteroids" Pyramid (TRS-80): A text adventure with a sense of humor. Arcade Games (no order): Dragon's Lair: Great animated game by Disney's (cringe, having to say that word) Don Bluth. Space Ace: Ditto Karate Champ Mach 3 Pacman Space Invaders: The one that started it all!

That red growlie face looks a bit to me like the guy needs more fiber in his diet...

Heh heh, James S I actually read your review when it (DA) came out which is what made me interested in it (I usually think GD reviews are pretty good and fair and tend to jive with my opinions.) To everyone, thanks for the input. I realize a lot of the posters are going to be TacOps fans since we are here, but of course that doesn't make your opinions invalid, either. For those who LIKED DA, did you NOT find the interface problems/dullness that others mentioned? I think I will do a search and find a little more info and download the demos and see if I like'em. My problem is not that I can't get them both (I'm married so I have two families giving me gifts which amounts to a lot of loot at the holidays), but that I don't likely have time to play both. Anyhow, thanks for the info. Any more opinions welcome, as well!

Ok, I have both TacOps and Decisive Action on my Christmas list this year. For those who have played both, what do you perceive as the strengths and weaknesses of each? I may get both, of course...

I am a professional C++ programmer. I have MS Visual C++ 6.0 at home. If you want to do something simple like you are describing (X% chance of getting Y type of setting/mission with Z types of equipment) I can program that up easily or else something like the campaign system rules that a few others have come up with would be easy, as well. Basically you are talking about just crunching some statistics and looking stuff up in a table. Creating a hex-based strategy game to output data to go into a CM battle would be more difficult, but could be manageable (though probably not by me since I have a ton of other side projects going on already.) For example, if you just needed a program to be able to create maps that look something like TOAW and place historical units and then select a hex and have it generate a quick-battle stat set for CM...that would not be too hard I think. It gets more difficult if you have to allow for the units to move and fight and really hard is making the AI. How ever, if you just needed a crude way to make hex-based Op/strategic level maps which could be used to make CM quick battles, that might be possible. Seriously, I'm surprised that BFC hasn't done one of the following yet: (1) Contacted Norm Koger about creating an interface between TOAW and CM OR (2) Created an interface to CM that players could use to create their own campaign system. I know this has been argued to death already and BFC's stance is that they don't want their "proprietary" code compsomised; however, if BFC did a little coding (and speaking as a programmer, I would say the level of complexity of this task is quite low, but I'm sure BFC will be along to say otherwise any second now...) they could simply output a text file of units remaining on each side, casualty levels, etc. and a little code to accept from a text file the unit and terrain data for making a QB. This would not, in any way, compromise their code, plus it would satisfy the community who wants a campaign system. However, all that said, there is a possibility that some people may not recognize: BFC may want to create their own campaign system someday as a means to selling more product. This is, of course, their right as the creators of CM, and it is mere speculation in any case. At any rate, if you want some programming help, let me know.

I think this is a good idea. It is obvious that the masses of newbies coming here are frustrated by all the old hands and all the old hands are saying "OMG, what is it with all these new people? How do they not understand this obscure reference to a joke we made two years ago? Do a search! This issue has already been discussed!" At any rate, what others pointed out is quite corrrect, so I shall summarize: Although I think it is a nice idea to start your own non-Peng Challenge Thread, eventually, you will probably find that people will begin telling jokes, some of which will become inside jokes. A group of regular posters (even newbies) will develop a camraderie and that will seem "clubby" to people just joining the forums. That is just human nature--it's called friends. However, you shall find that the regular posters here are pretty nice in general and will talk to you even if you are not "in the club". I will also point out that the response of the old hands here has not always been tremendously polite to the new folks. Anyone remember whatshisname that posted like 6 pointless threads his first day signing up? Although his threads' content value was certainly questionable, he was neither rude nor offensive. And what did he get for it? In his first thread, he just wanted to introduce himself and the moderator promptly locked it up. Really, I understand the frustration of not wanting to have a bazillion useless posts clogging up the board, but his threads were arguably no more inappropriate than, say, the umpteenmillion Peng Threads that are started here daily. <Sound of forum regulars organizing a lynching...some of them pulling up chairs and opening beers...> In other words, I suspect that there HAS been a little bit of preferencial treatment of old hands, and some shortness in dealing with new people. My point: Everyone should make an extra effort to be nice, particularly to the new folks. New folks: I recommend you often lurk and seldom post. That should get you up to speed. And please do a search before you post. As for the Peng Thread...I don't think it is that hard to understand and a lot of the inside jokes are not that hard to understand, either. However, may I recommend the Cesspoolers come up with a standardized post they can cut-and-paste into the first thread of a Peng Challenge which explains the threads intentions and some of the inside references that newbies won't understand. Sorry, one more thing: The new guys posting about how "clubby" the atmosphere is here and some of the curtness of the replies to their posts: May I recommend you try posting some genuine questions at, say, www.counter-strike.net forums? See what kind of joy that brings you. Here's my prediction: "YOU: How do I do/use XYZ? AVERAGE POSTER: OMFG, YOU N008! Y0u don't know how to use XYZ cuz u r n07 1337 like me! If you didn't suck so much you wouldn't be such an @$$! STFU and stop posting!" Except, of course, the grammar and spelling would be much worse. Anyway, that gives you an idea of how much nicer this forum is than most, so don't complain TOO loudly... Anyway, thought I'd put in my two cents, but it looks more like $10. [ November 10, 2002, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Ruthless ]

Wife again: She thinks she should be using the Mann-Whitney U Test instead of a T Test... she needs to do this in Excel. Ruthless again: Ok, I know all you die-hard statistics fanatics out there can crunch WWII video game numbers, so you should be able to help her out...? Get to it, lads! Treeburst, thanks for running thousands upon thousands of tests. Being a software engineer myself (specifically I do real-time embedded systems for avionics on fighters) and working, in my spare time, on a warsim myself (you can preeorder if you want to-- if I ever finish, it may be done in a decade or so during which time I will happily keep your money safe in my bank account) I am interested in this thread and other threads about all the inconsistencies between sim and real life as well as discussions about the AI's, etc. etc. Keep 'em comin'...

Ok, I really didn't want to get involved in this extreme statistics thread (other than lurking on it all last week at work), but my wife has a question she needs answered by a statistician for one of her graduate biology courses: How do you determine what the "hypothesized mean difference" should be for a paired two sample for mean abundance t-test? This is just slightly off the wall, but you guys seem to be statistics experts, and my husband has been reading me selected passages. Thanks!

My grandparents (on my father's side) are both from Romania. My grandfather was in (I believe) the Prinz Eugan division/regiment in WWII. Apparently he was fortunate that he was not tattooed as an SS because his brother(or something) apparently could not emigrate to U.S. because of SS tattoo. However, my grandfather, after being wounded twice (once in the head) ended up captured. I believe he said something about every man being lined up and every other one being shot. Nice fun stuff like that. He ended up in a Russian prison camp where he managed to make friends with one of the guards because he spoke some Russian. That probably kept him alive because he "was one of the lucky ones" to get a fish head with his soup (mostly water) very sporadically. Anyhow, he emigrated to U.S. with his wife after the war, eventually managed to buy his own orchard, and is retired now.

It would be too expensive (I bet) for BFC to redo the voices, plus it would anger probably the majority of players, but I would suggest they print up a translation we could reference? Or how 'bout subtitles when you get close to a unit that is talking?

I understand the concern, but I think rather than it being a matter of not being able to relate or being interested in the East Front, it might just be an unfamiliarity with it. I wasn't terribly interested in it until I started reading about it. I, of course, have some bias because my grandfather was fighting on the East Front (Prinz Eugen division, I believe) and ended up in a Russian prison camp. He doesn't like to talk about it much, but that still might give me the "hook" someone mentioned. But really, what it most fascinating in history is great triumphs (especially over overwhelming odds) or great suffering (a bit macabre, but it's human nature). The East Front certainly had tragedies beyond all imagination, and it was quite the epic struggle; albeit it was a struggle of evil against, well, evil. It may help you to think of yourself, as someone like my grandfather, a farmer from Romania conscripted into a Fascist army and forced to fight the Russian hordes. Use your imagination!

Hmmm...emphasis seems to be missing! Well, use your imagination.

[Emphasis mine] (1) As we saw in the Yelnia Scenario that has been much discussed, the Germans have little hope of killing the T-34 crewmen in their tanks (maybe a few lucky penetrations by little AT guns, but that's it. And the tank hunter teams have little hope of reaching them through all the guns blazing across the open ground.) Thus, having supporting units is very important to their survival. If lots of friendly infantry around, tank hunter team probably won't be able to get close, especially across open ground. (2) It is true that if they are isolated, they will eventually be destroyed, but if they have a few hours and they believe they may be rescued (or may be able to take out the gun firing at them) I think they would tough it out for while. The point of view above is correct I think: In either case of crews 100% of the time abandoning immobilized tanks or 0% of the time abandoning immobilized tanks, the model is flawed. Sometimes crew will abandon a tank, sometimes not. I suspect (total speculation) that it is possible that a crew will not abandon an immobilized tank in some cases. I don't know what that chance is or if it is correct chance, or even if my supposition is true.

Agreed. Of course, they could also become "elite" through training (101st Airborne, for example.) Although certainly a very good model, the CM model of soldiers does not (apparently) differentiate between courage, experience, discipline, intelligence, etc.; at least not on a level that is visible to us, anyway. My interpretation of "elite" is that they have been highly trained and probably have some (though they may not) combat experience. "Elite" forces, such as Navy Seals, are elite by training. "Veteran" is, I would interpret, someone with significant combat experience. CM amalgamates experience/training/courage/etc into one adjective (although I guess you can set "fanatic" and leader bonuses, too) which makes the discussion a bit confusing. However, I still believe that, based mostly on crew experience and current situation, some crews would stick with immobile tank, some would bail, within the time constraints of a CM game. For all or most crews to bail quickly out of an immobilized tank under very light AT fire is counterintuitive. They might at least try to locate the gun and knock it out before bailing. I'd be interested in hearing from BFC a little more (nothing classified, of course!) about how their model works.

Some food for thought from a non-grog (who also does not yet own CMBB): (1)The Tiger crew in the above story did not (apparently) abondon their tank when under small-caliber AT fire (even for 6 hours+) (2)Some crews probably would choose to fight it out in the tank at least longer than a typical CM exchange; that is, some tank crews bail in a matter of minutes, all bailing crews are observed within the game time limits, which is what? An hour? I think SOME tank crews would probably tough it out that long or longer, depending on experience, damage received, type of attack, support units, what they THINK is shooting at them, etc...as well as (in the game) a good sprinkling of randomness. This is based on speculation, of course, but I think it is sensible. (3)A good deal of AAR's would be required to try to put some sense into "how often" a tank crew under small-caliber AT fire would bail (immobilized or otherwise.) Bottom line: I think what someone else said is true about it being difficult to predict human response to known/unknown danger in combat. However, if "Elite" crews can't tell that they are being attacked by a weapon that can't have a serious chance of penetrating them, and they are attacking, and they are immobilized, I think they should probably not bail immediately, depending on how the rest of the battle is going. Obviously, a better weapon may be stalking them, too, once immobilized, especially; but, if they are leading the spearhead of an attack and they KNOW something is shooting at them that will try to kill them if they get out, that seems kind of silly for an "elite" crew to bail, human nature should be for the more experienced crew to have more discipline and knowledge to stay inside (at least for awhile.) My instinct is that if a tank is immobilized, it should be a bit random as to whether the crew stays to fight it out or if they bail. However, since I don't have the game yet, I can't really comment if they have modelled this correctly/to my satisfaction (which are, of course, one and the same!) Just my two cents.

Some other positive comments for BFC: The demos DO show many of the differences in the engine between CMBO and CMBB. I noticed graphics improvements on a grand scale; the sounds are better, too, I think; Cool death clock (although it made my stupid gunners keep pumping shells into tanks that already had penetrations and I knew the crews would probably bail); cool supression from machine gun and rifle fire (that didn't really exist in CMBO); etc., etc.... All in all, I am certain the full version will be very cool indeed. If BFC's goal was to highlight differences between CMBO and CMBB, they succeeded. However, I think the argument that they needed to do this to entice CMBO players to buy CMBB is pretty silly; how many people were clamoring to order it well before the demo came out? Anyhow, the demo isn't that bad, I just think the reasoning behind making a demo was a bit flawed and the scenarios could have been more interesting, but I don't think the scenarios will keep many people from buying the game who would otherwise have bought it. Do I think they should release a new demo or more scenarios? Not really; if they did, they would just give people more reason to complain. IMO, wargamers learn what games are good from word-of-mouth and good PR (reviews, etc.) anyway, so the demo really probably won't make the difference. There are a few fence-sitters out there who might be turned off by the demo, but if they can't reason that better scenarios will be included with the game, then we can't really help them, can we? And to be honest, I wasn't that impressed by the demo for CMBO. I bought it due to all the stunning reviews I read. However, like CMBO, I will be buying CMBB.

*SPOILERS BELOW* I wasn't going to get involved in the ongoing demo debate, but since it still hasn't gone away, I guess I will... First, let me make clear that I am not "whining" for any new demo scenario. This is purely constructive, unbiased (I only "like" Combat Mission and think it is very good, I don't worship it) observations, which I hope will not come off as arrogant or disrespectful. I believe CMBO is a superior product, and CMBB will be, too, when it comes out. I, and everyone else here, appreciate the time BFC guys freely give to addressing our concerns on this forum. I will also start by saying something positive (or somewhat less negative at least): The scenarios are not that bad. Yelnia, as the Germans, is mildy interesting, as I've played it twice now, and am thinking about trying it again, to see how many tanks I can take out in the course of the scenario (so far, I've forced the Russians to abandon 3 tanks.) I will also say that I was planning not to comment because I don't believe BFC would redo their demo and perhaps others would like those scenarios better (and many do seem to enjoy them.) Now, the less positive: I can say truthfully that when I first played the two demo scenarios, I made an offhand remark to my wife (who wasn't really listening) "Boy, they should have picked better scenarios for the demo for this game." That was based on playing both scenarios as the Germans (I didn't actually finish either one because I got bored after awhile and in Yelnia scenario, I got frustrated that I couldn't do anything about the T-34's attacking me, so I had all my guys do a suicide rush at the Russians...which was comical and stupid and pretty well ended any hope of winning. I got bored trying to mop up the rest of the Russian defenders in Citadel in the first part of the map. I quit when one of my tanks made it to the bottom of the hill where it wiped out the Russian Company HQ.) At any rate, I played Yelnia again as the Germans, and I did much better this time by placing my guns in a sneakier position (took out 2 tanks that way and a third was abandoned by the end of the scenario.) I was much happier the second time I played it. I haven't tried it as the Russians yet, but I have some idea of what it would be like, having read many accounts of it here and from having played the scenario as the Germans. Now, I have no doubt that this was historically correct (BFC surely does more research than I do), but that doesn't mean it makes for an entertaining scenario. I think, objectively speaking, that Yelnia is balanced...if playing against the computer-controlled Russians. I am fairly certain that a human would have better luck taking out the Germans, since they have 6 tanks which are REALLY hard to take out (the only reason I could take out two with my guns is because I had played it against the AI already and knew what it would likely do, so I could position the guns where they could get close-range side shots at the buttoned tanks.) I could be wrong about this, however, since I haven't tried it from the other side. But the other point I would make about this scenario, which also applies to the Citadel scenario, is that the terrain, while probably historically correct, is not terribly interesting. For the defender, the terrain allows the attacker to come from anywhere, on a broad front, over open ground, so they pretty much HAVE to defend everywhere, spreading their forces thin. For the attacker, it appears that the only real choice to make is to move forward and engage whatever pops up. In either case, there seem to be few choices for defenders and attackers alike due to force selections/terrain. I think that is why the scenarios are "poor" to some. As I said before, I don't think they are that bad, but in my opinion, it was an illogical move to put out demo scenarios at all. Since BFC surely knew that most of the people who bought CMBO would probably buy and enjoy CMBB, they had no real reason to entice anyone by putting out a demo. The screenshots show that the graphics are greatly improved. (The sounds are much improved, too.) Anyone not interested in the East Front will surely not be swayed by a demo. However, if they ARE to put out a demo, I would have recommended scenarios with more interesting terrain because, as I said, there seem to be few possibilities with such open, flat terrain. Anyhow, that's just my two cents. Others feel the scenarios are great and that's fine. I just think the terrain is a bit dull. I don't want more scenarios, just some observations to bear in mind when releasing CM:The Next Generation or whatever you will call it.