Jump to content

Eden Smallwood

Members
  • Posts

    504
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Eden Smallwood

  1. Got this book yesterday; I'm about 3/4 through it. For me it was a slow start, but then it picked up... I guess I'd say it was "ok". I won't bother giving x out of y starts, since I don't know what the heck the baseline would be. But parts remind me alot of the book that optionally comes with CMAK. Anyway, I'm wondering what you guys thought of it.
  2. From the trim and detailing, I think it's a 2010 Toyota Prius.
  3. So, my advice is: Buy one. Then buy the other one. (Do your part to stimulate the economy) Ok seriously: I think it really depends on what theatre you would most enjoy. For myself, CMBB got stale from the never-ending steppes, and Russians, Russians, Russians... Remember that in CMAK you get not only Africa and all that sand, but you still get part of Europe (Italy, Crete). Other than theatre, arms and nations, CMBB and CMAK seem to me pretty much the same game, but then I'm not a grog. I prefer CMAK, but that's because I like Europe as an antidote to steppes or sand, and I speak English so it's nice to play Yank/Aussie/Kiwi at times.
  4. I smite thine apologies, for they impugn my honor!! Eh, I mean I appreciate the effort even if it was wrong. I even appreciate just talking about my situation, really, just to know that I'm not totally crazy here. In fact, unless I'm blind, the Dynamic Flags are also something only available to scenario designers, not to QB players. Oh well. cinacchi, that sounds like *alot* of work for a QB. OTOH, it sounds like a really nifty way to make PBEM battles??? Where the designer picks most of the parameters, the map, and *some* of the force, but the players get to pick some of their own force too? Well, seems like a nifty idea. Joachim, my total losses are attacks/probes where I just don't have the right arms to advance-- say it's wide open field and I'm looking at panzers and have only green infantry... Of course there are grey areas. If it's obviously absurd, I'll abort the scenario-- there's a difference between long odds and just sending my men to the slaughterhouse. But I'll play the long odds ones. When you suspect me of "rushing"... Ha! I'm usually very conservative. The only time I really remember rushing in a really big way was playing someone's scenario that depicted the D-Day landing-- I did what I could with arty, but then I had to rush with everything I had. I had no choice! But it worked! I was amazed! It was quite a thrilling little scenario, I must say. And many here I'm sure would urge me to go "review" the scenario, but like all scenarios, I go and grab it with a dozen others, play it, eventually, then when I'm done... Who knows where the heck I got it from? And how many clicks would it take to find it again? Ah well. I guess that was my review for the D-Day guy.
  5. In hindsight, it is perfectly obvious I would have gotten this response; it's perfectly natural, after all! Ergo, I should have mentioned something in the first post: there is a bug in CMAK which forces me to restart my machine, *fresh*, before playing. IOW, CMAK will freeze up IF and ONLY IF the machine has ever been put to "sleep", (since the last restart). That's not a huge deal, if I'm going to play a whole game, (QB)-- the overhead of restarting is small if I'm going to do an entire QB. But in the case of PBEM, it would perhaps mean a restart per turn... In the case where I end up with a challenger who sends a turn per day. See what I mean? Ah, well... having said that, perhaps you guys are still right-- maybe I should just suck it up and do the PBEM thing. It was fun in CMBB. ( Has anyone seen "WhatsHisFaceSomething Cerda" ? ) JoMc67, offer noted, give me some time to work on a (separate issue) email bug I have right now in OS9. "House rules", LOL! But I bet they are something I would want too... costard, thanks for mentioning "dynamic flags"; I never thought of that, I'll try that tonight, FWIW. Force balance I don't mind, but the Exp Bonus can be annoying. At least for me, there is nothing more aggravating than trying to get my green/conscripts to advance against crack units... Talk about blood pressure!
  6. For awhile now, maybe a long time even, I've been playing QB's. After getting CMAK initially, I went to Scenario Depot Part Deux etc and downloaded every "Allied vs AI, Pts<1500" scenario I could find... And that was fun for awhile. But then, naturally, I'd run through them all and/or I got annoyed with the tendency too many authors have to put you up against truly preposterous odds, as if only a real man's man would complain about fighting an equal number of German forces.... only to find that there were six more Tigers waiting in the flanks to make things... ah... "challenging" towards the end of the engagement... Anyway, I started playing QB's exclusively, and that worked fine for awhile too, but now I find that all my results are "Total". Usually I win, of course, so it's a "Total Victory". In fact, awhile ago it really was "total": 100% to 0%. So you will probably say, "turn up the AI experience factor or troop complement"... Well hang on, cuz it's not that simple. I'm not saying I win them all: I still lose a fair number of battles-- but those are also Total outcomes. "Total Defeat" of course. But there's no outcome in between. I think it has to do with: A) my QB's have to be small, (because of HW), around "500 pts" (increased automatically if attacking, etc), and when I go to start turn 1, I either have The Right Stuff, or I don't. IOW, if the AI has picked Panthers, and I end up without any anti-armor stuff and the battlefield is wide and flat... I'm hosed. If there's enough cover or something, I'll win. It's hard to explain; maybe that's clear, maybe not. I can't tell right now. If you know what I'm talking about, what would you do to get more QB battles that are "in the middle" of the challenge-spectrum? Increasing the AI exp bonus would pull down my wins, sure. But that would also turn my defeats from "aw shucks, another 5 minutes and I coulda got him" into Total Agonies... Know what I mean? I've been playing with everything totally random except I like to buy my own forces. But maybe there's a magic combo of Year/Region/Map/Etc where things work out better than Random..?
  7. Yes, I was. Thanks for that "trick" if that's what it is, of slapping some sense into him. Nice to know, although I guess I'm almost disappointed-- I had a feeling that that was not the real reason I started this thread Anyway, thx.
  8. Ok, here's a saved game. I don't know if this is what I've been up against-- looking at it closely, this one seems like an honest 'bug', but we'll see what you guys say. As far as my original complaint in this thread, ISTR the spotter having the ability, in the command menu, to target something-- he just wouldn't. Whereas here, he doesn't even have that command! Hmm. I've saved the game in two places, once as a (hopefully) binary cmg file, and also zipped: www.lafn.org/~zeppenwolf/tmp/JustDoIt.cmg www.lafn.org/~zeppenwolf/tmp/JustDoIt.zip Open, look at the spotter--if you're like me, he doesn't even have a 'target' command on this turn. ( He recovers, in my original game, and he drops all his hard rain, but why not on this turn? )
  9. Sheesh! You guys don't know how lucky you've been. > I'd love to see one of your examples though, run some tests in the QB and feel free to post something. Ten-Four-Good-Buddy. (Ok, that was CB radio, not military, but it's the best I've got after a bottle of Chenin Blanc) >What Joachim is getting at is to be aware of the positioning of the mortar in relation to the HQs LOS to the target. Yes, Ok from your putting it another way, I totally see the point now-- it's about the HQ "line" and the mortar "line" being (mathematically) coincident. The more angle between the two, the less likely that errant rounds will block the HQ LOS. Got it. Finally. I'm not stupid, but sometimes I do a good impression. Back soon.
  10. MeatEtr>It's the same as CMBB, all on-board mortar can be spotted by any HQ. "Any' !?!!!! This is where I have a problem. Since nobody has disagreed with your statement there, I'll guess that I have to physically provide a scenario turn where the above is false. But it's simply not the same as CMBB-- I have had numerous instances where the HQ had LOS, was not panicked or any other thing, the on-board mortar guy had a line-of-command to the HQ (the Fat-Red-Line), and yet... the mortar guy woud simply refuse to fire a single round. Well, that takes us back to square one-- I need to show you a scenario where it happens, right? Ok, that does it. Next time it happens I'll come back and post the saved game here. I understand what everyone else is saying, except maybe this was a little confusing: Joachim>if the mortar fires into the LOS line between HQ and target then LOS is blocked. No LOS - no barrage. So set up the mortars to the sides of the HQ, not straight behind it. You seem to be referring to two different things here-- do you mean the smoke from the mortar-tube itself blocking the HQ's LOS? Or do you mean the smoke from the round exploding in front of the target? In the former case, I would understand putting the mortar downwind from the HQ; in the latter, I would choose a "target" downwind from the actual foxhole or whatever. You seem to be mixing the two concepts... ? Thanks all...
  11. Ok, guys, something happened to mortar and off-map arty spotting since CMBB and I don't see it in the release notes, (or else it has always been different for allied vs axis?) What EXACTLY are the darn rules for when & how an arty guy can be indirectly spotted for by an HQ guy, (and which HQ's can work?). It's starting to seem to me that an HQ can spot for someone IF AND ONLY IF it's the commander of his exact squad (even the company or battalion HQ won't work!). And if it's an "independent" mortar/arty, then forget it! Well fine then, but then I certainly won't be filling out my QB points with indy mortar guys, since they're kinda useless if they can only provide direct line of sight fire, yeah? Something's changed, or else I've always been so deeply confused that I never noticed. Don't think so though... I don't see a "Confused-As-Heck-Smiley"; use your imagination.
  12. Well I'm "here", and I'm playing with myself. I MEAN... Hee. Seriously, though-- I just got CMAK a couple weeks ago, (after playing the boobs off CMBB years ago), and I've been burning through the 50 odd scenarios at Scenario Depot II which are under 1500 pts and are "Allies vs AI" first choice. After all that CMBB, I WANT TO BE AMERICAN AGAIN!! Phew! Anyway, I'll probably get into the PBEM circus sometime, but for now I have a bug in CMAK I hope I can fix/avoid, (otherwise PBEM would be a drag)... Never heard of these other sites mentioned; I'll have to czek them out. Wish I could play the latest Syrian thing, but I'm Mac or die.
  13. Wicky: I presume you've got an old beige G3 which is limiting your problematic OSX 10.2 No, it's an iBook-- the first release iBook, a Blueberry which executes an astounding 300 million instructions per second. As I've said, the "upgrade path" for this machine is to... buy another machine. Which I might, I suppose, but for the nonce I'm happy enough to have figured out a way to make CM a realistic option. Guess I need to get CMAK before CM goes out of business or something. Emrys: Look at the bottom of the page when you are on the index page. Eh... ok, I will. Still, this forum is not what one expects after visiting thousands of others like it on the web. At least there would be a "next page of threads" button?!? Not something to argue about though-- let's find common cause: Emrys: And you might start checking the board a little more often too. Well exCUSE me, I was just stuck in OS9 wonderland for a couple days, but you are CORRECT-- I very well MIGHT start checking the board a little more often now. I might just need FRESH PBEM VICTIMS, don't you know? Ok, I think I need to go order CMAK first, yeah? Prolly nobody plays CMBB anymore... (?)
  14. Say, what happens to threads around here? They totally vaporize after a few days?!?? Welll, that's a bit different... but okay. In the thread I started about Mac OS awhile ago, (not long!), I think someone named.. "Wicky"? asked what OS'es I was on; I felt the urge to update my OS9 to the max, (although I already had the 9.2 "Startup disk"), so I've been in OS9 land for the past few days. I now I have OS 9.2.2, and OSX 10.2.8 (The OSX is limited by the hardware, and the hardware cannot be upgraded on this machine. So I'm REALLY maxed out here!) But I found, after googling and putzing around with Preferences and Caches and stuff, I can *sometimes* get back from OS9 to OSX by completely shutting down, then restarting with the option key down. Only works sometimes. And trying to select my OSX partition while in OS9 is NEVER possible; oh well. But at least I found a statistically acceptable method for getting back to X from 9, so I'm back in the CM business. Thanks for responding, "Wicky" (sp?) and Michael Emrys. Read this post before it's too late...
  15. It's not my fault!!! When Mac OSX first came out, there was a bug for some machines, (including, but not limited to, mine)-- when you chose to boot up in 9.*, that was fine, but when you chose to go back to OSX, it would refuse to make the jump. You wound up having to *reinstall* OSX (over your perfectly functioning previous install), to get back to the future. Well!! The problem was apparently in the "Startup Disk" control panel; Apple released a new version which allegedly fixed that bug. I heard, I saw, I downloaded. But... it STILL doesn't work on my machine-- if I ever choose to boot up in OS9, I will have to reinstall OSX to get back. This particular iBook won't reboot back in OSX, not for love or money. The upshot, you see, is that TO PLAY CMBB REQUIRES RE-INSTALLING OSX EVERY DANG TIME. Kind of a drag. But I guess the inference is clear-- I need to get me a used Mac with the right powers, pick up CMAK and just count my blessings. Thanks Wicky for the specifics, it looks like I have to do some pre-shopping homework.
  16. Guys, hi. I'm wondering what has changed in the last year (two?) since I was here. I've got a wimpy old Mac, I bought CMBB and played the poop out of it; never got CM Afrika Corps... I remember talk and talk and talk about "CM Next Gen" or "CMx2" when I was here, and I looked forward to it, although knowing that my old Mac wouldn't run it anyway, (good excuse to upgrade? Yes, probably). But now I come back, and, to the best I can figger it, CMx2 HAS in fact been released, but it runs PC only ??!? It took a whole lot of poking around and following links-- Ok, I'll say it-- as unspeakably awesome as these CM guys are, there's one thing they've always been really terrible at, and that's at describing the *System Requirements* for these games. I had to go around the iWorld six times before seeing that CM "Marine-Something" was PC only. Well, fine. Although I also remember back then, one of the moderator guys, ("MadMatt"?), saying, and this is a very close quote, "If there is ever a platform we abandon, it won't be the Mac". Ok, so things change. Er, right? Sorry, here are my questions succinctly: 1) The NEW combat mission stuff, "CMx2" stuff, is PC only-- right? 2) As far as the "old" CM, specifically the last one, "Afrika Corps" or whatever-- what is the *pragmatic* minimum Mac OS/CPU/Etc needed to run it? Thanks for reading if you got this far...
  17. I play a QB, pick two axis Art'y spotters, put them on separate hills. Here comes the Russian peasant horde, down one valley which spotter A can see-- A rains down wrath, runs out of ammo. Spotter B is looking down the other, lonely valley; he's full of ammo, but he's too fat and slow to make it over to valley A. I have arty shells which can't be used: game limitation, or realistic representation? It seems to me (who doesn't know) that it's reasonable to think that it could be decided on the field that spotter B needs spotter A's shells, if indeed there's any real sense in which each spotter has "his own" shells in the first place. ? Eden
  18. Say, ah... do you happen to have a list of those handy? I've got only the Naval ones, which are/were(?) different, different still from what the Hollywood movie crews use... confusing as heck, I can tell you. The correct answer, btw, is "SMACK!" with an exclamation point. Eden
  19. ne'ermind [ September 30, 2003, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]
  20. ...or it tells you that we've been around this block a few times already. I independently thought up with the same fix you mention above; I see no problems with it; I agree with you complĂȘtement. The answer to MikeyD's objection is simple and natural: If a "better" HQ comes along, whom you WANT to "take over", then you simply move BetterHQ closer-- give Mortar Man an order to ceasefire-- in limbo, MM is by default under the closer, BetterHQ's command-- give a new Target command-- all is well. IOW, the "stickiness" is only for the duration of the current Target command. It seems like an all-benefit-with-zero-cost fix to me. Eden [Edit: Oops-- need to update my sig file] [ August 28, 2003, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]
  21. In my humble non-grog understanding: No, they didn't quite get the hang of it. El Alamein is the first place in Rommel's advance which was unflankable- ocean on one side, impassable mtns on the other. During the advance, (here's the flammable part), I believe the allies relied too heavily on WWI ideas; Rommel did not. In fact, the allies fell for the same "tricks" not once but over and over. Too bad for R, Hitler was unwilling to send more than a smidgen of supplies to Africa, and R was largely on his own. At one point, at least half of R's tanks were captured tanks. By the time R reached El Al, the defensive line set up there and the campaign was given to Montgomery, who was intent on winning no matter what- for the allies to suffer one more loss to R was intolerable, and M personally considered losing to R intolerable as well. So, although by the time R reached El Al and made a weak attack, M decided to wait and build an overwhelming force, although he surely had one at that point, R being so extended and depleted he could have been pushed over with a feather. M reinforced, R did also, but of course M could bring much more to bear than R, who had lost even more in the way of supply when the island of I-Forget-Its-Name was finally secured by the allies, so when M finally decided to go swarming in, he had no problems, like picking up a carton of milk you think is full but turns out to be empty. Grogs feel free to correct me, Eden
  22. Help! "I have no weapons of mass destruction, and if you invade I will use them on you!" What does this mean, for someone whose sys just barely runs CMBB? Seems to be self-contradictory?!?!???? [ ] I've got it made- start saving bucks! [ ] I am sweating bullets, maybe yes, maybe no! :mad: Eden
  23. What a guy wants: A way to find scenarios suitable for PBEM game. I was/have been surprised to find how difficult it is to find these. At the SD, one can use the Search function to find, say, all scenarios in which the Wind is blowing from the SouthEast, but one cannot search for all scenarios designed as PBEM/TCP, let alone all such which are Large or Smaller, reviewed positively, etc yadda blah. That's my two, folks- no *vitriol* for the SD, just stating the limitation of the community which strikes me as the most obvious one at the moment. I'm currently just poking through them all, peek at it, maybe download and peek, go on to the next one in the alphabet, look at it, maybe download it, peek, repeat, repeat. For the time being, does anyone have a recommendation? Emphasis on Balance, Moderate Size, and preferably *Conservative* amounts/sizes of reinforcements. Tia, Eden
  24. This is the place- jump right in, the water's fine. Announce that you've made one and sent it to the SD, or ask people to playtest one you're working on, or ask to have your briefs proofread, or ask questions about the Editor, or issues with design, yadda, yadda, yadda- all that kind of thing is fine here. Who will review your scenario hosted at the Depot? Anyone who downloads it, plays it, and feels motivated to go back there and review it. It's a volunteer/courtesy type of situation. Many designers feel that there aren't nearly enough reviews... kind of like the lack of people who send in payment for shareware on the honor system. But you never know- some scenarios get lots of reviews. Some designers put their email address in the scenario itself, asking for feedback that way as well. Hth, Eden
  25. Yes to the if, yes to the then. If it makes you feel any better, it drives me nuts too; they've said it's 'too tough to fix for now', or similar expressions. You just have to learn to keep your HQs at arm's length- sometimes it seems impossible, I know, but you've got two years to practice. Hth, Eden
×
×
  • Create New...