Eden Smallwood

Yes. What is most painful is to see an enemy appear and eradicate my advancing platoon, while my back platoon does nothing, or continues to do area fire nearby, (but not close enough!). In this game suppressing the enemy is absolutely mandatory, or you know what happens and we have this thread. Ok, fine. But then please help my *troops* understood that too. Conceptually, I wish I could insert *one* line to the function determining whether my troops pull the trigger or not: Boolean ShouldIFireAtThatEnemy( EnemyType* thatNME ) { if ( thatNME->IsKillingMyFriendsRightNowOrDidLastTurn() ) then return YES; // End of story! // code as it "exists" now follows here } Eden

Eden

Those DO sorta make it look like Brittania, don't they? Eden

We don't need no stinkin' passwords! I think I know what he's seeing. The "Primary Downloads" from Der Kessel always ask me for a password. Since I aint got one I just use the Secondary Download. That works fine. If it's not intended to need a password for the Primary DL then something's funny over there... Eden

The news crews were hanging around his star on Hollywood Blvd right after. If you see/saw a weird looking blond guy in a man on the street reaction type of thing on ABC news that's (probably) me. Eden

Ah, glad you understood them! Not sure I did. I may take that one into the Ed and crop it. Just tried the Allied Ravine. Ohmigod! My battleing average (sorry) has *plumetted*!! The other day, I *lost* a QB. I was amazed- before that, I had had a streak so long I was ready to file a bug report. Now, two of your maps later, I have *two* more non-victories! In a row!! Great map. Myself, I seem to have a real soft spot for "I'm surrounded" or "He's surrounded" scenarios... If you think about, it completely removes the gaminess of the *edge* of the map. Eden

No apologies, please! Not everyone is impatient. I've said a couple times that I want ye folks to take your sweet time with it, and if that doesn't appear to make sense, well... That's true; I've written patches myself, for a commercial product, and it's just a fact of software- there is a point of diminishing returns, there is pressure to get it out, and a pressure to make it perfect, and the two things don't jibe. "Well, out of those thirteen things we wanted, we got most of them, but the last few look tough as nut. Should we just release it and get on with version two?" That's the kind of thing we said, that's probably what every software company goes through... Ultimately, those who are impatient for the patch are just not serving their own best interest, I would suggest. [EDIT/PS And then the dang *testing* takes forever...] Eden [ November 19, 2002, 02:38 AM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]

I feel a little silly saying this, what with all the SuperGrogTomes people mention here, but I read a little work of pulp-quasi-fiction centering on H's sarin development... It was pulp fiction, all right, but the author, allegedly, tried to make it "fit" a bunch of historical facts, which he tells you about in the epilogue... _Shwarze Kreuze_ , by I forget, if I even spelled it right- German for "White Cross", right? Like their biohazard symbol or something was it... Eden

So you even had the foresight to give everything a common prefix... excellent. Well, these should keep me busy for tonight... sleep is such a waste of time, don't you agree? Hmmm wonder ponder muse... Thank you * ( # of scenarios ) + ( # of maps ) + ( couple more for splash ), Eden

Master Goodale, (pronounced Good Ale)- It seems you have been elected to a position of dubious honour- like the White Male on a sitcom, it's become "OK" to bash you, and you alone. I guess I missed where that's coming from, but it's good of you to take it in stride. Nice to have some unquenchable ebullience around here... At any rate, I look forward to your "Easter" Front scenarios, and if they are at all single player oriented, I would be more than happy to test the protos for you. Er, unless they're "Huge". Eden

Oh I wouldn't call it generic, really. If you're looking for praise for this one then that's not a problem- I found it exceedingly rich in many regards. The differing possibilites at *all* stages of the battle, the constantly changing aspects as I advanced, the multitude of differing terrain situations. I'm not sure how to say it, if you hadn't noticed. An excellent map, anyhow, deserving scenarios better than my QB, no doubt. I have no qualms about saying it is at the top of the heap. Good flag placement, too, btw- I like to see an asymmetric flag placement... Cemetery Hill with just it's one big flag drove me crazy last time- no sudden death period gained, although I had advanced every vehicle intact to the foot of that d*mn church... Yes it was a bother. I only played the AI, but still- it did a very good job of holding me back, even though I had crack gaurds and oodles of arty. I got a Draw, and it's basically your fault. Seriously, I do have one little problem with the map, or I think I do, or say rather there is one thing which would make it better for QBs, anyhow... It's just a bit too long. Some of the interesting detail is therefore lost for a long time in the beginning, as I'm just advancing and wondering whether opfor is actually there or not. If it were a bit smaller, but had the same "stuff", the same rich and varied detail, it would be perfect. I think. Well I only had the option for infantry, so that might be part of it. Luckily, it was completely frozen and I just walked across it. Eden

Is that schnapps the reason they seem to favor minefields when crawling around panicked? Hmm. Anyway, yes, I'm hip to the daisy ones- just slow you down. Well that certainly seems reasonable, but what do I *do* if I really suspect that there are minefields *around*? I mean, I've already stepped on one, and I have reason to believe that there are a bunch more around. I can't just avoid all the copses, that's my only cover. Do I split a squad and tell that team to Take A Hike?? That seems kinda cruel... Eden

Just to be sure, I'd like to ask- there's nothing my Pioneers can do to *detect* a minefield, other than walking on it and getting blown up, right? Certainly I would expect to see some mention in the manual where it talks about clearing them and whatnot, so the implication is strong that we just can't do it, but otoh, it seems like sometimes I will "know" that there's an AP minefield over there but noone's stepped on it yet. Perhaps there are different kinds, some visible, some not...? Eden

Indeed they are, but I'm 99.9% certain this was a "light building"- you guessed it, I didn't save that game. Of course I took a very good look at it- initially I wondered whether some unseen gun was shooting at my Pioneers, or what in the world was happening over there... Can a building can be "somewhat damaged" by the QB randomness, but NOT have any kind of Warning above it when warnings are on? Eden

That does seem like a good idea, and we already have some of that ability, more or less. I played a scenario where, although I can't know the intention of the designer, it worked out just that way, for precisely the simple reason that the map was much longer than it would otherwise need to be. My reinf appeared, way way back there... That seems like a good solution to me- "Reinf are coming! Ahh, there they are now- I can barely see them..." Why not just make the backrow longer, and have reinf appear way back there, at an earlier time? Eden

In last night's QB, I left my Pioneers near a minefield and they tossed a charge at it, one charge... There was a building *nearby*, maybe 20-25m distant, which blew up pretty spectacularly. I watched the replay, just to be sure of what was going on there- it looked like an ammo depot accidentally went up! Anyhow, one charge for me, on a normal light bldg, not even being targetted. In the same QB, I took out another normal light building housing an enemy- one charge, no problem. Eden

Erm. Well supposing I had some not entirely good words, would you want to hear them? I guess nobody else had a problem... Eden

Snip on all your bull****; I've lost my patience with you, largely due to your insistence that you know who I am better than I do. You don't like to be quoted eh? Fine- this is it: In a nutshell, you say someone bashed Windows. Your response was to claim that Mac users actually choose Mac because they hate Microsoft, a claim which both insults Mac users as a whole and carries a direct implication that we would choose WinSuperior OS if we could just get off our prejudice. You made no effort to restrict yourself to speaking with that specific alleged person, but rather chose to make an insulting comment to the world on Mac and Mac users in general. In doing so, you should expect a rebuttal from *any* Mac user who doesn't feel like letting that go by. That would include me. I really don't care what some other alleged person said which WinRuffled your WinPanties- between you and me, YOU are the instigator who insulted me and my OS. YOU insulted ME AND MACINTOSH. THAT was the beginning FOR ME. Since that time, I have attempted to correct you, something I feel quite adequately qualified to do, compelled to do, and have a right to do, since your claim concerns how *I* choose my OS. You insist on interpreting my defense as some attempt to make you dump your Win machines, apparently so that you can continue to tell me that I, unlike you(!), need to change the world and other people's choice of OS. You repeatedly, and continue to, have the gall to pretend that you know who I am and why I choose Macintosh, and actually *tell* me who I am and why I choose this OS, even AFTER I have repeatedly told you that you are wrong. That is the rhetoric of an immature ass, and I'm sick of it. I choose Apple as my OS, and it has been that way since Windows 3.1, and the fact that Gates is an asshole has absolutely not the remotest influence on my decision. And I'm pretty extremely goddamn qualified to make that statement. To state that I choose Mac based on a dislike of Gates is an insult to me and Mac, and to INSIST that, over and over, is also just unspeakably stupid. If you have even the remotest desire to think to yourself that this is a "discussion", then your "I'll tell you who you are and what you think" bull**** needs to stop, yesterday. If you have anything to say or ask, then first get the previous paragraph through your fat head, and then post without pretending that you know otherwise. I told you before, however much you seem to want one, this is neither an argument nor a debate. Don't ask if you don't want the answer. Don't attack Mac and Mac users if you don't like my defense. And frankly blaming it on someone else is pretty lame. I'll try this again- if you have a problem with some Mac user, talk to him. Your argument that you can't do it that way stinks. You insulted Mac and Mac users, and continue to do so- my response is and has been to YOU. And on your badgering me to describe the benefits of Mac to you- no, I WON'T convince you to buy Mac. **** off. If you're qualified to speak on who I am or why I choose Mac then list those credentials now. Otherwise, game over- you "Win", in much the same way as a teenager or a terrorist- I simply don't have the stomach to deal with your self-important pretensions. You also seem to be completely immune to the notion of hypocrisy, btw. I'll let Method Man speak for my outtro: Who y'all kiddin? Trying to act like my shoe's fittin, Confused, with your head up your ass, like "Who's ****tin?" Eden

*Mr* Emrys! You should know, in all seriousness, that it is not within the depths of your personality to annoy me in the slightest. Just help me stay on my diet- "Should we have Sneak *&* Crawl?" Not allowed. "Do Movement orders span the space of what we need?" Not allowed. "Arc Ambush & Trigger Ambush?" Not allowed. "Media too liberal?" Not allowed. How long will we have to wait for THAT? Ah, yesssss. I agree completely. But what does the Sybionese Liberation Army have to do with it, and who's Marshal? Well this one doesn't work for me, at least not in the sense that it explains all available data. I witness what I perceive as reluctance quite easily *after* the unit has alreay announced itself. That's fine if they want to be reluctant to give away their positions, but once known... I'm mostly concerned with trying to find *some way* to guarantee that my units will at least TRY to suppress someone who pops up to decimate my advancing to cover unit. That hurts more than anything. My units appear to be cruel, heartless b*st*rds who would rather watch their friends die than go to all the trouble to open fire. Yes I KNOW, I am the KING spokesman for that fact, and have been pointing it out since the demo. I don't know if you saw the ideas LordFluffer(?) and I came up with in the Cover Fire thread, but if we imagined that an arc *did* engender trigger joy, it raises some very satisfying possibilities. Well let's not be too hasty with our words- it seems to be true that their only function is limiting fire, as stated in the Tome, but they do at least automagically *orient* the units attention to the "midway" point of the Arc. A tank will adjust itself to orient in that direction when at rest, eg, which looks neat if you give it a side oriented Arc and then have it travel down the road a ways. Put three of them abreast, with complementary arcs, and when they get to their destination they will fan out like a synchronized swimming routine. But now to say that it's attention is "sharpened" I agree may be going a bit too far, for the reason that if it's attention is sharpened what effect does that have if not to make him open fire? Eden

Ooops. Don't want you to feel unloved, there, Sgt- I think noone's responded, as I didn't, initially, because it's an almost impossible question. If you go to the Scenario Depot, you can see the "Top" rated scenarios, although those numbers are sorta hogwash, ultimately. Among the toughies that people seem to enjoy and keep playing and keep whining about too are Jaegermeister Cemetery Hill Geflaslaaskldfkj....rung Fun & different: A Deadly Affair Red Parachutes (one of my fave) Some of my faves not on CD but at SD: Making Motti Manstein Cometh The Move Back But honestly... it really all depends on you and your style, though I don't think you'll find any on the CD which are bad. There *are* some bad ones, imho, at the SD, but not many. And besides- you're going to play every scenario on the CD sooner or later anyhow!! Eden

The only hypothesis I've got in my huge brain is that BTS wanted us to have control over our forces, so if we actually want them to spend the ammo, we have to tell them to. They'll still shoot if it's a really good shot, or if they're threatened, but hold off otherwise. ? Naturally, in the case I mentioned, the enemy comes out of the hole, runs about, and goes back down another hole... by the time the next turn comes, it's already too late to take that golden opportunity. And a bazillion other cases I'm sure, where we'd really like them to shoot but they don't, the worst being when one of my squads is making an advance to cover, and the other guys fail to target some newly appearing enemy who shreds me to pieces. That really smarts- you can't provide cover fire *everywhere*. One idea I had was what if Cover Arcs actually *did* sort of coerce our units to open fire more readily, and the SMALLER the Arc, the MORE likely he would be to open fire on an enemy inside the Arc. Cool, huh? Anyhow, probably someone will come by and say it's all our imagination. Eden

That's hogwash right from the start, as I have been posting in *response* to your "claim". Regardless, it is not my duty nor my interest to offer you those reasons. Many years ago, I quite likely would have made the attempt, as I used to. These days, I don't attempt to explain the merits of Mac, neither do I attempt to explain Libertarianism, as both of these endeavours have proven futile in many experiments. I offered you some hand-waving hints on the matter (which you called zealous ranting), but with the qualification that in fact it can't be expressed any better than what is so great about surfing. Try it yourself, and perhaps you'll find it too. Otherwise, you don't know, and if you don't know, then consider not thinking you do, and if you still think you do, then at least don't come here and tell us you do. I know extremely well how and why I consider Apple the only OS for me, and I also know that the those reasons are too nebulous to express with the hope of changing any PC owner's mind. That does not, however, in the least support the idea that I don't know what I'm talking about, neither does it mean I won't step to the plate when someone makes the preposterous claim that I insist on Apple because I hate Gates. Of all teh assholes in the world, there is not one single one of them who has the power to influence my choice of OS not even one iota. As if that would need explaining. Hardly. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Which opinion was that exactly? If you need refreshing, it is your opinion that I choose Apple because I hate Gates which I find pathetically laughable, indicative of delusional rationalization and belittling of people who choose differently than you, possibly explainable from envy. Not what's your view on my opinion of what? I find it quite easily: Yup, that's arrogant allright. Dense, too. Why don't you drink that glass of icewater instead, you may realize that when someone buys Apple, the "respective merits" of the machine are quite decidedly MORE to the forefront of their minds than in the case of PC. We *already* know that we will be the subject of ridicule, ("Apple? It's just a toy." is my favorite), we will have a helluvalot fewer cutting edge games to choose from, we won't have something compatible with the damn office, we'll have to hear people tell us that we choose Apple because we hate Gates, and on and on. As the other person said, we already know that we will be second class citizens. Golly, why would we do that? Could it be that those "respective merits" are there notwithstanding your inability to see them? Nahhhh- it must be because we hate Gates. That's it. It fits perfectly, right? Yeah. I don't remember fouling Windows quite nicely in any kind of arbitrary and volunteered way. I *do* remember taking you up on your *demand* to know what I thought of your OS, which is exactly how I interpret your claim that I choose Apple because I hate Gates. How would you suggest I read that? You come into a thread with "Mac" in the title, explain that we choose our OS based on "political reasons" because, after all, the PC IS the "superior" OS, so there must be *SOME* weird reason why people choose Apple... and then you talk about MY AGENDA?? Yeah, me too. Mac, Unix, Amiga, Silicon Graphics, Cray, nCube and some other parallels I can't remember the names, and I've programmed all the above with exception of Amiga... and I'm probably forgetting some. Ha! I just reread that and realized I missed the whole point- yes win-this, win-that, and yes I worked programming on win too. Never again. I have been, (maybe again?) a freelance programmer... Macintosh *ONLY*. BS in CompSci from UCDavis, two years at U of Chicago, a year of post grad compsci at UCSD. Like Beetlejuice said, "So whadday think, ya think I'm qualified??" I think the record differs with you. I resist it extremely well, and very often. I will definitely step in to refute someone who is badmouthing Apple and doesn't know what they're talking about; that seems reasonable to me. No, I gave that up many years ago- how about you? You're stuck with that. No, no... not from *me*, but that will be a fact for along time. Kinda like surfers, kinda like Finnish soldiers maybe, kinda like CMBB players would be if they were surrounded by Tom Clancy players who thought they were superior.... Bummer, dude. But in the future, if you have a problem with some Mac guy, how about taking it up with him personally rather than espouse some offensive and ludicrous theory on why Mac users in general use Mac? Yeah... how about it? Then I could get more scenarios in before bedtime, ok? No, you think about this: Eden

Have you been wasting time making a living? Aargh, yes. In the "normal" kind of scenario, you know with valleys and trees and whatnot, I suppose it's not as big a deal, somehow. But units do seem to me reluctant to open fire, as if that weren't the reason for them being there. We can't know what's abstracted away... sometimes the enemy may seem like they're in sight, but in "truth" our units really had no "good" shot at them, perhaps. Yet other times, it seems irrefutable to me that they are just too reluctant. I just played, (or tried to) a City based scenario, which aggravates the problem. I watched with dropped jaw as my squads witnessed an enemy squad traipse out of one building and down the road into another... while they just sat there and watched. Ohmigod. While on the flip side, I had tried Advancing my squads *ten* meters outside of their buildings, to immediately Advance right back inside, as a way of getting the opposition to reveal itself... The opfor did. Those peek-a-boo squads typically got three or four casualties just in that ten meters... It makes me wonder whether it has been accidentally programmed that the opfor AI will open fire more readily than my AI. Well I certainly have nothing conclusive to say, but FWIW they do seem overly reluctant to me too. Eden

No, I don't. You just can't handle that, can you? If you were to approach that surfer I mentioned, a religiously fanatical surfer, which btw is by and large the only kind there is, and tell him that the *REAL* reason he surfs rather than play parcheesi is for Political Reasons, and why can't he separate his choice of sports from his politics, like you have, he would, I guarantee you, think you were a complete ass. That is exactly what you have done here- you have the gall to tell me why I choose Apple and no other, as if you had the slightest idea who I am or what my history or qualifications or anything was. Don't mistake this for an argument, or a debate, or an opinion which I am offering you. I am not asking, I am *telling* you, that we Apple afficiandos are privy to something which YOU DON'T GET. You don't like Apple? Fine. You choose to take the self-serving delusional opinion that my choice is from politics rather than from the machine itself? That too even, is fine. But to come here and publish your opinion on why *I* choose this machine is not fine. If you thought you had a problem with maniacal Finns, you ain't seen nothin' yet. Try and understand that your opinion is to me pathetically laughable- it reveals nothing so much as your ignorance, every bit as much as if someone were to tell you that the *real* reason you play CMBB is entirely *politics*- if you didn't have a political aesthetic problem with Tom Clancy's writing, you would really be playing that TC game-what's-it-called which has sold many more copies than CMBB and is therefore superior. The record says you are. I'm here precisely to defend against your assinine opinion on why *I* buy this machine and no other. Go edit your post then, and remove the arrogance claiming that Mac users are making their choice for political reasons. Pot calling the kettle black? We're here arguing because you've seen fit to sh*t on my choice. In point of fact, an Apple owner's choice is an order of magnitude less of a political choice than a PC owners- we buy this machine because it is what it is, not because we need to get what the manager told us to, not because we think we won't have software, not for the bazillion *other* reasons a PC owner purchases a PC *other* than a true appreciation of the OS. How perfectly galling and ironic of you. Yes, you're foolish, no, we're not debating, yes, we are zealots and fanatics, many of us, and there's a reason for that you simply don't get. If you don't care to hear the *reality* of why I buy this machine, then don't come here and float a self-serving delusional blimp of hydrogen explanation on whby *I* choose Apple here for me to shoot down. Simple enough, eh? Eden

Yes, that's a beautiful idea, but it shouldn't require CMMOS. For the rewrite, (of course), I've thought that it could be like this: the scenario designer writes his scenario, and then makes mods which fit it, like some weird church which looks like some church in Stalingrad, or whatever it is. Then, all packaged together, the user simply unzips that stuff all into one directory/folder. When CMBB or CMDD or what it will be opens that scenario, it *sees* that their are BMPs and WAVs there, and it will use those in preference the the default ones in the default place. Thus each scenario could have it's own mods, and installing and running such a scenario has no effect whatsoever on the user's other scenarios, or his installation in general. Follow? THAT would be placing some serious firepower in the hands of SDs, which I've lobbied before to be a top priority for the rewrite... Eden