Hortlund

Hmpf...there are many lawyers who like their jobs. Or so Im told anyway.

maybe we will finally see real campaigns too...if the scope is narrower. *drool*

Work sucks. Lovelife is ..I dunno. Economy sucks. I dont have any pbems going.

Hey Steve, thank you very much for the information. Im sure I speak for all of us when I say we appreciate every little piece of information thrown in our way. Now, being a lawyer and all, Im pretty used to pouring over scarce information, trying to milk out every last piece of fact from it. More often than not, I am of cource horribly misstaken, but still I get paid somehow. How cool is that. Hrm, back on track. It would seem that cmx2 will be more specific. The way I interpret your post is that each title will cover a smaller area/period, but in greater depth. The reduced development time will instead lead to more titles being offered. Thus, instead of having CMBB covering the eastern front, there might be 2-3 titles covering the eastern front. If this is correct, then its not unreasonable to imagine that one cmx2 title might be "Normandy" and cover US-Germans in Normandy June-August 1944. Another title might be [insert witty title because I ran out of ideas] and cover US-Brits/Canadians in Normandy/Holland June-September 1944. The smaller scope would allow for more detail, so instead of giving the player the option to create quickbattles with 5-7 armies from 43-45, you get the option to create quickbattles with 2 armies under 1944, but instead you get all the detail that cmx2 promises. I really think that would be a good idea, and I hope my ideas arent too far off the mark. I for one would welcome such a move. And I must admit that just thinking about this has caused the groggness in me to rise. I must sit down now. Anyway, since this post is pure speculation on my part, I welcome you all to ridicule me now, and in the future. Especially if the first cmx2 title is "ww2, 1939-45, play any side, and any battle from Denmark to Japan, from Stalingrad to El Alamein"

Wasnt it Freyburg who insisted on the bombing? It was ages ago I read about Cassino, and I honestly dont remember.

Lars hits the nail right on the head. The FIRST question you should be asking yourself is "is she hot" and if that is an affirmative, then you need to go down the "can I somehow use this situation to get into her panties"-avenue. Standard law school stuff really

Well, its Tuesday night, Im having a beer, and life is generally good. Seanachai Happy birthday you sod. Im sorry I called you names ages ago, but I was young and my feelings were hurt. CavScout Take care out there. I would tell you to keep your head down and all that, but I bet you already know stuff like that. If you ever find yourself around Camp Bucca near Um Qasar, send me an email and I'll hook you up with a couple of buddies of mine.

Exactly, I would buy the game even if the first module was "CMX2 - Border clashes between the Ngiri tribe and the Ulumpi Government in the Upper Volta region 1958-1959". I guess some people just like to whine, thats all.

Since when? Since someone started climbing up the "modern communications tree". If you read my quote in context, you will note that I hold that up as an example as to why the "what about communications and EW on the cold war battlefield"-argument doesnt really hold water.

It would seem that the people who oppose the idea to have a cold war variant of CMX2 are having trouble finding good arguments for their cause, and thus find themselves forced to use somewhat peculiar arguments. Nukes? First the question whether or not they would have been used is so massively hypothetical, its really pointless to argue the question. It is easy enough to say "we dont believe any tac nukes would have been used" and thats that. And even so, even if nukes were used, they would be about as relevant to a CMX2 battle as teh Dam busters raids are to CMX1. Chemical weapons? They were there in ww2 too you know...no one used them though. Simple enough to just say "no chemical weapons are in the game, and thats that." Now we get complains about classified specs for various weapon systems. One might ask what is better, to have several conflicting test reports for the same weapon, or to have none at all. I mean we all know what the forum has looked like when it comes to the armor penetration for various weapons, where the "evidence" presented was often reduced to some very shaky anecdotal evidence... "Here, look in the war-diary of unit X, they report to have knocked out 3 T-34s at 500 m" etc. Or why not when the results of the test reports are explained away with stuff like "oh, well, they must have been testing against a flawed armor plate" followed by a long discussion about German steel-welding techniques in the 1930s...There is no real difference from CMX1, the physics are understood, enough information is open source. Communications? Phu-leeze. Like someone said, that has never seemed to bother people in CMX1, where sometimes the entire on-map force would be without radios or field phones...still Ive heard no complaints that the player can order some isolated, radioless T-26 platoon on the other side of the map at all when in reality that platoon would have been completely impossible to influence for the combat leader.

Cheers! I figure I can have two beers tonight, so Ive got 1,5 to go.

How about if someone with too much spare time could start a thread with BFC quotes on CMX. That way we wouldnt have to wade through 800 pages of forum static to pick up one post of information.

Well, its friday night, the kids are in bed, and Ive just opened up a beer...life is good.

http://darthside.blogspot.com/ funneh First I thought Id share it with the GF, but then I realized this blog is much too fun to share with everyone. And since I know most of you cant read anyway, I figured "whats the harm"...

Hypothetical conversation: Lars: Why are you always on about Catholic schoolgirls, Hortlund? Hortlund: I want to be one. Lars: What? Hortlund: I want to be a catholic schoolgirl. From now on, I want you all to call me 'Hortensia'. Lars: What?! Hortensia: It's my right as a man. Nidan1: Well, why do you want to be Hortensia, Hortlund? To be continued...

Dear Everyone I have recently discovered that I am indeed not a Catholic schoolgirl. Yours faithfully Hortlund

Hmpf how rude to sneak in a post like that in the middle of a conversation.

Ah, yes, I remember that one. "...the more reasons to blame the australians"

Yes, its been a long time since I was here. I thought Id read up on some old threads, but I could only manage to get through a couple of pages before my eyes began to bleed heavily. And then I realized...nothing has changed, the M.B.T. is still the same. So naturally I simply had to return.

*blush* Aye...'twas me. And the offer still stands M'Lady.

Im probably returning to this place... better hide the women and horses.

I think I need a serf. Are there any unclaimed SSNs around?

*sigh*

Oh...no...you are not talking about... Olde one are you *shudder*

Ah, excellent. Finally a way to punish old Shaw for all his shortcomings. I shall immideately start signing in all my Ann Coulter-fanclub mails with Not-so-very-official spokesperson for the Shavian house . Muuahahahahaha