Ottosmops
-
Posts
149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ottosmops
-
-
@ Rambo,
Did you ever consider the theory that Patton = Jesus?
-
Why didn't the Russians kill Stalin?Originally posted by Blashy:As I said, a stupid leader can kill you.
But my personal BIGGEST mystery that will never truly be known is WHY did those military generals let that idiotic fool live and not simply kill him on the spot and take over.
There are thousands of reason speculated but no one really knows why.
Why didn't the Koreans kill Kim Jong-il?
Why didn't the people of Zimbabwe kill Robert Mugabe?
Etc.
Because humans are gregarious animals and military personnel is rather accustomed to follow the orders of their leader then to eliminate him.
-
@ Rambo - Dude, Saturday night fever?
-
I guess you mean EratosthenesOriginally posted by Stalin's Organist:The ancients know the world was round a coiuple of hundred years BCE - a chap called Ptolemy (what else!!) calculated the diameter by comparing the shadows at the bottom of 2 wells at a fixed point in time in the 3rd century BCE.
He got it wrong of course - by about 1/6th - initially too big, then by hte same margin too small a bit later!
His work was rediscovered in the late 1200's CE, so was known well before Colombus sailed.
-
Concerning hexes vs. squares:
While the unit icons must have a certain size, so that the players can easily recognize them and move them around, I see no need, that the hexes/squares must have the same size.
To approximate reality, i. e. the circular movement radius in flat terrain, the underlying grid of the map could have a finer granularity than the size of the unit icons.
If the side length of the hexes/squares would be a tenth from what they are now, their shape would no longer be relevant for the players.
Of course, the calculation of movements and supply ways would need more time, but with computers becoming always more powerful, this will be doable in the future.
-
I tried the link in your post, it works for me!
-
To counteract too much unhistorical play one could force the players to keep some occupation forces in the conquered countries.
Depending on the size of the occupied country, i. e. the number of its cities, the invader has to leave a certain number of troops there.
If he don't do this, then the occupied country could have a certain probability to start a revolution and switch back to neutral or to the other side.
The idea behind this is, to leave the player the choice which way to go, what countries to attack, but to prevent him to do more than what historically could have been done.
-
-
GT Legends
The best ( = most realistic ) racing game that I've ever played.
Caesar IV
I always love to optimize something, but since I play only occasionally and very slowly, I will never finish a career.
Worms Armageddon
Old, but still fun to play.
SC2
Every time when an update is released, I start a game as Allies, only to see, that the AI could not take a single one of my Russian cities.
But I don't abandon hope...
-
-
Not that I'm an agent from the 'other side', who tries to promote the 'other game', :eek: but why do you compare the prize of the 'other game' with SC1 (25$) and not with SC2 (55$)?
Do you judge from appearance (hexes) alone?
-
@ Rambo ... Dude,Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:Camp Rambo salutes those at D-Day, on the Allied side that is. My grandfather-in-law won a couple medals including the purple heart that day. Later in the Campaign, he waxed a Bunta officer & collected the uniform. It's in a museum today
Camp Rambo salutes ALL American soldiers in today's war. Camp Rambo salutes President Bush for taken on the today's Axis of Evil.
what has your friend George double-u to do with D-Day? :confused:
He is just celebrating a party with Mrs. Merkel and comrade Putin.
Anyway, I salute those, who you salute...
... and also those, who fought on the other side of the front.
:eek: -
History is never written objectively.Originally posted by Kuniworth:Well Liam you are correct. However in 1944 the Wehrmacht was a shadow of what it had been before. When will we see a truly amerian acknowledgement of the russian war effort that tore apart the best of the wehrmacht? The history writing of the second world war in the west is seriously flawed.
Der Standort bestimmt den Standpunkt.
(The location determines the point of view)
-
@Rambo --- Dude, you drunk? Cool.
:cool:
-
Great.
I love you too, Rambo.
And I'm sure, everybody else loves you too.
OK?
-
With an aircraft from the Vatican.Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:Question: How did the Buntas get to Brazil?
-
You are right, of course.Originally posted by TaoJah:There is one BIG difference : random events.
But:
From a theoretical viewpoint, the random number generator still works deterministically, it increases only the possibilities.
If someone knows the method that is used to generate the numbers and the initial seed, he could include this knowledge into his calculations.
Even without this knowledge, one could work with expected values.
And:
More practically seen, even in a game without random events, given the many possibilities and the unreliability of the human brain, ones moves sometimes give the impression, that they are randomly chosen.
-
But still chess masters use several hours for their games. And they would use more, if they could. :cool:Originally posted by Liam:I hear what some say about the Chess-Predictability factor. None of us want a ChessGame or a Poker game. Strategy Wargames are not supposed to be either.
...
And what we come for, this is a thousand times more elaborate than chess. You can finish a Chess match in a few minutes...
SC2 should take 10-20 hours
...
Abstractly seen, there is not much difference between SC2 and Chess (and other comparable games). :cool:
Both are deterministic and have a very large but finite game tree.
The size of the game tree says not much about the difficulty of a game. Anybody should be able to add two arbitrarily large whole numbers, though the set of the whole numbers is infinite.
Neither does the number of moves in a given position determine the difficulty of a game.
Imagine a game, where you have only two legal moves in each position.
Would such a game be easy?
Not necessarily, as you could read further ahead in such a game, and you would have to do this, to find strong moves.
So except that SC2 is a strategic game as many others, what makes it appealing to the players?
I think, it's the connection to reality.
The game mechanics are not arbitrary, but they copy some aspects of reality. The movement abilities and the strength of the units mirror real life entities.
Research and diplomacy also work similarly as they do in real life.
The military environment and the reference to history also attract people.
So the player finds the game familiar from the beginning, he doesn't have to learn abstract rules.
But to become a strong player demands time and dedication.
And again, in this respect, I see no difference between SC2 and other games or activities.
-
To play a strategic game means to make reasonable decisions.Originally posted by Moonslayer:I love strategy games but cannot stand chess... that's because it's not strategy imho... it's a memory game (which I hate).
...
Reasonable decisions must be based on facts.
Facts must be represented somewhere, usually in the memory of the player.
That's unavoidable for every game, be it Chess or Poker or SC2.
The better your memory and the more relevant information you have stored, the stronger you can play.
Intuition is always based on information.
Of course I don't say, that everybody should become ambitious, you can have as much fun to play ... just for fun, as I do.
-
He has only a 15” monitor.Originally posted by gravyface1:Ok I gotta ask: what is with Desert Dave and his "interesting" use of line breaks?
-
I find it extremely stu... -
oops, - I mean, unrealistic,
that the three US units are sitting in their cities for the first two years of the game.
They should lose a strength point every week,
because of alcohol, drugs and syphilis. :eek:
But they should gain a moral boost as compensation.
Sex & drugs & alco-holl is more fun than to
(Sleeping, you forgot the sleeping last time, Mr. Incredible.)sent tanks on sleeping farmers
-
No wonder there were no Nazis in Germany after 1945.Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:They are all a bunch of Buntas. Don't let anybody kid you. They stuffed people in ovens, beat up little old ladies walking home from the stores at night, broke into homes, sent tanks on farmers, etc. I could careless what kind of a society or technology those devils had. Then when the Americans entered into Germany, it was..."Oh, me no Nazi. Me, no Nazi. Me not Hitler." Yeah, whatever. Those German people knew exactly what they were doing. Don't give the "regular German army" was okay stuff either, they killed people too.
Thank God for the USA. Thank God for the 2nd Ammendment.
-Legend
They emigrated to America.
-
You don't consider the UK and Spain as your allies? :confused:Originally posted by Konigs:...
Since then the military has done it's job, it has carried the war to the enemy on their soil. Since the military has done this, there has been no attack on Amercan soil and none on any of our allies either.
...
-
War On Bad Policy!
would fit well into this schema.
And nobody would complain, if this were a world wide war.
Why The Germans Lose At War (Book) + JJR @Armageddon & JJ Goes, Returns, and Leaves.
in Strategic Command 2 Blitzkrieg and Weapons and Warfare
Posted
@ Rambo,
it seems that you have a superstitious belief in some prophecies of 'the book', and to support your opinion you use the existence of Israel.
Did it never come to your mind that the Zionist movement knew these 'prophecies' too, and that they acted to fulfill them?
Your belief in supernatural prophecies reminds me of Adolfs belief in 'die Vorsehung'.
