Joques

Treeburst still MIA?

Hey, I'm halv Swede and half Nordlænning. Does that count?

...I thought he meant like later that day! We're jonesin here!

Huh?!? :confused:

Noooo! The one scenario where I've been kicking @ss!!!

Not in the rules they don't. And not in a single SSR I've ever come across. Though in J1 Urban Guerillas the "Russian" partisans get Panzerfausts...

Out of only 7 new models? I doubt the IS-3 will get his. Probably a bunch of halftracks, God knows they need it.

Section 3-3 update: Rear Guard Action vs Sripe: Finished Christmas Battle vs Flammenwerfer: Finished The King of Debrecen vs Jaws: Finished The Beast vs Mark Gallear: Turn 9 Hosszupalyi vs Shock Trooper: Turn 10

See, I'm taking the fact that they've said nothing, as kind of a good sign. My reasoning is this: They are beginning to consider including all the models, but they're not sure if they can, and so they say nothing in order to not get our hopes up. Optimism, baby. It's the way to go.

This has not been established. Granted, there is some controversy, and as Sajer himself (contrary to myth, he does exist) wants nothing to do with public life, and refuses to comment, the controversy has been perpetuated. [ January 21, 2003, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: Joques ]

I must disagree. The game format places a number of constraints on us that we must abide by. Game length is one. Map boundries are another. Stating that taking a flag on the last Turn is "gamey", is untenable. Why? Because there are a host of variables that affect each and every game. Would Turn 19 be "gamey"? Turn 18? Turn 17? What if the opportunity to grab the flag didn't arise until Turn 20? Should he then refrain from doing it, just because it might be considered "gamey"? Obviously not, that would be silly. We operate under a different set of circumstances than did our historic counterparts. For one, and most importantly, we don't put our lives on the line. We have artificial constraints on our actions and maneuvers. Artificial victory conditions. We have artificially good intelligence about what each and every one of our soldiers is doing. In short, it is a game. It is a superb game, and it is maybe the one that most closely of all games models the hell that was the Ostfront 1941-45, but a game nonetheless. We play this game in friendly competition. To imply that, in the course of this friendly competition, we should limit our conduct to some arbitrary set of rules, that it seems none of us are even able to agree completely on, is patently untenable. The only sane way (in my opinion) to avoid arbitrary disputes like these, is simply to stipulate that what the engine allows, is allowed. God knows there are few enough ways to exploit the engine, and they can hardly make this a less real experience than it already is, considering we're a bunch of geeks sitting in front of a computer screen looking at little army men. Now somebody will indignantly ask me if I would ever rush a depleted halfsquad to grab a victory flag. Well no...but I am of half a mind to say that if my opponent had been so silly as to not guard the flag better, then he deserved to lose it. (Besides, depleted halfsquads is hardly what this debate is all about) [ January 20, 2003, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: Joques ]

Speak for yourself. I recently lost a Tiger to just a molotov.

Aha, I see. Still I must say that from my perspective as a gamer, the predicament of the 6th Army as a whole is irrelevant to me in the specific scenario. If I had spotted the same opportunity that Vadr did, I would have done the same. It takes all kinds.

Why hi there, Badger. I'm well aware of what IMHO is supposed to mean, but it seldom has this meaning any more on the internet. Nowadays it is generally used with more or less forceful statements, for the single purpose of making said statements more palatable. However, these are generalities and I digress. I dare say that in this particular case you must have held your opinions pretty strongly, since you quit the game over them. I'll agree that I did lift out what I felt was relevant. I did not feel that the last part of the sentence was relevant, since I as a gamer have no idea if in fact the Russians in that particular historic instance "were trying to conserve ever increasingly scarce people and equipment resources." There have been numerous reminders of equally risky, or worse, actions performed routinely during WWII. I dare say, also, that tactical doctrine in WWII and during the 50's, 60's or 70's were quite remarkably different. Consider only the fact that in 42, the germans had no infantry AT weapons with a longer reach than a man could throw. Interesting debate.

You should read the novel Cryptonomicon, by Neal Stevens. It has a number of things to say about this, and other unlikely occurrences of WWII. Besides, it is a really, really monster cool novel.

Ok, how is this: BadgerDog's assertion that this sort of thing wouldn't happen in real life, is manifestly untrue. Also, to add my 0.02 Norwegian kroner to the philosophical side of this debate: I find it inherently useless to label something as "gamey" and get upset when it happens to you. Every single player on this forum has different thresholds as to what they consider to be acceptable behaviour in a game. So if people start huffing and puffing every time something happens that they don't totally agree with, then there's going to be a lot of bad feelings. Me, I play a game that i quite thoroughly dig. Also, one where "gamey" tactics almost never work. So I play my game within the confines of what it will let me do. In the process, I have fun, and hope that my opponent does also.

This is, quite simply, not so.

I'm surprised we haven't had any official comment on this one yet. Nothing to either let us know they are on the case, or that it's a feature that shall remain so. Strange, since this is, to my mind, the greatest flaw in the game. Of course, everybody has their pet peeve. This is mine. Hmm, that's almost poetic: This is my peeve. There are many like it, but this one is mine...

How can you say that? If it had been a flakwagen, it would have died. And if it didn't, that that would have been even better/gutsier! I liked the reference to Peiper and his Gamey tactics.

Still haven't seen an answer to this one though.

Yes. This is not a problem. My tanks often start rotating, and while it increases traverse time I can live with it. The problem arises when the tanks rotate way past the point they were supposed to.

Hilarious!

I just lost a friggin' Tiger I to one of these! Made me really start to respect those bottles of gasoline.

Ever since I started playing ASL in earnest, the SU-100 has been my fave vehicle. Sexy little lady, incredible hitting power. Thin armour means you have to use some finesse and not just come barging in guns blazing.

Yes, and I guess it was the best decision available. But I must say, since the next game (engine rewrite) will be what, 2-3 years in the coming, it would be sad to have to play for all that time without the correct 3D models. I'm assuming there will be some more 3D models in the upcoming patch. Is there a list of these? And will that be the final batch of 3D models added to the game?