General Jack Ripper
-
Posts
2,326 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Posts posted by General Jack Ripper
-
-
On 4/27/2020 at 9:00 AM, SimpleSimon said:
By leaving out more than half of it lol.
Well that's just wrong.
We've been over this at length already. Historically, the Dreadnought race began in 1906 and was finished at the start of WW1. Rule the Waves game period of 1900-1925 with an optional extension to 1950 is more than adequate to cover the entire period and represent the concept completely.
On 4/27/2020 at 9:00 AM, SimpleSimon said:Rule the Waves doesn't span 100 years of history because the developer was lazy, unimaginative, or both.
I'll be sure to pass on your opinion.
Actually I won't.
In fact, why don't you head over to their forums and tell them directly?
I'm sure they'd be happy to hear from you.
On 4/27/2020 at 9:00 AM, SimpleSimon said:Yeah this is why I shouldn't bring up any of Wargaming's awful products. Your reasoning here is based (so far?) only on the advantage that your ship has twice the throw weight.
and the speed, fire control, sea-keeping, communication, turret arrangement, engagement range, etc. You're the one hung up on gun caliber as the single deciding factor of a naval engagement, and YOU are the one who decided the acid test was a "World of Warships style one-on-one match".
Don't get mad because you set the terms of argument and they didn't work in your favor.If you're going to have an argument, you should seek to read and understand your opponent's point of view, rather than relying on ad-nauseam re-iteration of your own.
Now I'm going to place you on my ignore list, you are the only such forum member to be so recognized.
Congratulations.
On 4/27/2020 at 4:19 AM, StieliAlpha said:Since the discussion already digressed quite far from the OP anyway: Did any one of you ever play Clash of Arms “Fear God, Dread Nought”?
I bought it a long time ago, but never really dared to touch it.
Are you telling me you roll dice?
-
"The violence of action is to our advantage."
-
6 hours ago, roadiemullet said:
The idea that students "know they will be gunned down by the PLA" - I'm sorry that's completely ridiculous. I just told my Chinese wife that one and she burst out laughing. Nobody thinks that, only westerners. It may be true, but again, that is NOT the perception here.
Students don't NEED to be gunned down by the army if they've been raised their whole lives to be indoctrinated into the system, and are now willing participants in their own repression.
What your wife needs to understand is that on a fundamental level, Western society respects the value of the individual's right to do what they wish with their own life.
Even if it's to the overall detriment to society at large.Foreigners I talk to play up the U.S.A.'s social problems as indicative of a flawed and failing society. That's because they are removed from the perspective that the massive drug, obesity, and crime problems we have here are indicative of a society that lets people make their own decisions, for better or worse.
You can argue the respective merits of both sides, but a direct comparison is foolish, and rather stupid.
-
12 hours ago, roadiemullet said:
You may have seen in the news the videos of people being properly barred in their homes, with a metal bar welded over their door. This kind of stuff did go off and its completely disgusting, but the reaction among the public here (this was not some secret that leaked to the west, it was shown on primetime news as evidence that the government is taking care of the situation) was pretty supportive. I don't agree with this, but many people here do as its for the collective good.
Well, if the government says it's for the greater good, who are we to question their motives?
This is why people here in this thread criticize China. Because they largely accept a draconian reduction in their liberty and rights that would very quickly lead to an armed response among the citizenry here in the West. Well, in the few places people are still allowed to bear arms anyway.
7 hours ago, Sublime said:Im on quora alot. I noticed when I debate people if they cant debate without getting personal and have no good argument they almost always run to insults or ad hominem attacks. its almost always a surefire sign your opponents got nothing. As you you noted youre already fighting a losing battle on that.
There is also the resulting to personal attacks driven by the fact you realize you're wasting your time arguing with someone who's as dumb as a brick.
I'm just saying. There's not some 'instant win card' you get to play just because your opponent got fed up with you. I think any time a debate or argument ends along those lines BOTH sides need to do some reflecting as to how things got derailed, and why.
7 hours ago, Sublime said:What I think is alarming and shocking and most Americans seem to not care is most of our media is now censored by the chinese communist party! Look at the game contest where a winner held a #free HK thing up. blizzard took his winnings and banned him for life! because chinese pressure. In top gun 1 maverick has a taiwan cruise patch. The patch has been erased in top gun 2. The reason it made no sense in Red Dawn 2 that N Korea had occupied the US was because it didnt. it was supposed to be china but they flipped out and wouldnt show it in china, so we changed it because we want money.
Censorship is not voluntary. These are voluntary decisions companies make to avoid losing a large potential marketplace. If you don't like their decisions, stop consuming their products.
I certainly don't.
7 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:To me it's incredible because all of it is shameless repetition of canned arguments and propaganda literally recycled from the decades of the Cold War and now combined with a crude sort of euphemistic racism against Asians. The idealist notion of the 80s that a free internet would become some kind of antidote for lies and disinformation rather than a highway for those things has been rather clearly sunk.
https://gking.harvard.edu/files/censored.pdf <- Try reading that.
The internet DOES allow for the free dissemination of information, unless you live in China. That's not just "racism against Asians", it's the truth. If you lived in China and clicked that link, you would run the risk of being arrested, because in China censorship of the internet is emplaced by law. If you read or disseminate information officially classified as 'censored' by the government, you are in violation of the law and subject to criminal charges.
I've literally seen video leaked to the internet of people being arrested in their own homes because they 'posted inappropriate content on the internet'.
7 hours ago, Wicky said:The Chinese Ambassador to the UK Liu Xiaoming also was only a few days ago speaking on the BBC denying Wuhan China was the source and pointing the finger at the French as the source of the infection.
He also denies there are no camps in Xinjiang holding Uighurs despite all the evidence to the contrary.
"I'll answer your question, you just need to give me time to answer," is what the liar says when he can't think of lies fast enough.
People who tell the truth don't need time to think, they simply speak what they know to be true. They may think briefly about how to compose their words, but they don't use the phrase, "I'm trying to answer your questions, you just don't give me time to answer them," as an excuse for not answering a question.
-
This one kicks off very quickly.
-
16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Florida is deliberately under reporting deaths, delaying the release of info, and blocking demographic info from being released by stopping the counties from independently reporting their data.
I would have been shocked, but I lived in Florida for eight years.
If you only knew how bad things really were...
-
On 4/28/2020 at 10:27 PM, Battlefront.com said:
Where I live we had a different problem... interlopers. Word got out that our grocery stores were well stocked after the first wave of panic buying. So what happened? Well, we started seeing an awful lot of unfamiliar faces in our stores.
Exact same thing happened here. All of a sudden I'm seeing a lot of out-of-state license plates on cars.
On 4/29/2020 at 12:27 AM, sburke said:And no I won't watch the video. I'd rather smear feces up my nose and snort real hard than listen to that gas bag.
That's too bad, it's a fun video. It's got frogs in it.
On 4/29/2020 at 2:13 AM, 37mm said:As to a sense of perspective, although I may agree with your perspective (perhaps I would go further & say I consider "abortion" to be nothing more than recreational human sacrifice) I must point out how utterly useless "perspective" can be when used as a prediction tool.
Consider this "Conservative" article written in late February... we could probably agree it has a sense of perspective but, in hindsight, it seems to be somewhat lacking in predictive power.
I don't much care for predictions. My intended point was that maybe we should all just simmah down a bit. I see the article in question says much the same thing.
Every time I read an article about the internal British government procedures, I feel chills run down my spine. Thank goodness we got out of that horrible mess!
On 4/29/2020 at 1:19 PM, Battlefront.com said:I heard a really interesting piece on the radio during the panic buying episodes. It was about how unprepared "preppers" were and that they were among the panic shoppers. The guy being interviewed has been studying them for a long time and explained why Human Nature gets in the way of the best planning.
Once upon a time, I was talking to a buddy of mine who is a rather rabid prepper type. He asked me once a hypothetical, "What's the one thing you need during the apocalypse?"
I answered, "Toilet paper, because if civilization is going to end, and we have to live without all of life's conveniences, then the one thing I want to be able to do is wipe my *ss."Now, when I answered his question, it was back during the ebola virus scare, and I had no idea I was actually predicting the future.
Anyway, I found some Charmin at a local store, so I'm officially no longer worried about anything. Life is good.
-
1 hour ago, MOS:96B2P said:
My first guess would be the Tiger commander sitting higher up can see the Sherman since the Tiger does have a confirmed contact marker. Maybe the gunner, sitting lower, does not have line of fire? I notice in the status block the gunner stays at spotting, never going to aiming.
Just because the commander can see it, doesn't mean the gunner can.
If you use the Target command I bet you a million dollars it will say, "Reverse Slope, No Aim Point" or some other such inability.
24 minutes ago, weapon2010 said:even more confounding , the sherman is not firing at the Tiger
Most likely the Sherman has not spotted you, or has the same problem you do.
Just move forward about 20 meters and this problem will solve itself.
Maybe you ought to narrow down that Cover Armor Arc while you do.
-
2 minutes ago, kevinkin said:
Believe it or not there is no actual shortage of any item in the US (but maybe common sense). The availability retail vs wholesale involves - get this - packaging. The regulations on how to package large and small amounts of things like lettuce and other things like paper products differs based on which market the product is being sold into. A 12 pack of toilet paper in Costco is fundamentally packaged, barcoded and labeled differently than the same product sent to a wholesaler that services many establishments. It takes a lot of time to change over packaging lines that have been dedicated to the wholesale market into lines that can crank out small family sized packs meant to supply the retail market. So there are many products just waiting to be packaged and barcoded into family sized packs but the line capacity for them does not exist. To put it another way. A Shop Rite can't just unpack 1000 rolls of unlabeled toilet paper and try to sell them without a barcode or any labelling that traces the product to the manufacturing site. Sure a tiny corner store can do that - and they do. But big boxes will not assume the risk.
I know that, I was speaking facetiously. Something like 50% of our strategic toilet paper stockpile is going unused because it's all sitting in commercial offices and other places that are closed for business, or tied up in the aforementioned UPC barcode wars.
Still rankles a bit my local supermarket has been hoarding toilet paper for the special "old people hours" they enforce every morning. By the time I'm allowed through the door, all the toilet paper is gone. If I hadn't stockpiled stuff back in December when I first became aware of the virus outbreak, I would have nothing now. The nearest wholesale location is an hour away, but even if I could, I would never walk into those disease factories.
If you didn't buy stock in Amazon, WalMart, and Costco during the recent market tumble you missed out on a golden opportunity.
-
11 minutes ago, sburke said:
You need to lay off the frogs. They have every right to decide their sexual orientation. After all half of them in France are amputees anyway.
It's not the frogs,
IT'S THE CHEMICALS IN THE WATER
Like I said, it's really not funny, it's serious. They put chemicals in the water that turn frogs gay. It's real. It's actually happening. It's not fake.
Now apologize to Alex Jones. He was right the whole time.
QuoteSome 80 million pounds of the herbicide atrazine are applied annually in the United States on corn and sorghum to control weeds and increase crop yield, but such widespread use also makes atrazine the most common pesticide contaminant of ground and surface water, according to various studies.
More and more research, however, is showing that atrazine interferes with endocrine hormones, such as estrogen and testosterone – in fish, amphibians, birds, reptiles, laboratory rodents and even human cell lines at levels of parts per billion. Recent studies also found a possible link between human birth defects and low birth weight and atrazine exposure in the womb.
-
On 4/23/2020 at 1:56 AM, sburke said:
Go tune in to Alex jones or Limbaugh or whoever it is that you get your oddly colored view of reality from.
I ignored all the political stuff in this thread because I knew commenting on it wouldn't do any good, the two sides are far too entrenched to listen to each other.
However, @sburke YOU TAKE THAT BACK RIGHT NOW!
I won't have my two favorite media personalities slandered by the likes of you.
Now apologize to Alex Jones.
Those frogs really DID turn gay!
IT'S NOT FUNNY!
No, really it's not. I'm serious.
-
On 4/27/2020 at 12:48 AM, Battlefront.com said:
That's one way to look at it. The other way is that the naysayers are always right:
The naysayers are always right, until they're not. If millions had died, then the naysayers would have to eat some humble pie wouldn't they?
The only thing I'm foggy about is where the toilet paper comes in, and why everyone bought all of it so quickly.
WHAT ARE WE MISSING?!
On 4/27/2020 at 6:34 AM, 37mm said:Millions will definitely die, that's no longer a fact in doubt.
Call me a doubter then.
The models published that showed millions of deaths were modeling the effects of the virus if no preventative actions were taken.
These were used to induce the government to call for social distancing and to shut down the economy.
They claimed there would come a point of no return in which our hospital system would be so overwhelmed that we'd be unable to treat, prevent, or limit the rate at which the virus spreads.All of these models were wrong, not just because we actually did things to slow the virus, but because several erroneous assumptions were made to yield model data as early as possible.
Data as to the result of travel restrictions and the shutdown of commerce and trade were not added until after it took effect. Data for population density was mostly ignored, which is why rates of infection and hospitalization for rural areas was entirely wrong. Most importantly, the models did not take into account the increase in hospital capacity by postponing elective procedures for the duration, and the creation of significant temporary capacity by both the government and private enterprise. It simply assumed hospitals would be an additional infection vector which is why several states and cities issued 'shelter in place' orders which effectively lock people in their homes.They just didn't think of these things, because the pressure was on to force the government to take action, any action, even a draconian reduction in citizen's civil rights.
As I've explained, the doomsayers are never wrong. Maybe by December the overall worldwide death toll may top a couple million, but by then we will have long forgotten the hysteria that accompanied the dire predictions of the doomsayers that stated our hospitals would be overwhelmed and our society would come crashing down amid a viral zombie apocalypse.
You can simply comfort yourself with the knowledge that you were right all along, while you shop for your Christmas presents in stores that re-opened without incident months ago.
The curves seem to be flattening worldwide quite nicely as hospitalizations are down, effective treatment and testing becomes more available, and the application of industry to the production of medical supplies continues to ramp up worldwide. Not to mention medical staff become more experienced in treating the disease, thus rendering medical efforts to be more efficient.
In the U.S. temporary emergency medical facilities are already being scheduled to close as they have no patients to treat. The Javits Center facility is scheduled to close after they transfer the few patients they had to another facility, and the navy hospital ship in New York currently only has about 50 patients onboard a ship with room for a thousand.
I think what's needed to stave off the ravening hordes of coronavirus zombies is a little perspective.
So far, around 19,000,000 people have died this year.
430,000 from traffic accidents.
340,000 from suicide.
800,000 from alcohol.
1,600,000 from smoking.
300,000 from malaria.
500,000 from AIDS.
100,000 from childbirth complications.
13,800,000 abortions.
and 150,000 from the seasonal flu.That's just a small sample. Let's be honest, cigarettes are still king of the hill, unless you're like me and consider abortion to be the act of taking an unborn human life.
What can I say? Eating dinner at the Denny's in Stony Creek, Virginia and then being able to light a cigarette because they still had a designated smoking section back in 2007 is one of the most memorable things I have ever done in my life. I don't expect I will ever see another smoking section in any public place so long as I live. I don't even smoke anymore, but I still think it's kinda sad. Then again, maybe I'm an inhuman monster who looks at the millions of people who die from smoking every year and think to myself, "Eh, it's just a drop in the bucket really."
-
On 4/20/2020 at 7:50 PM, z1812 said:
We would do well to acknowledge that without the measures taken we can never know how bad it might have been.
The doomsayers are always right.
Observe:
>Millions of people WILL DIE unless we take these measures!
Millions don't die.
>Millions of people WOULD HAVE died if we hadn't taken these measures!The doomsayers are always right.
Truth is, the real numbers of infected likely will not be known for some time, given this virus was spreading for weeks uncontrolled before any alarm was raised, and still spread uncontrolled for weeks while China assured everyone it's just a seasonal flu and there's no evidence of human to human transmission and masks most likely won't protect you and don't worry swine flu and SARS were just a big nothing-burger too etcetera, "It's all America's fault! Stop being racist! Go hug a Chinese person! Stop shutting down travel from foreign countries you bigot! Those faulty tests are just a conspiracy! Wearing a mask is racist!"
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/07/us/face-masks-ethnicity-coronavirus-cdc-trnd/index.html
This thing ran away from containment at the very beginning, and all we've been doing this whole time is trying to apply a vacuum cleaner to a dirt factory.
I'm sorry for my excessively sanguine attitude, but lets be honest here, the failure to prevent the spread of this virus is not the fault of any one person, or any one policy, it was a failure of our entire civilization.
Or as Dan Carlin titled it in an excellent Hardcore History episode:
"Globalization Unto Death"
Which I highly recommend by the way. Excellent story.
-
20 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:
Yeah but like, why does Rule the Waves start in 1900 is the point. If it's a game about the history of the battleship, seems a bit disappointing to me that they'd go and leave more than half of it out.
You'd have to ask the devs, but as I stated previously the idea was to cover the Dreadnought Race, which it does.
20 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:Really? I mean, devil's in the details but the details don't reveal a staggering mismatch or trivial encounter.
The devil is not in the details, the details are in the details. It'd be a rather easy slaughter in a straight up slugfest. Period.
Like sending the Colorado against the Yamato. It'd be fun for about ten minutes. Then the Colorado would sink with all hands.22 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:I can't imagine I'd be as cool with the idea of facing off against another Capital ship regardless of how "revolutionary" mine is. Bad luck happens you know but even if it doesn't, her guns are just as big as mine. That it doesn't have as many is hardly encouraging, she has enough to make me worry. Someone is going to die and I can't guarantee it won't be any of my crew...
Get turned before the mast for cowardice then. Meanwhile, I'll be busy sinking your navy with MUH BIG GUNZ and MUH SPEED.
Your example for measurement was a World of Warships style one-on-one engagement, and I've already explained to you just how outmatched your old 'traditional' ship is compared to 'the new hotness that set the standard for decades to come'.
26 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:I found the scope of the book too wide to adequately cover the topic.
Which is why Rule the Waves doesn't span 100 years of history.
Good talk.
-
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/world/europe/disinformation-china-eu-coronavirus.html
I wonder if the real story will ever come out.
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
And since the WHO's info was only as good as the Chinese allowed, the WHO should not have been used as a gold standard either.
Trouble is, the experts we rely on to give us our good information and plans seem to think the WHO is just amazing.
Aside from that, all I gotta say is this thread didn't age well. Remember when this was a global pandemic that was gonna kill millions of people?
Lame.
I didn't even get to see any zombies, and I went out and bought some extra ammo too just in case.
-
On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:
But Ironclads didn't disappear the next day crucially. Or even over the next year. They remained a factor in naval warfare for years to come.
Yeah, but they were long gone by the time Rule the Waves starts. The invention of the quick-firing gun put an end to that.
On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:The British and French played fast and hard with lots of Dreadnoughts during the war. Not the Dreadnoughts of the Grand Fleet no, but they were practically throwing them away in the Mediterranean to thwart Ottoman minefields. Not to mention Jackie Fisher's Battlecruisers and their escapades...
The fleet that went up the Dardanelles consisted mostly of old Pre-Dreadnoughts, which is why they were relegated to the Mediterranean theatre in the first place. They had no place in the main battle line of the channel fleet any longer. Rule the Waves lets you do something similar, by basing your obsolete units in other areas. Just because the Dreadnought race begins doesn't mean you just go and scrap your entire legacy fleet. My ships serve an entire 20 year term in game unless destroyed or scrapped.
On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:Yes it is nominally true HMS Dreadnought was the first "true Dreadnought" but if you sent it to battle against, say, HMS Agamemnon...a side by side comparison of each ship does not reveal a staggering mismatch even though our poor HMS Agamemnon is now a "pre dreadnought", literally just because it was a predecessor class of ship to Dreadnought. Is it inferior to Dreadnought? Yup, but by how much? My own litmus test is if you sent these ships to battle against each other in a World of Warships style team-deathmatch, would the Captain of HMS Dreadnought be totally sure of his victory? Would he even feel it necessary to take precautions?
In weight of broadside HMS Dreadnought outguns HMS Agamemnon by a factor of two. She literally throws twice the weight in broadside artillery. Dreadnought is faster, which means she can set the range of engagement, stand off outside of 9-inch range, and flail Agamemnon to death with her 12-inchers and Agamemnon is literally powerless to do anything to change that outcome. Not to mention Dreadnought has an electronic central range-finding system, a complete generational advantage over Agamemnon. Dreadnought will fire first, do more damage, score more hits, and cannot be chased down and brought within secondary battery range. That's also not mentioning her turret arrangement which allows for multiple turrets to fire both fore and aft. Whether she's steaming towards you, away from you, or alongside you, she outguns you comfortably.
In a WoWS type engagement, it's the same as sending a Tier 1 against a Tier 3. I would take those odds all day, and twice on Sunday.
On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:If I was him about the only ship I'd feel that way against would be...USS Monitor. I may have the "better ship" but I will certainly not be underestimating an opponent with similar protection and literally the exact same guns as my ship because he's a few knots slower, definitely not because he's a "Pre Dreadnought".
The arbitrary name of the category of ship is merely arbitrary. If I were in command I would be rubbing my hands together with glee seeing such an easy target steam into view. Dreadnought was literally designed to wipe out any existing battleship in service at the time.
On 4/25/2020 at 6:00 PM, SimpleSimon said:English histories always do that "Only one Battleship lost during World War 1" Wikipedia quote you know? Ps the British lost way more than one *Capital* ship during World War 1 but we all know that.
Try Peter Padfield's book "Battleship".
You'll find it much better than whatever tripe gets posted to Wikipedia.
-
On 4/23/2020 at 1:13 PM, Bulletpoint said:
That all depends on what quality you set them to. Paratroopers and Fallschirmjäger are not intrinsically any better than any other unit. They get some different equipment of course.
I once tried to conduct a whole series of tests to figure out which particular unit is the "best" in terms of fighting capability. It even led to a short lived youtube series of weapons tests.
After running through the whole gamut of testing however, I figured out the practical differences weren't worth two buckets of snot.
It all depends on what equipment is in which hands at any time, and not much else. Soft factors seem to account for much of the differences in performance we see.
-
On 2/8/2020 at 8:57 PM, CanuckGamer said:
I've been playing CM games since the first series and have never seen this. Seems unrealistic.
You must have never close-assaulted a tank in CMx1, because it was there, and worked exactly the same way. Infantry throws grenade at tank. "HIT" text appears. Then there is a chance to knock out or immobilize the tank.
That's the way it's always worked. It's intended to be an abstracted 'close assault' of a tank by infantry using grenades or whatever ad-hoc antitank weapon they might have available.
Seems unrealistic though.
Yeah, definitely.
-
On 4/22/2020 at 8:25 PM, SimpleSimon said:
Ah ha but were the Ironclad and Dreadnought race not one in the same? It's difficult to define exactly where one class ended and the other began.
The Ironclad Race ended with the development of Harvey Steel, no longer requiring iron plates to be used in armor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_armor
The Dreadnought Race began with the launching of HMS Dreadnought, and set a new standard with a homogenous main gun armament.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Dreadnought
So there's a brief period between the two from about 1892 to 1906 in which your Pre-Dreadnought Battleship reigned supreme, then rapidly became obsolete with B's sitting in reserve fleets or relegated to backwaters as much as 15 years after their construction.
Rule the Waves starts it's campaign at the very height of the Pre-Dreadnought era, but you only have a few short years before the march of technology leaves you behind.
On 4/22/2020 at 8:25 PM, SimpleSimon said:Nitpicking overall Rule the Waves is a fine game and i'm sure i'll grab the new game soon enough.
I've purchased it, but had little time to play it. Maybe someday soon.
-
3 hours ago, com-intern said:
* Against the AI especially I find it cheap
Well said.
I work around that particular gamey-ness by having my maneuver element approach from an angle removed from the "friendly" suppressive fire.
A clear lane of fire, and a clear lane of movement, both converging on the contested position.
-
On 4/19/2020 at 12:08 PM, SimpleSimon said:
No I just noticed that opening right up with a war in the early Pre-Dreadnought era frequently led to these laughable exchanges of meekly armed bucket ships that were more likely to sink each other with upholstery fires and
accidental collisionsramming attacks than any kind of sophisticated direction or marksmanship.I have had quite a few engagement simply end when I ran out of ammo, but that's usually held to the early 1900's. Once you have central firing, and a few national upgrades like better rangefinders, you'll score many more hits, and sink many more ships. It seems to me to be more about positioning, and maintaining a nice steady shooting platform early on.
I think what happens in the game is that at the very start, you can fit enough armor to make you immune to your own guns, and it's only after a few shell upgrades that you can really punch holes in things.
On 4/19/2020 at 12:08 PM, SimpleSimon said:Typical of warship games there's a tendency to place the cart-before-the-horse and retroactively apply modern definitions and thinking for warships back onto 19th and early 20th century designs. It doesn't break the game, but it's just a bit unfortunate to me that even a well researched game like Rule the Waves makes, for instance, the typical mistake of considering Pre Dreadnought battleships as "inferior battleships" and not "the logical evolution of the Ironclad" if you get what i'm saying.
It depends. The game is intended to simulate the Dreadnought race, not the Ironclad race. Your pre-dreadnoughts really only exist to tide you over until you build more modern BB's and BC's. By 1905 in a typical game, your pre-dreadnoughts are basically obsolete.
I, for one, would have loved the game just a little bit more if it started in 1875. But I'm weird.
-
On 4/19/2020 at 12:06 PM, semmes said:
That means that somebody decided that when 10 guys are rushing 8m. from one cover to the next another guy 300m away, with a MG, is going to aim at one of them? really?
Um.
Yeah.
Dudes aim at other dudes.
That's how it works.
If the leader is the first one to be seen, given he's usually the first in line, then he's the first one to be shot at.
If the leader is shooting his SMG, then he's drawing more attention than the men around him, and is the one most likely to be shot at.
If the machine-gunner is doing all the shooting, and thus being spotted and noticed by the enemy constantly, then he's the one most likely to get shot at.I don't know why this is difficult.
Unless you're ordered to fire at an area, you're going to aim at a specific enemy target and try to hit him.There is no random area fire in this game unless specified by the scenario designer.
Every time you are being shot at, they can SEE you, and they're TRYING TO KILL YOU.QuoteThe only way to mitigate leader casualties is to not expose them to so much fire. I usually split off an Assault Team from each squad as a way to protect the squad leader until use of their SMG and grenades becomes necessary. Otherwise they sit out of SMG range and use their binos while the team's rifles do the shooting.
I gave you perfectly good advice. Try using it.
-
On 4/16/2020 at 12:22 PM, SimpleSimon said:
+1 to Rule the Waves. Super crude game, but definitely the best available "Navy Manager" game right now. I was personally loving the tendency for Pre-Dreadnought battles to degenerate into silly train wrecks of under armed Battleships and Armored Cruisers endlessly trying to ram each other because their weak 10in guns run out of ammo quickly and can't hit anything. Damn the torpedoes Gridley, full speed ahead! All 9 of our pathetic knots!
Were you playing as Spain of some other such underdeveloped nation?
I had great success in attempting to model a historical US Navy, making a few sacrifices in order to preserve gameplay.
https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1272/creating-historical-navyIt even generated a couple of AAR's:
https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1100/turning-point-aar
https://nws-online.proboards.com/thread/1609/aar-fleet-battle-sicily
On 4/17/2020 at 5:59 AM, BletchleyGeek said:Ultimate Admiral Dreadnought is quite fun (early access though). It's somewhere halfway between Distant Guns and the ships game by the War Thunder Dev company.
I await the full release of that game with bated breath.
Issues with tank targeting accuracy
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
This is why I can't come to the forums anymore. You people make my brain hurt.
If you park two stationary tanks across from each other on a flat surface under perfect weather conditions, and allow one tank to range the other and sit there plinking away at it's target, then that is TRAINING CONDITIONS. The observed accuracy of the guns is here demonstrated under TRAINING CONDITIONS. This is no different if you'd hung a paper target and told the gunner to shoot it. The American 76mm gun is wickedly accurate, and at 2000 meters range can easily bullseye the center of mass on a 2 meter target under TRAINING CONDITIONS. I mean, Jesus Christ it can plaster a FIVE INCH circle at 1000 meters no trouble at all. That's a target about the size of my hand fully stretched out, so a 2 meter target at 2000 meters is no trouble at all.
We're not shooting smoothbore cannons firing round shot here. Sheesh.
If you want to test accuracy under combat conditions, then create COMBAT conditions, and record your results. This game doesn't automagically create combat conditions just because you load a scenario and let it play. Load up a random map, put forces on both sides, and order them to attack each other. Then you can see how effective your gunnery is. When your targets are maneuvering, evading, popping smoke, shooting smoke, and shooting back to hit and kill, you'll likely see a reduction in your accuracy.
Of course, you might be having too much fun to come onto the forums and complain about gunnery, but that tends to happen when you just play the game.