David Chapuis
-
Posts
627 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by David Chapuis
-
-
I think the 50 mm mortars are great weapons in the game. I used them to pin crack troops just the other day.Originally posted by MikeyD:Except for harrassing anti-tank gun emplacements, I can't say those little mortars with their low ammo loadout have been much use to me in the game.
However, if you were referring to the CW version, I must agree. With only 10HE and 10 smoke rounds they really are almost worthless.
On a slightly different topic:
Does anybody know the caliber of the little knee mortars that the Japenese used? Any other armies in WWII use those?
-
I remember reading somebody who said that tanks override inf on flags. Or that they have a longer reach than inf on flags? I did a lot of testing on this in CMBB and that doesnt seem to be true.
Is it different in CMAK?
-
I saw a history channel show where the Germans did something similar to that at Bastogne. anybody know the details?
-
You still looking for this? i have the game, but would have to dig it out of a box and load it on the pc.
-
Funny... Steve </font>Originally posted by Battlefront.com:David,
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I cant think of any reason that would be hard to program.
-
Yeah, I know. I was bored again after unsuccessfully trying to find a tcp/ip opponent, so I posted that as a joke.Originally posted by aka_tom_w:BUT I think Steve was serious when he stated this: "Therefore, we will be making no special map edge rules in CMx2. That's a certain point not subject to change"
-tom w
I hoped my last couple lines made that clear - but apparently they didnt.
-
I havent been following this thread at all, since back on page 1 Steve said:
However, since the topic is still around, I might as well throw in the easy answer to all of this. Dynamic map edges. Basically, every time a unit gets within 50m of a map edge, the game automatically ads an extra 10% (or 20% - whatever) of the total to that side. The game also would randomly insert units for either side when it does that 5% of the time.Therefore, we will be making no special map edge rules in CMx2. That's a certain point not subject to change.
So you could start with a 500m x 500m map and a company size force, and by the end of the game have a 5km x 5km map with a couple of battalions each.
I cant think of any reason that would be hard to program.
Dont forget to make it an option - because I personally like it how it is right now.
-
The truth is, I am one of those saps that has been married for over 10 years with 4 kids and another one in the oven - and I am more crazy about my wife then when we first met. However, marriage can really be incredibly difficult. I remember a couple of months after I got married, I walked into a bookstore and suddenly realized why there was an entire section dedicated to marriage.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:The grass is always less green on your side of the fence... :mad:
I'm afraid somebody else has been much more effective for the last couple of months of boring the forum to death. I dont think you - even though yours is the superior intellect - stand a chance to top him. You will be better off going back to normal Dorosh. And to help you with that, explain this, because I still dont see the comic brilliance.When my goal of boring the forum to death is realized, I'll ensure that you are among the last to die.
My God, did NO ONE see the comic brilliance of this line? I may take a screenshot just to preserve this moment forever... :mad: </font>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
And weren't most of the patrons only there for five or ten minutes before leaving, or simply asking questions about how to take a picture of their car?
-
That is because you arent married. That is an albatross so large it even dwarfs JasonC posts.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:Aside from the fact that hotties at work now tell me how thin I look, have you ever had the misfortune of falling in love on the first date? I can't think of anything worse - any sap who lives through that has my respect.
The book she loaned me shall hang around my neck like a dead albatross til the pages fall from the cover and the leaves turn to ashes.
Woe is me.
[/QB]
-
I wonder how many people beside myself have actually ran a CMx10 campaign. MikeyD and I ran what I considered a highly entertaining CMx10 campaign - for about 3 turns. After that, RL seemed to swallow everybody's time.
What worked well about it was that the rules were defined very loosely. Basically I had the players draw orders on the CM campaign map 'We-Go style', and I would just resolve them myself (I had movement distance guidelines of course). We had a substancial amount of role-playing, and I encouraged the players to ask for things not mentioned in the rules. That resulted in some fun counter-intelligence from one team, and a lively round of prison interrogation.
-
27 paragraphs - he's back.
Now all we need is a Dorosh/JasonC CMBB rematch.
Not trying to highjack the post - just dont know anything intelligent to add - and I'm bored because I cant find a TCP opponent.
-
Not mocking - just trying to get a lively response. You've been boring lately, not your somewhat spiteful but highly amusing self.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:Now that JasonC is back, you can go back to mocking HIM tyvm... post counts are insignifcant in comparison to the Forc...err...the number of paras produced.
-
Dont forget to give Tom access so he can give a recap.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:I move that we immediately start a "Mike Thread" where only guys named Mike can post in it to celebrate each other's failures.
[/QB]
Dorosh, you seem to have slowed down on your average of 18 posts a day. Have you become a workout grog? Do you know how many nanograms you gain with each granual of sugar you consume? Have you considered adding daily keystrokes to your routine?
-
I was wanting to see the walpurgis night AARs from ROW IV.Originally posted by Melnibone:It's a shame not all the AAR's from ROWIV have made it public...there were a few I was looking out for.
-
I'm not trying to open up the PBEM can of worms again, but I still am somewhat concerned about multiplayer philosophy in general.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:It should never have been a frothy, irrational explosion at all. Period. Especially when I said about 1000 times that it wasn't a sure thing that PBEM was on the chopping block, only that it might possibly be. And to be fair to me and others... the mention of a backdoor and FTP solution was brought out rather early in the fecalfest, but routinely ignored because I refused to say that PBEM was sacred.
Steve
And to be fair to those of us who were trying to be reasonable, the the backdoor solution was not, IMO, communicated very often or very well. In fact, I specifically mentioned (and others did as well) "some aspect of 'non-hotseat/tcp multiplayer' option.", and you responded to me only talking about PBEM. Now I am more than willing to assume that the enormity of the ficalfest caused you to miss that - I for sure didnt read all 400 post, mostly just looked for your responses.
But any way ... my one and only post in this ficalmess, was to try to express what I feel is a key component of any game that would try to be 'a best game ever' type of game - great multiplayer options - which only relates to PBEM in that it was the most popular CMx1 multiplay option.
If I have understood your position correctly, you guys are trying to make the best single player tactical wargame ever, and then add multiplayer functions to it. My personal preference would be to make the best tactical wargame that could be played multiplayer. I do understand that means I would be willing to sacrifice some play function, if it could only be played in single-player mode. In other words, if the best game you could make was XXX - but that had no multiplayer, I would rather have a game that was 90% of XXX, with multiplayer ability. Said a third way, I would rather you make a ferrari with 10 less horse power that I could race against a friend, than the super-powered ultimare ferrari that I had to drive on a race track by myself.
My justification for this stance is this: You mentioned that single play is by far the most played option. I agree with that. But I wonder if there has ever been a study of what mode produces the best gaming experiences. I would think that by far, the best gaming experiences in any game would be in a multiplayer mode. So from the perspective of 'the best game we could make would be the one that produces the best gameing experiences', I would think multiplayer options would need to be considered a key component from the beginning, as opposed to an option that 'we hope makes it.'
That absolutely does not mean I would want you to gut the design now to ensure PBEM or even multiplayer. But I am hoping that multiplayer, and even some sort of asynchronous multiplayer, is on the key component list.
If you have already answered something like this - then I missed it - sorry.
[ March 07, 2005, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: David Chapuis ]
-
Of course nobody is saying that directly, but that is in fact what they are saying means. And that is if there is a choice between a much better game and PBEM, the choice is to go with PBEM. Therefore, by definition, they are arguing that we must go with an inferior game design right now. There is no other way of looking at this. If we are going to ensure there is PBEM, come Hell or High Water, then a less sophisticated, advanced game is the only way for us to go.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:A.E.B
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />With respect to BF.C, I don't think that any of the B votes are demanding that CMX2 be dumbed down.
Steve </font>
-
When you split squads, will it split by fire team? So a squad with three fire teams would be split in thirds, rather than halves?Originally posted by Battlefront.com:I am pretty sure we will still allow people to split squads in certain circumstances for specific purposes. As with my statement above, a unit is a unit is a unit. If you split a Squad into two pieces you now have two units, and all that goes along with it.
Steve
-
Well in the last game I played, I had not one, not two, but THREE American HT driving single file right towards one of my stationary stugs. They were pinging the Stug with MG fire for at least 30 secs of the turn. The stug didnt button, didnt have a crew kill, and never once targetted those HTs. It was turn 1, and those were the only american units spotted on the entire map.
At the end of the turn, I checked LOS, and of course he could see them, but I knew that because he was being shot at. It was quit frustrating.
Explain that mystery.
-
That gets my vote. Especially if units are cheaper when selected as reinforcements. So if select reinforcements to come after 10 turns, you can save 10%. If you select reinforcemts to come after 20 turns, mayb save 20%.Originally posted by dalem:You know Steve, another neat thing would be a reinforcement randomizer for QBs.
-dale
-
We Band of BrothersOriginally posted by GreenAsJade:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by David Chapuis:
Just a joke - I'm bored and cant find a CM opponent.
The Proving Grounds </font>
-
Just a joke - I'm bored and cant find a CM opponent.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:[QB] Now what was the point of that post, Dave?
oh that was the point.Tom stated facts that are known to everyone on this forum who's taken the trouble to follow the right threads...
-
I was under the impression that when the Lees came out they were the best tanks in the theater.Originally posted by MikeyD:I was surprised myself at how well the Lee does in combat. This may be the case where the whole did not really equal the sum of its parts. BFC put in all the right stats and figures on the tank. But some extra variable wasn't factored in (rivet construction perhaps?) so the game's Lee is simply more competent than a real-life Lee.
-
Anybody else feel that Tom is front-runner for the BF.C forum liason? I expect the announcement of their new full-time addition any day now.Originally posted by aka_tom_w:the request has been refered to as FULL MOTION REPLAY
Hell yeah,
Everybody wants it but you will NEVER see it in CMAK or CMBO or CMBB
but maybe about a year from now when CMx2 comes out
we might get full motion replay...
maybe
-tom w
-
Fatty McButterpants ...Originally posted by Fatty McButterpants:Fatty McButterpants ...
That name kills me!!!
BO/BB vet looking forward to his AK arrival. What improvements can I look forward to?
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
file sizes are 3 times larger - or more