PLM

I always looked at is as something that showed you were important, if you weren't 'important' you'd be on the frontline with a rifle or SMG just like anyone else. An officer doesnt need to lug around a large weapon because his primary role isnt to actually engage the enemy himself. I remember those leaflets they dropped in Iraq with instructions on how to surrender safely, placing your vehicles in squares and standing several hundred meters away in some formation, also officers could keep their sidearms. I think its kind of a control thing even if it doesnt get used often, its still there just in case, easy to carry around and doesnt leave officers defensless

I'm just curious about the origin of a lot of shooter games giving each player his primary weapon in addition to a pistol. I didnt think it was true just wondering to what extent if any. I wonder what the number on pistol production was. I searched and couldnt find any. Must have been millions.

I'm curious if anyone knows to what extent regular soldeirs carried pistols in addition to their primary weapon. I know the Germans didnt issue everybody a parabellum, thats rediculous. For support roles and heavy weapon crews I can see it. Did American troops have pistols in addition to their primary weapon? It doesnt make sense to me, why not just give them more primary ammo? Now maybe at very close range it would be an advantage, particularly when carrying a bolt action rifle but I dont think they'd go to such lengths in producing all those pistols to give each soldier one or did they?

Whats that got to do with anything. </font>

Whats that got to do with anything. </font>

Whats that got to do with anything. I'm talking movement orders, simple basic monkey logic movement orders that dont exist such as rendezvous. Absolutely nothing to do with ordering a unit to fire at a unit it cant see when it can see, I think thats what cover arc is for. Sure. Stuff can go wrong but it goes wrong in all the wrong areas which leads to a different outcome. Is anybody gonna argue that the concept of rendezvous is unrealistic? Is the concept of rendezvous between vehicles and squads unrealistic? I can foresee some tankers getting impatient and moving on their own if infantry takes long enough to arrive to mount up. But I'll be darned if thats gonna rely on a timer without the ability to communicate to that tank crew that you want them to carry an infantry squad somewhere. I dont believe commanders very often give CM style orders of relying on ordering a unit to hault X time so another unit can meet up with them without either unit being 'aware' of the rendezvous. It doesnt make sense and the arguement is laughable. I know the game isnt perfect and everybody agrees but that right there me and I think a number of people despise. Well I really refuse to believe you fully believe in the most realistic situation a transport vehicle would make one drop off and end there. I dont know what kind of situation you're thinking about. I've made a bunch of scenerios trying to represent a frontline with unit movements over long range in relatively safe conditions. In a way it simulates the 'rear' areas or a mini rear area. It certainly involves some risks operating transports that close to combat but I think any commander can see the advantage in speed when force is needed somewhere and its not there and you have transports available. Oh I'm sorry I dont have the money to go to college to fullfill my dream of creating my grand strategy game which I've had drawn up in my head for years that would kickass if I had the software and the advanced programming skills that scumbags charge thousands for and publishers aquire your soul for. Maybe thats a good thing though cuz I can express distaste with any God-like creature anywhere on the interweb I want cuz I'm takin off August 2nd at noon to go spend the next several years of my life in the Army getting raped, ammassing some money to earn the divine right to put my ass in everybodys way and pretend like I know every goddamn thing. Btw I hate publishers and definately wanna see more independent developers and less of this satanist bastard publisher control treating game development as a business ruining games by early release and sometimes axing them all together. What happened to Civ War Generals III BF.com?!?!?! Smash publishers with an iron fist. :mad: :mad: :mad: [ July 27, 2005, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: PLM ]

Whats that got to do with anything. I'm talking movement orders, simple basic monkey logic movement orders that dont exist such as rendezvous. Absolutely nothing to do with ordering a unit to fire at a unit it cant see when it can see, I think thats what cover arc is for. Sure. Stuff can go wrong but it goes wrong in all the wrong areas which leads to a different outcome. Is anybody gonna argue that the concept of rendezvous is unrealistic? Is the concept of rendezvous between vehicles and squads unrealistic? I can foresee some tankers getting impatient and moving on their own if infantry takes long enough to arrive to mount up. But I'll be darned if thats gonna rely on a timer without the ability to communicate to that tank crew that you want them to carry an infantry squad somewhere. I dont believe commanders very often give CM style orders of relying on ordering a unit to hault X time so another unit can meet up with them without either unit being 'aware' of the rendezvous. It doesnt make sense and the arguement is laughable. I know the game isnt perfect and everybody agrees but that right there me and I think a number of people despise. Well I really refuse to believe you fully believe in the most realistic situation a transport vehicle would make one drop off and end there. I dont know what kind of situation you're thinking about. I've made a bunch of scenerios trying to represent a frontline with unit movements over long range in relatively safe conditions. In a way it simulates the 'rear' areas or a mini rear area. It certainly involves some risks operating transports that close to combat but I think any commander can see the advantage in speed when force is needed somewhere and its not there and you have transports available. Oh I'm sorry I dont have the money to go to college to fullfill my dream of creating my grand strategy game which I've had drawn up in my head for years that would kickass if I had the software and the advanced programming skills that scumbags charge thousands for and publishers aquire your soul for. Maybe thats a good thing though cuz I can express distaste with any God-like creature anywhere on the interweb I want cuz I'm takin off August 2nd at noon to go spend the next several years of my life in the Army getting raped, ammassing some money to earn the divine right to put my ass in everybodys way and pretend like I know every goddamn thing. Btw I hate publishers and definately wanna see more independent developers and less of this satanist bastard publisher control treating game development as a business ruining games by early release and sometimes axing them all together. What happened to Civ War Generals III BF.com?!?!?! Smash publishers with an iron fist. :mad: :mad: :mad: [ July 27, 2005, 10:33 PM: Message edited by: PLM ]

How about you explain the difference in the scenerio of a tank commander understanding and executing precise orders and a truck driver udnerstanding and executing precise orders before I even feel the slightest urge to defend my views. I was just talking with a tanker last week and we talked about an occasion in the Persian Gulf when one tank split from its unit and went off to the right with permission, the other tanks ran into the enemy and had to hault. When the other tank was ordered back that tank got lit up accidently by its own unit because they didn't realize how far ahead they were even they knew a friendly tank was heading back. My point everybody is attacking the idea of coordination between vehicles and infantry as if its nigh on impossible. I'm asking, what the hell is the plan for CM? It doesnt add up that you can expect a tank to move to exact positions but you cant expect a truck to begin moving after infantry mount up or shortly after without involving delays which can cause all sorts of problems even when fire isnt involved. If you can relay orders to a tank and guide them to precise positions, then what in the hell is so hard about other areas of coordination. And if we're going to simulate difficulty in that area, then are we going to simulate difficulties in other areas (such as moving tanks and units in general). The idea of serious lack of coordination and misinterpretation of orders is not present in CM. But this flaw in the game regarding mounting infantry is being brushed off as if it were intentional, I dont think so. I feel really something or other when I'm complaining about something that doesnt add up in the game and get told its supposed to be like that when its not even simulated close to what the reality is supposed to be. I really dont believe, if you can give orders to trucks at all, why they cant pick up infantry and start moving without having to give them separate orders timing to take off regardless of being mounted. Do I need to go "PS. Dont leave without the infantry squad"? [ July 27, 2005, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: PLM ]

How about you explain the difference in the scenerio of a tank commander understanding and executing precise orders and a truck driver udnerstanding and executing precise orders before I even feel the slightest urge to defend my views. I was just talking with a tanker last week and we talked about an occasion in the Persian Gulf when one tank split from its unit and went off to the right with permission, the other tanks ran into the enemy and had to hault. When the other tank was ordered back that tank got lit up accidently by its own unit because they didn't realize how far ahead they were even they knew a friendly tank was heading back. My point everybody is attacking the idea of coordination between vehicles and infantry as if its nigh on impossible. I'm asking, what the hell is the plan for CM? It doesnt add up that you can expect a tank to move to exact positions but you cant expect a truck to begin moving after infantry mount up or shortly after without involving delays which can cause all sorts of problems even when fire isnt involved. If you can relay orders to a tank and guide them to precise positions, then what in the hell is so hard about other areas of coordination. And if we're going to simulate difficulty in that area, then are we going to simulate difficulties in other areas (such as moving tanks and units in general). The idea of serious lack of coordination and misinterpretation of orders is not present in CM. But this flaw in the game regarding mounting infantry is being brushed off as if it were intentional, I dont think so. I feel really something or other when I'm complaining about something that doesnt add up in the game and get told its supposed to be like that when its not even simulated close to what the reality is supposed to be. I really dont believe, if you can give orders to trucks at all, why they cant pick up infantry and start moving without having to give them separate orders timing to take off regardless of being mounted. Do I need to go "PS. Dont leave without the infantry squad"? [ July 27, 2005, 09:28 PM: Message edited by: PLM ]

How is it the tank commanders in CM dont misinterpret my orders when I order them to exact coordinates in the best possible positioning? Oooh lets not go there but lets pick on the poor transport guys all the way. It doesnt add up in any way shape or form. Are we going to take a jab at everything to do with coordinating or just transporting because there's a load of coordination that goes in CM yet for some reason we're going to brush off the lack of specific commands with transporting for realism as if it was ever seriously intended. I dont think so. It doesnt match up with the rest of the game. Why dont they make the unit pauses approxomate then? Or how about a chance of the unit not executing orders at all because they 'forget' or 'misinterpret'

How is it the tank commanders in CM dont misinterpret my orders when I order them to exact coordinates in the best possible positioning? Oooh lets not go there but lets pick on the poor transport guys all the way. It doesnt add up in any way shape or form. Are we going to take a jab at everything to do with coordinating or just transporting because there's a load of coordination that goes in CM yet for some reason we're going to brush off the lack of specific commands with transporting for realism as if it was ever seriously intended. I dont think so. It doesnt match up with the rest of the game. Why dont they make the unit pauses approxomate then? Or how about a chance of the unit not executing orders at all because they 'forget' or 'misinterpret'

Its just the way its portrayed thats frustrating

Its just the way its portrayed thats frustrating

I dont feel the vehicle mounting/dismounting business was intentional, I feel its a flaw in the game and if things had turned out slightly different then we'd have better coordination.

I dont feel the vehicle mounting/dismounting business was intentional, I feel its a flaw in the game and if things had turned out slightly different then we'd have better coordination.

I found high caliber arty to be very useful on the defence in large battles. 200mm+ and target reference points can reak havoc on dense enemy formations even with the slow reloading. Its great in urban terrain because the enemy often builds up and feels safe in the areas of town he's secured. I used to play with a guy in 5000 point huge city fights and it wasnt uncommon for my 210mm to get 90 casualties total and his troops werent actually all that close together. You could deliberately leave a gap in your defences only to let them walk right onto a TRP. fun fun fun

I actually suggested this the first day I realized there would be a CM2. I really agree, this forum says CMAK not CM2. And I dont see anything against CM2 discussion. Would be nice

I actually suggested this the first day I realized there would be a CM2. I really agree, this forum says CMAK not CM2. And I dont see anything against CM2 discussion. Would be nice

Hmm too bad there cant be a difference between fresh craters and aged ones filled with snow

I like realism because its great to succeede in realistic circumstances. Its just being a commander IRL isnt much more than giving orders from safety, not doing stuff like nudging your stug forward. IRL you command a battlefield of real humans which the AI cant simulate. I havnt practiced with mounting dismounting much. You might get to make some miniscule moves like that but you arent the guy interpreting your orders, and you can make precise movements which rarely get misinterpretted by the AI. The God part seems necessary on a lot of levels thats the way I feel about stuff like giving specific orders to disembark etc. Dont care for the way realism is portrayed BTW, Steve is it me or have you been posting way too much in the past 24 hours. There's a game to be made

I like realism because its great to succeede in realistic circumstances. Its just being a commander IRL isnt much more than giving orders from safety, not doing stuff like nudging your stug forward. IRL you command a battlefield of real humans which the AI cant simulate. I havnt practiced with mounting dismounting much. You might get to make some miniscule moves like that but you arent the guy interpreting your orders, and you can make precise movements which rarely get misinterpretted by the AI. The God part seems necessary on a lot of levels thats the way I feel about stuff like giving specific orders to disembark etc. Dont care for the way realism is portrayed BTW, Steve is it me or have you been posting way too much in the past 24 hours. There's a game to be made

Well I pretty well consider the direct movement of squads and vehicles nitty gritty. You dont order a tank commander to move in an exact set path down to the meter. Even a tank platoon commander doesnt do that, its up to the actual crew. You play God very much so giving exact movement orders to the tank.

Well I pretty well consider the direct movement of squads and vehicles nitty gritty. You dont order a tank commander to move in an exact set path down to the meter. Even a tank platoon commander doesnt do that, its up to the actual crew. You play God very much so giving exact movement orders to the tank.

Well it ruffles my feathers because on the level of control, plenty of other things are capable of being done that you shouldnt be able to do while stuff like vehicle coordination is very difficult. It isnt so much of a matter of coordination as being able to give orders. If you can send orders to units simultaneously with the command delay, then whats so hard about giving a vehicle the order "wait til infantry mounts, move to point A." If I can tell any vehicle or unit without a radio and in command to do anything at all, then whats so hard about getting a vehicle to perform certain tasks just like any other unit. Are other vehicles going to be one-use only just because they aren't part of a platoon or dont have a radio? I'm trying to get Rome Total War installed for some massive slaughter fun but I cant, I ruined installshield somehow and cant fix it. Been trying to fix it all day. :mad: :mad: :mad:

Well it ruffles my feathers because on the level of control, plenty of other things are capable of being done that you shouldnt be able to do while stuff like vehicle coordination is very difficult. It isnt so much of a matter of coordination as being able to give orders. If you can send orders to units simultaneously with the command delay, then whats so hard about giving a vehicle the order "wait til infantry mounts, move to point A." If I can tell any vehicle or unit without a radio and in command to do anything at all, then whats so hard about getting a vehicle to perform certain tasks just like any other unit. Are other vehicles going to be one-use only just because they aren't part of a platoon or dont have a radio? I'm trying to get Rome Total War installed for some massive slaughter fun but I cant, I ruined installshield somehow and cant fix it. Been trying to fix it all day. :mad: :mad: :mad: