GreenAsJade

Oh - another thing to separate out from the "combined scenario score" question: the scenarios definitely need to be searchable by "Best played as". Each of "the lists" needs to be available as "for AI" and "for PBEM" separately. Otherwise it's forever clicking on popular scenarios, only to find they are popular for the wrong type of play! [ November 20, 2004, 11:31 PM: Message edited by: GreenAsJade ]

While a lot of the discussion has been about the ratings system (and I really hope Adm puts in something to help with the "find a highly recommended scenario easily" goal) there's one other small thing I'd like to ask... ... can we please have more characters in the review boxes! Once someone does decide to do a review, they might as well have room to say what it is they want to say, eh!? I always run out!

I just read at the depot that Adm Keth has V3 redesign underway. Thanks Adm for listening and continuing to improve!

An update: we've heard how some people still love the ole depot, but I've just finished a few scenarios and am finding two things: 1) In the past I've always reviewed scenarios I've played, but I'm finding I can't be bothered writing reviews on the depot because there doesn't feel like much point ... they're just not so useful anymore. 2) I feel more inclined to move to QBs - something I never would have dreamed of in the past - because its now quicker to set up a QB than sift through the depot... GaJ.

A move away from WWII would be "courageous" to use the words of Sir Humphrey...

I would so like to be able to unlock a movie file, so that you could circulate it with an AAR without having to broadcast the password.

You're not using PBEMH, are you? If you are, it's possible that the camera angle can be changed during the grey-screen phase, right?

Why are you waiting anyhow? I mean, seriously, what is there in the list of things that the patch gives you, that you are holding your breath for. When I read the list of "what it has" I concluded it wasn't even worth downloading!

Yeah, I've been wanting that for ages!

What about Moon? Shouldn't he be banned? I'm sure you can think of somefink?

Bring it on! Beta testers are ready & waiting...

(Modders note: it's nice to have what the mod is in the subject of the thread). A little while ago there was discussion about how the funny red bar on the end of the status indicator actually means "Rattled". So here is a mod that stands out better and is perhaps more descriptive. Here's a picture (you need to be logged into CMMODS to see it) For some strange reason the exclamation marks look blurry in the picture, but they look fine in real life... GaJ.

I'm not sure if this is exactly what others are saying, but the point is that with Computer Games you still _can_ learn a lot about the mechanisms. Read how Walpurgis Night won Wolf in Sheep's clothing. Amazing understanding. Just because it's not written in formulae in a book doesn't mean you can't learn it. On the other hand, with a computer game you don't _have_ to learn it. So contrary to the original post, there isn't a situation where board games had one thing and computer has another. In the case of CM, at least, it has it all (in this respect).

Doncha get bored!?

"Now then troops, remember to look both ways before rushing forwards, in case you get run over by a great big Tank..."

How often did that happen IRL? Ever? (Tries to imagine how you get in a postion to be run over by a tank....)

I never play the AI. The only thing that's made me play a QB is the BoB World Cup, which is using QBs. Otherwise, I have always played scenarios. I have 4-5 PBEM scenarios going at once, usually 1 turn every couple of days each on average. For a long time that meant "ROW". Now that's finished, I'm going back to the depot for others... GaJ.

Well - that's wierd for sure. I've only ever seen only infantry increase, so I just assumed that was the deal. Maybe it selects randomly what to increase? (As opposed to uniformly increasing everything, which might not be possible given the quantum of point value for large things).

That's how it's always been, as far as I am aware...

Congratulations and also many thanks for organising ROW for us! It was good fun (and that's coming from someone who didn't win a single scenario!) GaJ.

It's not a red dot in CMAK. It's a funny red mark at the end of the status bar. I thought it was a graphics glitch till someone pointed it out!

Is it the designers or the scenarios that we were voting for ? (I voted for scenarios, 1 -> 8)

(ooops, mistake post!)

This kind of stuff is self correcting, by the way. That's the beauty of it. If I give your scenario a long well thought out review explaining why it wasn't enjoyable, and you give me a low reviewer rating, I'm not going to review any more of your scenarios, am I? Problem solved: I get good reviewer ratings from people who appeciate my review style and you don't suffer from reviews from me that you hate. GaJ.

Sigh - the joys of written communication! Of course not. Notice that I didn't say what Troll gave as scores at all. What I said was that the designers gave _him_ low scores, because they thought his reviews stank. If someone posts a well thought through and explained review where they give a low score, hopefully most designers will be mature enough to give the reviewer a reasonable rating. What makes someone a troll is a review with a low score and text that says "This scenario sucks. The author's mother stank of elderberry wine." Don't confuse the rating that someone gives to a scenario in a review with the rating they get back in turn from the designer. In my example above it was assumed that the two low reviewer_ ratings that Troll got were because his reviews stank, not just because they were low scores. GaJ. [ October 30, 2004, 05:10 AM: Message edited by: GreenAsJade ]