Jump to content

Romulus

Members
  • Posts

    109
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Romulus

  1. This is the most annoying feature of CMSF from my point of view. I would have understood a penalization in terms of cohesion, responsiveness or whatever they would have deemed appropriate but I can't really stand this restriction as it spoils the game for those who enjoy playing as the Syrians.

    Romulus

  2. Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

    On a personal note, I would LOVE to simualte the Italian Army. They have some top notch stuff that people hardly talk about. But I'm thinking that likely won't happen just because the timeline stretches out way too far.

    I will definitely preorder this game and I will eagerly play and enjoy it even if the Italians are not present. Anyway, being myself Italian, it would be a real pleasure if I could take the command of a Bersaglieri mechanized company or of a platoon of C1 Ariete or a squadron of B1 Centauro or if I could call in the support of an A129 Mangusta! :cool: Now I have to stop as I am salivating too much! smile.gif
  3. I am currently playing a CMBB PBEM game as the Germans in August 1941. I have a platoon of Panzer IIIH equipped with the 50/L42 gun that has been involved in a fight with a KV I Model 1941 and all that they managed to do is a track hit. I was wondering if a track hit automatically leads to the immobilization of the tank. Also, when I click on the KV, the status doesn't display the "immobilized" tag so I am afraid that the tank is neither immobilized. :mad:

    Thanks for the help.

    Romulus

  4. Originally posted by c3k:

    I'm not sure exactly how to approach this. I think I should let it speak for itself.

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives:

    It's much more fun deriding the lazy and incompetant.

    I'm wondering how many others see the irony here?

    smile.gif

    Regards,

    Ken </font>

  5. Originally posted by J Ruddy:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Romulus:

    I particularly enjoyed the title of the article where the Hezbollah fighters in the village are defined as "terrorists". :rolleyes: That's a bit propagandistic, isn't it?

    By definition any revolutionary force could be considered a terrorist organization. I wonder what Sam Adams and John Hancock would think about that? </font>
  6. Originally posted by flamingknives:

    At the risk of splitting hairs, the CCW isn't the Geneva Convention and it does forbid the use of incendiaries on concentrations of civilians. However, it also excepts WP as an incendiary, the areas of use probably couldn't be considered civilian concentrations and the US isn't signatory to it anyway.

    flamingknives, the CWC was signed even by the USA as you can read on the official site
×
×
  • Create New...