Sanok

I'm the other player in this dilemma. Neither of us compresses files. I use Mozilla Thunderbird for my email. I've never had this problem with anyone else. We keep exchanging files, but one comes along that Sainteel can't open. We go back two or three files to replay, and they work, but the bad one keeps coming up.

In my pbem games, I've been paying close attention to the first shots fired by forces that have just ambushed an approaching enemy. The first shots fired by the ambushers seem to be very ineffective in killing anything, even against targets in open ground. Do I just have a bunch of bad shots or is there an under-modeling of the first shots fired?

Was small-caliber HE, say 50mm and lower, as ineffective in the real war as it is in CM?

And you admitted it? Whew....

I still play BO, too. I have several regular pbem opponents. BO is just more fun. BB and AK are improved, but there's just something BO has that the others don't. I love the explosion shockwaves. It's frustrating having to search the map to find where some arty is landing. You can hear the explosions, but you don't know where the shells are landing. It's also great to have off-map arty that actually lands where you order it. In BB and AK, the shells land so spread out, it's almost pointless to even have it. If BFC would have modeled the MG suppression properly, I wouldn't have purchased BB or AK.

Sure, I'll try them. Thanks. sanok_29@yahoo.com Does anyone else know of any?

Is there a mod for rocky terrain that makes it easier to see rocky from the overhead views? I really don't want to download all the doo-dad mods just to search for a good one for rocky terrain.

I'm converting a BO scenario to AK. The units were placed on the map outside the setup zones. When I tried to move an entire platoon, I would draw the box around it, and click on the HQ. Then, only the HQ would move. Now, I drew the box around the platoon, hit P, but did not click a specific unit, and the entire platoon did move. Thanks.

Why can't Allied units be moved in bulk in the scenario editor?

[/qb]

It doesn't say this at all. I feel like I'm talking to my wife. :-O

In regards to your inane flapping, the game I mentioned was a sceanrio, with all my tanks locked in place at setup. Moving them at Hunt speed across wet, open ground just to get to the road, led to three tanks being immobilized. It had nothing to do with poor tactics or improper force selection. Please, no more prattle when you have no idea what you're saying.

I've run it a few times and always get a popup that says the process failed.

I was just discussing this with a current opponent. I don't care if BFC has precise statistics on how frequently tanks became immobile in the real war. I play because I want to pit my units and abilities versus my opponent's units and abilities. If I lose, I want it to be because I was outplayed, not because of some unnecessary feature that takes out my only tank on the second turn of the game. In a current CMBO game, I had *three* Shermans become immobile while crossing wet, open terrain by the third turn of the game! None of them were immobilized because of combat. It's great that BFC is committed to realism, but sometimes, things can be too real. This is still a game, after all.

I haven't been able to get Pywacket's map converter program to properly analyze and work with my CMBO special edition. There are some nice maps in CMBO I'd like to convert to CMAK. Would someone that uses the converter be willing to use it to convert maps for me from CMBO to CMAK? I'd like to be able to save your email address and contact you as needed. Is there someone willing to do this for me? Thank you.

This happened to me once, but with a Priest. Panthers and Tigers are definitely not uber tanks in BO.

If you go to the site MeatEtr posted, there's a trailer and two clips to watche; about 4 1/2 minutes. It looks good.

Rob, how does one turn off the Windows XP firewall? I prefer to use something different. Thanks.

Boy, if there were ever a "Factual Distortion of the Year Award" I'd be nominating you for sure! You seem to overlook the fact that all my "ill-chosen insults" were the result of the "whiney, insane, stupid" stuff being hurtled at me for simply stating that PBEM might possibly not happen. Steve </font>

I think there's something in the midst of the pbem threads that Steve missed badly. I don't believe people were being whiney, insane, stupid, or any other ill-chosen insults Steve tossed out so flagrantly. Because of the CM games, many of us have established a comaraderie and a community with other CMers. Look at how active these forums are after all these years. There are other forums and gaming groups based on CM. There are mod sites. Because of CM, and because of pbem, we've come together to enjoy the games. I've established a group of opponents that are reliable and worthy opponents. I've gotten to know many of them as personally as is possible through the net and consider them to be online friends. I've helped some of them learn the game and some of them have helped me. We wouldn't have had any of that without CM and pbem. Many people also feel a kinship with CM and BFC that is similar to being a fan of a sports team. They feel like they're part of the team, even though they're really not. Because so many of us have this, when it came out that pbem was not important to BFC's Big Picture, people felt they could possibly lose this community. They didn't want that to happen, so they voiced their views. The more they voiced, the more Steve responded. There were things said on both sides that were inappropriate, some of them downright insulting. Just because people aren't knowledgeable about computers or game design, or because they didn't fully understand what Steve meant, or aren't privy to BFC's secrets, doesn't mean they're the rude things Steve called them. People enjoy very much the groups CM has enabled them to have. They just didn't want to lose that.

1900 GMT on Saturday 3/5.

BFC is a company out to make as much money as it can. That's great and they're supposed to do that. We all work to make as much money as we can. It's also their right to design the games the way they feel they should be designed. However, let's speculate on what their Big Picture could be. Steve said several times, that they did not expect or intend the CM games to be played as long as they have. I believe the ability to pbem is a major reason they've lasted so long. When a game is still being played for a long time, it means the customers are satisfied with them. If they're satisfied, they may tend to not buy more games. Why should they if they enjoy what they have? This is bad for a company that wants to sell lots of games. Steve also said, that BFC wants to release new games every 6-10 months. He said their games are not meant to be played for many years. Since pbem is likely a major reason why CM games are still being played, and Steve has said that pbem is irrelevant to their Big Picture, does this mean, that BFC is going to become just another game company more concerned with churning out the numbers? Whatever BFC does, it is their right and their choice.

Why is it that BFC and their shills say garbage like this? . </font>

Another BFC shill said: If anything 1% plays CM BB/AK as PBEM. And, who knows if PBEM will be in or not, are you just deliberating not reading what Steve said, or ignoring it? Sheesh, I'm glad I dont have to deal with you as my customer base! *************** Will you please show us the market research to back this claim? [ February 28, 2005, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: Sanok ]

Why is it that BFC and their shills say garbage like this? Just because we feel differently than they, it means we're whiners and complainers? Just how does BFC, you, or anyone know there are *likely* ten more that will buy the game for everyone that won't if it has no pbem? I guess you all have your magic eight balls in use everyday.