Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About dixon_el

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/07/1950


  • Location
    Ky USA
  • Occupation
    Instructor M1 MBT
  1. Asking about Vista again? Asimov is a lot more interesting, and probably, more to the point. As least Asimov worked with something. Screw Vista, up with Foundation and Asimov!!!
  2. CMBB doesn't work on Vista, Hammer?!?! Hell, that's no big deal, almost nothing works with Vista. I was thinking that canceling Vista might be more to the point. I check in every six months or so to see if there's progress. I see there has been, the number of posts are dwindling nicely. This forum needs to be turned over to Elvis sightings, at least people see HIM occasionally.
  3. Why make it Vista compatible? Ever hear of Windows ME, Microsoft second biggest mistake? I expect Vista to follow in ME's footsteps shortly, for the same reasons ME was a bust. Vista is singlehandedly making Linix a very viable choice for the up and coming decade. Microsoft survived ME, but still it makes no sense to shoot yourself in the same foot twice, or once in each foot. As for Microsoft being too big for a single mistake to do much damage. Ever hear of Commodore, Atari, Apple, IBM, Radio Shack, etc. They were all big companies (some still are) that took it in the shorts by making that o
  4. Hull down is a little different from multiple infantry. A fourth line would really be nice. Maybe you could add a modification for 'no lines' for people who really don't want to know what's going on when they try to target. Just a suggestion.
  5. I agree with most of the above. I hope battlefront immediately stops fixing the game bugs, deploys everyone on their team to fixing this blog (for the six to eight months) and only then returns to development of the games, AFTER this huge, incapatitating BUG is FIXED in the forum. WAIT.... I have the solution!!!!!!!!! Get Battlefront to stop fixing the game bugs! Then there will be no problem!!!. No fixs, no need to search for them, problem solved. Damn, I'm a genius..... Gamers are the only people in the world that demand the non problems be fixed before the actual problems.
  6. That is no graphics error. The bastard possessed an illegal weapon in a combat zone. I am personally going to try an have him court marshalled (post humorously, of course), to teach him a lesson he won't soon forget. Let one of them get away with it and the whole game will go to pot. Where is battlefront when we NEED them? Fixing some important error no doubt....duh!! I can't stand the irony of all this.
  7. Ever notice, the benefit of replacing a weapon with a better one, decreases proportionaly with the chance that the person in question will be forced to use it. Buy new weapons!!!!! Hell no WE need new carpet!
  8. I don't think you think you to worry about the effects of an exploding reactive panel, I think the incoming round will take care of the problem long before it becomes an issue.
  9. The comparison would be firecracker vs. half a block of C4. Nothing replaces pure destructive power when it comes to reducing fortified strong points. The Sheridan would compare very poorly. The 152mm was abandoned because its lack of accuracy made it an ineffective anti-armor weapon. (Think infantry tank) The missles are several generations removed from eachother in range, killing power, accuracy and control. The comparison would be similar to comparing the M1SEP to an M48A5 and would be patiently unfair.
  10. Duh! I think that if the game is well modeled on actual equipment, that both sides are going to be surprised. NOTHING, takes the place of good leadership. A good leader plays down the weak points of his force and accents the strong points. The US forces combat power is ,as much, a matter of its training, leadership and structure as its equipment. According to the arguments on both sides the German's would not have been able to take France in three years, instead of three weeks. (Personally, I can't take the French for ten minutes). Let Battlefront bring out the game a
  11. Nvida had problems with CM into one of its driver sets two years ago, but quicky resolved the problem in the next update. I've only seen the problem with that particular driver set, but I probably haven't tried every driver, but working in a computer store I've seen a large number of them. ATI and Fords.........who needs them
  12. If you read the history of the striker there are a couple of pieces missing. When the original models came out one was taken down to a firing range and was repeatedly fired at with a 30.06. The 30.06 repeatedly penetrated the armor. The contractor then "patched" the armor to strengthen the penetrated points until the "finished" vehicle could withstand the 30.06 rounds. Consider it fiction if you like, this took place on Steel Range on Fort Knox, Ky. P.S. The vehicle had to be towed to the range because it wasn't operational, as usual.
  13. In response to civdiv: Intel probably hasn't heard we're in Iraq yet. Intel never knows what's going on in the field. DUH..........
  14. Reducing the speed of a round decreases the shoot-thru effect. If the round doesn't go thru the target all energy is expended on the target. That and size are what makes the low-speed 45cal round so damaging to the fleshy parts of the body. In Viet-Nam many soldiers quickly discovered that the small, high speed M16 round was not as effective at close rate as many of the older larger and slower rounds at stopping close range targets. A lesson the military looked at and discarded because NATO wanted a uniform round.
  15. Duh!! the M1 variants are: XM1 - orginal protype M1 - orginal production model - 105mm main gun, supported idler M1IP - unsupported idler - 105mm main gun - increased top armor - improved battle override M1A1 - heavier top armor - 120 mm main gun M1A1 HA (Heavy Armor) - Increased overall armor - (post-Iraq 1) M1A2 - Digital control - hatbox M1A2 SEP - improved fire control - centralized electrical/data system M1A2 TUSK - protype Simplified list of the M1s
  • Create New...