cool breeze

Damn. Having my pixel warriors pounded with artillery playing CM: Shock Force is pretty extreme. I don't know if I'll enjoy playing against an enemy with similar artillery as powerful as ours. But I'll certainly buy it.

3 monitors!!!! really!?!? that rocks!! HOw do I do it? I got at least one extra I can set up. for triple wide screen? wouldnt that be like a 180 degreee view? Really!?

thanks. I guess what I thought were tires popped by HE fragments were really partly torn off. The stryker could still move though at the IIRC 5 mph run on flats speed. Must have been my bad luck with the rifles not firing when I was thinking about it and wanting them too.

Maybe we'll get if if we all say please? Please!

Strykers go really slow when enough of the wheels get popped. I want my rifles and mgs to open up while they are too far away to be spotted, like 400m. I dont think the rifles will shoot at real afvs like the stryker and BRDM, am I mistaken? [ May 12, 2008, 08:01 AM: Message edited by: cool breeze ]

If not can it be added?

This reminds me. Id like to be able to order my riflemen to shoot at wheeled AFVs at long range but I noticed in Paper Tigers Hasrabit campaign (havent had the pleasure to finish yet) that I couldnt get my SF to open up on the BRDMs with the target command.

Good idea John Kettler. that make more sense. Have sabots ever been defeated by slat armor? Seems to me like it could happen, turn or bend the rod just right.

doesnt seem to explain more than a tiny fraction of it but maybe the rod penetrators are too stressed and still destabilized at point blank range?

Cant wait to see them in scenarios!

If rosters and QBs are make or break deals for you I dont think you represent a big chunk of war gamers. Its strange to me that you require rosters to make the campaign immersive enough yet you talk like QBs (very unrealistic and devoid of immersion adding briefing)are more important than scenarios. Who do you imagine wont see the important game play features that are added because of lack of roosters and de-emphasized QBs?

Haven't checked but maybe a command slower than quick would keep them in the trench better? running on top is quicker.

I would really love to eventually see in CMx2 a model of the very interesting force he describes. He describes a future USA force deployed by container ship or c-113s and cargo 747s made of mechanized infantry and light heavily armed tanks. The infantry are all heavily armed with very accurate powerful HE via rifle grenades, rockets and missiles. They are carried in strongly upgraded m-113s. The m-113s have hybrid engines and band tracks (hi-tech plastic metal tracks) So that they can go 60mph on roads really far and maneuver over mud. They They have ballistic glass added to the inside and variable bolt on armor outside. Atop is a remote fired stabilized 30mm or similar. And they all have long range close air support via terminally guided recoilless rifles. They entrench hard and fast with back hoes. To make heavy bases they use the shipping containers to support dirt walls which they turn into concrete by spraying it. I think I just summed the force he argues we should adopt so that we have a behind enemy lines force in addition to our heavier elements. It seems like his is a good idea and I don't accept ad hominem arguments against it. My experience in CM:Shock Force argues that his HE increasing and decentralizing plans are good and that the protection from HE is become more and more important. It make sense that we need powerful fighting vehicles that can go any where the foot soldiers go. The m-113 seems like a good choice because of the expensive I read 4 inch thick aluminum armor 14 person capacity and 12 tons as equipped without the upgrades. And we have 80,000 of em. Oh, he also says we should quit driving on the roads and hitting mines and carry our supplies cross country and on field cement and not live in the cities. Mike Sparks is clearly not a good spokesperson with all the disrespect he gets but his basic ideas seem solid to me. I want to see them in action.

I second flaming knives!!!

Face commands improve that a lot.

I'll try to be more careful with grammar; I learned here that it is very important.

Sent the game! Hammertime, your blue. I havent tried it yet. Thanks

Thanks, I was about to insult you again. I need to find my CD for those and I dont know how long it will take. Im much more hoping t find a real time CM: Shock Force opponent. I havent thought about ww2 much in a long time and I have been thinking about modern war a lot lately. But I hope to find CMAK soon and will send a turn asap. Sam

Where else can I find a game, I tire of crushing the computer.

Nidan is a chicken!

Nidan1, I want to blow you up and shoot. Sam

Thanks John Kettler, It'll take me a while to do the reading, Im busy now. Do you think I should start working on a physics major? Sam

I thought the directed shrapnel blast to the side of the rod was enough to destabilize the long rod so it broke on impact. Like how arrows don't split arrows because they wobble too much. Sounds like YankeeDog is saying it wont, so I dont know, But I remember reading an add that talked about limited but significant effect on long rod penetrators. I know it very not directly relevant, but reminds me of how even a light slap/tap deflects most of the hardest of blows in martial arts. Oh, and just being funny doesnt a can of beans on a coffee table of many many M joules of energy already, if you knew how to get it out. sure feels like it sometimes [ February 01, 2008, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: cool breeze ]

bends them and makes em wobble by hitting em hard on the side

John Kettler, Do you have any insider info verifying Bearden? Talked to any of those pilots or anyone else he references, like someone who saw the cool forging of metal or a free energy machine? I thought I wanted to be a physicist for a while inspired by his claims, now it seems to hard and unlikely I would succeed, and others have probably already done fall of my wildest hopes, if it is possible.