imported_no_one

You can hide in all the entrenchments in the world dude,they arent going to save you..... Muahahahahaahahaha.... > :mad:

No I havent,but its going to come as a surprise when you find that that email addy is closed Might want to forward to(email addy removed).I'll be expecting it in a few weeks,and you can expect the next file in a month or so.I think we got this system worked out pretty well Let me know when you read this.I dont like leaving my email addy up like this.Every time I do, Keke sends me a bunch of pics of nothing but nads.It seems he is quite proud of his collection,as he has managed to get alot of them autographed [ March 31, 2004, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Yes,I like the idea.However,is there a way to include us poor souls that dont have CMAK? [ March 31, 2004, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

I agree with extreme only.Also make sure to discuss with any new opponents what level of FOW you will be playing on.Sucks to expect extreme and find out its only on full.

Agreed,and if I get to do this when you dont send turns,it would be even better :mad: [ March 29, 2004, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

One request.Would someone please set up a scenario editor test in which *any* russian AFV(as long as it is capable of knocking out a Panther from the side/rear)rolls up from a defilade position,and while in a hull down position,is able to fire at a buttoned up Panther that is facing away from the Russian AFV,while not hull down to the Russian AFV itself. I simply want to know what happens,as I am not proficient enough with the editor.

Good tip Wicky!I didnt know you could do that

Looking for a scenario with Panthers in it?Check out The Scenario Depot .There you should find a few with Panthers in them,or you could look Here for one that has just been released.Looks like a good one.

Axe you drunk,hyperactive,non-turn sending bastige you :mad: :mad: Struggling will only make it hurt worse,just ask Pseudo Speaking of Pseudo His troops sure do like getting their exercise.Running around all chaotic like,screaming and crying.Its quite a sight to see :mad: Now send me some turns!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: GRRGHHGAHHRGRGAAHHRGRAHAHGRGRHHA :moreangerthanyoucanimagine:

If I may,I would suggest focusing on PBEM playability.I know this is just a personal preference,but I just dont like operations versus the AI after the first battle is complete.This isnt always the case,as there are some out there that are very good all the way through,but there are some that arent. I do however,love playing operations PBEM.You should try to make them as balanced as possible while still focusing on realism to represent the actual struggles that you are trying to portray.It would also be a wise idea to make sure there are enough turns per battle.IMHO,too many turns would be better than too few. Operations against the AI might should be the other way around,especially when attacking the AI.If the player is having to push too hard all the time to try and advance,it should help make up for some of the AIs shortcomings,but will leave the player with an uneasy sense of urgency that may not be too fun,atleast not in the short term. I personally prefer larger scale engagements,but can understand why alot of people dont like them.It isnt always possible to devote a few hours a day issuing turns,or even worse,doing a lengthy setup.The reward for me,is that on large/huge maps,more tactics are required,and flanking/envelopment maneuvers are more realistic,and often times,more rewarding when done right. I guess total number of battles should be dependant on the number of turns in each battle.Low number of turns per battle might should equal higher number of battles,and vice versa.But then again,it also depends on the number of units involved per side. Hope some of this helped,and coming from someone who doesnt have CMAK yet,I thank you for continuing work in CMBB.

In the real deal,dealing with large calibre indirect(150mm+) HE versus infantry in the open would equal surface or air detonations,for sharapnel effect?(Though you say these were more rare?) 150mm+ indirect versus trenches would equal fuse delay,right?So what does this mean for a round that falls 20m,more or less,from a trench line?Would the rounds still need to be as accurate as surface detonation rounds?What would be the effects of the dirt plume(dirt,rocks,shrapnel)falling back to earth,or down into trenches?How big would a dirt plume be from a 150mm,and up,indirect round of HE with a delayed fuse? Also,what does FA and WP stand for? [ March 24, 2004, 11:06 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Yea,I know,this thread wont live for long,but I wanted to reinforce and idea from past request threads and I think it will be a great addition. BF.C,please increase turn time limit to 120 seconds.If thats not acceptable,for whatever reason,then please make it so that a scenario designer,or PBEM opponents,could select the turn time limit in increment of 30. 30 seconds for really small engagements 60 for medium 90 for large 120 for huge You might could even go higher than that,or atleast provide the option. To me,more time = less micromanagement.Plus,when you are playing really large scale engagements,60 seconds is just way too short.It makes it seem like each turn is 30 seconds instead of 60. So please,atleast give us the option? Any thoughts on this before it gets locked up? [ March 24, 2004, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

Is that any way to ask for turns, Maggot?!?!?! :mad: :mad: :mad:

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee *singing* The wheels on the(short)bus go round and round,round and round.............

...as cool as no_one ? :mad:

....any good at CM? :mad:

Quick everyone!We need to organize an intervention! Not only is Axe hang'n in the GDF,but he is actually getting all deep on us :mad: :mad:

Hey Pseudo ,remind you of anything? Thanks for the laugh, Maggot :mad:

To my knowledge,roadblocks cannot be removed/moved by any means once they are locked in place at the begining of the game.

I just dont see it.Even though I hate doing it,I just ran a simple test with 4 on map 81mm mortars(all with 40 rounds)firing direct,versus 4 on map 81mm mortars(all with 40 rounds)firing indirect with the help of a Coy HQ(with no bonuses),on a single trench apiece(IOW,2 enemy trenches total).All mortars were regular,as was the Coy HQ.I did everything I could to make the test unbiased,without allowing it to take forever. They all looked pretty even to me,but I'm not wasting time counting each round.Suffice to say that it was not close enough to even warrant a closer inspection. If someone would like to give a different,possibly less biased test a shot,I would like to know the results. [ March 23, 2004, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: no_one ]

JasonC, Again,you are citing RL examples,instead of commenting of how things really work in CM(see redwolfs post for example).I completely agree with the RL example/explanations you have given. Aye,very true,but when you say that someones ideas or strategy is "dumb",you take a few steps away from advising and a few steps toward demeaning.But hey,were all adults here,no harm no foul I also apologize if I have hijacked this thread,or caused it to go off course.

JasonC, You know,I was going to let the issue drop,especially since you cant seem to refrain from,what I persive to be,personal jabs.The thing is though,I simply have to know one thing.Where is the logic in that on map mortars are better against trenches than are off map mortars?Especially when the off map mortars are called on a TRP,which to my understanding is supposed to increase accuracy,atleast slightly. One(a German 81mm on map mortar)has,at the most,around 40 rounds.The other(a German 81mm FO)has 150 rounds,unless a scenario designer has given him more.So,if a 1/3 or a 1/6 of a on map mortars rounds land to full or partial effect.Then wouldnt a 1/3 or a 1/6 of a off map mortars do the same?Even if its only an 1/8,wouldnt it,atleast on occasion,be the same amount?

GGRHAHAHGRRGHAHHGRHAHHFGRGAGH I suck at these things,850 was my best.That was good fun though,thanks! Maggot :mad:

I am much more impressed with the ad at the bottom. *goes back to watching the ad* Yes!open them No!dont close them again :mad: Yes!open them No! dont......................

Bah! Smope screwed the pooch courtesy of the designer. Three AC's padlocked in sight of my armor...I felt sorry for him and considered not firing at the ACs. But the first brew up brought a screeching halt to that non TNT chuckin', pansy thought. </font>