J Ruddy

Hi, I thought I'd jump in. I'm wearing asbestos socks, so flame away folks. To paraphrase, "It was the best of tanks, it was the worst of tanks..." My understanding is that the biggest reason the Sherman was such a success is that the Americans (and Canuckians) used their mature N.A. automobile industry's knowledge to mass produce them in huge quantities. Early on we passed our knowledge to the Russians, who's tractor plants' production numbers greatly improved once they implemented western manufacturing techniques. The result of relying so heavily on the auto industry is similar to why GM produced trucks on the same C/K platform from 1962 to 1998. The auto industry hates to make *major* re-tooling changes. So you end up being stuck with the same basic design platform, with proponents finding reasons not to make major changes. (Sloped armour, larger turret etc..) Many of the updates were simply 'bolt on' changes where you could continue to use the same assembly line with source product changes where major components were changed then welded or bolted together for assembly using the same line procedures. The problem is the Sherman wasn't a *great* tank design from the get-go. In contrast, the Germans used heavy equipment manufacturers to hand build their tanks. They also over-engineered them to the point that the main engine bearing in the Panther/Tiger took more man & machine-hours to build than an entire engine from a T-34. (It must be true, I saw it on TV.) This resulted in some solid designs and fairly rapid changes to new models, but low production numbers and poor reliability for new models. IMO the main raison d'etre for tanks is to have a well protected and mobile firing platform whether the target is infantry, other armoured vehicles or hard points etc... The Sherman was not well protected. It was not a battlefield superiority weapon in my universe. It didn't have to be quite so crappy though. Look at what the Russians did with the T-34 chassis. There were Tanks, Tank Killers and Infantry Support all on the same basic chassis and for the most part they were all fairly successful. Imagine a strong and flexible chassis like the T-34, but with US engineering and solid Detroit engines? I guess the closest thing would be the M46 Patton which remarkably replaced the Sherman (& Pershing) in 1949 and very easily took on t-34/85's in Korea. [Edit - the Sherman Easy 8's were gradually phased out over the 1950's by the Patton. It takes a few years to build 12,000 tanks when a world war isn't on... ] Anyone who is in love with the Sherman probably cheers for the Buffalo Bills too. It feels good to support the under-dog. [ November 13, 2006, 10:51 AM: Message edited by: J Ruddy ]

Which option would make more sense for playing the game? :mad: Option 2 may seem a little gamey, but then option 1 just annoys me. Now is option 1 the early option or the later option and if the second option is the new option and the old option is option 1, is there any room for a new-new option that resembles the old option, sort of an option-classic option. Because while option 1 has its merits, option 2 has its benefits, and I personally can't fathom an option that doesn't have benefits. :mad: This statement annoys me even more than option 1. :mad: It makes me want to take on the persona of Gunny Sergeant Hartman, rip your head off and poop down the neck-hole. I don't know who's army attacks without the effective and professional use of 'machine guns', specifically I would not want to 'attack' without one of my great Canadian brothers laying down covering fire with a C9 and targeting sand bagged eejits with a C6 GPMG. Attacking without effective support of either a SAW or GPMG is like bungie jumping without a bungie cord. It might be fun and seem like a good idea, but you're only going to do it once. :mad: :mad: :mad:

Is that why I got those damned white boxes!!! :mad:

The only other option that I can see is a turn server. Not that you're going to waste time developing it, or anyone here would agree to it, but implementing a central server to handle both the routing and processing of turns would be the only really fool-proof system that I can think of. In the game you would provide an email address or other unique identifier for yourself, your opponent and for the scenario. For example: You would use the game gui to set up a game to play on the server, identifying the game name: "Jim vs Grog - Kabul" and your handle (defaulted from the set up for the game). Maybe you could select your opponent from a list or something. You also need to Deploy your troops as well. At any time, your opponent would then open up his copy of the game, check for outstanding games to play, see your game, and accept it. He would deploy his troops and click 'Ready' or whatever. The server would let both players know when they have an outstanding turn to play. The players would do their thing and the server would hold the data until both players are complete. Then the server could either process the data or pick a players machine to process it. The players would watch the game play out then play their next turn and so on... No more email size headaches, no more file hacking, no more problems and yet still an asynchronous system for playing games one turn at a time. [edit] This would also work for finding TCP/IP opponents, probably as an option when creating the server entry. Once the TCP/IP game commences the server is no longer involved. [ November 09, 2006, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: J Ruddy ]

Did you freeze your brain or somefink?

A redneck in the cesspool?! Now I've seen everything. I'll name a few of the more notable French Naval victories for ya, then get the hell out of here before the Pingthreadian Popular Police tell me to sod off. Battle of Cádiz Battle of Palermo Battle of Beachy Head Battle of the Chesapeake (They waz given yew rednecks a hand kicking Cornwallis in the nards down at Yorktown, ya here?)

So I tellz them, I sez youz busters best not be planning no modern like theatre for yer next combat mission game, and they sez "shut up turkey, we know what we are doing" and I sez, a can o worms buster, a big ole can o worms, and they sez "a can o' whoop ass is whay you're gonna get if you keep on complaining" so I sez, ya well, theres no way in hell you're gonna make your money back unless you have a U.S. government contract! Ya! That's it, yuo jerks are selling us all out for a nice fat cheque (sic) and they sez, "no way brother, we only want to give you the best game evar (sic)" and I sez, then give me Nazi's versus Space Lobsters, and they sez, "if we have to model one more Panzer IVH our heads will explode" so I sez, if I gets my way around here it's gonna be the fourth of July all over again there buck-o so maybe ye better start thinking of another dubbya dubbya eye eye game and they sez, "no, you are getting modern and you're gonna like it" I asks will I control entire divisions? and they sez "It will be a smaller game and a larger game, a new paradigm of player interaction that might have PBEM and might not, may play in turns and may be RTS, but will play in a way that promotes harmony and peace across the world" and I sez, ya right, that's what microsoft said about windows 95, hotlips, now tellz me this, what kind of machine am I going to need to run this puppy, I mean, will I need a dual Pentium Duo-Core 5 Ghz with 8 gigs of ram or what? and they sez, "if you bought a machine in the last 2 years that meets the specifications that we might one day release, it will work" and I sez, oh ya? well what if I bought myself a Nintendo Wii? What then buster. and they sez "then you are gay and should be marching in a parade somewhere instead of filling this forum with your nonsense." and I sez, nonsense? you mean like invading Syria? And they sez "it's our game and we are making it the way we want to" and I sez, that's great, I hope you enjoy playing it. :mad: :mad: :mad:

This thread is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! It's a stiff! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! If you hadn't posted it in the CMSF forum it'd be pushing up the daisies! Its metabolic processes are now 'istory! It's off the twig! It's kicked the bucket, it's shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-THEAD!!

(j/k)

Any order of preference? I think Drop Team will fulfill Battlefront's contribution to Space Lobsters. </font>

Oh I know these guys needed to do something other than WWII for the sake of their own sanity, and I agree with the comment somewhere on some thread that they might as well start with the most complex then simplify. I just don't think I have much desire to play USA vs Syria/Iran/Etc... I used to think that at least I could have fun as the Syrians, but now that my Brother-in-law is in Afghanistan I'm not so sure. Based on CMBB & CMAK I absolutely will try the demo. I'd rather be waiting for one of these though... CM: Rome vs Carthage CM: Space Lobsters CM: American Revolution CM: American Civil War CM: 1812 Or even a game based on a Harry Turtledove style alternate reality. *meh* maybe I'm just grumpy 'cause it's Monday.

Screenies look good. But then so did Battlefield 2, but the topic didn't hold my FPS multiplayer playing personality when compared to the less featured, but infinitely cooler COD2. I'm still holding back on prejudging CMSF, I can't wait for the demo. I'm starting to think maybe I'm a fool for hoping I'll like it. You can have the greatest game-play in the world, but if the topic isn't interesting... For a larf, I took a look at the stats on Boargamegeek for the top rated wargames with 99 votes or more. By far the era that is both most prolific by number of titles and most popular by number of votes is WWII. This doesn't mean much, except that maybe the majority of tabletop wargamers prefer to play WWII. It doesn't translate over to PC wargamers, does it? Era Data Total 1812 Count of Era 1 Sum of Votes 330 7 Yrs War Count of Era 2 Sum of Votes 701 American Civil War Count of Era 2 Sum of Votes 1635 American Revolution Count of Era 1 Sum of Votes 117 Ancients Count of Era 4 Sum of Votes 1576 Cold War Count of Era 1 Sum of Votes 598 Fantasy Count of Era 4 Sum of Votes 961 Fantasy/LOTR Count of Era 1 Sum of Votes 2070 Medieval Count of Era 2 Sum of Votes 1077 Renaissance Count of Era 2 Sum of Votes 1651 Sci Fi Count of Era 2 Sum of Votes 1539 Vietnam Count of Era 2 Sum of Votes 218 WWI Count of Era 1 Sum of Votes 666 WWII Count of Era 10 Sum of Votes 6065 Title / Rating/Votes / Era Downtown: Air War Over Hanoi, 1965-1972 / 8.45/106 / Vietnam Twilight Struggle / 8.22/598 / Cold War Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage / 8.22/609 / Ancients Commands & Colors: Ancients / 8.19/737 / Ancients Paths of Glory / 8.14/666 / WWI Europe Engulfed / 8.11/400 / WWII Here I Stand / 8.06/185 / Renaissance EastFront / 8.05/289 / WWII War of the Ring / 8.03/2070 / Fantasy/LOTR Great Battles of Alexander, The: Deluxe Edition / 8.01/110 / Ancients Up Front / 8/549 / WWII Wallenstein / 7.97/1466 / Renaissance Wilderness War / 7.96/308 / 7 Yrs War Bonaparte at Marengo / 7.95/330 / 1812 Rommel in the Desert / 7.93/263 / WWII Advanced Squad Leader (ASL) / 7.91/739 / WWII Hammer of the Scots / 7.91/851 / Medieval Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition / 7.89/1388 / Sci Fi Warmachine / 7.89/240 / Fantasy Memoir '44 / 7.87/3161 / WWII Friedrich / 7.85/393 / 7 Yrs War Battleground: Fantasy Warfare / 7.85/220 / Fantasy Breakout: Normandy / 7.84/271 / WWII Totaler Krieg! / 7.82/115 / WWII Full Métal Planète / 7.76/151 / Sci Fi Lock 'N Load: Forgotten Heroes Vietnam / 7.68/112 / Vietnam SPQR / 7.65/120 / Ancients RAF / 7.64/179 / WWII Warrior Knights / 7.62/389 / Fantasy Flames of War / 7.61/99 / WWII Crusader Rex / 7.6/226 / Medieval Warangel / 7.6/112 / Fantasy Liberty / 7.56/117 / American Revolution Civil War, the / 7.55/232 / American Civil War Battle Cry / 7.51/1403 / American Civil War

Listen carefully, do not eat the flat silver donut that came in the CMBB box. Put it in your computer's cup holder instead. :mad: :mad: :mad:

Isn't that the famous Paul Martin / Jean Chretien picture that sunk the Liberals last election?

Ahh.. Finland. The only country who's population thinks of Canada as a Tropical Vacation destination. How much sun are you seeing up there, your highness? :mad:

:mad: Finnish->English translation: "Pardon me sir, but it appears I have stepped in reindeer droppings." :mad:

Does anyone have the glacias armour thickness and angle for 1942 Romanian lightbulbs? I know it won't be in CMSF, but I'm hoping the WWII east front release will include Romanian and Hungarian lightbulbs, or at least Finnish candles.

Oh ya, my Bro-in-law (sis's-husband) is in Afghanistan now doing some senior-officer-like stuff. My gem of advise for him was if someone yells duck, they're probably not talking about the migratory bird. That and don't bring home any War-Trophy-Wives. :mad: I'm trying to think of more helpful advise to email to him, but all I can think of is don't eat the yellow snow, but considering he's in Kandahar, yellow snow probably isn't a big concern. Any ideas from the TNT chucking waffler gallery? :mad:

:mad: :mad: :mad: My video card died a horrible death. Not that I play CM on my *good* machine anymore anyways. Not that I even play CM anymore, not after The Prinzess Known as the Finnish CMBB Tease sent me a couple of turns then mysteriously went silent. (Which in itself is odd considering that in the name of world peace I was letting him win!) Congrats _Axe_, your significant other let you touch her, good show. My little rugrat #2 (1 month old) is great. Doesn't cry much. Sleeps pretty well. Much better than #1, who had two states; sleeping and screaming. :mad: Hope yours has colic!!! bwa haa haa haa. :mad: ..er maybe not... As for the rest of you, bugger off and find someone else to hurl TNT at. I have a fancy new video card and I'm going native!!! :mad: :mad:

... the CM player formerly known as Prinz is still holding back on the turns... :mad: :mad: :mad:

She shot you down, huh? </font>

Wahhhh!!! Mr. Prancing Eunich won't play with me anymore!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: (I see dead Nazis)

Oi, The Office never had a character called Dwight ! Ah, you're talking about the cheap&inferior American copy... Gareth's got more character than the types in your version combined. And my The Office quote's better, too. :mad: </font>

OK Mr. No-Turns, my wife is getting McDuffed tomorrow after which I'm going to be travelling between the Hospital and home to see my new son and look after my 2 year old son for a few days, so if you don't get a turn out to me soon, yer gonna have to wait! :mad: :mad: :mad:

They've been after us since CMBO. The problem is that the people with the money don't have the imagination. "Yes, yes... it looks good, but what good is it? I mean, we haven't had Sherman tanks in service for 50 years". "Picture it with Abrams instead of Shermans". "OK, but that's still a Sherman". That sort of thing We're making CM:SF for you guys, but the overlap with military training (not just US based, believe me!) is so blatantly obvious. Steve </font>