slysniper

Well, this might wreck my efforts of loading down drivers with ammo and then dismounting and trying to run the ammo to the troops, they might just be sitting there saying. "Sorry Boys, cannot give you any of this fine Ammo, program says I am not allowed to share this with you"

It might be a real bug. It seems I recall playing a game and having radios disappear from the halftrack equip list, though I knew they had them, later in the game, the symbol was back. but as mentioned, you need to send saved files to help with such issues if they are present.

Did you run any test against bridges, the old games you could take out bridges, the type of bridge had a big factor to it also. So a wooden foot bridge would be a good start if no one has tried it.

It comes down to conversion of the act to real life. Thus I would never trust you with a microscopic camera with signal feed to a remote recording device, it might somehow find its way into a womans restroom. Can I get a witness that Boo Radley would likely do that, lets keep this scientific please.

NOW, BACK TO MY THEORY If you protray a certain human trait within a game (like cheating) will you also protray that same attribute in real life if given similar circumstances. you all can submit any story or event that can prove or disprove the theory. Be careful though, Noob is watching , and we do not want submissions that could be distortions of truth. Consider this a labor of Love in helping mankind, do your part, right here on this forum

Should have asked him, what test he has done, how can we rely on that statement as being protrayed as fact. Should we not stay within what science has proven, and so on and so on.:eek: Why did I do that, I will just invoke more Wrath Actually, I do agree with that statement in general, but the interesting thing is, many people get past a feeling of guilt, once they have repeated a act many times. So someone in otherwords can cheat, without any feelings of guilt what so ever. because it has become just part of their general way of life, if the act is common in their behavior, it likely is justified in the thought process.

Just how I like it, I really do not like letting people understand me, lets just leave them in the dark.

Stop trying to push the tread down these lines, sorry, but we have diverted from that topic long ago. I just figured out a new title for this thread, "Thread Jacked"

Oh, you perceive so well, I will have you know I barely ever past any English class, never could spell worth a darn. Too lazy to put my type into a word document first before putting it on the forum to spell check or hide my imperfections and really just do not care if my use of English is judged harshly.

Yes, I must agree, very convenient of me I disagree with this statement, sorry I do not have resorces to point you toward but I recall reading that they have found that many street smart, low educated subjects demostrated a very high level of use in protraying signals that falsified intent. They also noted that those that demostraited these traits were normally leaders or organizers in their enviroment, that they had learned to use these things as a way to get others to do things in their behalf. No test, sorry Great what a terrific concept, maybe I can start a new field, I have now found a whole new meaning as to why I am here, I have a obligation. I need to leave this machine and start right this minute.

I will tell you not to trust me and that "yes" I could be trying to cheat right now. All my trickery to try and make you look foolish, with my methods to try and not confront the topic. As you would have it, we need to get to the real issue. Thus may I ask what that really is ???:confused: If it is about learning to read humans, judging what others are like, being able to understand anothers charector. There is no pure science for it. The police use profiling, it is likely one of the in dept methods as to how you break down and make conclusions about another human being. but will there be those that fall outside the rules of the concepts formed. Yes. So no matter how one human judges another, which I will add we all do, there is always flaws to the methods used. So once again I will live with the fact that I can misjudge someone by what I might see as I observe them playing games, but I still will hold to the fact that I beleive it is one of the best methods I know as to finding a persons true natural traits.

Since you bring up the topic of "facial micro expressions" I also use this as a means as to judging someone, funny that you should mention how it has scientific studies to back its concepts. I have found there are plenty of people who understand these traits and know how to act in the presents of others to send or give a certain message, but that they are basically in the state of a con and are trying to manipulate the person they are dealing with. So in short, I find this is a less reliable way to learn about someone than to just invite them to sit down or to go out and play some games with them. I can tell what type of sells person someone will be by playing a little poker or a game of monopoly with them over any other method I have ever found.

As for how I meassure success, to some extent the western world has not tainted my concept of success and this fine fellow describes the types of things that true success is. So my thoughts were more on these lines. Also adding in the concepts of what most materialistic people think of also. I do not lack the things of confort, but find they bring no happiness other than when I can give them to others which lack or has needs that I am blessed not to burdoned with.

I see that noob is still at it. That is one way of stating it, I like to think of it as some type of self appointed policing of the forum, he is here to rid the world of any possible mis-understandings that could be posted on the forum from such as the likes of myself.

Maybe, I just need to re-title the thread. Cheaters, what makes them what they are ? or 5 Sure signs you are dealing with a cheater, or was it If I cheat, does it mean I am a murderer also. I just dont know, the topic was getting so far off from where I started, I really just dont know. Any suggestions will be apprieciated.

At this point why should you care what I think about you. Yes, my conclusions are speculations, never stated they were fact. It has been you that thinks I need to do that or I cannot live by what I conclude as I watch a person play a game. But I have already lived a majority of my life, used these methods as to judging people and have been very successful with selecting people in life that have supported me, my bussiness and my family. Thus bringing me much success. I really do not care if the concept holds up to some scientific test. I never said a person could not be different than how they act within a game. I just beleive I find it to generally be true and since you do not like that concept, you have let it known here, but I will continue to view people as I will and risk the fact I might misjudge at times. As to a comment from another forum member. I never have won a mannors competition, so not suprised you think I do not have any.

Sure, I figured you would like that Never said it was profound, just said I found it to be true I agree, I just cannot help the fact that I think I can see what a person will do in real life by what they do in the realm of a game or a sport or anything like that. Everyone is potentially corruptable, thus back to my test, when you are playing a game, like golf, which is really a test against oneselve. it really comes down to self integraty. Those that play fair are showing that trait, does it mean that is the type of person they are, no. But I think it is a good sign that they are and that trait will hold up in much more important matters. Very correct, so if I was you. I would not not trust me. I on the other hand do not trust you, so that should keep things clear. See, the world is just a perfect place, where trust and peace abound. Provin right here in these comments.

As to the answers as to how PBEM works, Thanks. The CM games have always been well designed to keep cheating out of the system. So I figured I was missing something here.

Thanks for that great imput, sounds like the type of person that will cheat in a game and does not like the fact that if I was to catch you at it, that I would judge your charector by it. But I have found in life, that how people play games, pretty much any game will normally bring out many of their traits. Many times, traits that they seldom are tested on in real life. So it is my way of judging people, I will continue to do it, and really dont care if you think I am a paranoid person for doing it. Plus if you really want to get deep, How many of us really even can trust ourselves. Most of us will find that if oppotunities present themselves, we will do things that we do not justify in our own personal values

As for my trust issue Just go and take the people you trust the most out and play some golf, watch their score and play closely. It is amazing how many people will cheat at a game which has no real value at all, then question what else would they do if it did have real benefits for them in their life. Actually it is a great way to find people who you can trust in life.

OK, So maybe I am getting confused with the fact that the only way I have done both sides is hot seat, which does it just as I discribe. So maybe PBEM is done in a way that somehow prevents cheating. hard to tell, since I do not have access to the game at the moment, plus I would never pbem both sides of a game, but I do hotseat both sides when I am learning the game and how it functions, or when I am running test.

That is only correct for one of the two players, the other player is doing just the opposite. It depends on who starts the game as to which way your turn works So you are the one that is not clear on how it presently works

It just dawned on me, since I just started my first two PBEM games What prevents cheating, when the one player has files where he imputs his moves then watches the results, if he does not like the results, could he just not go back and replay the turn with new decisions. If its the honor system, well that stinks, because there is very, very few people I truly trust. The old system worked, the new speeds up the play, but. Or am I missing something here.

AND RIGHT IN THIS COMMENT IS THE WAY YOU CAN PLAY WHERE YOU NEVER NEED THE REPEAT COMMAND ANYWAY. You always have the option to order long missions and then cancealing them early anyway, so why would the repeat command ever be needed except for gamey tactics that would make arty very controllable and hardly any loss of ammo that was not needed.

No, not really that can be taken too far, if it was totally correct, it would be a very boring game. Arty has been upgraded already to be much more powerful than in the older games and many players are not liking it because it takes away from other types of play. Now if it was realistic, lets just see. The shelling would last the whole game time, a walking barrage would be common in front of many American advances and so on. Are you getting the point, many battles were dictated by arty in real life. But in the game, most players want small arms, infantry or tanks to dictate the win. What makes a interesting battle, not some spotter that can destroy anything in sight without any difficulties. Plus , keep in mind, the game does not represent counter arty strikes, which would really make arty less than realiable as a asset you know you would have the whole game time. Also once a request was made in the real situation, say you have a target and they hit it for 3 minutes, now you want a repeat, who is to say how many other sectors would have made a request in the 5 minutes you were using the unit, thus the reason to have to wait for a whole new request instead of just getting complete control of when you want to start or stop. Like I said before, some adjustment would be nice in the arty request, but it is not bad as is. maybe a few extra volleys could be requested, but I would say it would be uncertain, like maybe a 50% chance of receiving them. Plus to help keep the gamey aspects out of it, have it only allowed to increase the amount of shelling by 30% of the original request. thus preventing someone ordering a few rounds, finding target, then just repeating until thay are satisfied they have acheived the results wanted