Josh Coady
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Josh Coady
-
-
-
I'm pretty much in the same camp as Coaxial_Puppet. I'm mid-20s and my wargaming interest is mostly WWII, although I really liked operation flashpoint and have played a Korea game as well, but right now I'm back to WWII (highly fictionalized) playing Silent Storm. Like a lot of others, I got my start in wargaming with SL and then ASL.
Maybe the difference with the younger crowd is that we're more likely to play a variety of genres. My favorite games are Half-Life and its "War of the Worlds" sequel. I also liked Far Cry, Knights of the Old Republic, the Civilization games, Need for Speed, Homeworld, and Freespace.
Will I buy SF? Probably, but I'll wait 6-12mos for the price to come down. Would I buy it right away if the setting was WWII? Not necessarily, but it'd definitely be more tempting.
I think the appeal of WWII is that it is simply more epic and grandiose than current warfare. I think there is a more emotional connection to that setting than to other settings.
Thats not to say that I wont play SF and enjoy every minute of it.
-Josh
-
That's the funniest thing I've read since Jerry Taylor asking The Register to turn off the internet because he was getting email.
-
You can get a decent gaming machine for under $500 (assuming you have all the extras already: case, monitor, keyboard, hard drive, etc.):
AMD 64 3000+ ~ $100
MSI Socket 939 M/B ~ $120
MSI GeForce 6600 VC PCI-E ~ $120
1GB RAM ~ $100
This setup can play most games on high graphics, next-gen FPS on medium. In 2-3 years, or spread over the next couple years, add on more RAM, a newer VC, and a faster processor. With the add-ons/replacements you'll spend another $300-$400.
Total cost for a machine that can play most games that will ever grace it's hard drive at high detail for the next 5-6 years: $700-$900.
At least, that's my plan anyway.
(And it's quiet as well, the lowdest thing is the DVD drive when it's spinning.)
-Josh
-
I'm 26.. bought CMBO and CMBB based on PC Gamer reviews and a play through the demo. I also enjoy COD, KOTOR, Civ4, Freespace 2; but have yet to find anything that really compares to Half-Life. For strategy games I do prefer CM to starcraft and other RTS although Rise of Nations was great. I also enjoy the occasional M:TW game but usually only play the turn-based part which makes it risk but with more detail.
Anyway, as others have said, I also tried to get wife my into gaming, but the only thing she really liked was adventure games like Myst and Syberia (and I got her hooked on watching Star Trek and playing Catan).
My eldest son is also 6 and his favorite games are memory, connect 4, checkers, skip-bo, and parcheesi. He'll soon be ready to learn chess and cribbage and he keeps bugging us to teach him Settlers of Catan.
This thread has gone a little OT but I dont mind since it gives a little personal insight into CMers on the boards that you dont normally get.
-Josh
-
KOTOR is simply [K]nights [O]f [T]he [O]ld [R]epublicOriginally posted by Abbott:Thanks guys! I will look into both of them! I think I will go buy Knights of the Old Republic today, I have seen it on the shelf. I have not heard of Kotor before but
Bioware has made some good titles, I will check their website.
It's set 4000 years before the movies and has a better than average plot.
-
I agree. Oblivion is looking great. The Morrowind games are a little too open ended for my tastes though.Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:I certainly got my money's worth from Morrowind, and I expect that the next release in the series will be even better. But everyone wants awesome graphics and a price under $40. That doesn't leave much room in the budget for the actual game.
You should also check out Kinghts of the Old Republic and Silent Storm.
-
It was what they believed, but even before CMx1, they were proved wrong during beta test.Originally posted by Folbec:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Josh Coady:
Very generally speaking, and this depends on how it is being coded, all that needs to be passed around are the actions taken (give unit X command Y), the variable changes (e.g. new wind direction), and the seeds for the random numbers. Then the rest of the calculations should come out the same even if run independently on the other player's machine.
The game is for Mac and PC (different floating point libraries, a rounding error in floating point means a live or dead tank
) and even between various PCs the results where not the same (maybe this was at the time of the various Pentium floating point bugs).So each CMx1 movie file includes all the computations which are done on only one computer.
I guess it will be the same for CMSF, or they would not worry about file size. [/QB]</font>
-
Very generally speaking, and this depends on how it is being coded, all that needs to be passed around are the actions taken (give unit X command Y), the variable changes (e.g. new wind direction), and the seeds for the random numbers. Then the rest of the calculations should come out the same even if run independently on the other player's machine.Originally posted by Sergei:The problem is that the more accurate the map (individually modelled bullet holes in walls etc.) and modifiers for each unit in a battle (full psychological modelling of every soldier, including their childhood traumas, and such), the bigger the filesize, and if a movie file becomes 50 MB in size, it is impractical.
But whether it comes to that, they'll only know once they have gone further in the coding. If it should become a choice between PBEM playability and other features, PBEM loses, said Steve, but he was wishful that it didn't come to that.
The map, models, unit psychological history, etc. should already exist on both player's machine as part of the game install.
So, instead of passing along the turn (replay and all), you just pass along the parameters to generate the turn again on the other player's achine.
Again, this is overly-simplistic, but in theory that's how it could work.
As an aside, I'm one of those who think PBEM would be a nice feature to have, but would probably never use it. The majority of my time will probably be spent playing the solo campaign and after that solo QBs.
-
He may not even realize he can buy the game without putting on pants to leave the house. Once he does, his support will undoubtedly swell to the point of incipient madness... </font>Originally posted by Seanachai:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mord:
He may not have realized that he could.
-
Actually it's more of a budget issue. I tend to wait for games to drop off their initial $50 price tag and pick them up when they are somewhere between $10 and $30 (depending on how much I want the game). Sometimes I buy from amazon for full price because we get amazon certificates for doing market research surveys.
Anyway, if I had more money for discretionary spending, I'd buy it as soon as it was released.
(all this assumes the initial price will be greater than $30)
-
I just noticed that the current top story on CNN.com is the following.
I will add myself to the list of people looking forward to this release and will buy it as soon as it is available from gogamer.com, amazon.com, Target, or Wal-Mart.Bush says terrorists sneak into Iraq via Syria to carry out attacks.The presidents of the United States and Syria clashed Wednesday over policy in Iraq and the wider Middle East. Bush called on Syria's government to be a "good neighbor," warning Damascus not to interfere in Lebanon, incite Palestinian militants or allow insurgents to cross into Iraq. But President Bashar Al-Assad, in an exclusive CNN interview, said the United States should re-examine its policy there because of the negative consequences of the war.
-
I agree with everything here. Because of the computer picked jeeps and halftracks I started picking my own side, but that still left the opposition wanting...Originally posted by Abbott:Due to my very slow Internet connection and usually mean demeanor I often find myself playing solo Quick Battles. I prefer 500 to 800 point battles and I will let the computer pick both sides for some variety. However the constant stream of computer picked half-tracks sometimes becomes annoying. I then will load and quit several QB’s until a reasonable (to me) interesting or fun troop mix and map is obtained. Often I have to resort to “human” picks for the side I will be playing. I am not complaining and do realize what I think is fun or interesting is not what the next player finds interesting or fun.
I can easily live with the present system but I would sure enjoy seeing a few more options of some type or another when setting up Quick Battles.
It would be nice to select a general force composition whose units were randomly selected by the computer.
-Josh
-
I was thinking this would be a good solution for even a 2-player game. I think of it as a cross between PBEM and TCP/IP. You could call it persistent TCP/IP.
The downside is it would require BFC (or some reliable third party) to have a couple of servers to support it.
-
I was reading a preview to Civ IV and came across this description of it's multiplayer design and thought it could work well for CM (probably more like a later module or CMx3 though since this is rather late in the dev phase).
-Josh... But perhaps the most interesting new multiplayer mode is the pit boss, a persistent, stand-alone server that may be the answer that Firaxis is looking for. Basically, the pit boss will let you play a game of Civ online like normal. However, when someone has to leave (and usually someone has to leave over the course of a 10-hour game of Civ), the pit boss will save the state of the game. Then you can log in every now and then to see if your turn has come up. If it does, you can make your moves and save the progress to the server for the next player. This will keep a multiplayer game going, sort of like play-by-email. And when everyone is back online at the same time, you can resume the game at full speed. Moreover, you can participate in multiple pit boss games at a time. So if one game is proceeding slowly, you can start another to keep you interested. Then there's team play, which lets you buddy up with another player, or players, so you can try to crush the opposition. ... -
Following Bigduke6's suggestion, I found this thread:
http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=009455
Definately worth the read of the entire thread.
-Josh
-
Has this list move to another URL? The one given in the original post seems to be broken. TIA!
-Josh
-
Total War was just a discussion starter--there would be a lot to flesh out to get a working model, but the concept is intriguing.
It might work to have a campaign that is like an operation in that your forces retain their values after each battle, but different in that that battles take place on different maps and the series of battles that make up the campaign could span multiple years.
It would be nice to see your HQ move up through the ranks, see you green troops become veteran after a certain amount of experience, etc. The idea would be to build a personal attachment to your troops. This should give second thoughts about sending troops for a 200m run over open terrain under enemy fire in a futile effort to win a battle.
If a unit breaks during a battle there should be a chance that the unit would not be available for the next battle. Or, if a squad takes heavy casualties, it would start the next battle as a half squad.
Another interesting twist would be units captured in one battle and a rescue operation in the next.
There would also need to be some way to provide replacements, but those replacements would usually start out green.
Think about playing a "Band of Brothers" campaign.
-Josh
-
An amusing anecdote from the site:
Thanks for the link!D + 18, 24th JuneNot content with vigorous patrolling activity by night, an extensive sniping programme was decided upon, and from then on the enemy were constantly harassed by day and night.
By this time it was clear that the enemy no longer held the initiative and control of the country between their positions and our own was indisputably ours. No enemy patrols came out and apart from registered mortar fire on the more obvious routes of approach and withdrawal, our patrols were unmolested until they reached the actual line of the enemy defences. The enemy were on the defensive.
Another successful sortie by 3 Commando was made during the night. The patrol, a small one, penetrated into the enemy positions undetected, though it was not long before the enemy reacted.
Considerable confusion arose and several Germans started to run about. One came up to a Corporal of the patrol and asked what was happening. The Corporal, a fluent German speaker, told the man that the English had surrounded them and shouted to him to follow him. This he did only too willingly, imagining he was being led to safety, and was duly taken prisoner. The Germans appeared too disorganised to shoot, and the patrol withdrew.
Interrogation of the prisoner gave interesting indications of the enemy's strength and morale. Patrols, he said, were very restricted because the enemy had lost so many men in this way. Officers did not patrol at all owing to the shortage of them.
-Josh
-
I dont know if anyone has suggested this before, but I would love to see the "Total War" series concept applied to WWII.
For those of you who are not familiar with the series, it would be like two games in one. You would start at the strategic level (think Axis & Allies) and doing those sorts of things (purchasing units, gathering intelligence, etc.). But, when you decided to attack, you would have the option to resolve the attack at the tactical level (think scenario).
This would give CM a very rich and deep campaign game. Thoughts?
-Josh
-
Has anyone read "World War II Infantry Tactics: Squad and Platoon" and "World War II Infantry Tactics: Company And Battalion" both by Dr. Stephen Bull?
I am wondering if it is worth $25 and the time to read it..
Or, could you suggest another similiar book?
Thanks in advance!
-Josh
) and even between various PCs the results where not the same (maybe this was at the time of the various Pentium floating point bugs).
I'm tired
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
This may be old news, but I just noticed the domain the order page for SC2 is none other than CM2. https://www.combatmission2.com/sc2_order.html
Also, thanks for posting about the review for SC2 (which I completely ignored), but I did look into the game afterwards and am going to give it a try.
With most games having demos, reviews aren't as necessary anymore. I'd much rather play a game than read a review (with two exceptions: PC Gamer reviews of games that receive 20% or less which absolutley hilarious and for those times when you get bored at work/school/whatever).
On another note, the waiting for news here is not that bad, new for Half-Life 2 was sometimes more than a year between bones, but in the end it was a great game and I dont hear anyone complaining, "so what if its a great game, i'm choosing to miss out on it just to spite Valve for not releasing info on a regular basis"..
-Josh