juan_gigante

What grass mod is that?

Who's going to make the joke about his political viewpoints being half-baked?

When I make a map, I think "What do I want to be the key part of this map?" If I'm making a fight in a village and I know that that village is going to be a key part of the battle, I'll make the village first. Then I expand outwards from the point, making the approaches to it and so forth. But then again, I make almost entirely fictional maps.

When terrorists took over the Iranian embassy in London, SAS entered both through windows and through holes made in the walls with sledgehammers. I know that many CT forces have sledgehammers available for this purpose. I'm pretty sure that the Seattle PD SWAT team does.

He'd probably hang himself with it while trying to capture a large number of prisoners.

Thirdly (am I on third?), he can call you whatever he pleases, be it "lad", or "youngling", or "scrabblepuss". And though Seanachai will likely take a direct route to hell when he goes, I wouldn't be surprised if they kind of wanted to get rid of him down there. He'd enjoy it all too much, and ruin everyone's good time.

I think he'll find it difficult to play against you, considering that no such game exists. Besides, read the rules: an SSN such as yourself may not challenge one of the Olde Ones, only a fellow SSN or perhaps a serf (like myself). And as long as we're on the rules, I'm not sure how well "hell USA" qualifies as a location. Also, do try and correct your grammar a bit. Makes life easier for all the old chaps that can't read so well anymore, and for the foreign-types that don't know their English so well.

I'm Finnish, which beats all that. **Spoiler Warning** I'm not really Finnish.

Oh, yes, I know that China occupies Tibet, but I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with the invasion of a nuclear North Korea. Are you saying that the Chinese occupation of Tibet is an example of low-intensity operations one might encounter in-game? Firstly, I don't think there are that many RPG-armed insurgents in Tibet, and I think that a game set in the invasion of North Korea would feature little of that sort of low-intensity conflict. I'm not trying to be a prick or something. I just am perplexed why Chinese occupation of Tibet has anything to do with invading nuclear North Korea.

I downloaded the "full Scenario Depot archive" from CMMODS, and was pleasantly surprised to happen across these! CoD is one of my favorite games, and it was great fun going down into view 1 with my guys and reliving the FPS gameplay. (BTW... the battle turned out better when in CoD than in CM... I should get to command FPS me in some of my battles) Anyways, I'd just like to congratulate whoever came up with these fun little scenarios.

Yeah, it get that, but what does Tibet have to do with North Korea? The "Given TIbet" is what I don't understand.

Ha! MikeyD wins!

Can you please explain what this means?

Wing Commander 3? Oh yeah, baby. I remember there was that mission about 12 in, wherein if you had lost any mission before that one and you lost that one, it was impossible to win the story. The one where you get to fly the fancy fighter for the first time. I got by okay, but I had two friends who had to restart their entire game so it was possible to win the game.

One thing I do before I setup any of my guys is I sort them. I never really handled the long string of troops along the edge well, so what I do is I take all of company A, put them in that field and sort them by platoon. I put all my mortars in that field. All my tanks over there. Then, when I actually want to set up, instead of having to search down the line for them, I just go over to the appropriate spot and grab what I need. This is also good for evaluating your force's OOB. "Okay, I have 10 HMG-42s... 3 regular, 4 veteran, 2 green, and a crack... 5 of them have one casualty, one has two... 7 have full ammo, three are down to 2/3rds..." With this, I feel I better understand my force, can better allocate it, and setup easier. Of course, it takes about twice as long to setup, but it helps me a lot. On the downside, the long setup times really frustarate me. I just get bored before the game even starts. I would say that of the games against the game that I start, I don't even finish the first turn of 1/3rd of them. Just get bored setting up and plotting the first turn's moves.

I know that in the CMBB thread, there have been screen shots of squads with 150 or so kills. Usually SMG or Jager squads.

I like the last idea. If a force has been hit hard enough that it otherwise would be retreating and cannot, it makes sense to me that it would surrender. This also takes into account many other factors - a more experienced, better supplied, etc. force would be less likely to have a forced retreat, and hence would be less likely to have a forced surrender. And it also means that guys wouldn't mass-surrender just because. But if they have nowhere to retreat to and are pushed very hard...

I recently I wrote a paper on Giuseppe Garibaldi's campaign in 1860 to unify the South of Italy and liberate it from Austrian hegemony. The campaign was a masterwork of guerilla warfare - a truely interesting subject. But in the many letters written about it from the time period, the authors keep on using a word which translates into English as "manly". So in all these primary sources, people kept on refering to things as manly. The wife, writing to her soldier husband about how she misses him, says that she will be manly and not cry while he is away. Garibaldi, writing about the battle of Calatafimini, declares that "The Bourbon soldiers did not withstand the terrible push of the manly champions of liberty..." It popped up all over. Humorous stuff.

I had "X-Wing". It was a fun time, I guess, but "TIE Fighter" so much better. I had all the old Star Wars games. Rebel Assault, Dark Forces, even Yoda Stories.

JasonC, we are simultaneuously agreeing and disageeing, and you are right on both. I did get the beach wrong, and I confess that I do not have the level of tactical knowledge regarding the engagement in question that you do. I will defer to you there. In indsight, I think the example I was thinking of was the Salerno counterattack. But we agree that the ideal plan for defending the Atlantic Wall would not be one wherein the invaders were stopped right on the beaches (Rommel's plan) but one where they were counterattacked after some forces had landed. The fact that too many forces where near Calais and not enough were in Normandy was that the German command had bet wrong, not because the idea of (land-then-counterattack) was flawed.

The a big reason for the difference between Hitler's plan and Rommel's plan was in what they were afraid of. Rommel knew what Allied airpower could do, and wanted to try and stop the invasion before Allied air supremacy could destroy his tanks. Hitler, on the other hand, was worried about the overwhelming direct fire support that the battleships and destroyers along the beach would be able to provide. As an example, look at Anzio. The Germans drove panzers down onto the beaches to stop the landing, and naval gunfire decimated them. All in all, though, which ever plan was adopted, the Germans would have a really rough time stopping a strong landing effort.

Cuirassier, you've got Hitler's and Rommel's plans switched. Hitler wanted to wait until the Allies landed, and then to hit them once they were off the beaches and didn't have the cover from naval guns (as well). Rommel, on the other hand, wanted tanks on the beaches themselves fighting the enemy as they landed. Debate the effectiveness of either plan, but Hitler and Rundstat's (I bet I spelled his name wrong, but I mean the C-in-C west) was more reliant on manuver and reaction than Rommel's much more static plan.

yuvuphys, perhaps you'd like to explain why 52% of all the kickbacks that Saddam received were from U.S. individuals and corporations, and how this fits into your "corrupt UN" scheme. Or explain this quote from the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations:

Also, sometimes it can be cool to have HTs with guns for cheap direct fire HE. I've had battles wherein direct fire HTs one it for me.

I bet you could get all the MoHs for $10 - 15, which is a deal. You can also get CoD for $15 - 20, which is, IMHO, a must buy. Don't know about H&D II.