sburke

And before I forget to mention it, the Peiper campaign maps are freakin amazing. I can remember getting the HASL maps and thinking at the time how great they were, well prepare to be blown away again.

Moonwalking, or as I called it "the cow pie slide" is from what I was told not a CM specific issue. It is more a synchronization of what occurs in the game with the graphical representation. I have seen the same effect in other games as well. And yes we are all beta testers . That is essentially true of anyone who plays any computer game.

Hey in case you didn't see it in the general forum, there is a PBS special on tonight about Chosin, so far pretty good

heh i'm out here in CA too. I did that map and I got a lot of pointers from other folks. The maps topology and primary forests are based on 1944 maps as is the relative placement of houses. The details past that get harder as there aren't ground level pics of much other than the actual town. (I have 2 copies of the twin villages book, one original one newer, but it doesn't have an aerial view denoting houses so it was hard to really figure which building is where). The details I got a lot assistance from folks on what the area looks like some of that admittedly based on google map views, but the back roads look won't have changed that much. I don't have one handy but I'll see if I can't post one later. If you are asking for a screenshot view of the map in game, the only item I would warn you about is trees will vanish with distance. Long range views in CM tend to not actually give you the full pic. I think I speak for the other mappers in that we all started with 1944 era maps http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/search/collection/GermanyMaps

no he's fighting a DAR and the king of the smack talk wins regardless of what the game says. Are you always this much fun? I suspect he isn't really broken up by your last comment.

Now that is friggin funny

http://undertheradar.military.com/2016/10/battle-of-chosin-pbs-under-the-radar/

Okay I am bored after 3 conference calls so I will bite rebels announce they captured a facility with BUK, the only source for that I can find is through an unnamed Russian source so questions are did they really? If Ukraine knew it had no functional equipment there then they had reason to scoff at the claim if they did, then why did Russia feel compelled to send one? oh and it is still Russia's fault regardless. Their BUK, their missile, their fault go Cubs!

Take a look at a map. International air travel unfortunately is almost impossible to avoid some conflict zones. Last spring I went to Istanbul, Dubai, Luanda, Lagos and Algiers. No idea how many "hot" conflicts I flew over. The issue becomes what kind of risk are you expecting. Russia slipped the BUK in there unannounced totally changing the equation. Russia was morally bound to inform the world that airline travel was now at a different level of risk than anyone previously expected.

Well the Dutch investigation seems to think it is and Russia has only gone from one bogus excuse to another. So at this point the ball is in Russia's court to cough up some info. To date all they have done is fumed and cast out some really absurd claims. Sounds like a cover up. Regarding the posing of option 2 above. Anyone think Russia drove a highly sophisticated AA platform over the border and just turned it over to the first militia yokels it saw and said - hey new toy, want to try it out? Really? https://www.om.nl/onderwerpen/mh17-vliegramp/presentaties/presentation-joint/ Conclusions: Based on the above the JIT concludes that flight MH17 was shot down on 17 July 2014 by a missile of the 9M38 series, launched by a BUK-TELAR, from farmland in the vicinity of Pervomaiskiy (or: Pervomaiskyi). At that time, the area was controlled by pro-Russian fighters. Furthermore, the investigation also shows that the BUK-TELAR was brought in from the territory of the Russian Federation and subsequently, after having shot down flight MH-17, was taken back to the Russian Federation.

Isn't it more reasonable that Russia just f'ked up? Well for one I don't believe there were mitigating circumstances for either that Iran air flight or the Korean flight. In that at least I am consistent. As to the BUK, that sounds like bending over backwards to find an excuse for what was more likely simply a screw up Russia doesn't want to admit to. Just like the US paid out millions for the deaths on the Iranian Air flight, but won't actually say we screwed up. And bringing this back to the media discussion, you only have to go to Wikipedia to see some damning information about the Iran Air flight. Seems we aren't as good at whitewashing our stories. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Sorry Vladimir, the tribunal verdict is in. The BUK came from Russia, fired the missile and returned to Russia. Only Russians live under the fantasy that there is any other explanation. If you can explain how a BUK unit that crossed from Russia into Ukraine and then went back to Russia somehow had a militia crew somewhere along the way. . . .. Not that I'd buy it, but you are welcome to try. Russia didn't seem to like that investigation either http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-mh17-russia-netherland-idUSKCN1202IZ

Would that be the same punishment they gave to the BUK operator that shot down MH 17? pretty funny that you think we actually believe there would be any repercussions. Back to the media discussion, it seems even The NY Times can claim to be more effective against ISIS than Syria or Russia http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/insider/one-year-later-a-tip-about-fertilizer-at-a-border-crossing-pays-off.html?_r=0

Is it the US trying to impose it's standard or technology or simply the international community? The use of clusterbombs has been internationally condemned. That the US has developed alternative methods and employs them (as have many other nations including Russia) doesn't take away from the fact that 108 nations have signed the condemnation of cluster munitions as of April 2016.

Mostly I think that is true and the relationship of Advertising dollars also weighs in, you want the audience that advertisers are paying top dollar for. However within that there is an aspect of being trustworthy that means you are the news source people will turn to when they really do want to understand something and that also carries a lot of weight. Brokaw, Wallace, Rather and Jennings all carried a value that went beyond any news agenda or advertising. Megan Kelly despite being on Fox has challenged republican rhetoric, most recently with Gingrich and Chris Wallace did a decent job in the debates. Then there is always my preferred outlet, PBS. Point is western media outlets are not as predictable as people like to complain they are. Sean Hannity is a talk show political outlet and should not be confused with a news source. Blitzer as well is a TV personality I don't consider a news source. Foreign news sources are an excellent way to cut through some of our US bias to understand how others think of our actions, but those sources can also be speaking to their own audience. The thing is there is no monolithic news source in the US and I can easily go to other sources if I want. There lies the difference between Russia and the US media. In Russia people are generally fed from an approved gov't source. In the US a lot of folks self censor to the source that tells them what they want to hear. In both cases it is pretty amazing what people decide is true or not and how they justify it

Exactly, why shouldn't the US be held to a different and higher standard?! Oh wait...... not sure that comes out quite right.

No CMAK is a completely different engine (CMx1 versus CMFB CMx2). There is no migrating those maps, you'd have to build from scratch.

Why for sure they would say it was possibly okay because the separatists are using the populace as a shield right? Russia would tell everyone to not rush to judgement until we could really clarify what happened.... wow that almost hurt to say that.

Well if the US were doing that you could damn well be sure there would be a completely different response.

Exactly. and neither did Saddam. The only "terrorists" in Iraq were folks who opposed the Baathist police state. I honestly haven't the slightest idea what alternate reality Trump was referring to.

Just so long as they aren't casting votes in the US election....

Almost a direct quote from Donald Trump. You certain you want to be in that company? "He was a bad guy -- really bad guy. But you know what he did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights. They didn't talk. They were terrorists. Over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism,"

That I agree with you 100% on. The Catholic church has a very long and sordid history which makes ISIL look like a girl scout troop. Hell those bozos have only been around a few decades. They have a long way to go if they are going to be remembered in History books 100 years from now.

your google Fu is getting weak. Phoenix ran from 65. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Program

Nice try, but no I am not rising to the bait. Feel free to try again though.