Dietrich

Thanks much for the inadvertent compliment, DT!

It's no worse than the not-infrequently-encountered "heighth", really.

*shrug* Since the NYT caption writers aren't knowledgeable about weaponry (and neither are most of their readers), an RPG being used as artillery in effect is a mortar. Not that most of their readers even know what a mortar is in the first place. But I hear ya — the prevalent ignorance about weaponry and tactics among "war correspondents" irks me. And then there's the phenomenon of possibly-lacking-scruples-to-a-certain-extent individuals making assertions about particular weapons and their terminal effects and the way in which they're used tactically so as to shape public opinion about certain incidents.

While watching "Downfall", I felt like I was witnessing the events rather than watching a movie about the events. Highly recommended.

What about a rebels-versus-pro-Qaddafi-forces scenario? Perhaps Combatants (mostly Conscript, a few Green; fairly high morale settings but low-ish leadership settings) with technicals and maybe a BDRM or two versus Fighters (don't know about the various settings) with limited Syrian-reserve infantry support plus a few BMP-1s and/or maybe a T-55?

An off-the-cuff observation (not directed at anyone in particular): Since when is failing to express 100% (or as near as makes no odds) support for Assange and/or WikiLeaks equivalent to being (to put it broadly) a truth-hating, war-mongering right-winger? Just because I personally don't think he should necessarily be regarded as a worthy-of-a-Nobel-Peace-Prize hero doesn't mean I agree at all with the right-wing presumption that he's nothing but a digital terrorist who should be strung up from the nearest tree. As for WikiLeaks... well, I chuckle at how WikiLeaks basically indicts the US government and military for not being as transparent as WikiLeaks says they ought to be, yet WikiLeaks itself is quite un-transparent. <good-natured sarcasm> But, of course, if WikiLeaks were as transparent as it expects national governments to be, I suppose it could just be all too easily infiltrated and neutralized by agents of the very organizations it opposes. </good-natured sarcasm> *shrug*

I have a fair number of German voice files (including ones from CMBB) I plan to mod into CMBN. Not that I'm German, and not that I'm fluent in German conversationally, but if only I had decent recording device and an empty field to spend a couple hours in on a windless spring morning...

Not that anyone actually cares about factually refuting the "the Jews killed Christ" assertion, but... The Jews didn't kill Christ. Individuals who happened to be Jewish and who feared negative impact on their power and prestige lied about Christ, inciting the Romans to arrest and execute him. It's all right there in the Bible. People who assert that the Jews killed Christ (condemning an entire nation and ethnic group for the wrongful actions of a few) assert contrary to the record of the book they claim to adhere to and are a disgrace to the religion they claim to practice.

For 8 years now I've been working in a field of the healthcare industry which is so deep within the system that it hardly ever is even alluded to in medical dramas, namely medical transcription. As a medical transcriptionist, the impression I've gotten is that healthcare in the US is mainly a matter of medications and surgeries. By and large, the solution to most health problems is either giving you a drug (or more likely a battery of drugs; I've transcribed reports on patients who were on 25 to 30 different drugs at a time) or cutting you open, manipulating various anatomic structures, then closing you back up. It's ironic to consider how we nowadays regard the medical practices of past ages as barbaric; yet I reckon that if one were to go back to, say, 12th-century England and describe 21st-century western medical practices in terms folks (even highly educated ones) back then could understand, they could very well regard what we do as barbaric(!) (exaggerated delivery for emphasis) "If a pregnant woman shall fail to give birth within a certain span of time, the physician will cut open her belly and pull the infant out with tongs!" *gasps of shock*

I personally can't claim to know enough about Assange, WikiLeaks, or the "collateral murder" incident to be able to definitely proclaim judgment thereupon. Regarding the "collateral murder" incident, there are a number of questions which occurred to me but which I've never seen asked (let alone answered) by either side. Could that be because those questions related to points which are either invalid or irrelevant? Yeah, that must be it. I <good-natured sarcasm> love </good-natured sarcasm> how the consensus throughout the internet (the non-right-wing realms thereof, anyway) is that Assange and WikiLeaks are great and that anyone who says differently is highly unlikely to be anything but a tool.

Wait... haven't we had this discussion before? Oh, right, we have: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=91655 Put the whip cream on top of the naked women, and then you just might have yourself a deal.

As an American, I can confirm that Americans generally have a sort of "pics, or it didn't happen" outlook about historical events. I reckon most Americans would recognize the photo of the Marines raising the flag on Mount Suribachi, whereas few Americans would recognize the photo of the Red Army soldier raising the flag atop the Reichstag.

"I don't like being told what to think by people who say they hate being told what to think." —me

Why are the words "Peng" and "Challenge" missing from the title of this thread?

Granted, one can find hundreds of videos on YouTube showing Apaches, Cobras, etc., passing directly over the heads of the troops they're supporting, but any of those is in effect anecdotal evidence. Given the size of CMSF maps (the larger ones run in the 1.5 to 2 km per side range; very few are any larger than that in either direction), if a helicopter gunship were shown "on map", it would thus be within range of enemy weapons, whereas in real life the rotary-wing asset would stay outside the range of RPGs, HMGs, etc., and engage targets from stand-off range. (Right?)

(I'm disappointed with myself that only just a minute ago did it occur to me to make the connection between current events and the above scene from one of my top 10 favorite movies. -.-)

Kiitos, Sergei, kiitos. =)

Does this scenario have a setup zone? Move the MG-equipped teams to opposite ends of the setup zone (as far apart as possible) and see what happens.

Or even Major Tom. :cool:

But is an ACR actually cavalry in the modern US Army sense of the word? In other words, is a troop of an ACR the same as a cavalry troop in CM:SF? In other other words, is the typical Bradley in an ACR an M3 CFV with four (in real life two) cavalry scouts or an M2 with (most of) a regular rifle squad? I ask because I'd like to make a scenario featuring elements of the 3rd ACR or some such, but I haven't been able to find enough information about such units' composition to know how to represent them with the game's available TO&E.

Many liked listening to "Lili Marleen". But to my knowledge that song wasn't among those which Landsers (or GIs or Tommies, for that matter) would sing themselves. My point was simply that whereas the GIs considered the Landsers' singing awfully corny, the Landsers themselves thought it indicative of fair-to-good morale.

"Bring in..." <pause for effect> "...the pillow-plated Panzer!" Yeah, but even in 1944 the GIs huddling in their foxholes listened the singing of their German counterparts dug in along the opposite treeline and thought it awfully corny. =P

He also lacked the accompaniment of a Berlin Philharmonic rendition of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcZp7u_Krp8. :cool:

being asked questions by a guy with a foreign accent + wondering if questions might be trick questions + brain freeze due to being put on the spot + editing out all the correct answers = looking like a nation of idiots ---------------------------------- Besides, it's effectively in the rest of the world's interest to promulgate the idea that America has the Western world's monopoly on "don't know and don't care to know" people.