A Canadian Cat

Oh yes, the scenario editor that ships within the game is the same one used to create the scenarios, maps and campaigns that also ship with the game.

That's strange. I thought I had it all figured out. Back to the drawing board then.

I am not sure what to say. My point was not a specific one. Steve tried to use an example from his experience to show that just because you want something and can conceive how it will work doesn't mean you can get it without sacrificing something else. You responded by saying the MoD's budget is way bigger than BFC's plus some seemingly snide comments about design issues that had no relevance and claimed is example was wrong. I was just pointing out that the size of the budget is not the issue - the issue is a question of what is achievable and what other projects can be done at the same time. The fact is we don't really know from the outside what the trade offs might or might not be. To me it seem that all Steve is saying is your optimism is running high and you seem to have set you expectations on the high end of possible outcomes. You seem to be saying he is being a negative Nelly and your expectations are spot on because - say so. You guys have kind of degenerated into a pointless space. It seems unlikely that Steve will get you to think more critically about what you are expecting and it seem equally unlikely that you will convince Steve his concerns are baseless. In the end we will need to watch what happens over the next five to ten years I would think. Either way I really hope you guys are not still trying to get the last word on this in this thread in 2025

Well that was dramatic - except no one lost any thing so may be not If you take the s off the https your video will appear embedded in the message.

Oh I disagree. Steve is not saying that BFC's budget is comparable - that would be a poor comparison. He is pointing out that just deciding what you want to do and imaging it as possible may not mesh with the reality of the current capabilities of an organization, equipment, budget and / or time line. Any project that might be undertaken by an organization needs to match with in those parameters. The size of the budget or the organization only changes how many and how big those projects are but it does not change the reality that projects need to be prioritized. That prioritization needs to take into account how long it would take with the current staff and equipment and how much it would cost to add staff or equipment etc. Or put other projects on hold. etc. etc. The Russian or US defence department or their contractors are not immune to the realities of project management and budgeting.

Yeah figuring out how to classify someone as serious or attention seeking as a traitor or a hero is not always clear. Or on the other hand perhaps it is - both. I never had the impression that Snowden was out for attention as his main objective but even if your objective is to get important information out you kinda have to jump up and down and try to attract attention. And if you know about a secret government program that you think is unconstitutional but your boss says no its a state secret there is really no way to blow the whistle on that with out becoming a traitor by definition. It puts us all in a bit of an interesting spot cause generally we don't like traitors for good reason. On the other hand how else are we going to know if our government is breaking its own laws? That it does. I have noticed a distinct lack of concern in my country (Canada) about these kinds of issues too. Next time I have that conversation I'll use the dick pic technique and see if I get a better response. At any rate this is insanely off topic that's for sure.

Well he could just power down the road and skip the cover of the trees and head for Rovinetta (kinda AA3 between your AA1 and AA2). I would not expect it to be a likely course of action but if he does have heavy tanks he might just push them down the road hoping for your shells to bounce off. I know I would consider it. Mind you I would dismiss it but ...

Shamless plug: A friend of mine and I are playing an open game (we read each other's threads on the board) here: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119229-axis-cmbn-buying-the-farm-crowd-sourced-dar/ and here: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119230-allies-cmbn-buying-the-farm-crowd-sourced-dar/ Lots of good tips and chat offered by many great people in this community.

OK I just tried it. A chain of ingla launchers can share along the chain. Saves and screens will have to wait for tomorrow but it works like this. If everyone is chained along and they all fire their first missiles the first guy will have access to 4 missiles the next will have access to 3 the one after 2 etc.

I am sure it is worth a try. My prediction is it will not work because sharing does not acquire. So, if you have an MG team near a BMP with lots of ammo the MG can fire away and it has access to the BMP's stores but it never acquires 500 or 1000 of rounds it just uses them by the mag or belt. So an additional MG team that is near the first but too far away from the BMP will be able to share the ammo that the first team has but not what is in the BMP. Once that first team is out of its own ammo that it can share with the second team all they now have is what is in the gun and at that point I do not believe the second team can get that because there is no excess to ammo that is loaded only to the supply. The same will apply to the SAM teams. They will be able to share the excess that their neighbour has but never the round in the launcher. Given that the team near the BMP will never take more rounds than it needs to fill the launcher there will never be any excess to share with the next team down the line etc. etc. That is my prediction based simply on observing ammo sharing from time to time.

Neat idea. Love the neon pink and green.

Oh, cool. I remember when we were first discussing this your ideas sounded interesting. I only started reading - need to get off the phone and into a bigger screen..

Need to readjust your thought process there. In a thread about the possibility of new fighting in Ukraine you start justifying the Russian invasion based on the Ukrainian government being less than ideal? The Russian government is the invading force and their reasons for invasion are at best trumped up but really not justified (by that I mean there has been no credible argument made by the Russian government for the invasion). There are plenty of people here who are happy to criticise a corrupt government but first let's get the Russian government's invasion force and weapons out of Ukraine.

OK thanks to @Vinnart's post about Overlay Maker: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119690-is-there-a-printable-or-jpeg-version-of-some-of-the-maps/#entry1610231 I sent a small amount of time getting my icons into the program and came up with this where we currently are image. This represents the orders I just gave and the location of my units. I did this quick so only 1 platoon is split into squads and only one of the elements of 4 platoon (the weapons platoon) is shown - the mortar team firing on the AT gun.

OK I just had a quick look at The Overlay Maker. That is a seriously cool project - to bad the guy's web site is no longer. I did find a version you can still download and it works well. I think I can put this to use.

Oh standard please.

That is my recollection too. Can't find proof

<alt>J I believe. Video seems fine for me too.

Minute 23-22: This was a turn much like the last turn. The attack in the woods stayed stalled while my men were under a mortar barrage while the attack up the road advanced more with my men taking some fire and giving back in spades to the known enemy locations. Figure 90 Moving forward While men are moving forward along the road to get better positions to take deal with the enemy covering the road and eventually to get to that AT gun those that already have a LOF are using it. Figure 91 Covering fire In the woods near the road (left hand woods) one of my teams spots the enemy trying to with draw. Figure 92 Fire on fleeing enemy They manage to prevent one from being a problem later. Figure 93 Got one Meanwhile in the right hand woods my men are still under mortar fire and trying to ride it out. Figure 94 Still taking mortar fire The mortar team is still taking aim on the AT gun’s position. Another spotting round is away. Hopefully they will start to really send rounds down range in the next minute. Figure 95 Still sending mortar fire toward the AT gun Figure 96 Round away Minute 22: Orders Now that things have quieted down on the left side of the woods I’ll move 3rd squad back up to the bocage line. That way they can support the road advance by offering some flank protection. Figure 97 Left woods move up to bocage 1st squad over on the right side of the woods is a mess and are still taking mortar fire. They continue to just hide and hope for the best. Figure 98 right woods still a mess On the road those that have a line of fire on known enemy positions use it. Those that don’t move up so they do. Figure 99 Move up and keep firing

Yeah Holly smokes where did these names and avatars I have *never* seen comes from You can tell I never ready the Peng threads. Sorry guys I just cannot follow them and remain totally clueless as to what you are talking about - which I believe is a Good Thing

more people = more easily spotted just like in real life

Check out this: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/111514-counterattack-at-son-bailey-bridge-problem/?p=1574604

Oh, lots of us get that and do not need to be told. I would be baffled if you thought that there is more than a handful of people who didn't notice

Ah the latest version is 3.11 is that the version with the higher cost?

LOL. I used to work on a team with a resident genius and he never put comments on defect fixes either. Some high muckity muck wrote a decree saying "though shalt never have an empty description for a defect fix in the bug tracking system". From that point on my team mate put '.' (without the quotes) in the description field.