Ultradave

This is so true. Russia was one of the guarantors of Ukraine's sovereignty. Look how well that held up. I don't get why people keep saying that Ukraine should just negotiate/make a deal with Russia. Any deal made will only last as long as Putin wants it to last. Dave

If I did this right, I gifted the article and it gave me a gift link (I think), for those who want to read it. If it doesn't work for you PM me and I'll try to get it right. https://wapo.st/3vZhk1f Dave

I guess it would if there's good evidence for it (sorry I'm not up to date on the reports, which is why I said 'if'). Dave

Yes. It is. Interestingly though, not necessarily for crowd control by law enforcement. In war, yes, it's banned. Yeah, the training was fun. Stay in the shed to prove your mask works, and then take off your mask to show what happens without the mask (I guess to prove that the mask really works and it wasn't just a harmless steam sauna). Got the message for sure. Dave

Incidentally, this is not just my opinion I'm blurting out. REPUBLICAN lawmakers have stated this about their own colleagues. (It is also my opinion as well) Dave

Ah, that DOES make it confusing!

There is broad support in both the Senate and the House for the aid. The Senate passed it ages ago. The party that controls the house (small h) of Congress has the ability to determine what will or won't be voted on, regardless of (as you can see) how popular it is and how easily it will pass. So the House Speaker decided he wouldn't bring it for a vote? Why? 1) Because Trump told him not to, and 2) Because the small minority of 2-10 Russian propaganda mouthpieces in the House say they will throw him out if he does, and 3) A large number of Republican House members demand US border control legislation along with it (ignoring the fact they ALSO refused to vote on a Senate passed bill, which was negotiated by both parties - why? because it would make Biden look good - really, that's the reason). He (Speaker Johnson) just now summoned up the guts to go ahead and do it. We'll see if he still has a job Monday. There is a way to get a vote done by going around the Speaker. It takes a petition of the majority of House members. Republicans wouldn't go that far even though many want it. They are afraid of Trump/MAGA. Democrats are the minority, so they can't do it without help from Republicans, who won't. Also, I know it's confusing. Congress is made of two houses, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. It's confusing for those outside the US because we commonly refer to "The House" being the House of Representatives, while both are "houses" (small h) of Congress. They each have their own rules of conducting business, which they themselves make up (and can change or waive). I'm not sure I made that any clearer, but there it is. Don't worry. It's all confusing to many Americans as well. The rules for advancing a bill are complicated and arcane, with many opportunities for it to be derailed along the way. Dave

Possibly because he bashed the threads into mush? Just a thought They do seem to be trying to fuze rounds but it obviously is not going well, to say the least. The one with the view down inside appears to be empty, completely empty. You should just see an open area just big enough for the base of the fuze. Looks like you can see all the way to the base. That one will only hurt if it actually hits you, like a 1700s cannonball. That guy in the cartoon is at least trying to not destroy everything. See how the screwdriver is at the side - trying to get it to turn, not smash everything. [edit] Looking at the cartoon again, he's doing it wrong. The screwdriver should be on the other side. "Righty tighty, lefty loosey" Dave

Good question. I *believe* it's still in place, but does not yet have the required signatures to move forward. It requires a majority of the House, (218). But it is still open to be signed by others. The better news is that it sounds now quite likely the aid bill(s) will pass - (s) because it's convoluted. The bills were split to be voted separately, and then will be recombined so that they match the Senate bill already passed - or close to it so the Senate can quickly vote on the House version. Complicated, arcane rules. Dave

My thinking is that your scenario would require at least some NATO troops and equipment on the ground in Ukraine, and therefore a pretty big escalatory risk. Whether that risk is really large is in the eye of the beholder, and Russia could make quite a propaganda blitz out of NATO soldiers in Ukraine. Dave

She made some comment about previously supporting space lasers for Israel's defense. Not sure what that's in reference to, but I think it was not the same as the CA fires lasers. But hey, who knows what she's talking about? I'm sure she doesn't even know, really. The fear I have is that now that Speaker Johnson has divided up the aid and humanitarian packages to be voted on separately, he'll get the aid for Israel done, and then after that passes renege on even voting for the Ukraine aid and possibly the humanitarian aid for Gaza in order to save his job, regardless of what he says he plans to do. I read a suggestion this morning that other (saner, more responsible) Republicans should play Rep. Greene's game. "Hold a vote on Ukraine aid, which WILL pass with wide support, or else we'll fill a motion to vacate the Speaker." At least then the aid would pass, and it's because the majority demanded action, not a cabal of 2-8 (depending on day of the week) dictating to 435 Representatives their own personal agenda for the whole country. Dave

It's unfortunately true. Not that these and the others she introduced will go anywhere, but she DID introduce them and proudly lists them on her X feed. Others introduced diverted 100% of aid for 2 bills each to Lahaina, Oahu, and East Palestine, Ohio. Dave

I'm not sure I understand your question? A) Are you saying you've played 2 hours and nothing has happened? The scenario is 2 hours long total, and I'm pretty sure there are AI plans for both sides.. There is a 105 battery at the start along with a bunch of on map mortars, and you get more in 40 minutes, plus a 155 (which is actually medium artillery, and 105 is light artillery but that's just words. All artillery is good). For the ones currently available I was able to select any of them with a HQ unit. B ) Same comment. Selecting a Tiger tank, for example, no fire support available. Select a HQ and I can call from a number of mortars and a 105 battery. [edit] There are AI plans for both sides. I went back and checked the play testing notes, because I only played this one from the Soviet side. Dave

The good news is that there is no inherent problem with running CM in Sonoma. I've been doing it since it came out as a beta, including CM beta versions and everything works great. In fact, on my M2 MacBook Pro, everything screams right along, even the biggest scenarios. Dave

Back to your original question - the answer I believe is "no". There are many RT mods in The Few Good Men, and some of them are aggregations of some things - terrain, vehicles, and some are individual things. This is true for every title. But if you don't like the all in one you have, then you'll need to go find individual mods for the things you want improved and see how you like them. Swap things in and out of your Z folder. The all in one just means it's all in one package. It doesn't prevent you from manipulating every mod in it to find what you want. Go look at RT terrain mods, read the descriptions and there are usually screen shots, download and experiment. People have different tastes, so just because one person says, "yeah, this mod here is the bestest ever", doesn't mean you'll even like hit. Incidentally, BN probably has the most mods, because it's the oldest. The stock game looks much better as time goes on to the newer released titles. RT is kind of in the middle there. Dave

Try reinstalling the hotkeys.txt file that John provided. Is there a chance that the file you currently have installed is not readable as a .txt file? Did it somehow get corrupted? Try looking at it in a text editor and compare to John's file he posted. If it is in the Data folder, for some reason it's not being read. Dave

You do not need to issue 50 separate movement commands per unit to get to the objective. No way. Well, read on here and you'll find some ways. Have you tried issuing movement commands to higher level units? Double click on member of a platoon, for example, and give the unit you click on a movement order, or a movement order with legs, that ends in the cover you want to be at. All the other platoon members will have the same order - parallel lines. Then just move the endpoints of the rest of the units so that they end at good cover spots. That cuts down the workload A LOT. Yeah, you have to adjust, some, but that's less work than plotting every unit from scratch. This is a great scenario to use that on, as you are going to spend the first part moving to a jump off point, probably out of contact with the enemy. 90 units: A bunch are riding, so you only select the vehicle to move and the riders go along for the ride. You only need one movement command per unit to get that attack force over to the middle-ish on the map, moving to the left. Use the method above. The units in the middle aren't doing anything for a while, so that's less to move. But try all this on smaller more manageable scenarios to get the hang of movement commands. Then you'll find larger ones easier to handle. I recommend again Bil's Battle Drills. If you think this scenario is unplayable then you are going to think that 75% of the available scenarios are unplayable. There are many scenarios with large maps and many units but you don't need 50 movement commands per unit to get from your start point to the middle of a map or to an objective. Not even close. That's where your real issue is. Your first turn may be a bit tedious plotting all that movement to the middle where your defensive ring is, but once you do that you can sit back and watch for about 10 minutes or so. Then plot the next set of moves. And I'll emphasize again, you should not be charging the objective with every unit you've got. This isn't Guadalcanal and a Japanese Banzai attack. You need to have a base of fire established to keep the enemy's heads down and hopefully pick off a few, and a maneuver element to assault the objective. Again, that cuts down on the "50 commands" because a number of units are going to be sitting in place and firing, not moving. Again, Bil's Battle Drills. Dave

Well, maybe I see part of your problem here. Or maybe a few problems. 1. It sounds from your posts like you don't have a lot of CM experience. Both scenarios you are "complaining" about are from BP1, all of which were designed by @George MC, who is known for creating challenging and difficult scenarios, with excellent maps, and usually with ugly surprises somewhere when and where you least expect (maybe that's just me, but he's a devil, and I mean that with the utmost liking and respect) They are great, however, they are not the best to cut your teeth on. That one in particular requires a lot of movement to get to a jumping off point for attack, and yes, it can be a bit tedious, and it's a very poor candidate for a real-time scenario. It's not by any means unplayable, or that would have come out in play testing. The guys who play tested that one are knowledgeable CM players. I'd recommend sorting scenarios by size when selecting one and working on some of the smaller ones first. Smaller does not equal trivial. There are good tactical challenges in them all. Same goes for "Cat and Mouse". It doesn't have that many units but reading the briefing will tell you it's a scenario that requires some finesse, and not a shootout. It's a poor one for RTS IMO because you need to literally play cat and mouse, and do a lot of sneaking around. The map is very large, so things can be happening "over there" while you are attending something and the first you'll know of it is a loud boom and smoke. 2. Someone else suggested @Bil Hardenberger's tactical series. These are excellent, small scale, so they are easy to control. They are here: https://battledrill.blogspot.com 3. If you like that BP, then start with the 3 PzGr lessons. They are manageable size. Lesson 1 is even a pretty good candidate for RTS, I think. Small number of units. I just wouldn't plot too far ahead, so that they pause and give *you* a chance to catch up. 4. Speaking of which, if you really like RTS, then don't plot too far ahead. Plot relatively short moves, not all the way to an objective (that's just death waiting anyway - you have no idea what will happen and it will happen so fast you can't react). The units will pause, you can hit ESC and pause and issue some more orders. Make it manageable on yourself. 5. There isn't "Nothing you can do about it" You can pause, change orders, the units themselves will react on the spot to, say, taking fire from the flank. The will shoot back, go to ground, etc, giving you a chance to pause, issue new orders, and then continue. This isn't CoD where you can't ever stop. Even if you don't pause, you can select a unit, cancel its order (just backspace), and then quickly give it a new order. Yeah, takes practice, so again, start small, work your way to more complex. Just seems like you are diving into more than you are ready for, from your posts. Good luck. Dave

Late reply but as we were always told "it depends on the situation". If you are operating in very closed terrain, you may have no choice but to dismount and make your way through the woods, clear whatever is on the other side, and then eventually meet up with your drivers when it's reasonably safe. Especially if the only alternative is driving down a road in the open that the enemy has good lines of sight to..... hypothetically speaking, of course The other possibility is setting up a strong overwatch position that covers the open ground you need to cross mounted, so that you can respond to anything that fires into the open area. And we're back to recon bait there. But they may help you locate the major threats without doing to much damage to you. Dave

In the last several days there have been visits or major entreaties by Lord Cameron, PM Kishida and Pres. Zelensky. In addition there has been a pretty vocal group in Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, advocating for passing the aid bill. Their words were all publicized, at least for anyone who cared to see what they said. It's possible it's having some effect on public opinion. Dave

There ya' go. It's but a small step from ICM munitions to deploying a bunch of drones instead. Just have to make them tough enough to survive the setback of firing the round. Gets a bunch of drones 10 miles away in 30 seconds. Dave

UK trying to cover all the bases as Lord Cameron visits Mar-a-Lago, Biden administration officials, and Members of Congress, presumably the ones swallowing the Russian propaganda that need convincing. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/david-cameron-donald-trump-us-aid-ukraine-russia-war-h3w687nkb As for Russian propaganda, some comments from rational Republicans in Congress on that subject: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4579289-intel-chair-turner-absolutely-true-russia-propaganda-infected-us-congress/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/06/when-top-republican-says-russian-propaganda-has-infected-gop/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email Not that this is any great surprise, but it is refreshing to hear at least some Republicans calling out their colleagues for promoting misinformation. For The Times and WaPo, I have subscriptions, but I think you still get a certain number of free looks per month without a subscription. If you can't and really want to read them, PM me and I may be able to "gift" the article to you. Dave

Yeah. I can't see what possible reason Ukraine would have for doing that. Dave

Apologies if this has already been posted. Having a hard time keeping up and just skimming. Three drone hits on the unit 6 containment dome. No real damage ( containments are VERY strong), but this is still not great. The reactors are all shut down at least, but decay heat and spent fuel still exist and must be mitigated. Really you could do more damage hitting infrastructure OUTSIDE the containment, like incoming power lines, diesel generators, secondary water supply equipment from the river/lake. Containment? “‘‘Tis but a scratch” https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-zaporizhzhia-nuclear-drone-a28710a691f3259b5dd6586787838b60 Dave

I forgot one instance. Airborne unit's 75mm PAK howitzers can indirect fire from on-map. Probably the minimum range is so short that it falls within most maps. Dave