Ultradave
-
Posts
3,794 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Posts posted by Ultradave
-
-
3 hours ago, The_Capt said:
You tell yourselves this…try going to a soccer game. Hell get on a train before a soccer game. Understatement is not how I would describe the experience.
Also, get on a train AFTER a football match (riding north home from Manchester one night - ugh!). Personally I'm more of a rugby fan. When those guys fall down and roll around on the pitch you'd better get the medicos out there right away. Those guys don't come out of a game unless someone (or three) drag them out, or they are unconscious (which happens too).
Dave
-
3 hours ago, The_Capt said:
It is worse than this re: Trump in White House. If Trump somehow takes the presidency (from a prison cell...seriously best sitcom ever) he can also order all US military support to pull back. This will include operational and strategic C4ISR. This would have a potentially drastic effect on the battlefield as Russia would be on an equal or better C4ISR footing than Ukraine. At that point the entire framework of this war shifts away from precision and back to mass. More simply put, tanks may start to work again.
This makes the next moves for Ukraine very high stakes. Go on defence and make the surge in support try to outlast Russian reserves. Or bulk up and roll the dice one more time on an operational offensive. If the offensive succeeds it may create enough momentum that even Trump could not stand in the way. If it fails, further US Ukrainian support could very well be doomed even if Biden retains the White House.
So, definitely, this war needs an offset strategy. And to my eyes that is the EU and NATO.
Worse than that, he could also immediately withdraw from NATO. Based on past statements, I think he'd have to be convinced to remain in NATO. I'm not sure who would be trying to do the convincing though.
Dave
-
15 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Sadly, the caveat "for now" has to be kept in mind.
OK, so aid will start flowing to Ukraine on Wednesday of this week. I've seen some reporting out there claiming the stuff won't get into Ukraine's hands for weeks or months. Poppycock
There have been a couple of articles in reputable publications lately stating that the DoD has been staging equipment in anticipation of a yes vote, so that delivery can be started immediately. I guess that's one result of the delay in approval. The DoD had a couple or three months to get organized so they are ready to go.
Dave
-
6 hours ago, dan/california said:
It isn't getting enough press that Ukraine simply can't make a deal with Russia, because Russia simply doesn't keep its word.
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
-
5 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
This OpEd is behind a paywall, but I think you can guess that it sums up the feelings of many here very well:
The article continues on with quotes from others and factual accounting of what's been going on while Johnson dithered.
Personally, I believe Johnson should get credit for finally doing the right thing. He didn't have to or he could have waited even longer to do it. Dems should reward him by voting down the resolution to have him removed.
There is some indication that Johnson had to learn the hard way that there's a difference between heckling the person in charge and being the person in charge. He simply wasn't prepared for that transition and it took him months to get his bearings. If he was a stronger man with a better mindset going into the job I'm sure things would have been much better. But he wasn't and so it is what it is.
If Johnson can work towards undoing the damage he and his former MAGA associates (there's never friendship in radical movements) have brought about, then I think the country is better off with him than any of the alternatives until after the elections. Perhaps even better than Jeffries, simply because if he is in then 100% of the GOP will work lockstep to oppose EVERYTHING.
Steve
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.
Dave
-
3 minutes ago, NamEndedAllen said:
Thanks for the background. So, does this add another war crime to the Russian list? Or are the reports insufficient for further legal investigation?
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
-
1 hour ago, Vet 0369 said:
s using a crowd control irritant banned by something?
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
-
13 minutes ago, Ultradave said:
2) Because the small minority of 2-10 Russian propaganda mouthpieces in the House say they will throw him out if he does,
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
-
1 minute ago, Haiduk said:
In Ukraine (and former USSR) by some unknown reason under "Congress" traditiaonally meaning House of Representatives )
Ah, that DOES make it confusing!
-
1 hour ago, Haiduk said:
Mixed feelings. Congress version is stronger than Senate one (ATACAMS + Russian actives). But... How much thousands lives have gone, what economical damage was done, how much our lands were occupied until both political forces have been conducting own dirty pre-election games during these five-six months. All this could have been avoided if Senate agreed to continue lend-lease law.
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 -
6 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
I think what's happening here is that these shells are so old and rusty that the normal protective cap that is usually screwed off before screwing in the fuze is so rusty that it cannot be unscrewed, but it can be bashed in by a hammer. Then after fishing out the fragments, they try to attach the fuzes, but he complains that the fuze won't go all the way in.
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
-
2 hours ago, Eddy said:
Quick question on the US political process. Does the vote today mean that the Discharge Bill is no longer relevant? Or is that still hanging around in the background and can be triggered if the Aid bill doesn't pass?
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 -
48 minutes ago, photon said:
Another question I don't know the answer to. The consensus of the Thread so far has been that a NATO imposed no-fly-zone poses unacceptable escalatory risks (because it would involve NATO assets shooting down Russian planes). Does that escalatory logic hold now that essentially all (all?) of the Russian incursions into Ukranian airspace are unamanned? Is there strategic room for a more nuanced ruleset - something like, "We, NATO, will shoot down all unmanned aerial objects that are within 10km of a large conurbation or civilian infrastructure target west of the Dniper?
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
-
7 minutes ago, sburke said:
She blamed Jewish Space lasers for CA fires. She hasn't gotten crazier, she is just returning to her normal level of crazy.
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
-
3 hours ago, Beleg85 said:
Sweet bloody Jesus if true (if not, it's good at least to laugh through tears). But seriously, perhaps this aid will indeed come soon, crazies in US politics are getting even more crazy lately. Maybe it's good sign, you know- like fever or diarrhea under certain conditions?
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
-
On 3/17/2024 at 2:27 PM, AdamPraha said:
Hi
A.)They'are out of my position up for 2 hours and nothing's happening. Should the game end with me winning?
I was supposed to get 105 heavy artillery support. I didn't see anywhere within 2 hours those guns?
So, where they are ?
B.)Phone operators don't even have them? (105mm) Or do I have to find a supreme commander and he's the only one who can call them?
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
-
On 3/23/2024 at 11:26 AM, AdamPraha said:
I have a very nice : Initial 'All in One' modpack. However, I am looking to see if there is any "competition. Or even nicer graphically ?
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 -
14 hours ago, AdamPraha said:
However, any trick to reduce roughly 50 commands per game to 1 unit simply cannot be reduced in any way.
You do not need to issue 50 separate movement commands per unit to get to the objective. No way.
15 hours ago, AdamPraha said:There will never be a reduction of 4500 movement actions to a total of 90 playable units.
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
-
17 hours ago, AdamPraha said:
Panzergrenadiere Im Hauptkampffeld
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 -
On 4/2/2024 at 3:15 PM, Vacillator said:
A purely hypothetical question speaking as a person who has never even played Cold War until now. The question is not based on my first ever Cold War PBEM. Definitely not.
So I believe doctrine says Soviets don't dismount infantry for recon (they're probably in too much of a hurry). And they don't unbutton. Would I be gamey doing either of these games? Hypothetically.
The avoidance of recon by death is on my mind. How un-Soviet.
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 -
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
Yup. Add to that he is solidly in the camp that somehow came to the conclusion that foreign aid makes America weaker. I've never understood that, but there it is.
Also being reported in The Hill this morning... an uptick in US public support for sending aid to Ukraine:
https://thehill.com/policy/international/4589906-support-for-ukraine-aid-increases-gallup/
Steve
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
-
2 hours ago, Hapless said:
Artillery deployed drones
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
Some huge graphics mod ? With the most beautiful graphics?
in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
Posted
Two places to check.
1. The maps and mods section of the forum under FB
2. The Few Good Men website mods section.
The answer will stay the same for every CM title you buy.
Dave