Jump to content

GJR144

Members
  • Posts

    104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GJR144

  1. I knew that your "polite" behaviour was not honest. And always put a boot in...
  2. But also a liar. The first post was edited before a reply and was ignored. The second one that received the stupid comments is not edited at all. But vileness and lying has probably the full backing of Battlefront.
  3. I can't find anything in the Control Panel settings. How can a forum account be deleted?
  4. If you tell me, how an ongoing PBEM-battle can be edited in the editor and how removing the snowflakes does not destroy a huge battle that is built on the reduced vision, I can believe you. Otherwise what you call "Sorry, just want to help" is only a phrase covering ignorant behaviour. QUED.
  5. When the company itself uses ad hominem attacks why should long term forum members be any different...
  6. 1. I know what I see on my computer. Why you claim that opinions make the awful looking GFX at low resolution with low framerates here go away is beyond rationality. It's the same with non working anti aliasing in movie lighting on Nvidia cards. It doesn't work although it was promised to be fixed but if people with high resolutions don't care, the fact doesn't go away. That the proportional size of the snowflakes becomes bigger, the smaller the resolution is, is also something that doesn't go away with thousands of "opinions" of people playing with much higher resolutions. A fact is a fact and if one says it's a fact, it doesn't change anything if 1000 people say "I don't care" or "I don't know what he is talking about". What you called "helpful" comments from people not even recognizing the problem, or over and over again suggesting such brilliant things like going into the editor, without even reading the thread first, speaks volumes. In good forums long term forum members are the first who understand a problem - you could ask yourself why here they are the last ones. Not reading threads, ignoring the discussion but posting useless garbage has your backing, but asking if these people are feeble minded if they do so, is not accepted! How could a new registered customer dare to call a duck a duck if this duck has always been quacking "politely" for so many years? No wonder why there are so few regular posters and I already regret that I registered despite the recommendation of one of my PBEM friends. 2. Reading this thread from the beginning makes clear what was action and what was the reaction to very stupid answers. I'm wondering if you really have never recognized what a fight it is for new customers to get heard if they don't crawl into someones' ass first? You obviously are not willing or capable to be just and to protect users, that can't stand and do not accept this bad trolling and provoking behaviour: 3. YOU are the one who projects his political opinion into the discussion to attack me. You even claim to know what my political opinions were. :eek: How arrogant is that?! But it fits to the arrogance of some of the long term forum members perfectly. You are hiding behind forum rules only if they appease you, while on the other hand you allow other forum users to provoke and troll others. Probably the only thing you really want is to ban me because I dared to bring a fresh wave of honesty and uprightousness into this slowly dying incestuous community. But I can tell you, that it is not me who destroys this forum, but those posters who believe they know more about CM only because they are long term forum members and believe they can treat all new forum members as CM newbies. Like I said: selfrightousness. And they have ther full backing and you don't even recongize this problem, but you think you have the right to make ad hominem attacks! A good forum can only exist if the rules apply to all and if not long term forum members are allowed to develop a selfrightousness and trolling behaviour. Or how your "helpful" users in their "helpful" manner "politely" use to say: Good luck!
  7. It's one of the leader's tasks to care for an adequately wide spread unit - split the squad into teams and spread them - problem solved.
  8. No, my English is good enough to understand that you said that I should be glad for such "helpful" comments!!! Which I find extremely arrogant, btw. The sad truth is, that without shouting and giving some of the selfrightousness forum "leaders" a speech they finally understand, the first post had been simply ignored, then after a more detailed and visually more impacting description it was ridiculed, answers were provocative, in many forums such a behaviour would be seen as trolling. But not here. Here you defend absolutely useless posts as "helpful" and demand from customers with their problems to even be thankful for BS-comments! Thank you Battlefront.
  9. What specifically do you understand as "helpful" in sburkes or Leslies comments?
  10. Did I mention low resolution and low framerates? Incredible.
  11. Steve, in combat the pulse is very high. Have you ever shot at a target with the size of one apple over more than 100 meters with a pulse beyond 120? Every bet you will not hit. And once the apple begins to shoot back with automatic fire, I double my bet that you will become unable to hit at all. Every infantry and his rifle seems to become a sharpshooter as soon as they are aiming at german HTs.
  12. Thomm, thank you for a decent, not trolling reaction. Vulture, sadly not. This was possible in CMx1 despite it had beautiful snow, but not with the huge white flickering dots now. With a 1280 resolution watching from level 1 makes some snowflakes as big as human heads and even worse, with lower framerates they are not moving, but only blinking.
  13. Depends on your answers. Then there can't be a problem, can it? Resolution? Framerates? Idiot? Wait until an icon disappears and two turns later you recognize the team is long gone... I usually watch the replay several times, such a big battle I would watch at least ten times to know exactly what is going on. With the great "snow"-GFX, I prefer to lose units instead watching the great action again. Your help and your suggestions are nonexistent. Good luck and dream on.
  14. What else must someone do, than indicating that low framerates and a lower resolution kill any joy to play such a battle, until the ignorants who obviously have never played such a battle shut up?! MikeyD: In real life you have 24+ frames per second, don't you? sburke: show me how you open the editor in a PBEM game! Ever heard about playing double blind?! Are you both feeble-minded that you don't recognize the problem? It's shame that such an awful implementation of a GFX can ruin one of the best battles and fanboys even defend that there is no option to switch it off. If you have such friends you don't need any enemys. I'm a huge fan of CM and it's the only game I play. But if a GFX is that bad that it becomes hard to bear, then I guess there are more people out there who don't lose a word about it and just quit such battles before they even play them. "Go into the editor", "in real life i can't switch it off, too." Human stupidity is indeed borderless.
  15. Currently playing "A Temple To Mars". This is one of the best and most demanding scenarios I have ever played. The action is incredible. But with the low framerates of this huge map the blinking snowflakes are unreasonable. But to be not able to switch them off during the order phase, which takes around one hour here, is extremely annoying and almost torture. Nobody playing this fantastic scenario? Meanwhile I prefer not to check all the action and plot all moves I want anymore, only because of the annoying graphics. PLEASE BFC, make the snowflakes switchable.:mad:
  16. Where's the difference if "Plus 50!" is shouted from 10 meters further away?
  17. On-map guns and mortars: 1. If a forward observer or HQ is near (within talking distance), the time to adjust for the target should be as short as if the unit was operating on itself (team leader's commands = HQ's in shouting distance). 2. Shouldn't the team leader of mortar units be able to split from the team, take the binocs and move a few meters away without losing his ability to command the unit?
  18. What worked for me was to do the obvious and get the street under control. Because the street allows to dominate the whole battlefield and with holding the street you can influence the speed of the enemy's adavance. IIRC only the street gives the cats the wide LOF they need. Concentrate the tank forces on the street; the Panther leads, while the PzIV are behind and keep it's flanks secure. SPOILER ALERT When you have the Kingtiger move it on the street. But I was very cautious because I guessed this was probably what the scenario designer expects the player to do. Therefore i covered the move of the KT on the street with smoke to secure his left side. With the street under control the battle is a controlled withdraw, with KT and Panther being closest ot he pressing enemy. The PzIV behind them make sure no infantry can come close. Keep an infantry shield with binocs and good vision capabilities around the tanks but use the infantry mainly to guide the tanks. When enemy infantry comes dangerously close, it's time to retreat a bit again. IIRC from the main street there was a way torwards the right side of the map, which was covered by bocage. The area of the crossroads was a great position for the two cats for quite some time, and it allows to move a PzIV (concealed from the bocage) to the right, waiting behind the bocage for any enemy units trying to drive by on the right side. But do not forget the two minutes the PzIV needs to come back to the main street, once the crossroad position can't be held any longer. The left side: I placed the ATG on the far left side at the woods edge, protected from infantry by two HMGs with LOS over the open field; a weak infantry platoon was placed to the far left map edge forward to identify any possible enemy units moving along the wood on the left; IIRC I also had a Lynx supporting this infantry. Once the enemy units tried to move across the open field, they found themselfes in a devastating crossfire from the front and from almost behind. No chance to cross this field alive. Very clever scenario with great action. IMO "Kampfgruppe Engel" is the best campaign i have ever played.
  19. Correct analysis of the OKW: Conflict with the OKH: The disastrous plan of the OKH: First you ask about arguments and when I deliver them you immediately begin to show a face of ignorance and censorship and threatening. The bad thing is, that you probably will be applauded from the politically "correct" yes-men for doing what you are doing with your forum. You know what the difference between dictatorship and tyranny is? Arbitrariness.
  20. @Wicky The source is Volume IV, the first halfvolume, starting at p. 312. I don't know where I had downloaded it, it has been quite some time ago. It's a highly recommended read, although it must be read with certain scepticism, because it was released AFTER the war when Hitler was dead and many of the traitors were alive and needed to rewrite history and blamed everything on Hitler while covering their trails. For example the behaviour of the traitor Kluge (OB West), the abysmal performance and ignoring the orders of the highest command (OKW), is only covered with one or two sentences and that he quickly poisoned himself before the Gestapo got him, is not even mentioned. But even with these restricions the KTB is a first class source to refute so many propaganda lies that have been spread, printed and reprinted ever since. In regards to the upcoming CM Barbarossa game it's also a very interesting source. That, for example, the OKH (Brauchitsch; also a traitor, btw) ignored orders of the OKW, misused the Pz.Divs. against clear orders of the OKW. Can be found there. The main force behind splitting forces? The OKH, not the OKW. The reason why Leningrad was not taken and the try was with insufficient forces? The OKH, not Hitler. Who wanted to solve one problem after the other with adequate forces? Surprise after surprise. Who misused the mobile forces and kept them fighting the encircled pockets, although infantry divisions were available? OKH, despite the orders of the OKW. And much more. But people want convenience and ignorance is a bliss...
  21. aus: Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, Kriegstagebuch, geführt von Helmuth Greiner, Percy Ernst Schramm
  22. I guess these studies were written by academics who never have asked an infantry men or tanker crew how the USAF had helped to destroy German defenses or to deny that these defenses could even be established with full strenght units. If this study would be worth one cent it foremost would have looked at the German analysis, because you usually know very well, if your column is blown up by Jabos or by tanks... If below 20% of the German tanks in the West were lost due to enemy tanks and all German analysis shows the tremendous impact of the overwhelming amounts of airforce (and artillery), denying tactical and timely operational moves, and I have the German accounts describing in detail how the US progress was done, namely by a steamroller of bombs, and I have the furious French accounts about scorched towns only because a German battaillon was defending it, then I would read a study claiming the airforce was not decisively successful with some healthy scepticism. Since lobbies have been ruling the USA ever since, it also should be looked very closely which lobby, which branch of the industrial-military complex was behind each "study". If money rules a society this is a very important aspect to understand what is going on. Another important fact is, the USA can't sacrifice lots of human losses without the morale at home collapsing. But you have (had) endless industrial production capabilities and endless resources bcause of the British colonies. Therefore the USAF with unlimited amounts of bombs and grenades was the logical development to compensate the brittle morale with the overwhelming use of material.
  23. After you have turned this forum into a politically correct yes-men platform without any interesting historic discussions by banning almost everyone who dared to raise a politically not "correct" opinon over the last 10 years you say this? Hypocrite.
×
×
  • Create New...