Parker Schnabel

Well written, John. The "hater" vibe this board has taken on recently has not originated with you.
 
Sure makes me pine for JasonC's posts from the days of old!

Wicky,
 
You've been all over me of late, to include your deliberate baiting of me, despite numerous direct requests from me that you stop doing so, in a thread I started specifically to appease others who were complaining that I'd made too many posts. You knew full well when you did it that I wasn't allowed to so much as mention the things you brought up. Additionally it's readily demonstrable that you've been on me for years. I called you no name whatsoever. Rather, I addressed the behavior of both you and LukeFF. It's very ironic that you savage me over and over again with no thought whatsoever for me, my feelings, or even the effects your savage campaign has had on me and my creaky and fragile health. I'm not supposed to be stressed, you know this, yet you deliberately do things which cause me great stress. If you ever said something about your family and sensitivities related thereto, I must've missed it. That you should complain about being insulted after what you've been doing to me for a very long time is rich beyond words. Lying about me is okay with you. Slandering me is okay with you. Deliberately mischaracterizing me is okay with you. Conducting character assassination of me is okay with you. This set of observations must be true, because you've done, and continue to do, all those things and more. I've done everything but stand on my head to get you to behave appropriately toward me, but you won't do it. You might back off briefly, but that's all. Yet you're demonstrably capable of being socially appropriate with other Forumites. But you insist on coming at me like a rabid dog.
 
Now, let me set you straight. Steve never gave me an infraction. I got one from Moon over a year ago because you, in your typical perverse style, went over to a place I must not name, came back, made some outrageous set of accusations based on that, and I, placed once again in a situation in which I was under yet another vile attack from you, sought to defend myself by showing what was really said by me and got so worked up I inadvisedly posted a link to a certain place. That got me the Moon rocket, so to speak, because of the rule prohibiting commercial links. I worked my way eventually out of that. Steve has asked me in the past not to start posts on certain hot topics after you et al. went nuclear time and again in response to them. Nor have you ever let me off the hook for several technical mistakes I made regarding V-2 installations, mistakes I've several times publicly admitted. It has served you well in your endless efforts to discredit and humiliate me. You even went so far as to wreck a 2012 CMA thread in which several of us had a great discussion going on Russian lasers, one in which there was a serious military-technical discussion being conducted. Since any topic along the lines you know quite well automatically led to enormous Forum upheaval from you et al.,, Steve, in my estimation, decided to avoid future board explosions by not having certain things discussed. That's his prerogative. As the old SEAL Team Six saying goes "Thou hast not to like it, thou just hath to do it." Which is what I've been doing ever since.
 
Thus, I am in full compliance with the Forum Rules, and I rigorously honor Steve's request. Additionally, and with no rule existing requiring me to do so, I'm not allowed to so much as mention a certain endeavor of mine quite well known to you.  That's from ChrisND, I deem it unfair, but there's nothing I can do about it. So now, I'm under the Forum Rules plus two other strictures. I got the warning because, and again not from any rule violation, I dared to state that information of a category I'm not allowed to state anymore (unless, per Steve's statement, I publicly provide my sources) confirmed a certain widely viewed YT vid. Again, I violated no  Forum Rules and was shocked to get a Warning out of the blue. Thus, you go around breaking Forum Rules like twigs, go way out of your way to conduct a broad array of prohibited direct and indirect ad hominem attacks against me, make my life, both on the Forums and at home, very stressful and unpleasant. Because of you and your (insert strong pejorative here) ilk, I'm now forced to operate as though I'm walking in pitch black, on thin ice. Heavily mined thin ice. Practically afraid to sneeze. Unless and until someone at BFC starts subjecting you and certain others to the same standards which have practically stifled me for some time now, you get to operate without a care in the world while I, despite disabilities, a brain injury from which I'm recuperating, and a bunch of other things, have to always exercise profound care what I over say and how I say it. Else, I'll be gone, not you and your brethren. Which, I have to say, very much appears to be your real objective in assailing me the way you do. 
 
Frankly, Wicky, for you to come at me as an injured, aggrieved innocent party is like the boy who murdered everyone in his family and when arrested, brought to trial and convicted, threw himself on the mercy of the Court. Why? On the grounds he was now an orphan! You have led a very charmed life on the Forums, and by any reasonable review of the vast evidence of your ongoing malefactions, ought long ago, in my considered view, to have been banished for good. Why you're still here is a great mystery to me.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler 

LukeFF,
 
There isn't supposed to be any flaming here at all. That's precisely the point of the Forum Rules which, like him, you choose to ignore in your continuing vicious campaign against me. You might wish to consider that things have now reached the point where other Forumites are now quoting the Forum Rules to you. Others are publicly calling you on your outrageous behavior toward me and have down voted your posts. Which you were then somehow caught up voting subsequently! Over and over again I have asked you to leave me in peace. Which you won't. Lately, it seems you're even trying to force me to limit myself to the GDF, to which you have now many times referred me. Odd, then, isn't it, that my "inappropriate topics" seem to have spawned quite a bit of discussion, even appreciation? TRADOC manuals, this thread, the T-90 doc thread--for starters. I am going about my lawful occasions here, which you seem utterly determined to prevent me from having. You really need to figure out why you have this obsession with me--and start behaving like a rational human, an adult and a reasonable facsimile of a man! Leave me alone!!!
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

A new family but why.....
 
I wished BF would stopped making families or made just an east west family, it basically cancel out all the what if scenarios. Hell I would prefer just one family myself.
 
I feel like BFC is like the government telling me I must eat my peas with a fork not a spoon. In my opinion there is no logical explanation in my mind why they keep opening up new families rather then modules.
 
What if I want to play Normandy in 1945 then 1944 because, allied command delayed the invasion due to italy invasion being a disaster eliminating a lot of the landing craft that was used in Normandy.
 
Or market-garden happened with light snow instead of September, all these things cannot be realized cause I am confined how to play.
 
I am not angry with BFC here just very much disappointed because when we went from CMx1, where we had a whole front to deal with we were told modules will fill it out so by the end we should have the same front and it was more of a financial decision, now I am finding that is not the case. I feel let down from those conversations that were discussed many years ago when people initially raised these concerns.
 
I know I am just a voice in the wilderness on this, and will continue to support BFC game because on the whole they do good work, just a shame that's all.

Prefer Russian side but am flexible. Realistic battles are a must so, please, no 'Meeting Engagements'.  And anyone uploading youtube AARs will be prosecuted. Or worse.
 
Contact me at virtualczar@kremlin.com. можетпобедит сильнейший!
 

Found this GPW photo series in a sidebar while looking at an article on ice tanks. It has some familiar pics, as well as a bunch I'd never seen. I particularly like the officer bringing a 45 mm ATG forward (ATG being pushed with trails raised, sort of like a wheelbarrow) and the soldiers who look to be building a bunker with artillery fire geysering the nearby ground. But I'm really curious about these AFVs in column in pic #3. I think these are trophy vehicles, and they appear to have Panzer 38T running gear. Anyone know what these are? My best guesses? Gunless Marder III, Gunless(?) Grille M or 38T Munitionpanzer. In any event, this Czech 38 tank site is first rate. 
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

You are talking about real time, aren’t you? Why not using the great benefit of a round based system?
 
P.S.
I know, one of my favorites themes  ...  

Was reading about something else, when I came across this Patton quote. I'm sure we've already long since understood what Patton thought needed to be done and why, so let's stipulate that. What I'd like to see discussed is his argument that if he kept going (wanted to take Prague), he could beat the Red Army in six weeks. I'm hardly a Red Army expert, but I will say several of the Russian accounts I've read talk about how utterly supply depleted the Red Army was, especially after taking Berlin. The Russians had shot their bolt and had no means of rapidly resupplying their forces, if the russian sources are to be believed. Some go so far as to state they were semistarved and deeply grateful to find a big vat of German margarine to supplement their meager rations. In light of that, I invite you to discuss the quote below, particularly since there's been an outcry dating back to CMx1 CMBO asking for the means to let us pit the Red Army vs the US, possibly with some German units under US control. 
 
“The American Army as it now exists could beat the Russians with the greatest of ease, because, while the Russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge of the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these.”
Regards,
John Kettler
 
 

Hiya folks,
 
Anyone interested? 
 

Or

http://battlefront.mojohelpdesk.com/login/create_request#/ticket-form/19756

Messing around with an Afrika Korps FJ "bone sack"...
 

kohlenkau,
 
What a cool and clever project!  I don't own CMFI, but I have appeared from time to time and helped when I could. Here is some first rate large format color photography of Italian parachutist uniforms. Part of which is primo IWM yet not displayed to the public.
 
http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=251718&page=4
 
The above references an Italian film made in 1954 about Folgore. In it, the men are wearing authentic combat uniforms, except for a so-call  samurai or samurai gilet aka magazine carrier shown in the film but not used until after the war. The quality of the print used to make the vid is astounding. Consequently, the stills taken from the film in the article are utter dreck by comparison. You should be able to learn a great deal as a result. Useful uniform stuff starts an hour in, and there are some phenomenal closeups in the last ten minutes, maybe less, of the film. Eye watering closeups!  Below the vid is a site in which you can see what the paratroopers should've been wearing. Lots of AFVs in this (hostile) and a true miracle, the Italian field radio with the prominent ring antenna. First one of those I've ever seen anywhere.
 

 
And a resource you may not have thought of lies in those who collect, modify and build nit pickingly accurate 1:6 and other scale soldier figures. They're even more grog anal than we are, as you'll see here. A bunch of Folgore uniforms are depicted, including those worn after Italy went over to the Allies. Fun starts on page 2 and continues in page 3.

http://www.massimomoscarelli.it/leadaddicted/?cat=12&paged=2
 
A look at actual period Italian camouflage fabric and full detail (gnat's rear level) from all around of everything a Folgore sergeant wore in the period of the diorama being built.
 
http://www.militarymodelling.com/forums/postings.asp?th=92678&p=1
 
How about an equally anal Folgore historical re-enactor unit?

http://www.ww2italianreenactment.com/para.html
 
Correct uniform for Tunisia
 
http://home.earthlink.net/~frenchgreg/id3.html
 
10 minutes or so into this Italian newsreel shot before WW II, you can see what a drop looks like as the men shuck their drop smocks (cammies beneath), grab weapons and packs and go double timing away single file.
 


  Am stopping now while both of us a relatively sane!
 
Keep up the fantastic work!
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

The Allies:
 

 
12th Armoured Regiment (lineage from the Three Rivers Regiment)
 

 
Royal 22nd Regiment (The Van Doos).
 
Note: I am not an expert on the Canadian Army, if any of this gets cocked-up, please forgive me and press the semi-fiction button.
But like most scenario writers I am aiming to portray with respect and honor the horrendous events around Ortona in December 1943.
 
The Axis:
 

 
1st FJ Division
 

 
90th Panzer Grenadier Division
 

 
65th Infantry Division

Pardon me. I seem to recall seeing someone here say they were working on a Canadian Army Moro River Campaign or some such. I asked a few Canadian fellows if it was them but got bad indications I suffer from early senility. I even did a forum search "Moro". But it was a no go.
 
Anyways. Whoever you are, if you need/want my help, please PM me. Thanks.

Hi Denis,
 
These are my personal views from my experience over the last few years. Take them as they are worth.
 
I have been involved in several CMPzC Operations before and now presently have 1 going on with friends in CMFI (almost finished soon! We are attacking the final objective, Ribera, Sicily) and 1 in progress in CMBN "The Road to Eindhoven" and 3 new ones in the formulation phase.
 
Interest: I have seen initial interest in this back a few years ago. Now I consider interest as surprisingly low based on number of people replying back in the threads or asking to participate. I checked my breath, minty fresh from toothpaste every morning! I checked my socks and also other body odor areas. I don't think it is me! I thought maybe it was because I asked for an AAR with photos as entertainment, like a cover charge to enter the club? Maybe that is the issue? So, now recently when I invite participants I clearly say I have dropped that requirement and we can see if interest picks up. Some folks do like to just be PBEM foot soldiers and not have to be involved with the orders and decisions above the level of a CM battle. I understand their desire, they are busy and have maybe some time to read the thread that says how the big picture battle is going and make some nice inputs but not a mandatory commitment to guide it and monitor it.
 
Overall, I am hopeful to see participation increase as I drop the AAR requirement and simplify the Operations to have folks clearly see they can just swing in to play a CM battle.
 
I personally like to dial the size way down so we can finish the operation in a smaller time.
Congratulations to you to complete your ambitious Operation. I can see it must be a very good feeling to finally see it concluded
and the 24 page booklet is very nice. 
 
I wish you good luck with your project and I hope you get lots of folks to participate.
I will keep an eye on this thread.

Wow. OK perhaps my post was slightly harsh but thee was nothing personal in there and I certainly never meant to tell anyone to F off. Sorry you took it that way.

But come on you are comparing an open environment like Arma that does not have a playable tactical simulation that I can go to a website and buy / down right away and start playing against the AI this afternoon. To a game that can do that. A several months ago when Arma came up I had a look and could not find anything that was even close to CM. If I am missing something please point me in the river direction.

But kindly keep your insults to your self.

Yes, to pinpoint unspotted ATGs to the exact action spot. Really great...
Chess vs checkers.
Trying to attract checkers players to play chess can only result in losing both in the long term.

CM is WAAAY to complex to be attractive for the masses EVER. It will always be a niche product.
Chess will also NEVER appeal to the masses. NEVER. One could pump up the graphics of chess and make it look like a FPS, but after the initial spike of shallow interest, it will again only be played by chess players who are not interested in explosions and action, but like the challenge of the mind.
The same is with CM. I think the core CM-player was interested in realism above all.

Now what will have the bigger impact on sales: those that like CM more because of hit decals, and therefore will buy the next game, or those disappointed customers who no longer perceive guns as threat after the first shot because of hit decals?
I believe each of a disappointed core customer is a customer who bought all their products - contrary to those who are quickly attracted by shallow visual effects like hit decals and other gimmicks at the cost of degrading realism. Graphical effects attract quickly but the same crowd is also moving on to the next shallow effect in the next game.

But beneath everything the core of the problem seems to be something completely different:
The main game designer plays the game not in the mode the vast majority of wargamers play his products. That's never good, if you develop something and don't know, what your core customers need. There are no ladders, no campaigns, nothing played realtime. One could say: realtime does not exist among the wrgaming community.

The result of this dramatic discrepancy could be observed since CMSF was released.
The spotting problems as a result of keeping the calculation affordances as low as possible to make realtime play possible. Spotting works good enough for realtime but often not good enough for turn based.
And I think this has dramatic consequences for potential new turnbased customers: they try the demo, recognize a strange spotting behaviour and lose interest. The 1:1 representation makes things even worse, since it leaves much less room for imagination than a symbolic representation. So again: 1:1 is attracting the visual oriented player, but if there are discrepances between presented action and results, itdegrades the experience of the customer who is interested in realism.

The majority of realtime customers cannot be attracted, because FPS games offer them the much better quick action and cooler graphics. Additionally the game concept is so extremely different, that 99% will only shake their head. So the core group is lost and the big part of the massese cannot be attracted because it is chess and not checkers.

I will never forget the disastrous relative hotkeys-concept when I tried CMSF the first time. What a punch into the face of WEGO-players that was.
Or the water-effects since CMRT breaking FOW. Sounds from unspotted units? A problem since CMSF. But in combination with hit-decals since engine v3 this problem has been even increased instead to become solved. How easily foxholes can be spotted. Bunkers and trenches breaking FOW. And much more.

I believe all these are results of a design process done from a realtime-player's perspective and therefore many of the problems are only discovered very late in the design process, or even too late after implementation.

Instead that Battlefront had followed their former clear path torwards realism and protected and taken care of their brilliant WEGO-child, they lost this focus and now, with an ageing engine, they are sitting between the chairs, trying to keep new shallow action-customers somehow interested while they lose more and more of realism-focused wargamers which one after the other slowly give up, because the problems persist year after year and game after game and sometimes even become worse.

Yes, to pinpoint unspotted ATGs to the exact action spot. Really great...
Chess vs checkers.
Trying to attract checkers players to play chess can only result in losing both in the long term.

CM is WAAAY to complex to be attractive for the masses EVER. It will always be a niche product.
Chess will also NEVER appeal to the masses. NEVER. One could pump up the graphics of chess and make it look like a FPS, but after the initial spike of shallow interest, it will again only be played by chess players who are not interested in explosions and action, but like the challenge of the mind.
The same is with CM. I think the core CM-player was interested in realism above all.

Now what will have the bigger impact on sales: those that like CM more because of hit decals, and therefore will buy the next game, or those disappointed customers who no longer perceive guns as threat after the first shot because of hit decals?
I believe each of a disappointed core customer is a customer who bought all their products - contrary to those who are quickly attracted by shallow visual effects like hit decals and other gimmicks at the cost of degrading realism. Graphical effects attract quickly but the same crowd is also moving on to the next shallow effect in the next game.

But beneath everything the core of the problem seems to be something completely different:
The main game designer plays the game not in the mode the vast majority of wargamers play his products. That's never good, if you develop something and don't know, what your core customers need. There are no ladders, no campaigns, nothing played realtime. One could say: realtime does not exist among the wrgaming community.

The result of this dramatic discrepancy could be observed since CMSF was released.
The spotting problems as a result of keeping the calculation affordances as low as possible to make realtime play possible. Spotting works good enough for realtime but often not good enough for turn based.
And I think this has dramatic consequences for potential new turnbased customers: they try the demo, recognize a strange spotting behaviour and lose interest. The 1:1 representation makes things even worse, since it leaves much less room for imagination than a symbolic representation. So again: 1:1 is attracting the visual oriented player, but if there are discrepances between presented action and results, itdegrades the experience of the customer who is interested in realism.

The majority of realtime customers cannot be attracted, because FPS games offer them the much better quick action and cooler graphics. Additionally the game concept is so extremely different, that 99% will only shake their head. So the core group is lost and the big part of the massese cannot be attracted because it is chess and not checkers.

I will never forget the disastrous relative hotkeys-concept when I tried CMSF the first time. What a punch into the face of WEGO-players that was.
Or the water-effects since CMRT breaking FOW. Sounds from unspotted units? A problem since CMSF. But in combination with hit-decals since engine v3 this problem has been even increased instead to become solved. How easily foxholes can be spotted. Bunkers and trenches breaking FOW. And much more.

I believe all these are results of a design process done from a realtime-player's perspective and therefore many of the problems are only discovered very late in the design process, or even too late after implementation.

Instead that Battlefront had followed their former clear path torwards realism and protected and taken care of their brilliant WEGO-child, they lost this focus and now, with an ageing engine, they are sitting between the chairs, trying to keep new shallow action-customers somehow interested while they lose more and more of realism-focused wargamers which one after the other slowly give up, because the problems persist year after year and game after game and sometimes even become worse.

Not sure if I understand your idea. If you want a grid for the terrain, there is a mod for that.

We got one on June 22 2012, and that was nice to have.But we need a new one to see where we are going and what is coming with this game.