Kevin2k

Was just playing a mission where I had only a single Dutch Fennek (MRAT) to mop up some resistance. It had its 12,7 MG text turned gray, though component status was undamaged (green). Not firing anymore, with plenty of targets around. In the vehicle storage were 900 .50cal AP-I rounds remaining. Did I just get impatient with the reload time? or does it not reload? and if so, then why bring those rounds?

Pretty sure the topics below have issues left. (With the first quote I am aiming at the Vehicle stowage and LOD switching issue on page 3 and 4)

OK, no worries then.

Thanks a lot for this campaign! I see all campaigns are now SF2 level, no old ones remaining. I just noticed something, which is not really a concern for me, but may be a concern for some people owning only some of the three expansion modules: With this highland games campaign the Marines Module pops up as a requirement. As shown by the lights above the module icons. Same thing happened with the initial release of the SF2 "Semper Fi" Marines campaign, where it required a NATO module vehicle. That is fixed already.

Regarding "Model" setting. You know about different "Level of Detail" models for the same items? Like the 3D modeller is supposed to supply like 3 or 4 models of the same tank, with increasing amount of polygons and details***. The main one is just for looking up close. The lowest polygon one is for in the distance. The "Model" setting will change the distances involved here. *** Yes, this is tedious work. But most professional game developers do this. While modders of 3D objects often neglect it. It is only recently that Epic (Unreal Engine) announced they have a practical automated in-game polygon reducer. Edit: example picture here http://en.pcars.shoutwiki.com/wiki/LOD_-_Level_Of_Detail

Very glad to read positive remarks about the v4.03 tactical AI behavior. I haven't played enough to really comment on it myself, other then that the "Foliage Runners" test map no longer shows the weird behavior that was in CMBN v4.01/v4.02 before. I was in a bit of a limbo with this CMBN issue, where it felt like I needed to keep v3.12, v4.00 and v4.02 at hand to have the best experience for a certain scenario, eventually just playing another CM game instead of CMBN. But I trust v4.03 has made things right again. :)

For completeness: CMSF2 v2.04 patch level no longer has the AAV problem I described earlier: QB, US Marines, mix force, automatic selection -> is now quite good, infantry with HMMWVs, LAV-25s and sometimes an M1 Abrams. Awesome!

CMFB v2.03 patch level still has the same undesirable behavior: QB, US Army, mix force, automatic selection -> Preference for 'Flamethrower platoon' = full of tanks. CMSF2 v2.04 patch level no longer has the AAV problem I described earlier: QB, US Marines, mix force, automatic selection -> is now quite good, infantry with HMMWVs, LAV-25s and sometimes an M1 Abrams. Awesome!

Love the addition of the lend-lease vehicles like the Sherman tanks. I see no shadows below or beside the vehicles, or anything else for that matter. It seems you are playing with the shadow casting option disabled, yes? Edit: Just considered it is overcast weather, which of course tones down the shadows. Though, it is still a bit odd. I can see the shadow of the barrel of the tanks on the tank hull, but no shadow at all on the ground.

More specifically then: "Fire!" and "Shut up" you called the two groups. So lets say imagine my ideas fit with a group called Fire2. Which does suggest there is definitely a fire in politics, media and big business. Then also a fire in health, indirectly through measures. Then possibly also a fire in health through a strong virus season and a unpleasant winter and general weak health for other reasons. --- Though with the premise all of that would be better served by having none of the measures, or totally different measures. Also with the premise that top officials stating "We did not see it coming, we really try to make the world a better place, but somehow we always fail, because you know: we're always under attack by someone or something" is not a valid excuse at all. Something like that. Okay. But why is it double from that CDC "All covid-19" deaths / Total 2020"? The name of which is pretty clear. Of course it is a rabbit hole. I expect nothing else. Your argument was mainly your flu season deaths calculation and comparision. You know that in in gentlemens conversation I have to focus on that then, instead of dragging in all kinds of things from the sides. What I want to add because I failed to mention it before: this part "or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death" means that a person with terminal cancer that may happen to also show flu like systems before death can then technically be recorded as covid death. Because of the "contributed". CDC did not correct the previous seasons for pneumonia non-flu related. Here they make it 80.000 afterwards: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/26/health/flu-deaths-2017--2018-cdc-bn/index.html But anyways. In a ironic way I agree with you that the numbers and such will indeed eventually be corrected for 2020, and it will cause a huge backlash. But by then much harm will have been done, mainly in a protection racket fashion. With that view it pains me to see people advising other people to embrase the protection racket currently on offer. Let's say, not here I won't. Appreciate the opportunity to speak out. Definitely.

I am not from any crowd. Crowds just turn bad eventually. Or can easily be made to look silly by sending some guys with Flat Earth theory to join them. So I tried to check things. 61,000 Flu stat 2017-2017 allright. I don't see the 54,000? but this for the year 2020 so far: US COVID -19 deaths: 27,674 US Deaths all causes: 673,580 US Pneumonia deaths: 57,480 ( is this what you mean? ) US Deaths with pneumonia and COVID-19: 12,398 US Influenza deaths: 5,668 US deaths with pneumonia, influenza, or COVID-19: 77,695 (These groupings are odd..., but nevermind that now) My remarks: 1) Covid-19 numbers are free to be "assumption", As I showed for the UK before. The US CDC does it too: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/ "COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death." (This line was already in bold in the original text). Again PCR and lung tests have a significant error margin. Besides they are not needed to add a COVID case, assumption will do. 2) Seemingly these stats need pneumonia for their bulk. Both for flu headlines on itself, now and last seasons. Plus for using current flu numbers as to actually represent undiagnosed COVID-19. What is up with that? Pneumonia can be bacterial for example, as opposed to the virus based influenza/COVID. I find a guy with similar questions. He noticed that the way of reporting these CDC statistics was changed after 2014: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cdc-borrowing-pneumonia-deaths-from-flu-covid-19-james-lyons-weiler I quote from that "By not parsing out other causes of pneumonia, CDC has, for years, misled the public and the media with the term "Influenza Disease", causing everyone to believe "Influenza Disease" is influenza and not Influenza + Pneumonia from other causes." I won't comment on the field hospitals now. It will just degrade things I guess. Case closed? Judge and Jury in one?

I wrote I would leave this discussion until things were over. Not quite there unfortunately. But I get any of steve's replies in the email automatically so that is the reason...

I am gonna dig into that evidence later, because it must be done. Some examples: Other morbidities are down and now grouped with corona. Death certificate procedures have changed in this period. https://www.rcpath.org/uploads/assets/d5e28baf-5789-4b0f-acecfe370eee6223/fe8fa85a-f004-4a0c-81ee4b2b9cd12cbf/Briefing-on-COVID-19-autopsy-Feb-2020.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/877302/guidance-for-doctors-completing-medical-certificates-of-cause-of-death-covid-19.pdf In addition: News with daily deaths were shown include deaths from like 3 weeks earlier. PCR and lung scans tests have a significant portion of false results. Rate of infection versus death is questionable, because the rate of infection was and is probably much higher, though unnoticed and unrecorded. I spoke to a friend in Nigeria last week, on telephone. There were 11 deaths of corona in the official count, at that point. But was assured that many more were dying in Lagos city from hunger, resulting from lockdown. The lockdown there was not that strict in theory, but the police took it as an opportunity to extort people on the roads, much more then the police normally does.

Allright. Glad to hear that. Still, all aspects of this colossal event are now also full of emotions. So the atmosphere for my kind of wonderings is unsuitable I suppose. Too tiresome to word subtly. ... Took my colleague 40 hours to get out of Peru. A long drive to Lima airport. I was told that he was also on the news. He is fine.

Sburke, Wicky, Holien, I read your replies. If you say so. Either way this potato is too hot to handle. So I will withdraw, until retrospective times, which I hope will come soon. Good luck.

I was in Brazil, Sao Paulo international airport and also local airports. Colleagues: Indonesia, Germany and Peru. They are all just back in Holland or enroute now. I don't care, they don't care. I have two colleagues that are scared and absent though. Edit: It is not that I don't care about my health. But I found that in life I must be my own doctor. Sad but true...

Wicky: You don't know these people. It is mainstream media. It is their TV reality. My challenge: Ask around. People you know face-to-face in real life. If it is such a historical pandemic should it not be observable directly? Not in its psychological fear effect, but in actual effect.

I beat you to that one, earlier. Yes it is a lovely article. Or don't. And be critical when your income and freedoms are being butchered. Seems Nina Strochlic is the usual feminst and hangs out with the royal family, that likes to fake their own corona illness. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/contributors/s/nina-strochlic/ https://zfem.wordpress.com/2015/02/17/nina-strochlic-presents-evidence-of-gender-discrimination-in-laws-around-the-world/ ----------------- Meanwhile in the real world, where corona is not found: - I was travelling internationally throughout january with a colleague. Some airports were already announcing pandemic messages. Some passengers had mouthcaps. Was at a very crowded party in february. Was at two bars almost every friday. Three birthday parties. My colleages are still travelling internationally op to this very moment. How does this make sense? Then: - No known case in this town. Where gossip travels fast. - Large hospital in city nearby is quiet, according to nurses from my town. - Obituaries in newspaper are as usual. - My niece knows three people that were quarantined for suspected infection earlier. None of them were ever tested. One of them having a bad cold after a trade fair in northern Italy (right there and then, where the european press madness started). He was interned but never tested. - I don't know anybody in real life that actually knows a confirmed corona case in person. There is one sort of exception and that is that in an elderly home were another niece works; three people were said to have corona and were moved to another facility. Average age about 75. I don't actually count this as valid because it could be anything, and they are out of sight now. (Also as I wrote earlier the goverment tends to add the oldest of the elderly to their corona death statistics: averages of 82 and 85. So are these actually tested? Don't answer...)

Their way is to let something escalate and then overreact on it afterwards, for decades. Like this article from MIT already advocates: Title: "We’re not going back to normal" Subtitle: "Social distancing is here to stay for much more than a few weeks. It will upend our way of life, in some ways forever" Random scary bit: "We’ll adapt to and accept such measures, much as we’ve adapted to increasingly stringent airport security screenings in the wake of terrorist attacks. The intrusive surveillance will be considered a small price to pay for the basic freedom to be with other people." https://www.technologyreview.com/s/615370/coronavirus-pandemic-social-distancing-18-months/ PS: My replies here may be annoying to some. But between all the worries of past weeks, appropriate concern for your/our Freedoms is lacking. Sorry but I care for those.

Again COVID-19 Testing Kits. Before asking where? who? how? when? I am still left with the suggestion that they do not exist. Then can I place my money on the appearance of stories like this: Testing kits being in such short supply that only certain top level departments can use them and give the statistics. Whilst non of the lower level doctors will ever see these kits, and will never be able to verify anything. So convenient.

I am just basing this on 10 minutes of mainstream press internet searches. But the story seems to be that they are trying to develop test kits, but so far they do not exist. Like for example stated here: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johncumbers/2020/03/14/with-its-coronavirus-rapid-paper-test-strip-this-crispr-startup-wants-to-help-halt-a-pandemic/ Besides that, I have serious doubt that COVID-19 or something can be separated from some other COVID strain or any other virus strain. Virus are said to be much smaller then bacteria. PCR amplification of RNA leftovers in a lab is what I understand to be the mainstream method, but there are also indicators for it being unreliable, or even flawed. Next question is how often is this PCR actually performed with patients, especially patients with other conditions and/or the elderly.

Bald statements from te press = plenty Evidence = little ( +contradictory / illogical ) We agree = no

Similar contradictions in the UK. Their words not mine: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid "As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK. ... They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall)"

Got them: Five books in both epub and pdf format for free. Thanks for the tip.

Nothing is needed: No fact-checkers. No alternative theories. No special pages to stop whatever. Just look at the actual evidence the mainstream press presents. Not the stories, the sheer size of the media impact, the big claims of horror that they want to protect you from every once in a while. Just their evidence, logic and consistency, or usually: the lack of it.