DerKommissar

I am curious what our European compatriots think about this. To me, it looks bizarrely unnecessary -- what's the point?

Some campaigns actually penalize you for using a cease fire, and others reward you for not doing so. I've seen it done by giving you points at the end, and raising the threshold for Victory.

The game does a very good job of simulating ERA. If you look at the model, you will see the ERA bricks gone due to the hit. It's a life saver -- provided the enemy hits you in the right spots.

I've been playing Tank Warfare: Tunisia 1943, recently. All the infantry have the same face, and it looks like this: One of the major complaints I've had with Graviteam's games, starting from Achtung Panzer, are the arbitrary rules for the operational layer. I had 3 companies of german infantry attack 1 company of Valentine infantry tanks. I decided to preserve them and retreat before the Hun brought AT guns to bear. There is a friendly sector square behind them, where they should retreat. However, because its two slots are occupied by infantry companies, the game says that the Valentine company routed -- and I lost every single tank. WTF? How? I've also had sectors that I captured with 100s of fine British gentlemen, in the tactical layer -- only to find that the enemy still controls them in the operational layer. After almost a decade of playing these games, I still get this nonsense (which makes me go back to CM). It seems operational layers are easier said, than done. Back to topic: Steel Panthers has a VERY annoying (RNG) fire mechanic. Troops will get suppressed by the fire on their hex, and refuse to get out of the area. I'd like to see a proper simulation of fire in CM, but right now -- I'd settle for those patches. Inversely to SP, my troops in deep trenches sometimes decide to have a jog during mortar bombardment.

Isn't this already implemented (at least, in BS)? In the UKR campaign, Hinds would report rough locations of AFVs, which were obscured by buildings.

I am mystified by this vehicle -- is it an APC, is it an IFV? Why did they not mount the bushmaster on this guy (share ammo with Bradley)? Why didn't the U.S. Army just adopt the LAV-25? Hopefully, we'll get LAV-25s or LAV IIIs, in future USMC or Canadian dlc, for BS.

Is this the krusty krab?

Awesome line charge! I really need those to prevent empty AFV traffic jams! Why not use a mine clearing crab tank?

When will we see THIS product of astounding ingenuity in CM?

When he wrote the first three, he was feeding on his passion for the War of the Roses. Then, once the series became a commercial success, he had to make sequels. The focus was shifted towards a traditional narrative, because he/his publisher thought it'd be better received than his War of the Roses fanfiction. I did try to watch the Wire after seeing Sopranos. I found the first two episodes too dry, and stopped watching. It is one of those shows that I want to try again, and re-evaluate. Gotham? No thanks. I'm noxious of this Superhero craze. I am a big fan of the Burton movies, though. I highly recommend it. The Foundation series will sunder your mind. It's the basis for all space opera. Asimov has an insane attention to detail and really puts the "science" in science fiction. Which is hardly surprising, considering his main gig was chemistry prof.

To be fair, the last few books turned ASoIaF into exactly that. This being said, I think Martin's a decent writer. After HBO cancelled Rome, I did enjoy the first couple of seasons of GoT. I think I stopped watching after season 4 -- they started to spread it thin. Just finished The Complete Robot by Isaac Asimov. I read those short stories as a kid, but I did not enjoy them nearly as much. If you like Sci-fi, I think it's a must-read. I admire Asimov's crusade against the two extremes of robots in fiction -- either murderbots or wizardbots. Every story ends with a twist!

I'm still holding out hope for those Engine patches...

Some cheap shots: - Mission time limits - 3 out of 4 of tracers - Neutral steering of non-neutral steering vehicles - Single-core code - "The Grid"

Every IT department should give those out to "(Worst) User of the Month". I've seen people look up to the sky when talking about "THE CLOUD". 1989 V2? You just reminded me of the Teletank: The Soviets had two battalions of these, in 1940. Yes, that is the flamethrower version. And yes, if there is ever a CM:Winter War, this MUST be in it.

Nowadays, there's this popular misconception that modern technology runs on magic. From films, to the marketing where we opt for nebulous terms like "cloud" and "AI". All technologies have advantages and disadvantages. Any solution has a trade-off and is designed, operated and maintained by fallible people. You can try to make things safe and idiot proof, but they'll always come up with better idiots. It's also important to note that all of this is part of the economy. Everyone wants to spend less, and buy more -- as such, "Top Quality" is not feasible. All this being said, I am one FOR innovation. I would very much like to see machines take over hazardous tasks. However, I do see a trend of people ignoring limitations and believing the dream. Any solution takes time to mature -- even our most beloved ARs and AKs went through a number of critical revisions. Trying to push even a well designed solution to get implemented over-night will be a train-wreck. Always take the hype train with a grain of salt. Artificial Intelligence is hardly intelligent, it's just some code some blokes wrote. It is still just high and low voltages creating currents going through transistors -- it's not fundamentally different from what we've had in the past 50 years. Expecting human-like intelligence from these thing is simply absurd -- and even dangerous. It's the too-big-to-fail approach, but really the more complicated the system -- the more vulnerable it is to unpredictable behavior. Putting an overly complex solution where a simple one will do is anti-intelligent. Why would you need an AI toaster?

There's that old Murphy's law: "The complexity of a weapon is inversely proportional to the IQ of the weapon's operator." One of the advantage of modern electronics is that it gets rid of moving parts. Adding complex systems and software that are not reliable enough for the consumer market is a hard sell, right now. Speaking of which: I read this thing preformed horribly. They had serious issues remote controlling it even at close ranges, with no ECM. It could be user error, or maybe a shoddy design -- but it's an interesting precedent. Not certain how this one preformed, but I think it's a good idea.

I did recently watch a documentary on the Atlantic, during WW2. Iceland was critical to trans-continental shipping. The same applies today, you're certainly right. Britain even invaded it in 1940, because they wanted to stay neutral. Some locals, practicing for Biathlon. I also have been watching a series covering the Winter War. Considering how critical skis were to Finnish mobility, it's good to see them.

It's important to point out that while Germany spends less percent of its GDP than Canada on military (both below the 2 percent requirement), it hosts the largest deployment of U.S. Army and Air Force personnel than anywhere else in the world (by a significant margin). From what I understand, the Bundeswehr were constitutionally limited to defense of its borders. In 1994, it got amended to allow for World Police antics. So, they got to tag along in Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. I saw a program about a German small business that buys American decommissioned materiel by the trailer. They find a lot of goodies in there, refurbish them and sell them out. I am sure if Americans reduce the number of troops, that'll cut into businesses. If I was a Hun, I certainty would not mind if other people paid for my defense. Naturally, I would not lose sleep about the Bundeswehr having to defend Germany from foreign invasion on its own. I think it's bad form that NVA veterans do not get military pensions, while SS veterans do. NVA is considered a "foreign military", and it doesn't sit well with the East Germans (from what I've been told).

MMMMMMMMMM SCHOKA COLA! I'm currently 4 or 5 missions into this campaign. I actually really like the choices that are given to the player. It makes the missions feel more open. That and the fact that the maps are MASSIVE -- you really have a lot of room for maneuver in this one. However, this is the only CM campaign, where I had to lower my settings because the large detailed maps murdered my FPS. The scope of this campaign is unrivaled in the franchise. Much props to everyone involved in its development. While the quality of the troops is impeccable, I do find myself short of infantry 90% of the time. Pioneers often have to get pushed into infantry duties. Ironically enough, that takes less of a tole than doing what they're there for -- clearing out minefields. I'm actually not too happy with the Panther's performance. They're quite big and yet have problems spotting. Only advantage to a P. 4 is if they face 57mm AT fire or a 75mm Sherman. Two well entrenched/camoed 76mm Shermans wiped the smirk off of the faces of an entire late Panther platoon. Bazookas have no problems taking them out, either. The Doughboys aren't playing around anymore. Artillery is my best tool for breaking up the American defenders. I have to say, I've found the stummel and the 8cm mortar halftracks to be invaluable. Going from commanding a depleted company to a reinforced battalion took me by surprise.

This 5 minute scene did more for me than all of Fury. I may have to check out this film.

I believe it's actually a pro version of Arma 2 (Arma 3 was made for filthy casuals). It still gives an armaholic blue balls. It looks like what Arma 3 /should/ have been: I still think this vehicle is vaporware. All I saw in the video is some dudes playing VBS on a cool gaming set-up. It's also poor form when VBS looks better than the animation made for the demo. To boot, this concept is 2 years old and I do not see any real progress in implementation. Is Rafael going to be making Arma mods, now? Maybe they should get the RHS guys to help out with IFV development. All this being said, it is an interesting case study. What do manufacturers THINK MoDs want? An Armata-like IFV, from the looks of it.

How does one aim those things, anyway? Imagine taking a wee, except you're letting loose a stream of flame and a plume of smoke -- and looking out of a periscope! From what I've seen of crocodile footage, is that they kinda have to get close to a large target like a bunker or a house. Then, spew short bursts in the general direction.

I'm curious if they're planning to bring partisans into the mix. Some COIN stuff? Maybe an Otto Skorzeny campaign? I think Sicily and/or Cassino would be awesome.

I found it amusing that they ARE playing a computer game on those monitors of theirs. That game is called Arma, the map they're playing on is Takistan. At 1:47, it actually says Takistan, a fictional video game country, on their "GPS". Frankly, I can't take this seriously. I always had respect for Rafael as a company, and hardly expected this sort of antics. Worst part, is that this is the second time they're trying to sell a video game IFV. Why doesn't someone try selling a AT-ST walker from Star Wars at one of these expositions? It has as much relation to realty as this: