db_zero Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 and then some... I find myself playing this game so much h2h and against the AI I watch far less TV, so I downgraded to the less expensive package-only until the end of the football season and then I'm going to ditch the cable TV altogether and just use the internet and something like Netflix. I tell you the cable companies are going to price themselves out of business. In the last 10 years I've forked over $20,000. I remember when cable TV was less than $40 a month. Now it ranges from $140 to $215 a month and you don't get to pick the channels as the cable companies have fought ala carte programming tooth and nail. Thanks to Combat Mission I'll be going from paying $215 a month to $59 a month for just the internet. netflix will be around $7.99 a month. Rant over! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 The full CM package, the internet and rabbit ears for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 20,000 / 10 = 200/yr / 12 = $17/month 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 heh... well, I'm ahead of the curve! After we first started getting Netflix (before streaming started) we decided to do an experiment. We took our satellite box (no cable where we are) and put it in the basement for a month to see what it was like to watch only Netflix and over the air TV (at the time we had 4 channels). We found we didn't miss it at all, and this was before every channel stuffed it's programming with "reality" programs! We also now had access to local TV news and programming which, until recently, wasn't possible with satellite. That was in January 2005. We pay $15 a month for Netflix for BluRay and streaming vs. something like $70 for basic satellite service. That comes to about $6000 saved so far *AND* a lot better service. So even if one doesn't offset TV time with CM, one can still save a lot of money by switching to one of the on-demand services. And probably liking what you get a LOT more. Similarly, we dropped our landline and got a second cell phone added to our existing plan, then hooked one phone via BlueTooth to regular cordless handsets. Saving something like $40 a month and have done that for 2 years now. Another $1000 saved and more flexibility when out and about. I am convinced that Cable/Satellite/Phone companies are actively encouraging schools to have weaker math/science teachings. Because the last thing they want are people that can do basic math when trying to figure out why they have no savings in the bank Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Similarly, we dropped our landline... Oooo. I wish we could do that on our rightpondian shores. But to get Internet over here, you have (AFAIK - happy to find otherwise) to have a landline (unless you go to satellite/wireless, which won't quite do). And if you don't have a landline, the mobile companies all charge you an arm and a leg to access toll-free numbers, and both arms and both legs to access "fixed rate" numbers (which are a rip-off even on landlines). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fizou Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 20,000 / 10 = 200/yr / 12 = $17/month 20,000 / 10 = 2000/yr / 12 = $170/month 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Belenko Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 OK I'm thinking along the same lines. I'm right between San Diego and LA with too many hills for rabbit ears. My cable is reduced to basic so I can see NFL, but I lost the Thursday night games. If I dumped cable completely what are my other options for football? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Well I "have" to have cable, so my wife can entertain herself while I play CM in the other room, otherwise she would never leave me in peace. :-) I do have an interesting anecdote, however. We have one of those cable package deals where I get "expanded" cable w/DVR, 30 mb internet, and a home phone for $170 out-the-door. Like others here, I decided to drop the home phone since we both have cell phones. When I called the cable company and told them to drop it, they decided to give it to me for free for 12 months, and my bill went from $170 down to $140. So, a year from now, I'll call them again and see if they want to give me another free year. If not for my wife, I would gladly drop cable TV and use Netflix only. I don't care about football (gasp!). Edit: Oh, and yes, CM has more than paid for itself, as far as I'm concerned. Yes, the initial expense is more than most other computer games, but if you count the number of hours I've played CM since CMBO was first released, I'm sure it comes out to be a FAR better deal than other computer games, books, movies, or pretty much anything else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 +1 for dumping all those sports channels we're forced to pay for when all we want is some news channels, History, NatGeo and a few others. It's hilarious when I get sales calls and all they want to push are sports channels. They can't seem to believe it when I tell them I don't care to watch sports, and they keeping pushing them anyway - I guess it's a rigid script they have to follow. And yes, CM has paid for itself if only re the dozen or more per year computer games that I was no longer tempted to buy. And leave it to an European educated member to figure out the correct math lol. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Only reason we still have cable is that here in New York City, if you're lucky enough to have Verizon FioS available in your building (as we are), once you've purchased the high-speed internet subscription, adding the "basic" cable subscription package costs a whopping $5/month additional. It's a little more once you add in the cable box rental charge, taxes, etc. But it's still cheap enough that for it it's worth it to us just for the convenience of not having to run an antenna line out to the backyard. But if they ever increase the add-on cable subscription cost any significant amount, I'll drop it like a hot potato. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted December 19, 2013 Author Share Posted December 19, 2013 A hdtv antenna work good where I'm at. For the Thursday night games you can always head out to the sports bar. I have one of the newer smart TVs so it should work well with netflix. I'll probably return the cable modem and get a good one designed for gaming as I hear they are better if you use heavy bandwidth. Speaking of football we're talking real football...not the funny one where they run around kicking a ball Do I hear incomming? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Speaking of football we're talking real football...not the funny one where they run around kicking a ball Do I hear incomming? You mean Rugby Union Football, then. Obviously. Not the one where they wear pads and helmets cos they can't take the hits... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yo u know what guys - I live without TV for maaaany years and I feel better then ever. Got all my info I need on the nets. Who wants a passive intake (from TV) when one can activate brains (netz). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yeah...well you guys better pay attention in your respective parts of the US because I read recently that there is talk of the cable companies looking to charge you by bandwidth usage because of all the revenue they are losing to people opting for Netflix, Amazon, Hulu and all the other online viewing sites. It was something like 50 gigs per month and then charging extra for each additional gig after. Mord. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 This comic from The Oatmeal seems applicable: http://theoatmeal.com/comics/reasons_watch_movie I buy season passes for the shows I want to watch from iTunes (or get them from Hulu/netflix when possible). Even with the season pass purchasing I still pay way less than what I would spend on cable. And without annoying commercials! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 OK I'm thinking along the same lines. I'm right between San Diego and LA with too many hills for rabbit ears. My cable is reduced to basic so I can see NFL, but I lost the Thursday night games. If I dumped cable completely what are my other options for football? Direct TV satelite gives you the NFL Sunday Ticket package as part of its service, free for the first year. After that they charge for that, but you can go back to just watching CBS, FOX, NBC and ESPN and NFL Network and just get your local games. The FCC is contemplating eliminating the blackout rule, so you can also get the Chargers' home games. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altipueri Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 Yo u know what guys - I live without TV for maaaany years and I feel better then ever. Got all my info I need on the nets. Who wants a passive intake (from TV) when one can activate brains (netz). Me too. I've probably watched less than five hours TV this year. TV is receive only. Web is interactive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 20,000 / 10 = 2000/yr / 12 = $170/month LoL I thought so! Edit: Cable & internet quite expensive in the US? I pay about EUR 70,- for 3 in 1 via cable: voip landline, 60/5 mbit internet and cable tv with an extra package. If I want all sports channels thats another 20 orso per month, but the best (proper) football matches are available already. Proper football is the one that involves a round ball 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 football = playing a ball with a foot handegg = playing an egg with a hand no confusion possible 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 football = playing a ball with a foot handegg = playing an egg with a hand no confusion possible Hehehehe.. Added to vocabulary :-D 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I am convinced that Cable/Satellite/Phone companies are actively encouraging schools to have weaker math/science teachings. Because the last thing they want are people that can do basic math... Steve You have a point there, judging by Jon's calculating prowess. Still, it is a rather small sample size. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 And leave it to an European educated member to figure out the correct math lol. But leave it to a North American to correct "a" European's grammar. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 You mean Rugby Union Football, then. Obviously. Not the one where they wear pads and helmets cos they can't take the hits... I think most average human beings would be utterly crushed if a man 6 foot 5 inches, weighing in at 335 pounds, and who can bench press over 500 pounds ran into them at full speed. Normal sized non athletes would be hospitalized from the impact even if they are wearing the pads. NFL football players are ridiculously quick, big, and strong. I can assure you that you wouldn't want to be in a collision with anyone playing in the NFL with or without padding. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 19, 2013 Share Posted December 19, 2013 I think most average human beings would be utterly crushed if a man 6 foot 5 inches, weighing in at 335 pounds, and who can bench press over 500 pounds ran into them at full speed. Normal sized non athletes would be hospitalized from the impact even if they are wearing the pads. NFL football players are ridiculously quick, big, and strong. I can assure you that you wouldn't want to be in a collision with anyone playing in the NFL with or without padding. No, I certainly wouldn't. My playing days are long done. But: not all gridiron players are that big, and some RFU players are, or nearly so. And yet the more regular sized players manage to bring down the big'uns. Really, the reason for the pads is the nature of the game, not the size of the players. It demands direct, head-on impact in the scrimmage to a degree that isn't required in such an explosive fashion in RFU. There's a reason, though, that you don't generally see a "classic" sized scrum-half or winger trying to make a turnover at a ruck, and that's because the >6' >250lb blind side flanker is going to clear him out all the way into next week, same as if a quarterback trying to make the snap himself instead of taking it off the Centre would be. NFL players are a bit stronger and faster over the short distance than RFU players because they only have to pay cursory attention to aerobic fitness, but most modern professional RFU players have sufficient physique to play in the "lighter" positions (TE, WR, RB, QB, S, CB, LB), if they lack the experience/skills, and there are some that are right up there with the raw power, though they are less common. Yet they manage without hard pads because the game doesn't manage the contact into a position of requiring some of the players to wear pads. Once your linemen are wearing hard protective gear, everyone has to wear it, in a cascade of "ouch, otherwise", regardless of size. When you are talking about "average human beings" you are not talking about professional RFU players. When you are talking about professional NFL players, you're not talking about amateur or junior RFU players (and even they will be a bit tougher and larger than the "average", on average). Another big factor affecting the need (or not) for pads is the requirement in Union that you use your arms to tackle. In gridiron, a pure shoulder hit, which can impart significantly more impulse, is entirely legal (so long as it's from the allowed directions on the allowed target areas). So much for putting a smilicon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db_zero Posted December 19, 2013 Author Share Posted December 19, 2013 They say collisions in the NFL is equivalent to a head on car crash at 20-30 miles and players endure many per game. Many end up brain dead at relatively young ages. Nothing more than a modern day gladiator spectacle. Many are thugs who would probably be in jail if not for football. There are decent and intelligent players too, but some are just thugs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.