womble Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) Impressive post, Womble. And I don't mean the content but the feat of composing- in this tiny font- three paragraphs with zero grammatical errors and only one misspelling ('moveing') which you manfully didn't stoop to correct and thus incur the cursed 'edited' tag. Bravo, buddy.Thanks for the chuckle And "moveing" isn't unintentional; I use it as shorthand to mean 'moving using the "Move" command'. It probably orter've had a capital initial letter, but I'm not 100% consistent in my own syntax there, though I try... And I'm composing at a fairly visible size on my monitor here, so can't take any credit for good eyes...Edit: Oh, Moveing did have a capital Edited February 22, 2015 by womble 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) Re: 'Moveing': as a rule, when referencing Battlefront jargon simplicity rules. Proper usage suggests the simple capital M construct, but your invention, if a bit idiosyncratic, is certainly acceptable. However some neologisms are to be avoided, for example, 'Fireing' or 'Hideing'. "Dieing'? Beyond the pale, sorry.Hope this doesn't come across as pedantic. Edit: this space reserved. Edited February 22, 2015 by Childress 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Hope this doesn't come across as pedantic. It does, but don't sweat it. A little more informed pedantry (and I am not accusing you of some kind of sex perversion [that part included for the less well read]) would be welcome around here. If this were an English class—and I realize it isn't—two thirds of the Bozos who post here would flunk. Trying to decipher and guess what is intended in some of these posts makes my head hurt. <— This is me struggling to be patient. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Michael, I can commiserate keeping ever present the fact that many of the posters have English as a second language. I thought you'd get a kick out of this graffiti (graffito?) recently discovered on a wall in Pompeii. I'm guessing the original Latin would not be a problem for you. However some clever fellow rendered it in English: When I, Caesar did hear of the nameOf Cleopatra, I went to lay claimAhead of my legionsI invaded her regionsI saw, I conquered, I (censored). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Michael, I can commiserate keeping ever present the fact that many of the posters have English as a second language. I really don't have that much of a problem with them. English is not an easy language to learn if you haven't heard and read it all your life. Heck, most of the second language guys seem to use it better than a lot of the native speakers. It's the native speakers who drive me up the wall. English for all its odd rules and even more exceptions to the rules is a wonderful tool for explicating almost anything (although I'd say that you can express spiritual matters more economically in Sanskrit). To use such a tool clumsily or even barbarically is one of the worst crimes one can commit against one's own intellect and soul. To use it in such a slovenly manner as I see every day on this selfsame board bespeaks of a general sloppiness in one's character. It might not quite measure up to a hanging offense...yet. But it is lurking somewhere just below that horizon. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Re: 'Moveing': as a rule, when referencing Battlefront jargon simplicity rules. Proper usage suggests the simple capital M construct, but your invention, if a bit idiosyncratic, is certainly acceptable. However some neologisms are to be avoided, for example, 'Fireing' or 'Hideing'. "Dieing'? Beyond the pale, sorry.Hope this doesn't come across as pedantic. Edit: this space reserved.I would use "Hideing" to distinguish between troops which have been given Hide orders and those who are just keeping/being kept out of sight or engaging in the concealment behaviours the TacAI manifests when troops have not been given explicit Hide orders. There's no "Fire" order, nor "Die" order (though I'm sure Mr Ken C3k would find the latter useful ) so I wouldn't employ those constructions. Sorry if this offends your pedantry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pnzrldr Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 H2H or otherwise, I move INF over long distances using a jog/walk or 'quick'/'move' combination. Trick is picking the correct distances. Move paths look like candy stripes, but it gets them there fairly rapidly, frequently without being below 'ready' upon arrival. Not sure if this is my real world preference bleeding over into the game or not, but it seems to work. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agusto Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Personally i almost always use quick in CM when moving around infantry. Exceptions are 1) if the troops are unfit so they cant quick for more than a few meteres and 2) if the map is very large, there is a lot of time available and i dont have transports. Those two are the only cases where i use move for infantry. Most of times in CM the maps are either so small that using quick doesnt have a sufficiently negative impact to keep me from using it or my troops have transports anyways. But especially in the highly mechanized environment of CMBS getting men from A to B is rarely a problem, unless they get killed in the process of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 ....Hope this doesn't come across as pedantic. No, pedantic would have been pointing out Womble's use of "Cuz" I generally use Quick all the time, with waypoint halts of 10-15 seconds once they reach Tiring status. I'll risk a push into the position I intend to hold which may take them to Tired, but as long as they're not engaged immediately, they'll be fine. Being in a position first does engender a lot of advantages, so the risk is usually worth it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I generally use Quick all the time, with waypoint halts of 10-15 seconds once they reach Tiring status. I do that too, only I try to do it before they get to the Tiring status. I try to keep them in Rested status or at least no worse than Ready. Otherwise, it takes them longer to recover than I like. Exception being if I know they are going to be static for several turns and not under fire after they arrive at their destination. So normally, depending on what kind of terrain they are crossing, I will move them in 15-30m dashes with 10-15 second pauses at waypoints to catch their breath and do a little observing (I think that latter point is more important than some players are aware). Giving them shorter dashes with longer pauses in between is also a prudent course if they are apt to come under fire while in motion. Lately I have been playing with using Move where I am crossing difficult terrain, like heavy woods or swamp or steeply uphill, and do not reasonably expect them to come under fire. Otherwise, they get tired much too quickly and have to spend too much time recovering. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banex Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Generally i use quick to move my troops forward.The problem i have is using that in wooded areas,and getting totally chewed up.Any chance someone could let me know how they approach clearing out wooded areas with the movement commands,say for a platoon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Migo441 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 @Banex, clearing defenders from heavily wooded terrain is generally understood to be a rough business. Best option is to find an alternative (bypass, pound area with indirect fire, etc...) If you truly must, the order of the day is a cautious advance with your teams close enough to support each other and HEAPS of prep fire along with a tolerance for casualties. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Yeah, that's really a different can of worms. One that has been opened and spilled all over the table in many previous threads, some very recent.Try this one for size: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/117992-sweeping-woods-for-enemies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greycat Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) To misquote Jeb Stuart: "Git thar fustest with the mostest." . I think that was Nathan Bedford Forrest Oops, just noticed someone already spotted this! Edited February 23, 2015 by greycat 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.