Ungrateful Slackass PosterBoys

[Jeff Heidman]

Sten, you are correct. I did not mean to imply that no-one attempted to answer the question. That is not the case, several people made contributions.

I was just saying that the two posts that decided to lay into me did not bother to try to actually address the question, and the sad part is that those were two people who could have had some insight not otherwise available.

I have read the manual, and I found the information in there to be a little unclear, hence the question.

As far as hiding the truth, I certianly think that is being over-stated. BTS *has* stated that they intentionally did not include some information as a design decision. So my question was:

1. What exactly does it mean for a unit to be some percent exposed as far as how it effects my firepower, or

2. Is this something that is *meant* to be unknown, or vague?

The only hostility in that entire thread was what Fionn pointed at me. Period. It was unwarranted, unecessary, and a waste of everyones time, including Fionn's.

Jeff Heidman

[This message has been edited by Jeff Heidman (edited 07-19-2000).]

[DanE]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

So my question was:

1. What exactly does it mean for a unit to be some percent exposed as far as how it effects my firepower, or

2. Is this something that is *meant* to be unknown, or vague?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jeff,

I think if you had used the above wording instead of your original statement, you would have gotten a much different response, IMO.

------------------

Dan

[Sten]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

I ahve read the manual, and I found the information in there to be a little unclear, hence the question.

AS far as hiding the truth, I certianly think that is being over-stated. BTS *has* stated that they intentionally did not include some information as a design decision. So my question was:

1. What exactly does it mean for a unit to be some percent exposed as far as how it effects my firepower, or

2. Is this something that is *meant* to be unknown, or vague?

The only hostility in that entire thread was what Fionn pointed at me. Period. It was unwarranted, unecessary, and a waste of everyones time, including Fionn's.

Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am certain that if your original question had been in the same nice, calm, factual tone as this one, you would have gotten the nice, calm, factual answers you were looking for.

As to your questions,

1.From the manual, "exposure (infantry/non-armored vehicles)" means "a percentage value, stating how much f the target is vulnerable based on an abstract maximum (100%)".

This means that if your target is 50% exposed, it will recieve half of the firepower you're directing at it.

2. No. Not this or anything else. (Specific code deemed vital to the copyright aside) If Steve or Charles were not busy as h*ll, they could give you an even better answer.

If this is still unclear to you, I suggest you wait two weeks, until the initial rush of orders is over, and both S and C is back at work.

Sten

------------------

Keep your whisky on the rocks and your tanks on the roll.

[bauhaus]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Berlichtingen:

what happened to that Brag&Taunt page of yours?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Brag&Taunt page? That sounds like a lovely idea

Great, yet another avenue for Berli to belittle my knowledge of military strategy. It's not enough I have to hear it everyday in the office, and emails.....now the board. Death to the evil empire.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bauhaus:

Great, yet another avenue for Berli to belittle my knowledge of military strategy. It's not enough I have to hear it everyday in the office, and emails.....now the board. Death to the evil empire.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't worry - I'll post on it, that should keep Berlin in his place...

------------------

Andreas

[Fionn]

DjB,

I'd say that shows that you should ALWAYS take a chance . It's better to try and get 10% than not try and get 0%

ASL Vet,

Well, personally, I think that newbies DO have something to contribute IF they have information and knowledge AND a good attitude. Unfortunately a LOT of newbies come onto the forum and think they know ten times more than they really do. Of course, we were ALL newbies at one time so I agree that newbies just might have as much or more info than old-timers. Unfortunately the confrontational attitude of some newbies gets over-generalised ( something I don't like to see).

Unfortunately a few of the old-timers sometimes, when pissed off at some newbie attitude, do over-generalise and that's not right.

E.g. You're a relative newbie BUT you, as far as I have seen, have always maintained a good attitude, been constructive and polite AND known what you're talking about sufficiently.

Unfortunately one can't say the same for a lot of newbies.

Jeff,

You didn't come along and ask a "pleasant question". You came along and spoke about "fantasy" OOBs and conspiracies etc.

Now, if you'd asked politely without getting into fantasies and conspiracies you WOULD have gotten a polite, full answer first time round. BUT if the question is asked poorly you can't expect people to respond 100% seriously. So I decided to poke some fun, where's the big deal ? Your question didn't deserve a proper answer.

Oh, and as for other stuff.. You say CM is a great game. Well, just for one second, you might want to reflect on the fact that the very people you are dissing here are the EXACT same people who had a hand in making CM and making the various design and informational calls. Just maybe if they turned out a great game they should be accorded a little respect and given a little credit.

Mirage2K said "if you come on the board with a polite, friendly attitude and can carry on an intelligent discussion, you shouldn't have any problems."

Amen. I have seen some occasions where newbies were jumped on for little reason but in the vast majority of times old-timers HAVE stepped in to rein people who were a little over-zealous in and provided answers. 99% of the time if you ask nicely you'll get a nice response. IF you ask with an attitude then you probably won't get given the respectful and complete answer you desire. It's all quite simple really and based on the fact that OTHERS treat you as you treat them.

Jeff,

DanE is 100% right. If you'd ASKED as you did in this thread you'd have gotten a much different response. Remember, a LOT of people don't like it when someone accuses them of intentionally hiding the truth ( as you did in the other thread).

In the real world you're going to have to learn that IF you ask people for info you want/need with a bad attitude that you shouldn't be surprised if they laugh in your face. IF you show respect and politeness to others they'll show it back BUT if you show a bad attitude then it is just naive to go on and on about how someone responded back to you in the same manner.

Seriously.

[Fionn]

While reflecting on the fact that USP is an acronym for Ungrateful Slackass Posterboys.

I came up with a term for the newbies with piss-poor manners. NWA= Newbies with attitude . I think it has a ring to it .

[Jeff Heidman]

Fionn, could you do me a favor?

Could you quote me were I claimed there was a conspiracy, or used the term "fantasy"?

Thanks.

Jeff

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

Fionn, could you do me a favor?

Could you quote me were I claimed there was a conspiracy, or used the term "fantasy"?

Thanks.

Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Could we try not to add to the number of threads that automatically go nuclear if specific people post in them shortly after another?

Please note: this is not an accusation of anybody, just a hopeful post.

------------------

Andreas

[Fionn]

Sure thing Jeffster,

1. "Anyone have any idea, or is this another example of info We Are Not Allowed To Know?"

Now, you are going to say you didn't actually use the word conspiracy but I believe the capitalisation says it all to any moderately intelligent human ( or alien ). (Mork from Ork probably wouldn't get it though )

2. The fantasy thing was said by Gary T, my apologies for misattributing it.

And in conclusion.

Jeff, this was a fun thread ok? If you have a problem I'd be more than willing to settle it privately ( like I tried to do when I emailed you yesterday. I know you said in your reply you don't want to settle anything privately but, trust me, it'd be better than invading various different threads on here.)

[This message has been edited by Fionn (edited 07-19-2000).]

[Jeff Heidman]

Fionn, case closed. As far as I am concerned, it is a dead issue, and there is nothing to be settled, privately or otherwise.

Jeff

[TeAcH]

Well, I'll wade in here with a few comments of my own.

Newbie, pleeb, rookie, whatever the designation, they are all foolish and stupid names that one can get on forums like these and we shouldn't use them here. Some people end up using them in a derogatory manner. Moreover, just because someone is new, doesn't mean what they have to say is unimportant. If Richard Garriot, General Colin Powel, or Bill Gates showed up here, someone would look at them as a newbie and might even "joke around" with them if they asked a question about the game when the topic had been talked to death.

Also, I think there are some people here, that have been here for awhile and who do have a good working history of not only CM but of WW2. People we can learn from. Unfortunately, some of those people seem to get carried away with themselves and they act all high and mighty when a new poster comes along. They may even post a rude or haughty remark or two. THAT doesn't do anyone any good. Be an adult and answer the question. There was a poster awhile back named Talenn who is the best example of how to discuss an issue. In his Post "Questioning MG effectiveness", Talenn went to great lengths defending his arguement and retained his composure throughout. Very commendable. We could al learn something from him. Thats not to say that he is the only one either, there are many others. But some like to be sarcastic and dont offer a sliver of help in their replies. I say, keep those comments to yourself!

Jeff, I read your post about exposure and didn't get the impression that you were ranting and raving for one bit. Then someone comes along and, well we all know the rest.

As far as the comment "Im joking" is concerned, I say yeah right. You go around answering people's posts like a dolt and someone takes offense and you say, "Duh...I was only kidding". Well, people don't want you to kid. Go do that somewhere else, like on the elementary school playground. People don't know you. What's more, as fans of this game and of BTS, we owe it to everyone who bought the game. They deserve a little respect for at least being not only smart enough for choosing this fine ware, but for helping to ensure the life of BTS. Go "joke" somewhere else. I don't buy that excuse. I took your reply as sheer sarcasm. Guess I need some "insensitivity training" eh NOT

As far as this forum is concerned, everyone here can ask whatever they want as long as it pertains to CM. And they can ask it as much as they want. Some people need to do a reality check and relinquish what ownership they feel they have over this forum. Flame wars on these types of boards are commonplace enough without someone coming along playing joke-zee-poos on someone else.

Here's hoping this thread is closed for good,

TeAcH

[Simon Fox]

I think that sometimes that CM Borg gets indigestion

Oops, sorry teacher, I know you said "no jokes". I feel contrite, this is really serious stuff, this GAME we are discussing.

Ok, Ok, I know, 1hr detention.

------------------

"Pink Floyd, a load of old twaddle"-John Lydon

[:USERNAME:]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TeAcH:

Some people need to do a reality check and relinquish what ownership they feel they have over this forum. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I agree with you. That is, I think I understand what you are saying. All joke-zee-pooing aside, the CM "barflys" should get a grip.

Lewis

PS Jeff, I admire your courage in the face of unwanted email. Nice work.

[TeAcH]

Username:

You got it. Thanks.

Simon Fox:

Sorry you missed my point. Oh well.

[Talenn]

Well, as someone who y'all would consider a 'newbie' to CM (had it since 6/28, but hadnt played even the demo before 6/22), I kind of resent the implications of many of the things in this thread. I agree with ASL Veteran 100% in that just because someone recently discovered CM, that doesnt me that they are newbies to gaming and tactical wargames in general. They just MIGHT know something that is applicable to the further development of CM.

I know when I started my thread on 'MG effectiveness' that it was in way so as to elicit intelligent response. It wasnt accusatory, derogatory, or in any way demeaning to CM or anyone here. I felt (and still feel) that MG modeling could stand some adjustment. There was fair amount of agreement with my position. I was under the impression that one of the points to this forum was to let people voice what they thought to be improvements or variants to the current system. Just because some folks have played the game longer doesnt mean that they corner the market on good ideas, even when/if the topic has been repeatedly discussed.

The constant reply of 'do a search, we have 40000 posts, blah, blah' doesnt always cut it. Perhaps some people HAVE discussed 'x' topic to death, but some of may not have. Given how quickly CM sold out, there are obviously quite a few people here who may enjoy and benefit from an 'old' discussion. They MAY shed some differing and needed viewpoints.

The way games like CM will survive will be on the strength of its modeling and on the loyalty of its customer base. When new customers come here to discuss things (even things that have been discussed before) and are snubbed, they lose interest quickly. I know that was what happened in my case. I felt I made an adequate case, with others who felt the same way. But it felt like trying to overthrow the Government or somesuch! Its not worth the hassle. So I give up and go back to lurking and am much less likely to participate again.

Final points: There are obviously going to be areas that can be improved and expanded in CM. When folks come here and discuss ways to do such, it should be encouraged if the discussion is well reasoned. Much of it cant have 'sources'. Alot is based on gameplay 'feel'. If you cant understand that, then you've never designed a game system yourself. It doesnt matter if your data is 110% correct, and every source quoted with footnotes and references galore if something doesnt 'feel' right. Of course, the feel of a game is going to vary from person to person. Part of the point of a discussion forum is to elicit that 'feel' from others enthusiasts. Based on that, decisions can be made as to whether or not to change certain aspects. Also, if 'x' historical tactic cant be modeled in the game, and folks are discussing possible workarounds or solutions, I would think that the 'old-timers' should be jumping for joy that others are interested enough to try and help. It means that CM is expanding and that the potential for future games is increasing.

Discouraging that is NOT the best if ideas IMO. These 'pesky newbies' are the future of BTS and CM...try and remember that.

Talenn

[Ron]

Wow.

ASL, Jeff, Teach, Talenn:

Being serious here for a moment, please reread the posts by Goanna, Sten and Los. I think that's it.

Or in the immortal words of a former girlfriend "Don't tell me what I mean!"

Ron

PS My apologies Doug, I rightfully cannot claim credit for 'Slackass Posterboy'

[TeAcH]

Hmm Ron. Nice title "Ungrateful Slackass PosterBoys"

How about "Whiney assed Newbies"

-or-

"Cry babies and Pessimists!"

Point is, I didnt care for your derogatory title. Maybe I'm way off the mark here, but you seem to be slamming new customers/posters to the board. Who appointed you keeper of the forum?

I know you don't care what I think. Fine. But please don't slam those people who ask questions about the game. And if you ARE going to reply to them, please don't be sarcastic. That was all I was trying to say.

Take care,

TeAcH

[Bastables]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TeAcH:

Hmm Ron. Nice title "Ungrateful Slackass PosterBoys"

How about "Whiney assed Newbies"

-or-

"Cry babies and Pessimists!"

Point is, I didnt care for your derogatory title. Maybe I'm way off the mark here, but you seem to be slamming new customers/posters to the board. Who appointed you keeper of the forum?

I know you don't care what I think. Fine. But please don't slam those people who ask questions about the game. And if you ARE going to reply to them, please don't be sarcastic. That was all I was trying to say.

Take care,

TeAcH<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ummm, Ungratful slackass posterboys was a term coined for all the members on this forum. It was a while ago though.

------------------

One of these days MattBot, people like me will rise up and overthrow you, and the end of tyranny by the homeostatic machine will have arrived.

[Simon Fox]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Maybe I'm way off the mark here,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How perspicacious of you.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bastables:

Ummm, Ungratful slackass posterboys was a term coined for all the members on this forum. It was a while ago though.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suggest doing a search.

Regarding that discussion of Talenn and MG effectiveness, I don't know why that is being dug out as an example for new members being dissed, I can not remember anyone flaming anybody else in there. I think there was a very good and valuable discussion going on all the time, and the few times it seemed to get a bit heated it was clearly down to misunderstandings. I may remember it incorrectly though.

Talenn, I completely agree that people new to the board might be able to benefit from an old discussion. That's why I think using the search function is the way to start. Or do you expect those who have been here for a while to constantly rehash those same discussions every X weeks? If someone came in now asking the question you did on MG effectiveness - would you go into posting all that stuff again, or would you say: 'We have discussed this before, do a search/here's the thread.'? I simply don't understand what is wrong with that answer. And you can not expect BTS to give you the official answers time and again because people new to the board don't care to search. That has nothing to do with ownership or barfly attitude at all, IMO. But a lot with respect for other people's time.

And I think that if you go to read the thread 'Newbie questions', you will see what I mean. It just shows that blanket statements like 'newcomers are being jumped on at every possible moment' are simply wrong.

------------------

Andreas

[This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 07-20-2000).]

[Sten]

This thread is getting ridiculous.

Show some maturity, and just stop arguing.

Talenn and others have made some good points.

People who are just recent acquaintances on this forum should be met with the same respect as anyone else. They also deserve answers to their questions, but that does mot mean that the more knowledgeable among us should spend hours and hours answering questions that really HAVE been answered before. In such cases a polite and respectful reference to the search function is a totally acceptable answer.

Does this sound reasonable to you?

Is this even something that (fingers crossed) we could *agree* upon??

Sten

------------------

Keep your whisky on the rocks and your tanks on the roll.

[PawBroon]

Funny how those threads are typically going down in the dump.

CM is a great game and all of those who contributed to it, be it directly or through this forum, are to be commended on their work.

CM is a success and the fantastic reviews it got from all over the web are attracting newbies by the dozens.

Being protective of BTS/CM is right.

But the success of CM is to be measured in SALES.

And those are rising because newbies are buying CM.

If we want to be protective we might consider that offending would be customers isn't right.

BTS said it in a post when the game was first released.

Newbies will come, some will have an attitude, some will be plain A-holes and some will be great.

It's our contribution to this forum and towards this great game that we should police it.

Answer, dispatch, advice and if need be bash...

Wargaming is a small community and CM has all the bells and whistles to broaden the interrest one have in this particular niche.

It may appeal to tank sims guys, to 2D wargaming guys and even to RTS guys.

Let them have a go at the forum for as long as they don't talk bull****.

The best present we could do to BTS is to let CM grow away.

Just like with kids.

Sorry for the long post, it's the old jerk in me that does it.

------------------

Either he's dead or my watch has stopped

[ncounio]

Ah PawBroon,

I totally support your post (but I do not recognize me as an old jerk ).

BTS have invested years of their lifes in CM and in the Battlefront adventure and it is common sense to welcome newbies or former forum lurkers as long as their electronic behavior sticks with this board regulations.

I found in this forum a high ratio of mature post compared to what you can find on other boards...

Let us all hope that it will remain the same !

"Chien qui aboie ne mord pas !"

------------------

Nicolas

"Deux intellectuels assis vont moins loin qu'une brute qui marche"

Un Taxi Pour Tobrouk

[Fionn]

Gees guys, CM is a GAME.

Showing a sense of humour in posts isn't some kind of crime. This reminds me of the time we had big discussions where a couple of people argued that since this was a game discussion forum ALL manner of personal banter was off-topic and unwelcome.

The basic conclusion to that was that a lot of people had made friends here and so that personal banter was just part of the scenery ( and a good part of the scenery too).

I think that cracking a joke is just the same. I'm sorry if some of you don't get it etc but I'm not about to become a humourless automaton to please a small minority.

As for newbies. Of COURSE they should be given the respect they deserve. Unfortunately a lot of newbies make their first posts full of attitude etc and then cry foul when people don't take them seriously. Guys, you get what you give out. There ARE a lot of NWAs joining the forum and to expect old-timers to simply welcome them as though they are polite and constructive ( when most times their posts aren't) is extremely naive.

OTOH any newbie who is actually reasonable and polite is to be encouraged to post. No-one has anything against newbies as far as I can see. People just don't like the way some of them act like assholes and then cry foul when someone calls them on it.