Mark IV Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 I have killed more little digital people this weekend than probably died on D-Day. They didn't feel a thing. I think a post-April '45 scenario would be excellent- CM: Beyond the Elbe! Every Quick Battle is a hypothetical war. No one gets hurt. The shootin' part has been over for 55 years, with many others (including US-USSR surrogate conflicts) in between. What's one more hypothetical battle between friends? Fer cryin' out loud, this is a wargame, and I am really at a loss to understand the nature of this objection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 As I said befor BTS has been asked befor and the answer a big NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Were they, Rob? I dont recal the thread asking for a matchup between the nationalities in QB format. Care to provide a link? I want to see if their case is the same as ours. ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 And if there was, it was for CMBO, not CM2. Ray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 It was for CMOB but why should CM2 be any less real? The game is already 355mb. CM2 will be someing like 500mb why make it bigger with American or any other unrealist forces on the east front? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Ok...wait a sec...let me get this right...the size of the game in MEGABYTES is an ISSUE now-a-days?! What the hell?! BG2, probobly the best RPG around at the moment comes with 4 disks and over 2 gigs worth of game. I dont see anyone complaining... Oh, and if BTS charges more for a second disk, I dont think ANY of us would mind paying an extra - what? - $10. ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jaja Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 I think a US vs. Russia red star/white star game would be great! All the equipment could be easily modeled (the war would come to an abrupt end in November). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 I think you miss the pont what about the people with low end systoms?...not me thank god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 CM requires a Pent 200 and a video card to run. Most systems with those specs probobly have a HD of at least 3-5 gigs. Now, if you have an Atari with 3-5 Megs of memory and try to run CM2, then you know its time for an upgrade. Besides, by the time CM2 is out most people here will have a HD large enough for CM2, or in the process of buying one. ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Besides, you could have CM 10 times larger and people would pay an extra $100 for a hard drive to play it. Is it me or are the arguements against it so far a bit off base? Ray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 If it's you, Manta, its also me and a bunch of other guys. Ultimately, the decision would not be based on the feelings of all these ill-speakers, but on the personal opinions of Steve and Charles. If they feel the same way David or Rob do, we get no match ups. If their views can be shifted with valid arguments, we may just stand a chance. The least we can do is try. After all, much of what we see in CM originated as suggestions from loyal fans on this very board! ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Commissar: CM requires a Pent 200 and a video card to run. Most systems with those specs probobly have a HD of at least 3-5 gigs. Now, if you have an Atari with 3-5 Megs of memory and try to run CM2, then you know its time for an upgrade. Besides, by the time CM2 is out most people here will have a HD large enough for CM2, or in the process of buying one. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ok sorry do know what all the P.C junk is but is sound dum.As for buying more CM alone cost to much! OK I AM only 15 don't have $1000 in spara change to though around! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 15? Now I understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vergeltungswaffe: 15? Now I understand.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ANd what is that suppost to mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 You figure it out. Its your turn to wonder what in the world someone is talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 The Commissar wrote: > From what I can tell, you are personally offended by the possibility of such a war. Nope – it takes a lot to offend me. But I find it morally objectionable to take the combatants of a historical war and pit allies against each other. Yes, it's just a computer game. But doing so would destroy any semblance of respect for those who suffered during the war. It turns the whole thing into a big military circus. > you cannot say you dont want something made just because it contains something you dont like. Yes I can, as much as you can say you do want something made because you would like it. > If everyone had to abide by the personal feelings of every single person, games like this would not be made No, they would be made, but they would have to include every feature under the sun as a togglable option. Including pitting allies against each other. MantaRay wrote: > Ummmm, this is war, and since it is a game, how the hell are you killing many extra thousands of people? To quote myself again, with added emphasis: > You're talking about pretending to prolong the war, and go ahead and kill thousands more people and wreak even more destruction. MantaRay wrote: > I served 10 years in the military, participated in Desert Storm, Somilia, and many other smaller engagements that you will never hear about, and if someone wanted to do a scenario or game based on them, why in the hell would I care? During these conflicts, were you crippled? Were any of your friends killed? Were you, or anyone close to you, raped or tortured? Was your hometown razed to the ground? I mean that seriously. > And since this game doesnt model social or political aspects of war, someone who lived or fought in WWII may even think, "Boy, for a second there in 1945, I thought Patton was gonna start WWIII." Someone safe at home in the US, maybe. I can assure you that someone in Berlin or Moscow would not regard the possibility so casually. > Well, it would be the same war, combatants, and in the same theatre. The troops are already there............. ... and half of Europe, Japan and various other countries is destroyed, millions are dead, the economies of the Allied countries need to wind down from a war footing, and the Axis countries need to rebuild what is left of their homeland. To say that the troops are there is poor justification for arguing that they could or should start a new war. > But the whole issue revolves around would this add to the game. In my opinion, yes it would. Of course it would add to the game. Whether the addition would be desirable or respectful is another matter. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Are you some kind of drugy?Not you David [This message has been edited by Rob/1 (edited 12-10-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 OK we need to be carfull don't wont to turn this into the pang thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: The Commissar wrote: > Nope – it takes a lot to offend me. But I find it morally objectionable to take the combatants of a historical war and pit allies against each other. Yes, it's just a computer game. But doing so would destroy any semblance of respect for those who suffered during the war. It turns the whole thing into a big military circus. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Huh? How does fighting conjectural battles show a lack of respect for those who fought the actual battles? I contest the very basis of your claim. How is that morally objectionable? The very idea that fighting a conjectural battle with conjectural units base upon actual vehicles and weapons having any kind of moral relevance is preposterous. I know we have disagreed (sometimes heatedly) over things in the past, but for the most part I resect your views David. This though is so far out in left field that it is rather befuddling. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> No, they would be made, but they would have to include every feature under the sun as a toggleable option. Including pitting allies against each other. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So? I could see an objection based upon lack of interest, and hence a perceived waste of resources, but your objection seems to be based upon some rather intangible moral objection. Allies DID fight each other in WW2. The French fought the Brits, the Italians fought the Germans, etc., etc. A hypothetical conflict between two former allies AFTER WW2 would be no different than a hypothetical conflict between the US and USSR in 1980. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>To quote myself again, with added emphasis: > You're talking about pretending to prolong the war, and go ahead and kill thousands more people and wreak even more destruction. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Who here plays CM because they enjoy "pretending" to kill people? Why is it morally objectionable to pretend to kill people in a war never fought, rather than "pretending" to kill people in a war that WAS fought? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> During these conflicts, were you crippled? Were any of your friends killed? Were you, or anyone close to you, raped or tortured? Was your hometown razed to the ground? I mean that seriously. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If his answer is yes, does that matter? If his answer is no, does that matter? I claim that whether or not some calamity has befallen a specific individual has no bearing on the merits of any argument he might make. To disagree is to fall victim to the Fallacy of Ad Hominen. You are taken what is, in the end, a game designed to entertain people way, way too seriously. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>... and half of Europe, Japan and various other countries is destroyed, millions are dead, the economies of the Allied countries need to wind down from a war footing, and the Axis countries need to rebuild what is left of their homeland. To say that the troops are there is poor justification for arguing that they could or should start a new war. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Who are you, and what did you do with David? Who has said anything about whether the war should or could have started? Do you refuse to play Steel Panthers since it modelled a hypothetical US-Soviet conflict? The Operational Art of War? Do you find toy soldiers morally repugnant because they *could* be used to simulate a conflict that did not actually happen? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> > But the whole issue revolves around would this add to the game. In my opinion, yes it would. Of course it would add to the game. Whether the addition would be desirable or respectful is another matter. David<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Desirable, maybe. The idea that it is disrespectful is downright ludicrous. Last I checked, CM was not modelling any real people. I think they are just lines of code, little 1s and 0s. They are morally neutral by definition. The idea that it is morally ok to "pretend" to kill people who supposedly actually were killed, but morally suspect to "pretend" to kill people who were not actually killed is a non-starter. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dittohead Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Looks like a US vs Canada version maybe needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dittohead: Looks like a US vs Canada version maybe needed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ever see "South Park the Movie"? All that BTS has to do is watch it, and they have a storyline to base it off. Plus, the graphics don't have to be pretty spectaular either Rob/1, does your keyboard have some letters switched around on it? I really don't mean to harp, but, there is a spell checker included in this webboard. Right beside 'Submit Reply'. Your posts will get a lot better reception if you don't type like a 4 year old. Please, I am involved in education, and seeing a 15 year old incapable of basic spelling abilities is just sickening. Especially when the computer can do it for you. Regarding the amorality of allies fighting allies. In 1940, Britain and France were prepared to go to war with the Soviet Union over Finland. Russia purposely stalled outside of Warsaw so that the Polish Free Army will get slaughtered. In REALITY this alliance was only in name and revolved around the purpose of defeating Germany, a common enemy. Churchill said he would side with the devil if he were against Hitler when asked about the English-Russian Alliance. If indeed the devil did side with Churchill, would you have any qualms about the British going to war against Hell after defeating Germany? To state hypothetical situations that had a VERY good possibility of occuring is not an insult to veterans. It is just as 'insulting' in regards to your statement, to state what would happen if Japan and Germany won the war, and would they fight it out. This was also very possible and commonly thought and debated over. They aren't trying to do something that is totally off the wall either. No American, British, Canadian, French, or Polish (on the Western front or with the Home Army) were fighting in order to save Russia. The Russians weren't fighting in order to free France, or even free Poland, but to rid themselves of German occupation and to create a buffer zone of states on their border so this didn't happen again. This cozy alliance shattered into paranoia virtually once the last German layed down their arms. Although I do think that BTS will not implement the idea, as, their goal is to reenact history that actually happened, not history that could very well have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spii Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 I add my voice to the INCLUSION of Hypothetical battles i.e. US v Russia in CM2 It would be a blast to create scenarios with all kinds of nationalities to model. Both strict historians and hypothetical game players would be entertained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: were you crippled? Were any of your friends killed? Were you, or anyone close to you, raped or tortured? Was your hometown razed to the ground? I mean that seriously... Someone safe at home in the US, maybe. I can assure you that someone in Berlin or Moscow would not regard the possibility so casually.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is just bizarre. In every scenario we play, historical or imaginary, people were, or would have been, maimed, crippled, or killed (the raping and torturing is really over the top). This comes with the war game genre. To say that simulating Beyond the Elbe is somehow more sanguine, or more disrespectful, than simulating Normandy's hedgerows, is indefensible. In CMBO, WWII is a vehicle for the imagination. The accuracy of the sim is what makes the imagination's fruits valid. Testing tactical hypotheses is valid and bloodless against any "Orange" force. This whole "more sensitive than thou" argument is hypocritical, to the extent that it draws some arbitrary distinction between battles that never occured between historical combatants, and battles that never occured between non-historical combatants. CMBO is about taking tactical simulation to the limit and I don't know why anyone would want to pull back on the reins now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 David wrote: "During these conflicts, were you crippled? Were any of your friends killed? Were you, or anyone close to you, raped or tortured? Was your hometown razed to the ground? I mean that seriously." Ok now I see just how much class you have. Were any of my friends killed???? Well I lost 2 close friends in Mog and had a friend dragged through the street and beaten and shot, do you think that fits the bill? I also had another friend die in a training excercise, so I guess you wouldnt count that eh? One word of warning though. Next time you ask a Veteran if they lost a buddy, use more tact, or you may find yourself in deep trouble. *Note to Matt* See I kept my head this time, no banning of me this time Ray ------------------ When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one." New CM Site. In process of switching. Brought to you by Hardcore Gamers Daily Hardcore Gamers Daily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIX Posted December 11, 2000 Share Posted December 11, 2000 Chalk up one vote for being able to play USA vs Russia in CM2! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts