argie Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eumundi: As for the Bailey bridge mister smart guy, have you ever set one up? If not then you have no place to talk. I think when it comes down to it none of you can prove that it was not possible to set up a Bailey bridge in combat, just like you can't prove that the Ark could not be used under fire.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have set up two Bailey bridges: one over an obstacle for an exercise and one over plain terrain just for training... Making the one over plain tarrain take us a whole morning (was a Double-Double, we have all the construction stuff stockpiled at hand and was in light snow conditions). The other one takes us all the day, including moving and stockpiling material to make the bridge (a Single-Single, around 20mts long), not including survey and simulated assault operations to secure farest shore. And I can tell you that a Bailey is one of the last things I want to do under fire, just after pooh-pooh, but before mine clearing [ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: argie ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
argie Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 I forgot! We were Conscripts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Steve N Jackson: I want the ability, as a real life commander does, to overcome obstacles, natural and manmade which might lay in his path. Simple as that. River? Bridge it. Ditch? Fascine it, etc and so on. At the present moment, we are forced into the IMO unnatural situation that we must seize a bridge if we are to cross any sort of water obstacle. Essentially, the attacker is channelled to choke points which are easily defended.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Please note to the community that the original poster Kim Beazley MP Ma (a stolen identity originally) has started to post under my name, Steve N. Jackson, in some attempt to bail out his image on this board. This is the fourth new account attacker I have faced. Most could be ignored or let past, but the community should know of this is not me, not that the poster is hiding who he is. [ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: Slapdragon ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve N Jackson Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: Please note to the community that the original poster Kim Beazley MP Ma (a stolen identity originally) has started to post under my name, Steve N. Jackson, in some attempt to bail out his image on this board. This is the fourth new account attacker I have faced. Most could be ignored or let past, but the community should know of this is not me, not that the poster is hiding who he is. [ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: Slapdragon ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am not claiming to be you, Mr.Slapdragon. Remember, you supposed to be play the ball, not the man, as we say downunder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by the scourge of Jacko: I agree there isn't. Nor have I insisted there should be. I have noted that I think its rather unrealistic to expect a simulation which purports to portray WWII in NW Europe to not have those features included in it. If those features were included in the game, then obviously a means to overcome them would be required.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Now look hear boofhead (as good a name as any, feel free to adopt it on your meanderings), as I pointed out about 20,000 pages back, of course there are limitations to the simulation. The 20x20 terrain tile imposes enormous problems for CM to simulate certain types of terrain and a whole bunch of other things besides. Computer capabilities imposed the 20x20 limitation on BTS and they had to fit their simulation into that as best they could. Down the track as things improve in the average customer base computer capabilities then there will be scope for this. But just look at their valiant attempts to simulate bocage, it just doesn't work too well in the current game engine. It is best to view CM as a work in progress. As a simulation it is akin to a pixellated image of the Mona Lisa. It its essence it resembles the real thing but closer examination reveals that resolution varies throughout the image. Some portions being all but indistinguishable from the original at 14,000 dpi and above whereas others are only at 100dpi. It would be well to consider that CM2 will not merely address a different theatre of the war and the addition of large numbers of new vehicles and units but will also improve upon CMBO in many other ways. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Mr.Slapdragon, as Brian has noted, appears on the otherhand to treat CM and this BBS as his private property and woe betide anybody who questions his authority. I like unseating those who like to seat themselves on such high horses.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes well Jacko does take a bit of getting used too. I have an affectionate and amused regard for his tendentious proselytizing. Akin to how one might regard a professor on the cusp of dementia who wanders between lucidity and babble . It would be best for all of us if you just responded to the worthy bits of what he has to say rather than stirring him up all the time (though that can be fun). It does get a little tiresome when every second thread turns into Jacko's Debating School Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve N Jackson Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Terence - indeed those are Bailey bridges. We still use them in Canada; one of my best friends is an engineer in the Canadian Forces; it does indeed take a wee bit longer than 30 minutes to "build" one. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Which is why they developed the skid/mobile/Dalton/Brown Bailey Bridges which were assembled offsite and pushed into position. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Germanboy is about the biggest proponent of Commonwealth stuff I know (duh) so its beyond me why any of you regulars feel the need to respond to him. Ignore the little peckerwood.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "proponent" or "opponent"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 Aside from the fact that that Simon feels the need to deride others as lecturers, sermonizers, or whatever description seems to come to him on a whim, his comments are quite accurate re: CM. Beazly/Jackson/Whomever is a colossal bore whose sole purpose is to whine about CM, confuse real life with training films, and then chastise us for not agreeing with him. Do leave him alone gentlemen; you're better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve N Jackson Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Fox: Yes well Jacko does take a bit of getting used too. I have an affectionate and amused regard for his tendentious proselytizing. Akin to how one might regard a professor on the cusp of dementia who wanders between lucidity and babble . It would be best for all of us if you just responded to the worthy bits of what he has to say rather than stirring him up all the time (though that can be fun). It does get a little tiresome when every second thread turns into Jacko's Debating School <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm not the one who turns the debate to a mud-slinging match, everytime, Simon. I am merely defending my position. I'd suggest you ask him to refrain from his attacks. BTW, like the new name you've given me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Aside from the fact that that Simon feels the need to deride others as lecturers, sermonizers, or whatever description seems to come to him on a whim, his comments are quite accurate re: CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Whim? I can assure you that they are based entirely upon careful analysis and meticulous collection of data. Occasionally the recipients are misidentified as being able to "take it". I am quite confident that Slappy/Jacko and Boof are able to do so. Non-deserving recipients of this kind of attention are generally quickly identified as such. Hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted September 21, 2001 Share Posted September 21, 2001 Hmm, your comments might have some more weight if you weren't in violation of our registration policy. You ARE in effect posting as Mr. Jackson and you are hereby banned. That's BOTH accounts. People keep pushing us and we are keep responding in kind. We have had it! You WILL obey the rules here or you will be GONE. Case closed. And in response to an earlier post about a customer not needing to prove anything. Your 45.00 USD bought you a copy of the game. THATS ALL. It did not buy you any sort of special privledge to come here and waste everyones time with unfounded and speculatory info. We have a long history of changes being implemented due to forum member input but you gotta be a real piece of Samsonite to think its a given just cause you pluncked down some cash... You bought the game, not our obedience to your whims. We never have and never will operate like that... Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts