Slapdragon Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Originally posted by Germanboy: OTOH - some people never grow up. You have that right!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenDragon Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 From an outsider looking in, it looks like mission acomplished. Throw a grenade and watch the fireworks. Look at all the effort in this thread just to counter a FPS twitch. BTW I love the graphics, the best of any wargame I've ever played and THANK YOU to all the ARTISTS who's mods I've downloaded. ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Der Unbekannte Jäger Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 I hate to use this thread for it but I have noticed several new people to the fold post in here, I would just like to say welcome, and to those still lurking a big hello! ------------------ "'S muladach ma theid ar sgaoileadh..." -Duncan Ban Macintyre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Originally posted by JenDragon: From an outsider looking in, it looks like mission acomplished. Throw a grenade and watch the fireworks. Look at all the effort in this thread just to counter a FPS twitch. BTW I love the graphics, the best of any wargame I've ever played and THANK YOU to all the ARTISTS who's mods I've downloaded. Very needed. If you let a BBS go, then it becomes like Usenet as the trolls crawl from the word work. The reason why this BBS is one of the best is because there are literally a hundred people will to keep it that way on top of BTS's beneficial moderation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Who gives a flying monkey poop about CM's graphics not being "state of the art." BTS has said there is a reason for this, and it is because most of you dont not have state of the art systems with 5gigs of Ram and duel GF2 graphics cards. Kind of be pointless to make this game look like Quake3 if a jeep can kill a Tiger. Ray ------------------ When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one." Click now for shelter from the Peng thread The Red Army of the Rugged Defense Group Ladder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Now everybody knows the latest cutting edge PC games also come with demos on the CD of unsolicited commercials of the latest smash hits, "The Daryl Brothers White House Vacation", Bill Clinton's latest PC game, "Dude, Where's my Cigar?", and CM didn't have any of those that I saw. Proves it right there, and I really miss the hundreds of demo .dll files overwriting my registry settings too. Was really looking forward to reloading my OS. Finally, the leading edge companies are interested in fast quantity, fast profit, and slick advertising not total quality, commitment, and continuous improvement like BTS has demonstrated to its customers. I guess they just aren't in the mainstream after all. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-27-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Originally posted by PeterNZer: Never once has he said anything useful, and his ads for his forum are a joke, his very behaviour ensures i'll never visit PeterNZ If you're talking about alt.games.combat-mission, it's certainly not his forum, when he posted the same article there the response were far less polite. He doesn't post much there anyway - not since he tangled with Fionn... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Manta Ray, you might be surprised to learn that a lot of dedicated CM players do in fact care about CM's graphics and are aware that excellent graphics and excellent gameply aren't mutually exclusive--and that the former can add to the latter. Bruno, you do realize that BTS isn't the only company to make good games or care about their customers? It sounds like a cult around here sometimes--or should I say collective? ------------------ New to Combat Mission? Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips. [This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Looking at the clip that GB posted, it looks as if it is only a segment of a thought instead of an entire one. He says that it doesn't match up to what a first person shooter would like, and he agrees, but... then it cuts off. For all honesty, I believe that he was ready to write something like 'it doesn't need it' or 'as wargames go it is spectacular' and so on. You have to admit, for whatever reason, these graphics aren't utilizing the 'cutting edge' of 3D detail, smoothness or even computer processors. BTS stated that their market isn't like a FPS, which usually is of young children/teens who all have modern computers and upgrade every other month, but career individuals who have better things to spend their money on (school, mortgages, crack, etc...). If BTS decided to have a minimum requirement being a P500 when CM was first released then its 'graphical quality' would probably be a lot higher, and its target audience a lot smaller. However, since they wanted 'average' and 'sub-average' computers to be able to run the game when it was released 6 months ago (based on computers 1 year ago) it had to sacrifice something. When CM2 comes out, possibly speeds of P500's will be their target point. Sure, it won't compare exactly with FPS of that day, or probably not even with today's FPS but it will probably be better then the detail of CM1. Personally, I think that the AFV's are just about as good as anyone can get them. Trees as sprites work fine. The only possible improvements that I see (need is a bit too strong) are regarding extras like rubble, bushes, wheatfields and infantry. Eventually modelling down to the individual soldier in each squad/crew would add to the realism (this doesn't mean you get to use them individually, just see a squad for 12 men) HOWEVER, I do realise this won't be for a long while, most definitely not for CM2, probably not for CM3. Time will tell. Possbly there will be a great advancement, or a long stagnation of computer speed in the next few years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 A note about the FPS market, with which I'm rather familiar: it seems that a great proportion of FPS players are actually in their 20's and 30's. Most all the ones I know personally are also college-educated professionals. ------------------ New to Combat Mission? Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Gunny how many wargames you play before CM? I ask because anyone who has played wargames oh say for the last 20yrs knows exactly just how far ahead CMs graphics are for a wargame. Regards, John Waters ------------------ "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field". Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt.Tom Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Uh, why is this thread still on the first page(of the forum), would everyone please stop posting to this so it will go away. Thank you for your support. Pvt.Tom [This message has been edited by Pvt.Tom (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Originally posted by Gremlin: A note about the FPS market, with which I'm rather familiar: it seems that a great proportion of FPS players are actually in their 20's and 30's. Most all the ones I know personally are also college-educated professionals. Really? Just going on my experience, most of my friends stopped FPS around the age of 19-20. Of course, does Mechwarrior 4 count as a FPS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Some food for thought on this issue: Whenever people bring up graphics, a lot of responses imply or even state the following: 1) Excellent graphics and excellent gameplay are antithetical. Actually, that’s not only illogical on the face of it, but little more than a cursory glance at today’s games shows that there are many that excel both in terms of graphics and gameplay. It’s true that there’s an element of subjectivity in those judgements, but by reasonable critical standards, I think you’ll find it to be true. Secondly, good graphics contribute to any game that seeks to create a visual representation of reality, through their ability to emotionally immerse you. I believe even BTS said CM is as much a sim as a wargame. 2) Graphics aren’t really important in CM. CM wouldn’t be the same game it is without a 3D battlefield and units. The former, at least, has a direct bearing on gameplay because of LOS. 3) It’s OK to question BTS or make suggestions to them if the topic deals with historical accuracy or mathematical modeling, but not other elements, including graphics. I’d submit that CM’s true greatness lies in its overall design innovation. Most game designers with basic research skills, time, and energy could create an historically detailed and accurate game, but very few can create a fundamental game design that’s both novel and effective. BTS did the latter and deserves every bit of praise for it. It seems reasonable that issues outside of historical accuracy can and should be open to suggestions and questions, particularly if you agree with the above line of reasoning that sees CM’s real strength not in penetration charts, but rather its amalgam of design concepts. The basic equivalent of the CM game system, could—-and hopefully will be—-with modification applied to other conflicts, real and hypothetical, including fantasy and science fiction. Great detail and tactical sophistication don’t require an historical foundation. 4) Anyone who makes suggestions for improvements in CM only plays or knows about FPS’s, FPS games are simplistic, and FPS players are simple-minded. Take the time to seriously play FPS’s like Tribes or Team Fortress Classic with top clans, and I think you’ll agree the tactics involved are actually quite subtle and complex. I’ve had the good fortune to meet and associate with literally hundreds of FPS players from around the world, and by and large they tend to be intelligent and well-educated people. Some of the brightest people I’ve ever met, including quite a few professors and professionals, love FPS’s. Many FPS players also enjoy and can see the merits in games of other genres. 5) If a topic has been raised before, it shouldn’t be raised again. It’s presumptuous and even arrogant to assume others can’t intelligently add to an existing discussion you already read or contributed to. 6) BTS is the only game design house that interacts with or cares about its customers. False. I’ve had email discussions on a number of issues with designers of prominent games, including number-one best sellers. Many game designers are also very involved in fostering mod scenes built around their games through direct support. If they don’t interact with fans as much as you’d like, it’s quite possible that they lack the time and energy to respond to email from their enormous fan bases. Also, don’t confuse a publisher’s lack of quality technical support with a designer’s wishes or intentions. Publishers aren’t the same as designers, which is obvious, but apparently forgotten pretty often. 7) CM’s graphics should only be compared to previous wargames. Why? A great number of CM players have broader gaming backgrounds than just wargames, and understandably compare CM to games in other genres. CM’s appeal extends well beyond the hardcore grog audience. It’s clear to me from posts on this forum and from discussion with a number of CM players that many of us who absolutely love CM and appreciate its sophistication also greatly enjoy computer games that aren’t wargames. As noted above, CM is a revolutionary game, but not just within the wargaming genre. It’s bigger and better than that. As an aside, I’m guessing a number of grogs probably mocked CM when they first heard of it, saying the designers were just trying to make a flashy RTS knock-off ------------------ New to Combat Mission? Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips. [This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 1) Excellent graphics and excellent gameplay are antithetical. While certainly not antithetical, they can be mutually exclusive. Consider that there are a fixed number of hours that a company can allocate to a given project. Work within this project then becomes a zero sum game. If BTS spends 100 hours improving the graphics that is necessarily 100 hours they will not spend improving gameplay. Now, a balance must be struck between the two areas of concentration, but no one on this board is even remotely capable of dictating what this balance should be. Only BTS can do that. 3) It’s OK to question BTS or make suggestions to them if the topic deals with historical accuracy or mathematical modeling, but not other elements, including graphics. It's ok to question BTS about anything you want. But when they answer (several times, definitively) you should stop arguing. It wastes their (very precious) time and yours as well. We should remember that every hour we spend bugging BTS about something they've answered already is one hour later CM2 will arrive on our doorsteps. - Photon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 1) I thoroughly agree, though some don't seem to look at the issue from a logical stance as you do. 2) A discussion among fans isn't the same as bugging or even making requests to BTS. Personally--and maybe ironically --I don't care that much about the graphics in CM, since they look fine to me with the mods I have installed, and I pay the great majority of my attention to tactical matters--for what little good that does me Still, I'd love to see CM and its successors excel in every regard possible. But, I do care about how these discussions often seem to devolve into misinformation, insinuation, and disrespect. As an aside, everyone here should be happy that so many "non-wargamers" have become interested in CM. When the wargaming genre is faring so poorly overall, at least in terms of commercial success, respect, and attention, the more "new blood," the better. ------------------ New to Combat Mission? Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tris Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 As an aside, I’m guessing a number of grogs probably mocked CM when they first heard of it, saying the designers were just trying to make a flashy RTS knock-off You may well be correct, though in my case the initial impression evoked less "mocking" and more skepticism that the final product would one day arrive as software of a "serious" nature and intent. Happily, I was mistaken. For the rest of it: you seem to have your fingers on the pulse of reality. More's the pity that you do not represent the mean intellectual attitude in this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Originally posted by Gremlin: 1) I thoroughly agree, though some don't seem to look at the issue from a logical stance as you do. 2) A discussion among fans isn't the same as bugging or even making requests to BTS. Personally--and maybe ironically --I don't care that much about the graphics in CM, since they look fine to me with the mods I have installed, and I pay the great majority of my attention to tactical matters--for what little good that does me Still, I'd love to see CM and its successors excel in every regard possible. But, I do care about how these discussions often seem to devolve into misinformation, insinuation, and disrespect. As an aside, everyone here should be happy that so many "non-wargamers" have become interested in CM. When the wargaming genre is faring so poorly overall, at least in terms of commercial success, respect, and attention, the more "new blood," the better. First off, as long as this thread keep bubbling from the surface, please reread the first posts which posses the question in terms of current computing power -- number of polygons drawn -- future computing power -- and maximised market potential. No one has ever said CM should slip behind the times, just that people who want the detail found in Diablo II do not understand the engineering and marketing reality of that statement. CM2 will advance. CM3 will advance further, then they will redo the engine and you will have fingers on the model's hands. I have actually used virtual actors before and written an article on their use, and in a scene which a couple of years back pushed maybe 3 times the polygons of the most advanced FPS, about where people ignorant of the facts like Gunny Bunny want it to be now, it took a render farm an hours to generate a single frame with full lighting effects and pysics modelled actors. 30 frames a second and our render scene was 18 seconds. So I would urge people instead of arguing cross each other (who does not want better graphics -- no one said they did not this whole post -- people just need to read the previous posts rather than jumping into the middle and commenting) argue something useful like what is the base number of polygons CM2 should push and what range of machines should it serve and why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Originally posted by Gremlin: Some food for thought on this issue: snip 7) CM’s graphics should only be compared to previous wargames. Why? A great number of CM players have broader gaming backgrounds than just wargames, and understandably compare CM to games in other genres. CM’s appeal extends well beyond the hardcore grog audience. It’s clear to me from posts on this forum and from discussion with a number of CM players that many of us who absolutely love CM and appreciate its sophistication also greatly enjoy computer games that aren’t wargames. As noted above, CM is a revolutionary game, but not just within the wargaming genre. It’s bigger and better than that. snip GREAT Point! There are many here (myself included) that enjoy games in MANY forms. I still play old style cardboard board games with old friends one evening every two weeks. I enjoy Age of Empires and Warcraft, and for awhile I was alomst as addicted to SimCity as I am to Combat Mission. There are ALOT of gamers on the board that BUY other games besides CM. I imagine I will be flamed for saying this but the wargame ONLY grog types here who like Combat Mission "should" be EXTREMELY grateful of the large non-grog Mass appeal of Combat Mission. It is now sold out for the third time, AND it is NOT sold out becuase it ONLY appeals to grogs, if it did it would not even be half as sucessful as it is. The fact that it is sold out three times in a row says something about its mass APPEAL, to the non-grog video game fans. There alot of us and because we have helped make CM so profitable, (and it is we who are suggesting and requesting even further graphics refinements and MORE eye candy in CM2) (Ok FLAME me NOW!), all the, true historical wargame, ONLY grog, types here on the board should thank the majority of us here who are not grogs for contributing (by buying CBMO) to the huge profitability and sucess of CM in numbers larger than the entire grog market put together. Here it is simply: If CMBO ONLY appealed to the VERY narrow hardcore wargame as an historical simulation grog market, would CMBO be half as successful as it is and would Steve and Charles be expressing the SAME level of confidence about moving ahead with their dreams of an even bigger and better Eastern Front version of CMBO in CM2??? Seriously? Again Gremlin makes a GREAT point... "7) CM’s graphics should only be compared to previous wargames. Why? A great number of CM players have broader gaming backgrounds than just wargames, and understandably compare CM to games in other genres." We are talking about market competition and today video games are a MULTI BILLION dollar market and the non-grog part of the market accounts for a MUCH MUCH larger part of that total market than the narrow wargame only grog market. So... Making a pretty game with lots of eye candy and graphics appeal (never at the expense of the historical accuracy of course) CAN ONLY be MORE profitable because that's what the MAJORITY of the market wants to see. And yes to someone earlier in this thread who accused me of trying to sell the sizzle and not the steak, they are mistaken. I am suggesting selling the sizzle to the BEST steak you can buy. Damn right lets ask for better, more state of the art "eye candy" high tech graphics, why not? We KNOW BTS will deliver the steak (historical accuracy, and all the goodies you can't see) why not ask them to present the very BEST sizzle on the market as well? So I say YES to both MORE SIZZLE and MORE STEAK in CM2 And of course I wish Steve and Charles and MadMatt and KwazyDog all the very best in their attempts to deliver CM2 on there own timeline and at their own pace. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-28-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Gremlin wrote: Bruno, you do realize that BTS isn't the only company to make good games or care about their customers? Well for the fun of it, let's assume for a moment that I don't. Name me some then you feel are of equal stature with BTS in the terms spoken of, bearing in mind the BTS Manifesto, and we'll see what my own experience with them has been, if any. There are many companies out there ofcourse who do not make a product I'm interested in and/or that I've ever considered spending my money on. In terms of a cult? I rather see the comparison of BTS to the mass production companies something akin to the days of hand craftsmanship as compared to the mass production assembly lines in a rather abstract way. There are those who feel just as passionately about Waterford crystal, Rolls Royce, or Harley Davidson. There is the best, and there is the rest. Is that opinion, yep sure is. But why would one wander into a Harley Davidson shop and start telling them how they should be more like Honda? Besides, I believe the entire thread wasn't so much about whether or not the graphcis "could" be improved, it was about the manner in which, if not the context of which, it was suggested. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oberly Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Name me some then you feel are of equal stature with BTS in the terms spoken of, and we'll see what my own experience with them has been, if any. Well,three that spring to mind for me are HPS,Shrapnel,and SSG.I'm sure there are many others,but those are ones with whom I have had dealings in the past on a variety of matters,and have had nothing but good experiences.I agree that BTS is responsive,etc,but it is quite tiresome to read over and again here that they are unique,and that all other gaming companies are the devil. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Well, don't read it then. Read something else. I don't usually hang out in the teenage romance section of the bookstore for similar reasons, but if I did, then why would I complain to the manager that I'm tired of seeing romance novels on the shelf? I do not have any personal experience with Shrapnel, or SSG. HPS I do have some experience with. HPS is dedicated to their product, and they pursue a continual improvement of that product. However, they stubbornly resisted any radical graphical enhancements to the product, despite an outcry from many for the improvement. As a former HPS game player, I'm now here on account of that. Probably no biggie to them, and certainly not to me. Other than that, my experience with them was fine, and they too are a rather small company among the giants. Very similar to BTS in many ways I'd say. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Bruno, here are just a few games from the past few years that I feel demonstrate substantial quality in some regard or other (off the top of my head, no particular order, not including free mods): Half-Life Age of Empires II Unreal Tournament Grand Prix Legends Steel Beasts Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator II SWAT 3 Mobil 1 Rally Championship Need for Speed: Porsche Unleashed Grand Prix 3 Superbike 2001 Baldur's Gate StarCraft Rainbow Six/Rogue Spear series Giants: Citizen Kabuto Tribes No One Lives Forever High Heat Baseball series Tony Hawk Pro Skater 1 & 2 Homeworld etc. Some developers or publishers that seem to take pride in their work, interact with fans and/or mod developers directly, and/or tend to publish quality games, though usually not all three (the following will no doubt be hotly disputed, and I won't be drawn into it ): Epic Microsoft Id Geoff Crammond Milestone Sierra Relic Shrapnel Ensemble Blizzard etc. Btw, I think it's great that BTS takes time to talk with fans and consider their input. My point was that they're not the only good game developer out there, nor the only one with that exhibits a sense of craftsmanship. As noted above, gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry, all told, so you can't expect the biggest designers and publishers to interact with fans all the time directly--it's just not feasible. And while publishers may just be in it for the cash, I've never seen evidence that most or even many game designers don't actually care about their games--quite the opposite. ------------------ New to Combat Mission? Visit CM Boot Camp at Combat Missions for tips. [This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 02-01-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oberly Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Well, don't read it then. Read something else. How about this:I'll read what I like here,and comment on what I wish to comment on.I'm not telling you what or what not to post,after all. I agree to a certain extent about your problems with HPS on the graphics of some of their games,but tell me this:how is their response on the graphics any different than BTS response to those who want flashier graphics to CM?HPS,like BTS,is trying to keep system requirements realistic for the majority of their customers.I don't blame either company for that. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 28, 2001 Share Posted January 28, 2001 Well, I think you left out Leisure Suit Larry, most everything else is there. And I'd submit there is a substantial difference between game designers, and the game companies. Which, was where I was coming from. No, I'm not going to debate the wonderful merits of Microsoft. Though I don't remember BTS being hauled into Federal court. Sierra, where would one start. Made AOD, dropped it like a hot potato, (and wrote it with NMI API calls so it now will not work on most modern systems), made AOE, dropped it like a hot potato, Return to Krondor, dropped it like... and a host of others. RB3D they came through on after an uproar of such magnitude as I've never seen before, but the uproar did have its effect and they made good finally, and so on. Most of those on your list mass produce. Some good, some not so good. A hit here, a miss there, and off the shelf it comes. Have you read the BTS Manifesto? Look, you don't think BTS is something special and unique, that's fine by me. Applaud the big giants as much as you like. My opinion is different, and I applaud BTS. Their Manifesto speaks for itself. I do not see a lot of that in other companies, and certainly not in the giant companies. That is my opinion. You don't agree, fine then don't. Spend your money where you like. Is BTS the only single solitary company that is a good company, no ofcourse not. But I've personally had my fill of the trash from a lot of the bigger companies. If your experience isn't the same as mine, splendid! Glad to hear it. I don't hang out on the Microsoft forum and declare how wonderful BTS is, nor the Sierra forum to declare how wonderful BTS is, nor would I hang out on other companies forums thinking that I wasn't going to hear how perfectly wonderful their products were, and then attempt to tell everyone they were wrong. I mean, are we on the same frequency here? This is the BTS forum, so your just apt to hear how wonderful they are around here. Kinda works that way. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-28-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts