Bluefish Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 I think to model true machine gun fire the current ability of the gun would diminish. Less firepower in more areas instead of more in one. Sounds good to me. BTS are you with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 Lewis wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Didnt answer my question about how you initially playtested the game but I thought as much.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yup, we totally don't know what we are doing. We are a bunch of fools. Combat Mission is just a lucky accident, brought about by some freak combination of luck and ... uhm... luck. We are not worthy of you. This is the thing I don't get here Lewis. At the same time you obviously love CM (or perhaps are such a waste of humanity you hang out here talking about a game you hate) you have zero respect for me and our work in general. Is there anybody else besides me that sees some sort of oddity about this position? If we are such idiots, then how did we manage to come up with CM? You appear to think it was luck, since you obviously don't think we know what we are doing, not to mention our testers (veterans and all). As usual, when logic and rational thoughts fail you, you trot out your tired assortment of insults and abuse. This has been your pattern since you first came on this BBS last year. It is also the reason why you have been ALMOST banned more than anybody else in the two years this BBS has been active. It is only because I can tollerate your smug ego that you remain on this BBS. Lord knows there has been more than one popular cry to have you banned. I have even taken a bunch of personal heat for letting you stay here. But hey... every once and a while you don't talk out of your back side and actually make a contribution here. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>But my point is that in CMBO, the game makes it possible to be as bad a commander as you could have possibly have been in WWI. The game ALLOWS you to do exactly as the dumbass generals did from 1914-1917.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Perhaps, although the guy on the other side would have to be a "dumbass" to not set up an adequate defense. I don't know about you, but I don't leave sole MGs, with no covering units, guarding key advances. And neither did the armies in the trenches of WWI. And of course, the units in CM are, inherently and internally, using WWII tactical doctrine. I have said it once, I have said it a thousand times... a unit using Move or Run is not walking or running shoulder to shoulder like his counterpart of wars past. Obviously this point keeps escaping you. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think that BTS has to address some level of orders limitations and possible ramifications from just plain stupid behaviour.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> We have to some extent done this in CM1. The player has far less control of his units than in other games. Did we restrict control enough? Perhaps not. Might we restrict unit behavior more in CM2? Wait and see. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Your discretionary choice of what is worth ignoring...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am not ignoring anything, in fact I have addressed the issues head on. I admit where there are problems and discuss how to fix them. If such discussions go over your head (which is probably why you start slinging mud instead of engaging in rational discourse) that is not my problem. I am not your therapist. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...and your need for constant adulation.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I do not seek out, nor need, constant adulation. If it comes it comes. Perhaps you are jealous of the attention? Perhaps you wish you could have people honestly complementing you on a job well done? Your attempts to claim that you are CM's sole, or at least lead, savior does look like a cry for attention. It is the only reason I can see why you are still here seeing as you think I am a moron. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Do you?, perhaps, have a Napoleanic complex?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Nah, I just don't like a disresepctfull nobody continually pissing all over me in a thread where I am taking the time to discuss the game I helped make and continue to help improve. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Is it possible that people can like the same thing yet not exactly like each other.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sure. But I still don't understand how you can so totally believe I am some sort of fool. Combat Mission is a reflection of me, in part, because I spent 3 years of my life helping to make it. If I am a moron, then how do you explain your obvious love for the game I in large part created? This is probably what eats you up the most. You want to always be superior, yet you have done nothing to earn such a position. On the other hand, I readily admit that I am not perfect and neither is Combat Mission. Somehow you continue to overlook this admission and accuse me of being something that I am not. Have a good look in the mirror Lewis, for over the past year or so you have been here I don't think I have ever seen you admit that you were wrong. I have also never seen you admit that anybody else might have a better grasp of something that you. However, I have continually seen you dodge all legitimate discussion when it turns against you and lash out with personal attacks and mud slinging. You remain on this BBS for two reasons: 1. Your attacks on me don't cause me any pain and suffering. I saw your type back on the playgrounds in elementary school and didn't pay your type much mind back then either. 2. Your attacks, issue ducking, consistant twisting of people's words (note the lack of response to my last post...), lack of humility, etc. keeps your standing with your peers very low. In other words, nobody takes you seriously when you go off on one of your tirades. And anybody that cares to do a search on your profile will see that you have thrown tantrums like this more times than one can count. This thread remains open for now. I think the value in it has already been exhausted. We acknowledge shortcomings in CM's model, and I have discussed some of the ways we are going to fix them. I have been consistant with my logic and my line of reasoning. I am not perfect, and have never said I am (although Lewis likes to think I have), but I do think I know a thing or two about warfare and how to simualte it. If I didn't, why are any of you here on this BBS? Otherwise... what a waste of time talking about a crappy game with its crappy, pigheaded, moron of a designer. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 Bluefish wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think to model true machine gun fire the current ability of the gun would diminish. Less firepower in more areas instead of more in one. Sounds good to me. BTS are you with it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is already being done to some extent. The problem is not the firepower itself. It is also not usually the means of its delivery. One problem we did identify was a last ditch "going for broke" MG behavior. We are also going to take a look and see if our abstracted Grazing Fire system might need to be beefed up a bit. But not before we take on what is likely to be the main cause of some shortcomings... The main problems have been identified earlier, and most have to do with too great of an abstracion of Run and Move. Although it works fairly well in most situations, we do see the need to have an order somewhere in between. That order will be called Assault Move. This order will be in Combat Mission 2 along with the other changes (including TacAI behavior). Thanks, Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: The Assault Move is simulating a skilled and coordinated effort to "leapfrog" men, with some running to new cover and others providing covering fire. Conscripts have no military training, and therefore this is something they aren't capable of even attempting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Okay. I think I got that part. Check me if I'm wrong; I am presuming that: 1. The Assault Move does not appear on the menu of permissible orders for conscript troops. 2. For other troops, the order appears in the menu, but like many other actions in CM the successful execution of the order is probabilistic with a higher probabilities given to troops with higher experience, morale, lower fatigue, and so forth. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 Michael, <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Okay. I think I got that part. Check me if I'm wrong; I am presuming that:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Bingo Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Michael, Bingo Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks. I like it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbott: Lewis, Your reply actually gained back some of the respect I was beginning to lose for you. I do realize your posts have some merit (as Steve does) however your antagonistic ways scratch at ones nerves at times. I am glad to see what I think may be a settling down a bit on this thread. Regards, Abbott<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well thanks alot. I was never really upset or anything. And yes I do continue to post about the subject and wont try to write long posts about myself. I think others here see my general points about the game (and warfare). And I am going to take Toms advice and just avoid getting a certain someone in such a tizzy. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 Lewis wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And I am going to take Toms advice and just avoid getting a certain someone in such a tizzy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oh, that would be easy for any normal person out there. Just show the people you are talking with an ounce of respect and don't sink to personal attacks. And if you think you only have a problem doing that with me... do a Search on your own posts. You have a winning record here in terms of pissing people off. In fact, that is the one thing you freely admit you are really good at. Something for you to take pride in I suppose. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 22, 2001 Share Posted April 22, 2001 Hey, at least I got my first ever sigline out of this nonsense I don't even want to imagine... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Username Posted April 26, 2001 Share Posted April 26, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Hey, at least I got my first ever sigline out of this nonsense I don't even want to imagine... Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What sigline? Why do I always find you saying baffling things? I dont see no sigline.. But as far as the pathos about "loser" "nothing better to do", etc. Uh, its was the weekend and you were posting back to back posts here.. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted April 26, 2001 Share Posted April 26, 2001 What?? this thread is not dead yet? How about letting it rest in peace? -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts