It has been brought to my attention by a respected fellow forum member that I may have turned into "Mr. Cranky Pants". Sorry.
That may be one of the oddest covers I have ever seen.
Z
Zinzan
Guest
@Meat Grinder - my answer to that would be "YAH-Boo-Sucks" 
- but then I've never been an expert at human relations ( now that's an understatement), pretty good at etiquette and streetwise though (Yeah, you just have to let the controls off in "interesting situations),
I didn't see ANYTHING you've posted here as cranky, to me I read it as mild disagreement, respectful if mildly blunt. One of the things that is great about this discussion (and THIS place) is that there has been differences of opinion that haven't got out of hand and remain rational. As most members will be aware that is immensely rare on any internet groups/discussions about games (never mind other topics)
I am aware that my lack of tact can be seen as provocative at times and I try (with my help) to not be TOO disrespectful, egotistical or self-important here. I fail (obvs) on occassion in ways much worse than what you wrote mr MEAT GRINDER so I would not take it to heart.
Brill vid btw
- but then I've never been an expert at human relations ( now that's an understatement), pretty good at etiquette and streetwise though (Yeah, you just have to let the controls off in "interesting situations),I didn't see ANYTHING you've posted here as cranky, to me I read it as mild disagreement, respectful if mildly blunt. One of the things that is great about this discussion (and THIS place) is that there has been differences of opinion that haven't got out of hand and remain rational. As most members will be aware that is immensely rare on any internet groups/discussions about games (never mind other topics)
I am aware that my lack of tact can be seen as provocative at times and I try (with my help) to not be TOO disrespectful, egotistical or self-important here. I fail (obvs) on occassion in ways much worse than what you wrote mr MEAT GRINDER so I would not take it to heart.
Brill vid btw
@Zinzan well, through the magic of technology, I did go back and edit my original comments to make them more ..... diplomatic.
The whole "house rules" discussion has just been done to death, IMO, and it's now to the point of beating a dead horse to those of us who have been on these (and BFC's) forums for years. What I need to understand, however, is not everyone has been on the forums for years and, to them, the house rules discussion may be fresh and new.
As for me, the fewer the "house rules" the better. I think the game's purchase system is self limiting. If you want to buy all Crack troops and Big Cats, you are going to have a lot fewer of them than you would if you had chosen lesser quality troops and armor. The only house rule I insist on is no pre-planned arty/air for the defender.
The whole "house rules" discussion has just been done to death, IMO, and it's now to the point of beating a dead horse to those of us who have been on these (and BFC's) forums for years. What I need to understand, however, is not everyone has been on the forums for years and, to them, the house rules discussion may be fresh and new.
As for me, the fewer the "house rules" the better. I think the game's purchase system is self limiting. If you want to buy all Crack troops and Big Cats, you are going to have a lot fewer of them than you would if you had chosen lesser quality troops and armor. The only house rule I insist on is no pre-planned arty/air for the defender.
Z
Zinzan
Guest
AND that just makes me want to see the original comments even more@Zinzan well, through the magic of technology, I did go back and edit my original comments to make them more ..... diplomatic.
(sigh)I agree actually, and with the bit about "done to death" I ommitted, about the general house rules! Too many discussions on the BF boards tend to devolve into complaints about the engine limits/patches etc..
Z
Zinzan
Guest
In this thread my own interest has been mainly in the specific issues over fortificastion (and by context) Assault type situations, rather than general games.
Having thought about the issue in light of this discussion I'm of the opinion that the only way to really do such a battle is through a scenario design. It would allow much more control over the size of map, choice of VL's with special conditions and restrictions on limits of points/reinforcements.
The players could then agree a force restriction for THEIR game along the lines I discussed several posts earlier. The main interest I have always had in wargaming is experimenting with the military problems faced by commanders in at their time. Due to this I've always tended to play to experiment rather than to win (Luckily for my ego).
I have no time, patience or skill to create such a scenario and I doubt many designers would be interested as the map size etc would make it quite a large project.
Having thought about the issue in light of this discussion I'm of the opinion that the only way to really do such a battle is through a scenario design. It would allow much more control over the size of map, choice of VL's with special conditions and restrictions on limits of points/reinforcements.
The players could then agree a force restriction for THEIR game along the lines I discussed several posts earlier. The main interest I have always had in wargaming is experimenting with the military problems faced by commanders in at their time. Due to this I've always tended to play to experiment rather than to win (Luckily for my ego).
I have no time, patience or skill to create such a scenario and I doubt many designers would be interested as the map size etc would make it quite a large project.
Yep. There is no fixing this using the current game engine, IMO, other than through careful scenario design (which just really works around the current engine limitations). I, for one, am ready for a brand new, fresh, CM engine.