Main Menu

Recent posts

#11
Computer Gaming / Re: Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnou...
Last post by Destraex - Today at 07:07:19 AM
Quote from: CaptainKoloth on Yesterday at 06:24:45 AMYou get a lot of these types in DCS too. Unquestionably that game has its bugs and so forth, but you do get this weird vicious subculture where they'll release a switch-for-switch accurate, lovingly crafted AH-64 (for example), and people immediately pop up on the forums saying "I COULDN'T SHOOT NUCLEAR WEAPONS AT B-52s WHILE IN A LEFT BARREL ROLL FIVE SECONDS AFTER BOOTING IT UP FOR THE FIRST TIME ALSO IT'S HARD DCS SUCKS 0/10" :shrug: Sigh.... internet.
Yeah, you do get these types. But then you actually also have the people who are passionate rivet counters that really care. These are often mistaken for toxic trolls in this day and age, previously they were just grogs ;)
Over the internet I guess it is hard to tell sometimes.
#12
Computer Gaming / Re: Second Front (in Developme...
Last post by Steve Walmsley - Today at 07:05:27 AM
Only reading the manual so far, not playing, but it looks like the game auto-saves every turn and you can go back and load any autosave, so it isn't forced ironman - you just can't save mid-turn.
#13
Computer Gaming / Re: Second Front (in Developme...
Last post by Grim.Reaper - Today at 04:51:55 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on Today at 04:05:39 AM$34.99, presently discounted 15%. $29.74.

Yep and thanks.  Good enough price for me to try it so just bought and downloaded.  Fingers crossed.
#14
Computer Gaming / Re: Second Front (in Developme...
Last post by Jarhead0331 - Today at 04:05:39 AM
$34.99, presently discounted 15%. $29.74.
#15
Computer Gaming / Re: Nuclear War Simulator
Last post by Jarhead0331 - Today at 03:04:14 AM
Quote from: bobarossa on Yesterday at 10:51:04 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on Yesterday at 12:00:01 PM
Quote from: gregb41352 on January 28, 2023, 01:12:53 AMI'll undoubtedly check it over.  The difference between this and World War 2 is that I didn't participate in that one but I kinda feel like I did participate in the Cold War.  I remember being unsettled as a youth in the knowledge that the world could end at any time.  I remember the Cuban Crisis and not knowing what was going to happen. \\

I accept this, but don't really understand it. Unless you served in the military in some capacity during the Cold War or in one of its associated conflicts, I don't see passive observation and witness counting as "participation". At least, not to the point of making one uncomfortable to play a wargame. It would be like me saying I participated in Operation Iraqi Freedom because I was alive when it took place. Don't think that flies.
I disagree.  While I suffered no danger during Iraqi Freedom and could not claim to have participated, facing nuclear anhilliation during the 60's was something we all participated in as we were all likely to die from it.

I guess it's just a matter of semantics on how broadly one wants to define participation. So, thank you for your service, I guess.  :crazy2:
#16
Computer Gaming / Re: Nuclear War Simulator
Last post by solops - Today at 12:44:50 AM
I gotta say, it never bothered me. I was born in 1956. I do remember the Cuban missile crisis, sort of, and I was aware of it all in the later 60s. I started wargaming in '65 or 66 (AH Gettysburg), so nukes became something we looked into as our gaming horizons expanded. The whole nuke thing never bothered any of us that I can recall. It was just a thing that was there, nothing you could do about it and it had no effect on daily life, other than the occasional drill at school.
#17
Computer Gaming / Re: Nuclear War Simulator
Last post by bobarossa - Yesterday at 10:51:04 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on Yesterday at 12:00:01 PM
Quote from: gregb41352 on January 28, 2023, 01:12:53 AMI'll undoubtedly check it over.  The difference between this and World War 2 is that I didn't participate in that one but I kinda feel like I did participate in the Cold War.  I remember being unsettled as a youth in the knowledge that the world could end at any time.  I remember the Cuban Crisis and not knowing what was going to happen. \\

I accept this, but don't really understand it. Unless you served in the military in some capacity during the Cold War or in one of its associated conflicts, I don't see passive observation and witness counting as "participation". At least, not to the point of making one uncomfortable to play a wargame. It would be like me saying I participated in Operation Iraqi Freedom because I was alive when it took place. Don't think that flies.
I disagree.  While I suffered no danger during Iraqi Freedom and could not claim to have participated, facing nuclear anhilliation during the 60's was something we all participated in as we were all likely to die from it.
#18
Organizations and Equipment / Re: Tanks!
Last post by Staggerwing - Yesterday at 10:14:33 PM
It's good to have a cousin with skills.
#19
Current Events / Re: Russia's War Against Ukrai...
Last post by SirAndrewD - Yesterday at 07:44:03 PM
Quote from: JasonPratt on January 29, 2023, 04:07:27 PMRe bringing 500K the first time instead of 250K: I WISH THEY HAD! They were almost completely incapable of logistically supporting 250K (including in C&C), and would have fallen apart even more quickly with 500K.

Logistically, no, they never had a way of supporting that number with the equipment and plan they had. 

That's the point.  The Russians, for what they had, should've had a much more limited plan that could've been supported better with short, controlled line of supply. 

The initial invasion plan was wildly over ambitious for the number of Russian troops and Russia's ability to supply them. 

To have won this war in the "first week" if that was even possible, the Russians needed a different plan.


And, 500k troops available doesn't mean you use that in the invasion.  The reason the UAF was so effective in its counterattacks was that the Russians by mid summer had no reserves.  Had they planned for the potential of a longer war and already mobilized those reserves by February 2022, they would've gone a long way to plugging the gaps against future counterattacks like they're doing now. 

Anyway, as JH said, this thing is a LONG way from over and a long way from being decided in the Ukrainian's favor.  Russia could very well start a war winning campaign in the Spring if they do it smartly and understand it's not going to be done in a week. 

I'm not holding my breath for anything decisive though.  Not as they sit.
#20
Current Events / Re: Russia's War Against Ukrai...
Last post by FarAway Sooner - Yesterday at 06:47:22 PM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on Yesterday at 12:15:30 AMAnyone who thinks this war is anywhere close to ending is seriously misguided. The worst is yet to come. Undoubtedly. Russia is nowhere close to collapse or coup.

The big unknown here is Putin's health.  Like you, I think it's unlikely that he's overthrown.  But if he dies, then we'll have a major guessing game about who inherits the mantle next?

As Gus suggests, an extended civil war within a country holding 6,000 nuclear weapons is a recipe for all sorts of problems.  To be sure, even if he's surprised us in the last few years (in part because he's done such a crappy job in many respects), he is still The Devil that We Know.