Registered Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


madrebel last won the day on April 4

madrebel had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

162 Salty

1 Follower

About madrebel

  • Rank
  • Birthday
  1. i've studied this a bit but am by know means an expert. from what i understand though ... the neck bone is connected to the ... ;-) you guys are doing great work scotsman ;-)
  2. this just isn't true. idk if you remember swiftcut but he was a real life artilleryman and in this game posted many 100+ kill missions (one over 300 as i recall) using a mortarman. idk how he managed to do it and i even watched him from in game a few times trying to figure it out with him explaining and i never got more than 2-3 HE kills as a mortarman. to me, indirect fire and how to properly employ it seems to be a science that you really do need to understand. just sayin, i've seen our mortars used to great effect in game.
  3. 1) having support for Dolby only matters if the game or media you're playing encode in Dolby - without that encoding you're receiving w/e directsound is outputting. 2) Dolby is also a software processing - just to pick nits.
  4. IPX - omg you just said its name! im going to go into the fetal position now, I hope you're happy. years of therapy ruined ... i hope you're happy.
  5. odd considering this is exactly what it took to eventually beat the germans. however, in your head - and i suspect only in that vacuous expanse - in some fabled alternate reality the allies could have just starved out the Germans. interesting.
  6. I doubt many would accuse you of 'getting it' actually.
  7. further, what if Germany just didn't attack France? France built a defensive line ... could they even go on the offensive? How long might it take? What if instead of attacking France, Germany held the passes and Italy held theirs while focusing everything else on a 1940's red army? What could France really have done? In theory Germany could have wiped the board in Russia as Russia was worse prepared at that time. What could England have done? from 40-43? Could anyone realistically have gone at Germany at that point? Doubtful - back to vanopo's initiative point. initiative is something you need to talk about at the political/economic level too. frances politics and economy had no initative for war. in fact - they went fully defensive in hopes it would deter anyone from attacking. they didn't want to fight. chamberlain was a fool too who also did not want to fight. prior to pearl harbor, the US had zero intention of joining another european war. Germany going at Russia first = Capitalism kinda shrugs but is concerned, however, never miss an opportunity for a buck so any capitalist countries not directly involved will profit. exactly what the US did prior to pearl harbor. Germany going east = Chamberlain holds his seat and Britain's involvement stays at arms reach for a bit longer. Apart from Germany, no country had the imitative. This is why Stalin needed to be attacked before the Red army could muster its [censored]. The decades prior to this invovled massive famine leading to the deaths of 10s of millions of 'Russians'. The Ukraine was essentially starved out as were other non pure Russian areas. The population had no initiative to fight for Stalin - many would sooner poor gas on him than [censored] on him if he were on fire. more would have rather set the fire in the first place. I think you grossly over estimate any of the allies ability to actually go on the offensive. their kit was certainly capable though. you also grossly under value what Bletchley did, specifically Turing and his team. Knowing everything about your enemy, and knowing that the doesn't know ... well bringing this all back .... The day after Enigma was cracked - the entire allied force had 100% initiative.
  8. And when did this bogging down really happen? It wasn't until after Prescott Bush's UBC bank was shut down that the [censored] war machine ground to a halt. This is a key piece you're missing. The US wasn't in a hurry to get into war because actors within the US were funding/enabling the [censored] war machine (Bush/UBC > Fritz Thyssen > Krupp etc). Meaning, we were already profiting, handsomely - our shores were NOT at risk - why then would we jump into save Britain? We did nothing until they gave us every secret they had - then finally we got involved. This pic, over Hitler's left shoulder that's Fritz Thyssen. This was one of his bankers at the time - US Senator Prescott Bush p.s. Rommel was NOT a tactically brilliant anything - he was an opportunist and a belligerent door knocker.
  9. this just isn't the case. the day before enigma was cracked the uboats were dominant. the day after, not so. better radar sealed that deal for good but it was enigma being cracked - something this game may never model - that did in the uboats.
  10. Stalin needed to be the victim. No way he would have had the average person's support in an offensive as The Soviet "Union" was on the brink of civil war courtesy of the mass starvation that occurred a few years earlier. Even then the Red Army got absolutely crushed early on. They weren't ready or capable of mounting an offensive. It took winter, incredible land mass, and the cracking of Enigma in order to reverse the Soviet's fortunes. All while the Germans were partly occupied in Africa. Not saying the Germans could have defeated the US and Russia but you're just f'n high if you think they weren't willing and capable of handling both the Brits and the French. They did in fact handle one of them and had the Brits a week or two from starvation. yet you claim they couldn't have sustained it ... ok. if Enigma doesn't get cracked when it gets cracked the Brits starve to death. Even selling their soul to the US wouldn't have prevented that and the radar good enough to spot periscopes was still many months away. Things woulda got really real on the Isle. Thankfully they didn't.
  11. I for one would love Africa. The whole MTO would be sexy.
  12. i dont disagree completely, however, it should be noted that Rommel was vastly over rated. He was a one trick pony and essentially if he couldn't bash down the front door then he wasn't going anywhere. In Africa, Rommel rushed head long into heavily fortified positions, and kept throwing his forces at said positions over, and over, and over blaming all his failures on the Italians. Not saying they could have won merely suggesting that had they attempted something other than belligerently trying to bash down a well defended door that Egypt may have fallen.
  13. poly crewing has more to do with attaching players to vehicles. various game engines over time have had multiple players per vehicle. I think the oldest working version was starsiege tribes. i'm probably wrong there but that game did have 'multi-crew' vehicles in ... 98? visual supply - you might be able to argue for indirect help just by way of the vastly superior rendering engine making full use of modern GPUs allowing for longer visual ranges. our current engine in theory should be able to handle visible supply however, lots of stuff would need to be written for this under either engine. ocean depths ... i forget the exact why on this. I know we don't have it but I didn't think it was a hard engine limitation just that it wasn't delivered at launch. that said, unreal owns here. tons and tons of middleware with fluid dynamic water, accurate reflections etc. UE4's engine as it relates to water is light years beyond what our current engine can do. bomb tracking is less about the graphics engine and more about not wanting to kill squishies that never saw, heard, nor even saw the bomber that dropped the bomb. Meaning in a high activity AO the individual infantry player's client is trying to track everything around him and organize that into a 'visual list' - or - the list of things the client actually allows you to see. In a hot AO, if a bomber is flying at 4KM, that infantry guy will NOT have the bomber in his visual list. is it really ok then to kill that infantryman when he had zero knowledge or warning? my vote, bombs do need tracking but we should NOT track infantry - only vehicles.
  14. why? would be a lot simpler to just add time for reloading if certain crew are dead like war thunder does.
  15. what do you mean? Btw, we have always had a limited economy. Resupply functions over top a ticket system that is a very broad brush high level analog for economy. Scotsman has long opined for global tracking of munitions for a variety of reasons, logistics is accounting and functionally is a measure of economic output. I don’t understand the hesitation.