jam

Free Play Account
  • Content count

    5,530
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

jam last won the day on June 28 2018

jam had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

360 Salty

1 Follower

About jam

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday
  1. Tough news indeed. Here's hoping you catch a break. Alex Trebek says he is in "near remission." Perhaps look into what kind of treatment he is receiving. Alex Trebek Now Says He is in Near Remission
  2. This sounds rough, but you've shown yourself to be tough . . . and attitude matters a lot. My brother had a break from his stage 4 colorectal cancer for a couple months. The docs mistook his dehydration and near kidney failure for the ill effects of the chemo and so stopped his treatment prematurely. Hydration brought his kidneys back, but now he's got lesions in his liver and his lungs. The docs have since apologized to him for stopping the treatment . . . cold comfort. He had a brain MRI this past week and his brain is in the clear so far, and the new round of shunt-fed chemo is working. He's determined to fight and I am witnessing that his determination is making a difference. He's asked for the highest dosing he can get and he's getting it. Being able to eat yogurt after not being able to eat at all . . . is a victory. Let's hope there is soup for you next week!
  3. You are missing the "OT only" subscription for $4.99 a month.
  4. We'll see . . . At my TGTCWTF capacity, I couldn't even link to a photo of Eva Green in an Axis uniform. This is how low I have fallen. I wish the Rats would institute a subscription for an OOT-only account at 5 bucks a month. I'd sign up for that.
  5. Kindly send me a telegraph should introduce an Eva Green avatar . . . and perhaps I'd reconsider reenlisting, Of course, she will play Axis. Brits get Maggie Thatcher French get Gabrielle Deydier Americans should get ether Amy Schumer or Kathy Griffin
  6. I hope you win the battle, Geoff, Determination counts for quite a lot. My next younger brother has been fighting stage 4 cancer for about 8 months and so far, he appears to have achieved a state of remission. The rate at which developments are occurring in the cancer-fighting field provides some reason to hope. Cheers, ~ Joe
  7. Even if you miss, right? Hello Mike
  8. I won't comment with any authority as to whether the introduction of AOs caused a further decline in the player base or not. It certainly was an attempt by the Rats to stem the outgoing tide. But anyone who thinks that the player base was not in decline before AOs were introduced is flat-out wrong. The Rats saw that the number of active players was insufficient to stimulate and sustain a fight in any one area when those who were available roamed too far afield failing to find action. If you happen to think AOs are evil, then they were a necessary evil. With AOs, one could be sure that there was always a fight even though the fight might not be in a place of personal preference. I did not like the introduction of AOs one bit, but in a fairly short time, I had to accept them as a necessity. I wanted to continue to play the entire map and I felt that AO turned the game into a moving shoebox game - but what real choice was there? In my view, it was not necessary to eliminate visible resupply, but I may well be wrong. You either believe what the Rats were saying at the time or you don't . . . and what they were saying was that they were getting exit interviews from players as they quit the game, and as I remember it, the leading complaint was that it took too long to get into a fight and the departing players were simply bored with the game. High learning curve, low satisfaction. AOs concentrated the ground players (and also gave the flyboys some concentration of fleshy targets without them having to fly all over the map for a one kill here and another there.) Brigade swapping - instant refresh of the spawn lists - made it possible to sustain longer fights. Spawning away from the front and taking a lot of time to get to the fight and having to drive up units from the rear while risking interdiction - visible supply - was just a royal pain in the arse for too many players - those who lacked the requisite patience of which there were many. Can anyone actually blame people for wanting to experience fun in a short time rather than often suffer long periods of tedium? This is a video game we are discussing, right? So the game I once played faded and disappeared. Had it not, there probably would be no game at all today. I stopped playing the game a few years ago and I don't really know what it is like today. I'd like to see the game survive without me though.
  9. I'm not going to write a book here, but I'll share a couple of observations in brief . . . I'm sure this post would come out sounding better if I thought about it for a few days and made some notes in advance, but I hope it will be at least adequate without so doing. I started playing the game in January 2002 and for a couple of years I was as "hooked" as any drug addict may be attached to his or her particular glorious poison. I've not complained about the changes that the Rats made to the game for the simple reason that the game was never meant to cater to my personal tastes and I always knew this and did not expect anything. I'm older than all of you. Shame on me for playing video games at my age. I merely enjoyed what was for as long as it existed. For a period of time, the game mechanics accidentally supported what I enjoyed, but as things changed, I realized they were changing because they needed to change. I never felt a second's worth of resentment. Allow me to flesh this out just a bit. When the player base is large enough, the game can meet many of Nugitz likes, and my own likes - while satisfying the desires of others who think differently. Numbers are everything for this game. AOs came about, in my view, mostly because a shrinking player base needed to be concentrated into an area where a good fight may occur. This is partly why the necessity of driving to front in a Beddy or an Opel was eliminated. Too much waiting around time for all but the most dedicated and nuttiest of players. The hope was that more grognards wold come and stay. That was nearly always the hope. Twitch-players were a necessary evil and fodder for the true believers. But hopefully, many twitchers could be converted. The smaller the overall dedicated player or subscription size, the more the need for areas of focus to exist on the map and the smaller the map becomes for any given period of time. I got to play on my chosen area of a vast canvas. Back in he days when there was a larger number of players on at peak times, one could literally pick a town and instigate a good fight in it, pretty much at will. My squad years ago used to alternate between the flat north and the hilly south, just for variety sake and, as we were Germans, we'd sometimes like to fight the British kit and sometimes, we'd like to fight the French kit. We had the luxury of choice. North to fight the Brits; south to fight the French. Anhee was our home town, though we had others whose names I no longer remember. if Anhee was Allied, we'd cap one flag and wait for the Allies to start spawning in and a really good fight would be practically guaranteed. There seemed to be enough players on either side (East Coast US peak after dinner and into the wee hours) to maintain a battle at the front while allowing for players to defend or attack seemingly randomly selected towns. I loved town-centered finite spawn lists because, as the fight developed and the enemy's spawn-list was attrited, they'd have to bring up supply - visible supply - from neighboring towns. Invisible spawn-list swapping became anathema to me. For me there was real opportunity right there - in the days of visible supply - as I was a certifiable mad bushwacker. I lived for the opportunity to create WTF moments in the brains of my opponents. I'd take my Opel (Jamsbus) and my ATG and I'd roam the countryside setting up one ambush after another each night. Oldzeke and I could occasionally decimate an entire British armor spawn-list with a pair of Pak-36s. Back then, you could be in the middle of nowhere, discover a field with flowers growing in it that you never saw before . . . and come across an enemy taking a long drive bringing up his favorite tank from three towns back. As I loved to kill tanks, not only did the death of visible resupply hurt my game play, but then inf players, constantly complaining about too many tanks eventually got their wish to reduce the armor spawn lists while at the same time, new and competing methods of killing tanks was introduced. My kill per hour rate plummeted. Interest flagged. I shifted to AAA for a rime. It's a constant struggle for the developers to please the flyboys, to please the armor guys and to please the foot soldier and as there are always more foot soldiers that need pleasing, the game has to favor them. I saw the player numbers shrink. I saw the Rats being forced to compromise what they actually had on their white board to try and change a negative churn into a positive churn. Few of you probably remember this, but there was a time when the Rats wanted the game to have unit cohesion. Some of the true believers back then did not only believe that one should earn rank by army type or side, but also by unit. If you were in the Duncan Donut brigade and you earned rank there, you'd have to start all over if you switched to the Tim Hortons brigade and . . . in the vision of the Rats at the time, the player base was going to be so large that one wouldn't even know what was going on in other parts of the map except on a need-to-know basis - so you weren't tempted to bail on Duncan Donuts to go and assist the Tim Hortons. There was going to be a separate noncom class and a distinct officer class. I could say a lot more, but why? Bottom line is that the only way to keep the game alive is for the developers to keep experimenting so as to find a model where the churn is at least slightly positive - no matter what it takes to do so. The continuing existence of the game depends upon more people coming than going . . . and individuals must either embrace the changes or else move on.
  10. Give my love to odolf, lol. ~ Joe
  11. I'm still peeking in here now and then, though I won't re-up just to post in OT as I had been doing for years. Here's what I see in Sorella's post . . . the big tease: Of course, I have to host the snapshot myself. <shrug> Cheers, ~ Joe
  12. Research is needed to get at the facts of the matter, I reckon. One of the many things we can say about Internet posting is that one encounters a lot of people who think they know something - and while it is true that everyone knows something that someone else doesn't know, there are many who think they know something in particular and don't know that they don't really know it - that something that they think they know, that is. ,s Joe Rumsfeld
  13. Still no joy, but . . . I found a potential explanation here: http://forums.wz2100.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3000&sid=bf57d3dcc60fffed77aac56f671915b5&start=15 And it goes like this: While this post is from a Warzone 2100 forum, it seems to explain something that points back to the suggestion Oldzeke made earlier on - and may cause me to eventually bite the bullet and upgrade my system to Windows 7 64-bit, if the underlying argument is true. Player (WZ) Kaldera asserts that a 32-bit OS can only address something less than 4 GB of memory - including the memory of the peripheral devices. If he is correct, then, in my case, I have 4 GB of cache RAM in my system, plus another 2 GB. on the Quadro 3800M board - 6 GB. in all. So the memory address space violation issue may be due to the newer nvidia driver treating my system like a 64-bit OS system attempting to address 64-bit OS memory locations (on the video card) that do not exist. I can: Try the low-mem option that OZ suggested. Continue to find an nvidia driver that works. As an experiment, pull out 2 GB of memory from my system, leaving a total of 4 GB counting what is in the vidcard. This may still be an issue because the total is over the 3.5 GB. Long-term, the best thing to do to access the full power of my system is to go to Windows 7 64-bit. It also should go without saying that I ought to verify the assertions of Kaldera even if his suggestions do make sense, logically. Cheers, Joe
  14. I am going to keep an eye on this thread. I started a thread here where I CTD, usually after playing from minutes to an hour or so since I upgraded to 260.99 on a laptop using a Quadro FX3800M. For a few months, on the laptop, I had no such problem. The driver that worked well was the one that came with the Dell M6500 from early 2010. I uninstalled 260.99 and replaced it with 197.16 with no change. In my case, the error comes when a hit a particular terrain view. It is repeatable. I.E. if I have a CTD while spawning in to a particular FB and I re-spawn in the same place, I get another CTD immediately. Go somewhere else and I am fine. Not meaning to high-jack the thread, just adding another OpenGL driver related issue. My next step wil be to find a good nVidia driver cleaner and try an older driver a second time. Cheers, Joe
  15. Small update: I noticed in the Nvidia control panel that: OpenGL Rendering GPU was set to "auto-select," which, I suppose, ought to be fine. But the laptop only has the one GPU and so I set it for the "Quadro 3800M," the only other choice in the drop-down box. Afterwards, I had five missions without a CTD, 2 were under 1 minute and the other three were 10 minutes, 5 minutes and 18 minutes for a total time w/o CTD of about 33 or 34 minutes. I have "threaded optimizations" off and the above setting for the chosen GPU for OpenGL. The game seems fine to my eye - with good frame rates and fluidity. I may not have fixed anything, but so far, there seems to be some improvement. Cheers, Joe