BrerRabbit~SPARTA~

This is very cool, and I want one. But I cant help but point out: bicycle > RYNO.

0:05~0:07 thats Cy, MH6, Hali and Halo as POWs. The others insisted that Halo have his own cell. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ShXCvBedI&feature=related

Germans beat a divided allied command - some lessons can be learned Cylawyer, MH6, Hali, and Halo fall to me and three AI (two easy, one normal). The reasons for their loss were largely not the reasons they stated after the fact. They actually came quite close to defeating me and my AI allies twice, and were in a potentially dominant position for much of the match. So why the loss? Here's what I saw from the opposing side, and I think there are lessons for new players to COH. 1. Little coordination in attacks. The allies did not communicate and did not effectively coordinate their attacks, using the strengths of their different doctrines to overwhelm me. Instead I was able to assist the AI in separate engagements. Also the Allied attacks came at intervals long enough apart to allow me to sure up defenses. 2. Blobs. When they did attack and press hard, they did so in "blobs" of armor and/or troops. Armor or infantry when tightly packed dont move well and are extremely vulnerable air attack, artillery attack, and attack on the flanks. It can be demanding to micro manage individual tanks and infantry units, but it is worth the effort to deploy your units individually rather than just grouping them in one big mob. 3. The rush. Rushing into the enemy base with a blob of armor can be effective against the AI (especially easy AI), but with a human player to aid the AI this strategy is more than likely to fail - which it did twice in our game. A steady and more methodical advance with a variety of of units (armor, infantry, scouts, mortars, etc.) is much more likely to be successful and suffer fewer losses. 4. "His X is fluking us up!!!!" Whatever the "X" is (88s, air attacks, rockets, infantry, etc etc.) its best to learn once from your mistake and not repeat it. If 88s are tearing into your armor, then scout their locations with cheap/light units and take them out with artillery or infantry. Dont just keep sending in tanks against them! In our match my anti-tank air attacks kept tearing up their armor blobs and despite this they never changed tactics! What could have been done? A. build mobile AA units (American half tracks upgraded with quad .50s) and B. stop using the blobs. 5. Dont be timid. The fog of war in the game can be intimidating in itself, as a commander can always imagine more horrible things hidden in the unseen areas of the map than there are in reality. In our match Id say at least 2 out of 4 allied armies were hanging well back letting the other two do the attacking. If you want to be more defensive overall this is fine, but you must have a forward defense - hanging out in or close to your home base is just a recipe for disaster.

If you've had a particularly interesting or epic COH battle or perhaps learned some new tactic or trick how about sharing it here! Last night Cylawyer, Maj3stic, LeeMarvin (a buddy of mine), and myself played the Germans against three Russian AI and after three long hours we were victorious. The only lesson I learned from it was that when facing the Soviets in open terrain its probably best to go with the defensive doctrine; my 88s kept them from over running my sector. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky-zdHMNFNM

Now that is what I call "effective British armor!"

Well, in case you were directing that at the documentary I linked, Id have to say that it is pop history and typical of such mil. docs. made for TV, but it still gives a fairly even handed accounting of Wittman. I certainly dont think it presents him as a "Nazi Superman" - but any tank commander who survives through Kursk is either exceptionally lucky or skilled or both in my opinion. There's no way around his outstanding record in the war, whether or not someone wants to represent him as a "Nazi Superman" or a flawed tactician, the point is the guy knocked out an incredible number of tanks and AT guns during his career. I do understand there is some critique of Wittman's tactical choices in Normandy (of course always easy to make such critiques from a comfortable armchair decades on) but it is the daring do of the Villers-Bocage exploit that inspired THQ/Relic to put it into their game. I just wish they would call a spade a spade and name the character Wittman, and for that matter just say "SS" for particular units in their game instead of tip toeing around the matter.

COH has the fictional character Maximillian Voss leading his Tiger into Villers-Bocage but in reality it was SS-Hauptsturmführer Michael Wittman commanding his Tiger in '44 that blew through a British tank battalion. Relic has always been reluctant about representing SS units in COH and I guess this is why they dont properly identify Wittman. Anyway, heres the wikipedia article on him and the first part of a 5 part documentary on his career. Wittman's wikipedia article http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IFEux4No7c&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R55e-uHQna0

Could someone post some clear/easy to follow instructions on how to install these mods for Steam CoH- I DLed EF and installed it into steam>steamapps>common>company of heroes but I get an error when i try to run it. EDIT - Ok took some major digging to find my solution. There are posts in the EF forums saying you need to edit the registry etc. and I wasnt about to mess around with that. What I did was run the launcher, go to settings, and then in the lower right hand corner theres a dialogue box you need to set to the CoH folder. Anyway, it works now.

What sort of problems are you having? Do you have v1.5? You will need SH4 1.5 (i.e. the U-Boat expansion) to play TMO. If you are having some sort of install problem detail it here or come into TS and I can likely help as Ive been messing around with the mods quite a bit.

Since getting back into Silent Hunter Ive been on a submarine kick. Thought I'd share some of the good web stuff Ive found the last few weeks. US Submarines, Pacific War Really not much out there about the still relatively unknown yet critical US submarine war against Japan. Here's a documentary done by the US Navy just after the war detailing the US submarine campaign. (1 of 6 youtube vids) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHaAWrOEB6M Not really specific to submarines, but still a great tune: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FePPDsMMnaM Battle of the Atlantic Tons of sites dedicated to this, especially about U-Boats. Probably the best site is U-Boat.net which has just about everything you'll ever want to know about U-Boats. 1. If you can find it, the BBC's "The World at War" episode on the U-Boat campaign is fantastic (as is the whole series). 2. Part of the excellent "Battlefield" series, this has got the whole Battle of the Atlantic episode minus the first segment. (2 of 12 youtube vids) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnJNpaGyavU 3. Part of "Battlefield II" series, missing the first segment. (2 of 10 youtube vids) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pxlt9-nRSM 4. The U-Boat Lied http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kat9WQhibwE 5. German newsreel, first half of which covers the return of U-181, commanded by Wolfgang Luth, the second most successful U-Boat commander in WWII. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_R_n-48DQw 4. The U-Boat Lied http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kat9WQhibwE 5. German newsreel, first half of which covers the return of U-181, commanded by Wolfgang Luth, the second most successful U-Boat commander in WWII. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_R_n-48DQw

Im starting a thread to post/discuss mods for the Silent Hunter series. I've been messing around with mods for SH4 and SH5 quite a bit and I find them well worth getting if you choose the right ones. They can greatly improve the games. Other than the Total War modding community Ive never seen a group of moders more dedicated or prolific. JSGME - JonesSoftGenericModEnabler This is a piece of freeware that is essential for enabling and disabling mods for Silent Hunter games. Nearly all mods for Silent Hunter are made to be used with JSGME, so it is the "must have" software if you want to mod your game. JSGME download link ***IMPORTANT*** Once the.exe is DLed, double click it and start the install. It will ask you where you want to install JSGME, this is IMPORTANT!!! You want to install JSGME into the home folder of the Silent Hunter game you want to mod. So if you are using Steam, for Silent Hunter 4 this would be "Steam>steamapps>common>silent hunters wolves of the pacific." Also, choose to have a desktop shortcut created. If you installed for SilentHunter4 the desktop shortcut will read "Generic Mod Enabler - silent hunter wolves of the pacific." Run JSGME once installed and it will create a new folder in your SH home folder called "Mods" - this mods folder will be where you place all your SH mods. Also, if you want to mod SilentHunter 5 you will need to reinstall a second iteration of JSGME, this time in the Silent Hunter 5 home folder - you must have separate iterations of JSGME for each version of Silent Hunter you want modded. SH3/4/5 Mods Ground zero for all things Silent Hunter is Subsim.com, and in particular their radioroom (i.e. forums): Subsim radio room Post of SH4's most popular mods Post of SH5's most popular mods Please note, some mods are not compatible with multiplayer mode - cosmetic mods seem to work fine, but mods that tweek realism or game mechanics do not. They do seem to work if all involved in MP have the same mods installed. SH4 Mods I recommend 1. Spax's SH4 U-Boat missions German Language mod (link). If you have the U-Boat missions expansion, and if you want your crew to speak German, this is the mod to get. Please note, if you have this mod installed and you play as the Americans, your crew will speak German!!! You need to uninstall via JSGME to get them to speak English again. Also, Ive had no issues with this mod but one, and that is after removing the mod the English language was restored except for the crash dive command when I was in free camera or on the conning tower, then the command came in both German and English. A minor bug. 2. Trigger Maru Overhauled (link) - Trigger Maru Overhauled (aka TMO) is universally held to be the mega mod to have for SH4 (a mega mod is a big mod that makes many changes to the game, these are often done by cobbling together a number of popular mods into one package). TMO makes changes to the graphics (for example more more accurate Pacific Ocean environs), improves realism, added historic ships and subs, an improved UI with added sub commands, etc etc. I highly recommend installing it and just giving it a try, if you have any questions about it just ask me in TS. TMO's realism settings (please note that all the settings can be customized once a Campaign is started): By default the following is always on regardless of skill level selected: – limited battery – limited compressed air – limited oxygen – limited fuel – realistic repair time – realistic sensors – dud torpedos on – realistic reload times The following varies based on selected skill level: Easy: – Auto TDC enabled (or in other words, Manual targeting is off) – External Camera is enabled Normal: – Auto TDC is enabled (again, manual targeting is off) – External camera is disabled and replaced with the event camera being enabled. The event camera gives you eye candy, without giving away as much information that the external camera gives. Hard: – Manual targeting is enabled – Event camera is enabled. External camera disabled. Realistic: – Manual targeting is enabled – event camera and external view disabled. – Map contacts are disabled. I suggest reading through the TMO pdf (download it here: link), it will detail the changes and the philosophy behind them. Example: "The objective of this mod is to make the pacific theater as immersive as possible, offer an increased level of challenge, and to make the player behave more realistically. TMO defines realism as encouraging the player to make the same decisions, and have the same fears that a real WW2 submarine captain would have. Historical accuracy and realism in the traditional sense of the word ( sometimes achieved by abstract means) is adhered to as much as possible, but some elements may be taken with creative license in order to achieve the overall objective. Trigger Maru also leans more toward the "seasoned" submarine simulation fan, and some elements may appear to be too daunting at first for your rookie player." Direct link to TMO filefront DL page ***TMO and Multipler*** Ive not had the chance to make sure TMO and multiplayer will work as no one else in Sparta has this mod installed. I suspect it will work so long as everyone is using it. SH5 mods Coming soon

Complex topics demand rigorous discourse. The Nuclear IED. I think those words alone sum up how silly the idea is. But heres my bullet point questions to you about such a thing. 1. What does said nation have to gain, other than national suicide, by the use of the Nuclear IED? How is the deployment of this "weapon" in anyway beneficial to the country of origin? ("They are bat shit crazy" will not be considered a valid argument.) 2. Such a weapon would involve a rather long time to target, does this not add tremendous (dare I say unacceptable) risk to the launching country? That is to say, as the Nuclear IED in cargo container rounds Cape Horn on its way to whatever doomed port of call, if the plot to send such a device were discovered or the device itself discovered, wouldnt the country of origin expect immediate and complete annihilation? ("They are bat shit crazy" will not be considered a valid argument.) 3. How does an adversary's potential use of a stratagem like the Nuclear IED (be it real or imagined) justify preepmtive war? You may not have raised preemptive war MH but others have and its sort of the subtext to a lot of this discussion so Im asking. ("They are bat shit crazy" will not be considered a valid argument.)

Here's something I found from the Brookings Institute by doing a quick Google search. This gives you an idea of what Im talking about between the difference between having a nuclear device and then having a deployable weapon. For the USA, the richest and one of the most technically advanced nations EVER, between 1940 and 1996 the cost of deploying nuclear weapons ate up %57 of the total money spend on nuclear arms, while just building/developing the nukes was 7%. Oh and targeting and controling the nukes was another 14%. We spent on our nuclear arms programs as a nation in that period $5,821.0 billion ! Those numbers I think show how N. Korea, Pakistan, and Iran have made just the first, smallest, and least expensive step in what is a long, pricey, and technically difficult road to having a credible nuclear arm. Again, one thing to blast sand into glass in New Mexico, its yet a whole nother deal to cook Hiroshima. source

A truck. And just how exactly is said truck going to reach Seoul or Tel Aviv or Yokohama? Dont take offense MH6, but its just that sort line of reasoning that makes the discussion of these topics so often spill over into the realm of the absurd. It is feasible, I grant you, for N. Korea to park a nuke close to the DMZ and close to Seoul and then detonate such a device hoping to do as much splash damage as possible to the S. Korean capital. An unpleasant end game for all I think. Now, everyone knows, including the N. Koreans, that if the Korean conflict goes hot again it will be the North that loses. Of course, the cost would be dramatic and tragic as S. Korea will suffer horribly, Japan will likely get hit as well, and theres always the ever present worry that war on the Korean peninsula would expand and bring in the Chinese (much less likely now than in the past but still a serious concern). So you see, all involved have a stake in that not being the end game. The fear is often put forth that if pressed against the wall the North will go ape and attack with everything including nukes - and I think its a valid concern, so the key then is to avoid putting them against a wall. Now the North would LOVE to be able to have a credible nuclear threat that was projected. Something they could use at range, something that is a great trump card and bargaining chip; i.e. a nuclear tipped missile that can hit Pearl Harbor, or Yokohama, or Peking, or Seoul. The fact is though that they are not anywhere close to having that capability. They want that capability and that deserves our attention and concern. But they dont have it, and wont have it for years if ever at all. But you cant equate the long term potential threat of a nuclear armed missile with a nuke Ride-On truck. Because one is a valid topic for discussion and the other is an episode for 24. Now the issue of a bomber. Sure, its far more feasible for Iran or N. Korea to get a nuclear weapon into the shape of a bomb and deploy it with a bomber. The problem here is of course bombers are extremely easy to counter. Prepping said bomber for flight, taking off, flying to target all without discovery and being intercepted and countered is a tricky thing to pull off. For the North Koreans, sure maybe this is a feasible and even likely strategy they could use if the shit hit the fan, but again to what end? Just because they might make use of such a strategy and assuming they would essentially commit national suicide, this can not be the basis of a preemptive attack on our part. If potential action by an adversary where a valid jumping off point for war the world would have been a nuclear wasteland long before many of us here were born. In Iran's case, a bomber nuclear threat is even less a credible vehicle against their most likely target, Israel. Part of the problem is we really cant lump N. Korea and Iran in together. They are very different nations with very different concerns regarding US strategic policy. N. Korea is the crazy damn religious cult that took over a home at the end of the block, they are extremely difficult to deal with, armed, dangerous and everyone knows that its going to be tricky as hell to get them out of there. Iran is a different ball of wax all together with a very different set of circumstances and history. The real issue is that culturally, economically, politically, Iran is a player in the Mid East and it is almost certainly destined to become the regional power there. There is very little we can do to thwart that, but we can and should do everything we can to make the eventual outcome as livible for us. This includes trying to persuade them from not joining the nuclear club. But do I think its worth my nation going to war over a perceived and yet unacted upon potential threat of them stuffing a bomb into a truck or trying to fly a Persian Fat Sultan bomb to Tel Aviv? No, no, no.

When I read the title of the article the first thing to my mind was "Israelis." Wikipedia has a long and well resourced article on this (Stuxnet) and it sites sources pointing to Israel's Unit 8200 (their NSA) as the culprits. They have the motivation, resources, and know how for this. As for the fear some have expressed over Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, I dont share it. Frankly speaking there is, unfortunately, little that can be done to stop any moderately rich state from developing such weapons if they are dead set on doing so - the tail end of the 20th Century saw nations like Brazil and South Africa come close to doing so. They voluntarily stopped their programs. And of course we have down right destitute states like Pakistan and N. Korea playing with the nuclear genie. If they managed to develop nuclear weapons you can be damn sure that Iran (which is whether you like it or not a much more powerful - economically, politically, militarily, etc. - regional power than either Pakistan or N. Korea) is going to be able to get such a weapon in the near future. Oh, and lets also not forget that Israel herself has had undeclared nuclear weapons for decades. So why am I not fearful of Iran "going nuke?" I am concerned of course but Im not about to write my congressman demanding the U.S. go to war over it. First, lets talk about the capabilities of these junior members in the nuclear club. What most people dont understand (and I only understand because I try to follow this stuff) is that just making a nuclear bomb that is tested in some underground mine some place is just the first step in an extremely long and difficult process of developing a deployable nuclear weapon. Its all well and good to have Fat Man sitting in a shed on Tinian island, but unless you have the miracle of a B-29 Flying Fortress to fly it to Hiroshima its not going to do much good is it? Well that is just the sort of problem Pakistan, N. Korea, and eventually Iran, face. "Ok, my fellow nuts who've wasted our national treasure on building a monstrosity, now that we have it, how do we make it into an actual and not perceived threat?" These nations have yet to display the technical know how and skill to put a nuclear warhead on the top of a rocked, send that sucker up and have it come down with any accuracy and detonate. "Accuracy BrerRabbit, what on earth do you need accuracy in a nuke for?" Yeah, well actually they do need to be accurate to an extent if you want the thing to be a deterrent and/or threat. Lets just say for yucks that N. Korea has Taepodong working well and they have miniaturized a bomb to fit on top of it, and they have a real triggering device etc., and they were to launch that thing at Tokyo and it ends up detonating east of Honshu in the Pacific because their guidance system is shit. Well its not been too effective has it? And that was assuming they could leap all those other technical hurdles that I just sort of gifted them in that scenario. When the Soviet Union imploded, one thing that came out was that the capabilities of the USSRs strategic rocket forces had been extremely exaggerated thoughout the decades of the Cold War. Exaggerated by the West and the USSR itself. Now Im not claiming it was not a credible threat, but my point is if the Soviet Union's strategic nuke force had huge technological issues how do you think Pakistan's. N. Korea's, and Iran's are going to fare? "What about those nuts giving a bomb to some spooky terrorist group and they set it off in a port, or at the World Series, or sneak one into the Israeli Knesset and set it off!?!?!?!!? OMGWTFBBQ!!!!" Well, such a scenario is I grant possible, but it is only likely to take place on a show like 24, and its real world likelihood is low. First of all its important to remember that any nation states ruling power structure has one real bottom line, which is to remain in power. That is doubly so for dictatorial regimes. Now if say Iran were crazy enough to hand over nuke to a terror cell (just writing those words make my eyes roll because Im sure its a fantasy) and they were able to carry out an attack on Israel, just what do you think the response would be? How long before Tehran were a burning cinder? How long before say the full weight of the United States strategic nuclear mega tonnage comes raining down on them? Believe me, they know this. Hell, forget America's response, how about Israel's. "Hmmm .... Im losing the chess match here ... I know I'll use my pawn to take his bishop ... yes, that allows his queen to then check mate me and I lose but ah fuck it!!!!" Now there are truly crazy regimes in the world and N. Korea is the most bat shit crazy of the bunch, but that does not mean they are crazy enough to throw themselves off a cliff. Also, despite how its often portrayed, Iran isnt nearly as crazy as N. Korea. In short, what is there to gain from handing a nuke over to a terrorist cell? Nothing. "But Ahmandinejad is a new Hitler!!!!" Well, first I think this gives Mr.-Business-suit-and-shirt-but-no-tie Ahmandinejad waaaaaay too much credit. He is without a doubt a firebrand, a provacatuer, and likely a nut, but we have national political personalities who fit that description right here in the good old USA. "But we dont put our nuts in power Brer!!!! Jeeez!!!" Well, I think we do and have done, but this brings me to my next point about Mr.-I-take-style-cues-from-Miami-Vice Ahmandinejad ... he is NOT the man in charge over there. He is subordinate to the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenie. Now, Im not saying "I dont worry about Ahmandinejad because hes under the authority of a mullah," but what I am saying is that much of this hand wringing over the personage of Ahmandinejad is unfounded. Ahmandinejad is being portrayed as a Hitler like figure by forces in the US that want to make people unduly fearful. Caution, diligence, and strength of purpose are all called for when setting our national policies with regards to the new nuclear club members or "rogue nations." Fear however should never be the basis of foreign policy. Anyway, its a huge topic but I thought Id offer a somewhat dissenting opinion to the what seemed to be the majority here.

Probably also a bad idea to text while driving. ;)

The format of Top Gear prior to Clarkson & Co. taking over was exactly what youre talking about Athlon ... and to be honest, it was a huge bore. It had dull hosts who droned on and on about the latest sub compact family car. Zzzzzzz. Top Gear as it is now is about the fun of cars. Look at it this way, most of the cars they talk about are super cars ... in other words cars that 99.99% of the viewing audience will never own, so they skip of the details and talk about the 'fun of motoring.' It is as luggage says about entertainment. As for the knowledge base of the three hosts, those guys are actually quite well informed about cars and engineering and technology, its just that the show isnt about the details. PS - Im talking about BBC Top Gear here nor the US version.

BBC's Top Gear works so well primarily because of Jeremy Clarkson. I dont think any of the American hosts have that thing that Clarkson has.

ok Hali here are some ideas ... Ok the first one is not what you had in mind but I was going for a military insignia type that used the chevron and "H" for Hali. Here's more of what I think you talked about wanting ...

Some ideas for Cy ...

Offered to help Majestic come up with a player icon. He wanted something of the soviet special forces / OPFOR unit insignia. Here are some things I came up with. The color scheme is just red/black/white/yellow for now as those are always easy colors to design with. Let me know what you think Maj.

Neat list, but I think any top 10 RPG list w/o Wizardry, The Bard's Tale, or Ultima is incomplete.

OK, so I played around some more - there are loads of classical greek shield designs you can do with the playercard system. Here are some I did. spartanhelm1 spartanhelm3 spartanhelm4 spartanchevron spartanscorp The classic Spartan chevron is really easy to make. Also, a simple google images search for "greek shield symbols" will net you dozens of things to get ideas from. Im quite partial to the "60s special forces tiger badge" I currently have, but if everyone else goes greek I will too. PS - Ill gladly help or even outright design someones player logo if they like.

Ive figured out how to construct a Greek classical helmet on a shield using the playercard in COD:BO. Hali had mentioned his interest in one of these for his playercard - I'll post some screen shots and general instructions on how to make it if folks are interested. It involves using at least 6 layers and six icons.