A small rant

[Lowpe]

Alfred's Opus.[:D][&o]

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Nuthin quite like an old Netscape user reverting to antiquated terminology.......[:D]


I used Netscape back in the day as well. [8D]

Firefox, Netscape's descendant still calls them bookmarks. As far as I can remember the only browsers that call them something else are those from Microsoft and Apple.

Bill

[sfatula]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

Firefox, Netscape's descendant still calls them bookmarks. As far as I can remember the only browsers that call them something else are those from Microsoft and Apple.

Bill

Using Safari on Apple, they call them bookmarks! So, make that "just" Microsoft.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: wdolson

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Nuthin quite like an old Netscape user reverting to antiquated terminology.......[:D]


I used Netscape back in the day as well. [8D]

Firefox, Netscape's descendant still calls them bookmarks. As far as I can remember the only browsers that call them something else are those from Microsoft and Apple.

Bill

Last time I used IE (a very long time ago), they were called bookmarks. I think.

[wdolson]

I hate IE, but some sites require it, so I use it on rare occasion, MS call them "Favorites". It has always annoyed me that Microsoft has tried to drive some fairly good ideas out by insisting on doing things the Microsoft Way. Back when Microsoft didn't dominate e-mail, most e-mail programs would show quotes by putting a caret ( > )in front of quoted lines. You could see how many levels of quote there were by counting the carets. It was a simple method that worked quite well.

Then Microsoft decided they weren't going to support it and because Outlook was becoming dominant in the corporate world, carets went out of fashion.

They've tried to kill off the use of "bookmark" by renaming everything "Favorites".

I thought Safari might use Favorites too, but I don't use Mac, so I wouldn't know.

[jimh009]

Back on topic...

Since this is a "rant" thread, I'll put in my two cents.

I agree about for PBEM games that it is crucial to find someone whose "play style," for lack of a better word, matches "your own." Playing a Japanese player that is hyper aggressive isn't much fun if you were hoping for a war that more or less followed original Japanese strategy.

Personally, I actually do enjoy the "out of the box" stuff and new strategies not used in the real war. It's part of war gaming, after all - testing out new tactics and strategies.

However, for me, there's a difference between "out of the box"/new strategies and "something not possible whatsoever."

My gripes about AI relate to that.

1. China - The sheer uselessness of Chinese forces once the Burma Road is cut. And the ease at which Japan can sweep the Chinese aside.

2. Supply - I've long thought the supply system was somewhat "broken" in the game. For the most part, there just seems far too much supply, for both sides. Being able to launch every British and Indian Division from India for a jungle march into Burma in 1943, while fun to do as an Allied player, was in no way possible in real life. Nor was it possible for Japan to set up enough supply in Saipan, Rabaul or Truk to last, literally, years.

Yet, by the same token, overland supply can't even provide enough supply for a dinky unit in Darwin that does nothing more than sit there and gather dust.

Then of course there's the supply disaster in China - where once the Burma Road is cut units inside cities "starve to death" (literally) while units outside city hexes remain (for the most part) in supply - making it simple for the Japanese to sweep it all aside.

3. Pace of Game - And, I guess, related to supply...the "pace of the game" simply moves far faster than what was possible in real-life. For my games against the AI, I use that mod (forget the name) that reduces supply capacity of ships by 30% and has tight stacking limits. That mod helps with slowing down game pace quite a bit, but even with the mod the pace still moves too fast than what was possible historically. The Allied player still has endless supply by mid-1942, and the reduced shipping capacity doesn't seem to affect the japanese building up supply cache's the size of Mt. Everest in key places.

[geofflambert]

Da Babes mods (some of them) limit stacking and reduce cargo capacity. I like that a lot. As to the Chinese, they sure tie up a lot of Japanese troops. If you use the unrestricted ones properly and with good discretion you have a chance at least of stopping the Burma Road from being cut in the first place.

[geofflambert]

I must have bookmarks. That's where I keep the serious stuff. Favorites is where I keep the porn links.

[BillBrown]

Gorn porn? [:D]