Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: a white rabbit

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Groupthink is not cool!

Lol. That's another first. No one's ever accused me of participating in 'groupthink' before. I almost feel comforted. 'See, I don't compulsively disagree with everybody.'

..oh dear, still in denial..

..and you were doing so well..

You should open up a group therapy center or something. 'Help for troubled executives.' By the time they realize what a mistake they've made, it'll be too late...

...It'd be easy for me to get along here, all I'd have to do is follow certain people around and compliment them and figure out who they don't like and insult those people; its a very common situation in the world, and I'm not at all paranoid.

Oh bumph. I know I can annoy people -- and I often make no effort not to. In fact, sometimes I suspect I bully people. Being congenial is pretty low on my list of priorities -- and I've been banned from at least two websites that I can remember. Moreover, I don't regret a word -- well, some of the bullying I'd prefer to retract.

I'll advocate almost anything and will tell people to fuck off if I feel so inclined. Sometimes the positions I take would even be considered criminal in some countries. I don't care. I might get banned here someday -- and I have no intention of modifying my behavior to avoid such an outcome. It'll just happen if it's going to happen.

You're not a martyr to free speech. You're just being an incredible dick.

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff...for someone who claims to understand psychoanalysis, I think you show a stunning lack of understanding for how primates operate.

He seems to have the behavior of some of the lower ones pretty well pegged.

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

The health of your units is too low. See the color tagging of the units?

I thought you might mention that... its actually because I broke the units up into smaller units with only a third of their equipment assigned in the hopes that it would change things; but notice how the bright green units are also resting? So yah, I can recombine the fighters and they'll still rest as bright-green units. But perhaps the equation should not take the fraction of assigned vs authorized strength into account? I mean, honestly, why would that matter? During the Normandy invasion, two lone German fighters strafed the beaches; they didn't care that the rest of their assigned strength was unavailable, and they didn't rest.

Yeah, and I'm sure that their commander had to get on his phone, or radio, and cajole, harangue, threaten and order them to do so. Well...when you're playing TOAW, it's your job to be that commander. So, be that commander and do the same for your troops. The few mouse clicks will take you less time than that phone call, or posting to whine about it in the forum, for that matter.

Yeah, and I'm sure that their commander had to get on his phone, or radio, and cajole, harangue, threaten and order them to do so. Well...when you're playing TOAW, it's your job to be that commander.

I mean, does it make sense to reason backwards and invent an explanation for something, rather than just fixing the problem? Does the commander in Iraq right now have to "harangue" the air force to stop resting all the time? Come on now, be reasonable; there is simply no reason that a player should HAVE to check on every single unit, every single turn, in order to ensure that they aren't shirking. That kind of micromanagement is pretty absurd.

ORIGINAL: wolflars
First, are you or are you not the same Adam Rinkleff who was caught up in some controversy from wikipedia for demonstrating very similar behavior?

Spent some time following web searches on that. Interesting reading that certainly adds some perspective. Thanks.

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

ORIGINAL: wolflars
First, are you or are you not the same Adam Rinkleff who was caught up in some controversy from wikipedia for demonstrating very similar behavior?

Spent some time following web searches on that. Interesting reading that certainly adds some perspective. Thanks.

Mmm. Interesting to see if Adam rides off into the sunset at this point.

Children... children... children... Do you have any idea how to stay on topic? 

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

Children... children... children... Do you have any idea how to stay on topic?

Whether that really has been your purpose all along is a mildly interesting question, but at any rate, the net effect of your posts has been to make you the topic.

So we are sticking to the subject. It's you. Isn't that what you want?

Wasn't the topic that if air units flew all day and rested at night that it should be considered a problem with the game system?

Wasn't the topic that if air units flew all day and rested at night that it should be considered a problem with the game system?

Essentially, but some people feel irresistibly drawn to 'ad-hominem' arguments, and prefer to spam up the thread with unrelated trolling. Technically tho, the argument was not about air units flying all day and resting at night; it was about why they rest so much, and the answer I found is that during PM turns the computer tends to automatically put units into a permanent rest state until the user manually changes their status -- thus, the problem is not that they rest at night, but that they don't unrest the next day. Mention of this should probably be made more clear in the manual, so that players don't have to wonder why their air units aren't flying.

According to Jamiam, this situaiton is ok because military commanders are expected to micromanage each airfield at 6am every morning, wake the crews up, and beg them to return to their air superiority missions; but that is obviously absurd, and there should simply be a way to order the crews to fly their missions every day. Meanwhile, according to others, the units are resting because they are out of fuel, or the aircraft are damaged, but those people are simply wrong, as it is obvious that they are resting because of the PM turn cycle.

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

Wasn't the topic that if air units flew all day and rested at night that it should be considered a problem with the game system?

Essentially, but some people feel irresistibly drawn to 'ad-hominem' arguments, and prefer to spam up the thread with unrelated trolling. Technically tho, the argument was not about air units flying all day and resting at night; it was about why they rest so much, and the answer I found is that during PM turns the computer tends to automatically put units into a permanent rest state until the user manually changes their status -- thus, the problem is not that they rest at night, but that they don't unrest the next day. Mention of this should probably be made more clear in the manual, so that players don't have to wonder why their air units aren't flying.

According to Jamiam, this situaiton is ok because military commanders are expected to micromanage each airfield at 6am every morning, wake the crews up, and beg them to return to their air superiority missions; but that is obviously absurd, and there should simply be a way to order the crews to fly their missions every day. Meanwhile, according to others, the units are resting because they are out of fuel, or the aircraft are damaged, but those people are simply wrong, as it is obvious that they are resting because of the PM turn cycle.

Why don't you object to your ground units not repeating their attacks unless you tell them to do so? I really don't see why -- other than the various personal reasons -- you should see this issue as a big deal.

It's not. As I said, sure it could be fixed -- and I'd put it down as about item #843 on the 'to do' list.

Why don't you object to your ground units not repeating their attacks unless you tell them to do so?

There is an obvious difference between ground and air units.

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

Why don't you object to your ground units not repeating their attacks unless you tell them to do so?

There is an obvious difference between ground and air units.

What -- precisely? And in any case, why is this issue important? Wait'll you cotton on the problems with the supply model OPART uses -- or what passes for naval warfare in this game. Those are serious shortcomings.

What -- precisely?

Um, it might have something to do with airplanes which move at a several hundred miles per hour, and are generally operating from positions located far from the actual battlefield. Gee, I wonder what sort of an impact that could have? I could give you a more detailed answer, but I also know that you are trolling and won't take anything I say seriously regardless.

And in any case, why is this issue important?

Isn't it obvious? If the computer is ordering units to rest, and turning them off, and the player has to continuously fight the computer for control of their units... well, that is simply an INANE interface. Meanwhile, it is obviously very easy to fix, just give players/designers the option to turn off whatever function is attempting to sabotage the air units.

ORIGINAL: AdamRinkleff

What -- precisely?

Um, it might have something to do with airplanes which move at a several hundred miles per hour, and are generally operating from positions located far from the actual battlefield. Gee, I wonder what sort of an impact that could have? I could give you a more detailed answer, but I also know that you are trolling and won't take anything I say seriously regardless.

Honestly. I am not 'trolling.' As for your argument, how about tanks versus infantry? After all, tanks are hardened steel packages that move at up to forty miles per hour whilst infantry are little meat bundles who have a hard time averaging more than three.

So it would follow that the system should treat them completely differently. But it doesn't. So why this demand that the system automatically handle your air units when it doesn't do the same for your ground units?

And in any case, why is this issue important?

Isn't it obvious? If the computer is ordering units to rest, and turning them off, and the player has to continuously fight the computer for control of their units... well, that is simply an INANE interface. Meanwhile, it is obviously very easy to fix, just give players/designers the option to turn off whatever function is attempting to sabotage the air units.

No...there are far worse interfaces. The one for Forge of Freedom for example, drives me crazy. Maybe it's just familiarity with the system -- but having to look at my air units every turn and modify their missions to what I want does not bother me -- nor does it seem to upset anyone else. You're not having to 'fight' anyone for control of your air units by any reasonable definition of the term. You call up the air unit list and review and adjust the settings for each round. There's no problem.

By any yardstick, it certainly is not a major problem. It does nothing to reduce the quality of the simulation, nor does anyone other than you seem to find it especially burdensome. It's like you've decided you find the color green for 'go' irksome. Well, it works, and it doesn't seem to upset anyone else. Maybe it is not a major problem -- however much you may try to argue otherwise.

I've looked up some of the references to you elsewhere. You seem to have a real problem with using language accurately. Farmers in Iowa are not running 'concentration camps,' I am not 'trolling,' and this is not a 'major problem.' Get a grip.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

. Farmers in Iowa are not running 'concentration camps,'

..as, probably, the only organic farmer here with some 25 years behind a plough, i'm willing to debate that, i'll even lead..

..intensive farming is needed to supply the cities of any country with cheap, affordable food of a reasonable quality....[8D]..

Norm Koger is a veteran of the US air force.

US Air Force, wow! That's almost like being in a military service.

It also explains a lot about the problems with land and sea combat.

Regards, RhinoBones, USMC

What is the significance of "Lir"?

Seems to me that the question about the realism of units going into the Rest, Disorganized, Retreated and Reorganization modes is more a problem of how long they are in this mode rather than the fact that they can be rested, disorganized, retreated or disorganized. 
 
In scenarios with 6 hour, half day and full day turn lengths I can easily see units immobilized or disorganized for the entire turn.  However, when the turn length is half-week or longer the question becomes, should the unit(s) actually be immobilized for the entire time period?  In actuality are infantry and air units typically completely disorganized to the point that they cannot function for an entire two and a half days or longer?  In extreme cases maybe, but in the norm, I don’t think so.
 
Should the engine be modified so that units have a reasonable probability of coming back on line after a few pulses of the turn?  Think so.
 
Think that in any scenario with a time parameter of one half week or longer there should be a possibility that rested, disorganized, reorganized  and retreated units have a probability or returning to the battle as functional units. 
 
This would seem to be the essences of the original post.
 
Regards, RhinoBones