Blatant error, decided not to buy the game over it

[koplinsol]

This a threat?

[larsieman1988]

nah man, he's just letting everybody know he's really skilled at being violent man.

Also, his dad can beat up all our dads. Just letting ya know.

[OldSarge]

So the Galactic Republic thousands of years from now is still using NATO symbols! Cool! [:'(]

[JWW]

A Marine should be able to adapt to the situation on the ground and expect imperfection. I would recommend doing what most people would do with a first day of release game, which is report bugs and fixes that you want. Give Vic a clear, calm, professional report, and carry on.

[Malevolence]

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint
In the bottom left hand hand corner of the first graphic there you can see a truck mounted infantry unit. The NATO symbol on the counter, however, is not the one for motorized infantry but is instead the one for armored infantry.

Speaking as a bonfide expert, if you're going to make a case, get your facts straight.

That is the symbology for a mechanized infantry element. Not armored by STANAG.

That reference, and individual nations, have versions. In some versions, and in some nations, that symbol is perfectly capable of symbolizing motorized elements... such as Russian Motorized Rifle echelons... assuming they are not enemy on the operating picture.

Nice troll. [:D]

[wodin]

Well you are really missing out

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint

I was reading the reviews and the manual and the forum for this game and spotted https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4823511

In the bottom left hand hand corner of the first graphic there you can see a truck mounted infantry unit. The NATO symbol on the counter, however, is not the one for motorized infantry but is instead the one for armored infantry.

That's a blatant error. Those two types of infantry are not the same thing, nor even close to it. This blatant error has convinced me that the game does not pay attention to basic military unit functions and differentiation, so I won't be buying it.

[tucsonbandit]

how would you represent a formation of half soft covered trucks, half armored personnel carriers? or 1/3 armored recon, 1/3 soft covered trucks, 1/3 armored personnel carriers? or 1/4 armored recon vehicles, 1/4 mishmash of civilian transportation vehicles, 1/4 armored personnel carriers, 1/4 motorized infantry?

is it really wrong to use mechanized infantry for any of these?

[JWW]

ORIGINAL: tucsonbandit

how would you represent a formation of half soft covered trucks, half armored personnel carriers? or 1/3 armored recon, 1/3 soft covered trucks, 1/3 armored personnel carriers? or 1/4 armored recon vehicles, 1/4 mishmash of civilian transportation vehicles, 1/4 armored personnel carriers, 1/4 motorized infantry?

I'm thinking infantry symbol with this inside it.

[Malevolence]

ORIGINAL: tucsonbandit

how would you represent a formation of half soft covered trucks, half armored personnel carriers? or 1/3 armored recon, 1/3 soft covered trucks, 1/3 armored personnel carriers? or 1/4 armored recon vehicles, 1/4 mishmash of civilian transportation vehicles, 1/4 armored personnel carriers, 1/4 motorized infantry?

is it really wrong to use mechanized infantry for any of these?

It is not wrong.

The symbols are not so definitive. They can contain much more data, modifiers, affiliations, operational condition, and might even include evaluation and reliability ratings for the information shown -- among many other available details.

If you really want to play around, try this link-- (commercial product, made by a swiss company)

https://www.map.army/symbol

[kosmoface]

ORIGINAL: OldSarge

So the Galactic Republic thousands of years from now is still using NATO symbols! Cool! [:'(]

I love this comment.

[JWW]

ORIGINAL: kosmoface

ORIGINAL: OldSarge

So the Galactic Republic thousands of years from now is still using NATO symbols! Cool! [:'(]

I love this comment.

Vic's fault. He should have thought of this and invented an entirely new Galactic Republic military symbol library we could have learned. [:D]

[kaliyama]

ORIGINAL: Astyreal

Too many MREs, methinks

My money is on CREs.

[Adam Rinkleff]

This blatant error has convinced me that the game does not pay attention to basic military unit functions and differentiation.

[8|]

This is essentially the same difference as between a black bear and a grizzly bear.

[8|][8|]

is it okay to label a bass as a trout?

[8|][8|][8|]

violence is the first resort of those who are really good at it. I should know.

[X(][X(][X(][X(]

[Aaron321]

This is the most idiotic thing i have seen today, good job [:D]

[IslandInland]

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint

ORIGINAL: koplinsol

Got it, not a joke.

Nope. Dead serious. Oh, and FYI: violence is the first resort of those who are really good at it. I should know.

Edgy.

[:D]

It's a sci-fi 4X game. If the counters are really that important to you then maybe a sci-fi 4X game isn't your thing...

[Bleek]

This has got to be a wind up, surely?

I think you chaps have been trolled!

[IslandInland]

ORIGINAL: Bleek

This has got to be a wind up, surely?

I think you chaps have been trolled!

If that's the case it's a great troll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law


[:)]

[Bleek]

ORIGINAL: IslandInland

ORIGINAL: Bleek

This has got to be a wind up, surely?

I think you chaps have been trolled!

If that's the case it's a great troll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law


[:)]

Bursting a blood vessel over NATO symbol accuracies, for a game set some 1,000 years in the future?

Perhaps the least productive use of one's time!

Without turning this in to a witch hunt - I suggest the OP needs some time away from their computer.

[IslandInland]

ORIGINAL: Bleek

ORIGINAL: IslandInland

ORIGINAL: Bleek

This has got to be a wind up, surely?

I think you chaps have been trolled!

If that's the case it's a great troll.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law


[:)]

Bursting a blood vessel over NATO symbol accuracies, for a game set some 1,000 years in the future?

Perhaps the least productive use of one's time!

Without turning this in to a witch hunt - I suggest the OP needs some time away from their computer.

I agree and I think he has. It's the biggest over reaction I've seen in a long time on these forums.

[pzgndr]

If the OP was about the lack of Oxford commas in the manual, well, then THAT might be a valid reason. Wait till the rules lawyers get into it! LOL [;)]

BTW, got the game and fired it up, despite the missing Oxford commas. All good. SE is similar in some ways to Armageddon Empires but with a more traditional wargame feel. Very cool.