Complaints about 103

[Herr Straße Laufer]

I actually was a Seven Up guy! ;)

[K K Rossokolski]

If you think is is tough to assault now, It would be nearly impossible if the "D" was taken away. I think troops have a decent idea if the opponents are cowering, butting up, not firing effectively, not behaving in a customary way, etc (ie disrupted). I am against making the "D" invisible.

(My emphasis) That's a big call ...on what basis do you make that? I would argue that experienced troops with good morale themselves should/might have a feel for the matter. Therefore the question mark idea has a lot of merit...and I believe it more truly represents the real thing. Salient features of combat include doubt and confusion. Fear dulls the mind more often than it sharpens.
Of course, the issue is that the Assault is now too difficult, so alteration of the D will make it more so.I think there still remains confusion about what is a bug and what isn't.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Therefore the question mark idea has a lot of merit...and I believe it more truly represents the real thing. Salient features of combat include doubt and confusion. Fear dulls the mind more often than it sharpens.
Of course, the issue is that the Assault is now too difficult, so alteration of the D will make it more so.I think there still remains confusion about what is a bug and what isn't.

Hi Rod,

This is a misconception when I read what others have written about my comments.
It's not that the new assault rules are too difficult. Heck, ya just need to jump through different hoops to succeed. Trouble with them is that they "out of balance" games.
They just simply change the game. Like "new coke", it looks like coke, comes in bottles and cans that say coke on the label, pours into a glass like coke, and fizzes like coke. It was, quite simply, not coke.
I don't want to use a battalion of infantry, the better part of a battalion of armor, and artillery that all could be used elsewhere to take out a 2 strength disrupted engineer over the course of five turns in a ten or twelve turn game.

Same with the variable visibility rules. The scenario set the visibility for a purpose? It could have been to help balance the game? I am in the middle of one where being able to shoot at long range against the enemy helps. The enemy has numerous tank platoons and you need to keep them at "arms length".
"Arms length" is determined by terrain and visibility?
I'm playing this opponent in mirror. First with the new visibility rules and then with both rules.
My opponent benefitted from visibility in the first game as I had the numerous armor platoons. Visibility increased and never returned to what was originally programmed.
Now the opposite has been happening with visibility. And, I have only armor to fight with and it is my turn to move into and assault. LOL!
There's no way to see beyond what the scenario should have been set at? ;)

[Kool Kat]

I like Diet Coke. ;)

Hey... I'm a Diet Coke guy too! :P

Also love those Cape Cod chips! :)

Those are my "staple foods" when working on a game turn.

How about that? It is a small world...

[Ivan]

Ed, lets be frank about this. At the end of the day this is not about what you want. It is not about what I want. It is not about what any individual player of this game wants no matter how long they have been playing or how much they think they have some sort of ownership of this game. The game belongs to Matrix and they can pretty much do what they want with it. All the versions of this game you have purchased you still have access to and you can play them without alteration at your leisure with people who have like minded views. Then there are other people who would like to see the game grow, improve and develop even if that means some glitches and imperfections along the way. The people in this camp like myself will keep on patching and move along with the changes and adapt. That doesn't make either camp right or wrong we are just doing what we feel is right. What I think is unacceptable is for this game to be held in stasis because one camp does not want to contemplate change. No one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to patch, are they? At the same time I don't think it's fair to put a gun to someone else's head (metaphorically speaking) and use emotional and over the top language because they happen to like change. You have a choice and I have a choice what we don't have is the right to dictate to others how a game we do not own will develop or not as the case may be. They didn't ask you because you don't own the game. They didn't ask me either that's why I'm not upset about the things I do not like but happy about the things I do like. I hope they continue to develop the game. If I want stasis I will play my old Talsonsoft editions or 1.02.

As a moderator perhaps you should be more moderate? I do not have a troubled mind, thank you.

Oh sir Ivan, I can get perfectly frank.

The first thing I will tell you in a "frank" fashion is that you do not tell me what my duties are here, nor what I can write or not write about the changes that Matrix made. There you are stepping over the bounds. Be careful where you want to take the discussion because I have a lot of "frank" words that I have not said.
I think I have been more than fair to you, Jason, and the boys at Matrix.
Just because I wear the hat of Ladder Commander and moderator of this forum it does not mean that I do not have the right to express my belief that they made fundamental changes to the game that make it stink.
If you think I wanted status quo you are again mistaken and I will surely knock down any strawman that you wish to place as my reason.

Secondly, don't try to school me on how corporations work. I've had much too much experience in that area. This may all be about "making money". That is what corporations do?
But, corporations also study the effects of changing a product. Ever hear of "new" Coke, or know why we have Classic Coke?
Ever hear of the Edsel?

How'd they do? That was a bunch of corporate boneheads who thought they could force something on the consumer.
I didn't drink "new" coke. Why? Because I don't like it.
I don't play Advanced Squad Leader. Why? Because I don't like it.

I've played the Campaign Series since West Front came out. Why? Because I liked it.
I've been a member of the Blitz. Why?
Because I played PBEM with one guy from Florida and I wanted to expand my PBEM experience. And, I liked it.

You keep bringing up your one gaming experience using the new version 1.03 patch. Good for you. Glad the one game was not changed for you.
I was in the middle of 16 PBEM games, some of which my opponents paused because of what the new rules did. I've had some return to play and I can tell you the experience, over many scenarios, that the changes made were fundamental. And, my experience says that the change is wrong for the game.

Years ago and up until recently all that was ever said that was needed to keep this game going was to provide support, update the graphics, make it a no CD install and boot up, add new scenarios, add new units, fix all bugs, and the rest of the little things that would improve the game.
No where was "completely change the way the game is played" was ever discussed as what would make the game great. A very small group of people made that choice. I will not be silenced because you, or they, do not like what I have to say.

Please experience more and enjoy your "new coke" if you want. And, don't tell me that I cannot express my opinion. I can take or leave your opinion as much as you can take or leave mine.
Just don't tell me how to do my job along the way. If you don't like it Jim Mays, Paul, or Randy will be a place you can go to air your grievances?
Just do not come on the forums and expect that I, or anyone else, who disagrees with you are not going to express their opinions because you think we should be more "moderate". I don't sit on the fence and vote what I think everyone else will want. I lead. If no one follows or agrees it will not change my opinion.

Bottom line, that is all I have done. Expressed and defended my opinions.

Just for the record I am going to complain and I also think you are abusing your position by speaking to members of the club like this. Please don't address me again. It seems there is one rule for you and another for everyone else in terms of acceptable behaviour.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

Just for the record I am going to complain and I also think you are abusing your position by speaking to members of the club like this. Please don't address me again. It seems there is one rule for you and another for everyone else in terms of acceptable behaviour.

Quite an interesting response? :chin:

Here is the forum rule and your rights as a complainer:

20 Message Boards

Message Boards are moderated by club leadership with discussions concerning historical and game issues relating to each individual ladder. While we respect free speech, we reserve the right to edit or delete messages which we determine to be inappropriate.

Please refrain from personal attacks, ie namecalling, or cursing on the message boards. Debate can become heated, but lets keep the flaming to a minimum so that we can have reasoned and impassioned discussion.

As with our gaming ladders, the related message boards are moderated by the Ladder Commanders and their Assistants. In all issues relating to message board content their word is final. If you have further issues with the board moderation contact the club senior officers.

Here is the link to the Chain of Command so you can be speeded on your way:
https://www.theblitz.club/chain_of_command/index.php

The day I am told that I cannot make a post, as a player of the game expressing his personal opinion, and following all posting rules, will be the day I step down.
It's mighty cheeky of you to wrap yourself in the robe of free speech and then try to deny mine? Or, to claim some type of harrassment when all I did was respond to your comments and express an opinion.

The irony of it all is that I could just have deleted your posts or edited them. I left them on the forum for all to see.
And, if you intend to post more on the forum you should really cut some of the long quotes from you posts. We all know what is being talked about?

And, this is a public forum, I'll address you, and anyone else is free to address you, on this public forum. Though, I will not be sending you an e-mail, that's for sure!

[Von Earlmann]

I like Diet Coke. ;)

I like Scotch......and my play shows it for sure.........hell; there are times I can't even remember my password.......rotflmao!

[Hawk Kriegsman]

Everyone please calm down.

This is starting to creep into the realm of unacceptable IMHO.

I really don't want to start modding anyone.

Let's ratchet it down a notch or two please.

Thanx!

[Steel God]

Hi guys. What's with the spilled beer and broken glasses? ;) I saw the bat signal and decided I'd swing into the CS forum and make sure the joker wasn't robbing any banks.

Okay, lame jokes, that's me.

Ivan, for the record, I told Ed last weekend that I understand how he feels about the new mods, and he was free and clear to defend his position, as long as he was critiquing the issues and didn't make it personal. He's getting passionate to be sure, but I don't think he's getting personal. (At least not in this thread, since you did indeed invite him to be frank) If he was being personal, I would moderate him myself. I would love for all the moderators to be as calm and reasonable in their debate as me but I know we're all different, so the only standards I set are that we keep it from getting personal, and I don't see it getting there yet. If you disagree, please email and we can talk more about it privately.

[Von Earlmann]

I still like Scotch........and man am I ever calm :-)

I'm so calm that when you look it up in the dictionary.........you see my picture......:-)