Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I can do 4.0 if its consecutive sats.I prob can make the 1st 3.28 if all are played in one sat.why not scrap the .28 and do a 4.0 only being the massive improvments?

 

M1A2 OR M2

Marder

Chally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, mpow66m said:

I can do 4.0 if its consecutive sats.I prob can make the 1st 3.28 if all are played in one sat.why not scrap the .28 and do a 4.0 only being the massive improvments?

 

M1A2 OR M2

Marder

Chally

 

For the page or so of reasons I already outlined.

 

On 01/05/2016 at 6:08 AM, Gibsonm said:

I thought I'd been fairly clear, but once again for the "English is not my native language" readers :) :

 

Since I'm not inside the tent and don't know:

 

- The exact date it will be released.

- How many people will use it straight away.

- What sort of machine it needs to run well.

- The impacts on LAN play.

- How long after the normal executable is released will the server executable be released.

- How long will it take for Server licenses to be ungraded.

- Whether it will have some massive impact on the 3.028 scenarios (since no doubt once you save a scenario in 4.x you wont be able to revert to 3.028).

- Whether there will be some unforeseen "bug" that makes it "unplayable" for a short period after release and require a hotfix.

...

 

If, I have no idea BTW, there is a "world changing" item in 4.0 (say a playable Marder and / or Jaguar) then it may well be adjusted since that will have an impact on the German mission.

 

But overall, I'm working on it being a 3.028 event. :)

 

 

The compromise I am suggesting is to rework the missions once played in 3.028 (a known quantity) and incorporate the changes (once known) and roll them out one at a time.

 

I CAN'T revise all "just in case 4.0 is out and perfect" on the 11th.

 

And I CAN'T just reschedule the whole thing for a different weekend - hence why I gave several months notice.

 

If Rolling Thunder in 3.028 no longer appeals, great, wait until 2017 for a 4.x version.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, mpow66m said:

why not scrap the .28 and do a 4.0 only being the massive improvments?

 

Because these take WEEKS of work for $0 (people may have noticed my reduced attendance at TGIF as that time is re-directed into Rolling Thunder).

 

Feel free to create your own in your spare time.

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mpow66m said:

ok,thought id try but the previous post stands as far as vechs.thnx.

 

Sure but M1A2 for example isn't even in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol,ok how about a M2

Ill stop bugging you now.:$

didnt know you were doing the whole by yourself.

 

we should start a thank you beer fund for the LTC.

Edited by mpow66m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well there are M3A2 (ODS)s in Mission 2 - (Being an ACR they don't get M2) :)

 

And as far as I know the mission time frame matches the M3 ODS model so again no need to make it 4.0 just for that.

 

Basically I'm (me, myself and I - no huge team) 80% finished with building the missions in 3.028.

 

It will go out in 3.028.

 

Then when I get 4.0 (and confirm it runs on my machine, etc.) I'll (again me, myself and I) start work on converting them to 4.x.

 

Then we can run the 4.x versions on consecutive Saturday nights (GMT) and people can compare and contrast the 4.x experience to the 3.028 one.

 

If they want to skip Rolling Thunder and play the 4.x versions I can't stop them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far this date is good for me. Accordingly, may I request:

 

Msn 1 - III/4./203

Msn 2 - TBA once the mission is announced, and

Msn 3 - 3 Tp, "D" Sqn, (T43)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the individual Mission specific threads are now "up".

 

Please review to make sure I didn't miss anything.

 

Be aware that for some of you I've had to move you (e.g. 2 people wanted to command a specific Platoon, etc.).

 

To resolve that I've gone with "first in best dressed" and the person displaced has the same job but elsewhere - so if two people both wanted to lead a tank platoon, one got the specific platoon they asked for the other is still a tank platoon commander but a different tank platoon to the one they specified.

 

If that's a big issue ("Callsign XYZ has a special place as I used to fill that role in real life", etc.) let me know and I'll try and adjust to accommodate your needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like I should be able to play all three missions.  I would prefer a mech infantry position in each mission please.  Recon as a second choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wiglif said:

Looks like I should be able to play all three missions.  I would prefer a mech infantry position in each mission please.  Recon as a second choice.

 

OK, so can you look at each of the respective mission threads, find a vacancy and then make a post in that thread saying where you'd like to go.

 

There is no "recon" per se except mission 2 where everyone is in a recon position given its an ACR. :)

 

Edited by Gibsonm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Nebuluski said:

Would be happy to participate in all 3 missions. Feel free to slot me in anywhere you need a body.

 

Thanks for that - I've found the CO for each mission then. ;)

 

(be careful what you wish for). :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

17 minutes ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Thanks for that - I've found the CO for each mission then. ;)

 

(be careful what you wish for). :)

Your evil but then again ive seen you do it on the normal game nights , but i have a feeling that that just wassent what he had in mind and he wassent excatly late like the others where. :D

Edited by Major duck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it was meant to be be a joke, given the "put me wherever you need me comment". :)

 

If he, or anyone else, looks at the actual manning lists he'll see that it hasn't happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nebuluski said:

Cheers, I had not realised the CO slots were still available! ;)

 

This maybe a terminology issue but by CO I'm not referring to a sub unit commander - I'm referring to the Commanding Officer (the vehicle at the top of the list).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...