Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2007 4:59 am Post subject: Recognition where it's due
This forum seems to cover the technical issues only.
I'd like to personally thank everybody who was involved in making this mod.
It's excellent on many levels.
Infact I think it drops a howitzer shell on all the close combat games I've played.
And at last I can play as my native Britain! I've not seen any Scottish regiments yet but if I do I might mess my pants with joy.
The game difficulty is upped a level which is great.
I was pretty annoyed not to have us plucky brits included in the original(s) considering our great contribution to the war.
I'm going to download ebro next and I'll be able to play both my grandpa's wars
och aye ya jock.. thats one from us convict exporties.. dont worry i much admire the 3rd Scots Black Watch, But not so much the Cameron Highlanders that shot poor old Breaker Morant during the Boer war...
Scottish regts. as such will not appear as the battlegroups are drawn from the Divisions, however you will find both the 15th Scottish and the 51st Highland Divisions both represented in the mod.
These were made up from the famous Scottish regts. Royal Scots, RSF, KOSB, Gordons, Seaforths, Argylls and so on .
The other Infantry divisions are :- 3rd Regular Army, 43rd Wessex, 49th West Riding, and 50th Northumbrian.
WOW and all these years i thought Socrates was a Greek name...
I knew there would be a lot of military names so I chose a name that stand out. I thought of a few others first but "Ghandi" was too non violent and "Fairy Princess Barbie" might make me seem a little bit effeminate.
Hey thanks for the info on the divisions I'll be sure to look out for the lads. I can't believe somebody bothered to put a kilt on the snipers but I like it!
Hey.... Macs a deviate... only he could find a" skirt" in ccv mod.. btw Socrates never go drinkin with this bloke... ive heard from another Pzt that he will ply you with" Fosters"
WOW and all these years i thought Socrates was a Greek name...
I knew there would be a lot of military names so I chose a name that stand out. I thought of a few others first but "Ghandi" was too non violent and "Fairy Princess Barbie" might make me seem a little bit effeminate.
Hey thanks for the info on the divisions I'll be sure to look out for the lads. I can't believe somebody bothered to put a kilt on the snipers but I like it!
nice name pick... Socrates is a veteran of the Peloponnesian War. He fought as a Hoplite in the Athenian ranks... Also in the platonic dialogues (Politeia and Symposion) Socrates delivers a fine overview over Spartan "agoge" (training) and about the meaning of comradeship of the sacred band of thebes.
once again, very nice pick, and I dont say that just because I am Greek
btw. If you have time and spirit, read the passages in Plato's politeia where Socrates has a rhethoric battle with Polemarchos about the nature of justice.... hehe
nah... unfortunately Socrates does what he can best... twisting around arguments and winning every discussion on the planet
polemarchos (means leader in war) is a philosopher in Athens and argues that justice is to help friends and harm enemies...
here a short overview (by wikipedia, no so good) i recommend you reading Plato's Politeia.
Socrates: What is justice?
wikipedia post :
"In the first book, two definitions of justice are proposed but deemed inadequate. Returning debts owed, and helping friends while harming enemies are commonsense definitions of justice that, Socrates shows, are inadequate in exceptional situations, and thus lack rigidity demanded of a definition. Yet he does not completely reject them for each expresses a common sense notion of justice which Socrates will incorporate into his discussion of the just regime in books II through V.
At the end of Book I, Socrates agrees with Polemarchos that justice includes helping friends, but says the just man would never do harm to anybody. Thrasymachus believes that Socrates has done the men present an injustice by saying this and attacks his character and reputation in front of the group, partly because he suspects that Socrates himself does not even believe harming enemies is unjust. Thrasymachus gives his understanding of justice as "what is good for the stronger", meaning those in power over the city. Socrates finds this definition unclear and begins to question Thrasymachus. In Thrasymachus’ view, the rulers are the source of justice in every city, and their laws are just by his definition since, presumably, they enact those laws to benefit themselves. Socrates then asks whether the ruler who makes a mistake by making a law that lessens their well-being, is still a ruler according to that definition. Thrasymachus agrees that no true ruler would make such an error. This agreement allows Socrates to undermine Thrasymachus' strict definition of justice by comparing rulers to people of various professions. Thrasymachus consents to Socrates' assertion that an artist is someone who does his job well, and is a knower of some art, which allows him to complete the job well. In so doing Socrates gets Thrasymachus to admit that rulers who enact a law that does not benefit them firstly, are in the precise sense not rulers. Thrasymachus gives up, and is silent from then on. Socrates has trapped Thrasymachus into admitting the strong man who makes a mistake is not the strong man in the precise sense, and that some type of knowledge is required to rule perfectly. However, it is far from a satisfactory definition of justice.
At the beginning of Book II, Plato's two brothers challenge Socrates to define justice in the man, and unlike the rather short and simple definitions offered in Book I, their views of justice are presented in two independent speeches. Glaucon's speech reprises Thrasymachus' idea of justice; it starts with the legend of Gyges who discovered a ring that gave him the power to become invisible. Glaucon uses this story to argue that no man would be just if he had the opportunity of doing injustice with impunity. With the power to become invisible, Gyges is able to enter the royal court unobserved, seduce the queen, murder the king, and take over the kingdom. Glaucon argues that the just as well as the unjust man would do the same if they had the power to get away with injustice exempt from punishment. The only reason that men are just and praise justice is out of fear of being punished for injustice. The law is a product of compromise between individuals who agree not to do injustice to others if others will not do injustice to them. Glaucon says that if people had the power to do injustice without fear of punishment, they would not enter into such an agreement. Glaucon uses this argument to challenge Socrates to defend the position that the just life is better than the unjust life.
Glaucon's speech seduces Socrates for it is in itself contradictory. Glaucon has openly, passionately and forcibly argued for the superiority of the unjust life, something truly unjust men would never do in public. Socrates says that there is no better topic to debate. In response to the two views of injustice and justice presented by Glaucon and Adeimantus, he claims incompetence, but feels it would be impious to leave justice in such doubt. Thus The Republic sets out to define justice. Given the difficulty of this task as proven in Book I, Socrates in Book II leads his interlocutors into a discussion of justice in the city, which Socrates suggests may help them see justice in the person, but on a larger scale.[4]
For over two and a half millennia, scholars have differed on the aptness of the city—soul analogy Socrates uses to find justice in Books II through V. The Republic is a dramatic dialogue, not a treatise. Socrates' definition of justice is never unconditionally stated, only versions of justice within each city are "found" and evaluated in Books II through Book V. Socrates constantly refers the definition of justice back to the conditions of the city for which it is created. He builds a series of myths, or noble lies, to make the cities appear just, and these conditions moderate life within the communities. The "earth born" myth makes all men believe that they are born from the earth and have predestined natures within their veins. Accordingly, Socrates defines justice as "working at that which he is naturally best suited," and "to do one's own business and not to be a busybody" (433a5-433b) and goes on to say that justice sustains and perfects the other three cardinal virtues: Temperance, Wisdom, and Courage, and that justice is the cause and condition of their existence. Socrates does not include justice as a virtue within the city, suggesting that justice does not exist within the human soul either, rather it is result of a "well ordered" soul. A result of this conception of justice separates people into three types; that of the soldier, that of the producer, and that of a ruler. If a ruler can create just laws, and if the warriors can carry out the orders of the rulers, and if the producers can obey this authority, then a society will be just.
The city is challenged by Adeimantus and Gluacon throughout its development, Adeimantus cannot find happiness in the city, and Glaucon cannot find honour and glory. Ultimately Socrates constructs a city where there is no private property, no private wife and children, and no philosophy. All is sacrificed to the common good and doing what is best fitting to your nature; however, is the city itself to nature? In Book V Socrates addresses this issue, making some assertions about the equality of the sexes (454de). Yet the issue shifts in Book VI to whether this city is possible, not whether it is a just city. The rule of philosopher-kings appear as the issue of possibility is raised. Socrates never positively states what justice is in the human soul, it appears he has created a city where justice is lost, not even needed, since the perfect ordering of the community satisfies the needs of justice in human races' less well ordered cities.
In terms of why it is best to be just rather than unjust for the individual, Plato prepares an answer in Book IX consisting of three main arguments. Plato says that a tyrant's nature will leave him with "horrid pains and pangs" and that the typical tyrant engages in a lifestyle that will be physically and mentally exacting on such a ruler. Such a disposition is in contrast to the truth-loving philosopher king, and a tyrant "never tastes of true freedom or friendship". The second argument proposes that of all the different types of person, only the Philosopher is able to judge which type of ruler is best since only he can see the Form of the Good. Thirdly, Plato argues, "Pleasures which are approved of by the lover of wisdom and reason are the truest". In sum, Plato argues that philosophical pleasure is the only true pleasure since other pleasures experienced by others are simply a neutral state free of pain."
basically its all about ontologists (socratic/platonic philosophers) versus realtivists (sophist thinkers)
Problem of the Relativists in an important sense is that they can never be wrong in their eyes, because they assume that TRUTH or VALUE is relative to the person that holds that TRUTH or VALUE.
So Socrates twisted then into their own paradoxes and unveals that Sophistic realtivist is just about being right, not about reaching truth...
Although my name is that of a Relativist in the Platonic Dialogues I rather go with the Polemarch, that is in charge of conducting war for his city-state
---> CC5 nut
I have NEVER seen kilts in the regular GJS mod.
Are they only in the Overlord or the GJS TRM mod or what?
OR, im i just ignorant?
(I think its the latter one)
Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: mmm
real men dont wear kilts!
Forget words,actions will show your true ambitions!The Battlefield,In many cases, the terrain of a battlefield can be the best resource a commander has. A clump of trees, an abandoned house, or a drainage ditch can all be powerful tools in the right hands
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
thats one from us convict exporties.. dont worry i much admire the 3rd Scots Black Watch, But not so much the Cameron Highlanders that shot poor old Breaker Morant during the Boer war...
.
