text:
I agree, a work of art should be news.
I think there should be a big Apolyton announcement.
Many are cold, but few are frozen.No more durrian, please. On On!
I agree, a work of art should be news.
Proud to be a AOM Warrior
I reported this as a news item by hitting the link below but didn't hear a response. Locutus tends to spend his time with Civ4
wow no more help from apolyton
Dan Quick did everything possible to help move the AOM home page and my thanks to him.wow no more help from apolyton
Unfortunately even he could not raise the necessary help to move the forum itself.
I still harbour plans to run a competition to find the world champion at AOM III. The last test of AOM III was so stable, I believe it is viable.
I will of course, not be participating.
I have successfully removed the cheat editor from a competition test game. I will also write some code to include in the competition version that will show if the player has still managed to use the cheat editor or reloaded slic.
The competition game would be a saved game at the start of turn 1. It would come as an installer program that would automatically install the files in an AOM III game and you take it from there. I cannot stop people from going back to saves, but otherwise, it will be a real competition.
It will be tough. Tough to win. Surviving, even building a reasonable empire, will not get you a win. You will have to build the largest and longest lived empire of all time.
Apolyton have kindly agreed to match a cash prize of $50.00 Australian from me (total $100.00), and I will be also providing a small trophy.
The end game, when you reach the required score, will be sent to me for checking. The winner will be the person who achieves it in the shortest time. My version of the game will display certain secret integers and code that tell me if people have used cheat mode or reloaded slic.
I am going overseas in just under 4 weeks for 2 months. When I return, I will launch the competition.
Okay, I got a link from StanK on the other thread for AOMIII. I tried to install over a working version of AOMII complete with the CTP 1.11 patch and option to play vanilla CTP. Had a good time with both, by the way.
BUT... got messages when tried to load AOMIII after install that Could not find Concept_Royal Wedding in string database...Could not init database.
I panicked (typical) and uninstalled the entire AOM and CTP. Now I can't get a reinstall of CTP that the v.1.11 patch will recognize and this probably shuts me down from playing either version of AOM as I've heard you must have the patch to viably play mods. Have been working with it all day (to detriment of other important things) and CTP won't reinstall so recognizable to the patch. Don't really think I need discs as I have what was up till today, a viable CTP2 disc bought originally and have high-speed broadband for downloads. Last time I shut down firewall and "system analyzer" and still patch won't recognize.
Also tried "copy" of patch into CTP folder within (new) Activision folder, (old one kaput) and this don't work either.
An awful shame, aside from time wasted today, as like many I became sort of hooked on AOM and now can't play its old or new version. Unlikely Mr. Karpinski can help if he's travelling, but can anyone?
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
Rule no 1 never panick. You will never survive AOM III if you are prone to panick.
I also have had some trouble getting a recent reinstall of the game to accept the patch or vice verca. I wonder if it is something to do with windows XP giving computers names (mucks up the root directory search)?.
If you cannot get the game to accept the patch, then AOM will never run. I can only suggest that you download the AOM II from the apolyton site again. That is a complete copy of the game, patch installed. All you need to do is copy and paste it onto your hard drive and run from the already installed modswapper. You still need the ctp2 disc in your drive.
Copy that and rename it AOM III. Then reinstall the AOM III files from the download as per instructions. Note some folders are replaced, where others, the contents from the AOM III are added to the corresponding folders in your AOM III game.
If you get the same missing string error again, it is because your download of the AOM III update was corrupted. The royal wedding string is in the approrpiate place in my zipped copy of the folder that was uploaded.
Keep me posted please.
If you are travelling, I appreciate your taking the time. I have the original zip of AOMII yet, but may try for a new one. Didn't know the patch was installed on that.
I think it possible that my AOMIII install today was corrupt as I messed up the copying initially and then kept rewriting over my work. As you say, some files are copied in their entirety and for some, one should just copy the contents.
I think now I'll get this worked out; the time expended isn't bad from all the enjoyment I got out of your earlier version and what I can expect to get from the new; and just a fraction of what you have invested yourself for little gain.
Much thanks again.
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
AOM III successfully installed about 0500 US EDT, (sorry I don't know how to compute Greenwich.) Appreciate help, was a good exercise in computerology for this novice, though about 14 hours work. (Maybe if available, a little more time on making mod more user-friendly on install? )Originally posted by stankarp
Rule no 1 never panick. You will never survive AOM III if you are prone to panick. ...Keep me posted please.
Double-copying AOM II file to make sure AOM III done right, with backup if not, was smart advice. Also, download files for AOM II still include CTP v.1.11 patch in both "charts" and other main file (name escapes me now, somewhat brain-fried ) , Stan was correct saying this patch already installed at least lately on AOM II play file (whatever that called,) so wonder if these extras shouldn't be deleted (and install guide modified) to avoid confusing other novices. (Maybe they won't load anyway, due to aforementioned quirks in Windows XP.) Modswap shortcut for AOM II will not track to AOM III on its own, have to create new shortcut with new version.
Am a little worried when following install memo advice on "copying" without replace contents on files "sprites," "pictures" and "videos". All three had duplicate files from prior versions, upon prompt, I did opt to "replace" these, where called for. Hope this is right, but if it is, the installation guide needs revised, again mostly to benefit program novices.
These criticisms are extremely minor. Stan, if I may call you Stan, take a bow for a tremendous achievement.
Of course, now, I still have to play the new game.
P.S. I'll keep in mind that advice about avoiding panic.
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
Overwriting is correct as sum re numbering of sprites took place.Am a little worried when following install memo advice on "copying" without replace contents on files "sprites," "pictures" and "videos". All three had duplicate files from prior versions, upon prompt, I did opt to "replace" these, where called for. Hope this is right, but if it is, the installation guide needs revised, again mostly to benefit program novices
I will make that more clear in an update.
Having trouble getting AoMIII installed on a fresh install of CTP2, partly because the AoMIII update only updates previous installs. Problem is that I've forgotten all I need to do to install the mod, but also I can't find AoMI anywhere to get started!
Stan, is are there plans to get an 'all in one' install of AoMIII produced?
I'm going to try to jump in here as Stan I hear is travelling and will go crazy trying to help everybody individually, as he did me.
Here is the link for when AOM II came out:
Jump down halfway the first page to DanQ's post which has a 559mb version link of AOM II for people who didn't have AOM I. Download it. (Takes about 8 minutes with broadband, lots more if you're dial-up.)
Go into the Installation guide in the folder and follow the directions for AOM II; then download the AOMIII and follow Stan's directions above on this thread to me for installing AOM III, its a little simpler than what I last read in the AOM III installation guide, though they may have revised that since Wednesday.
Hope this helps. If not, probably someone more tech-inclined will jump on this thread and try to help you further.
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
Yup, there it is. I had forgotten about that thread. But its funny that it is so hard to find this on the front pages of the sites hosting it.
I guess the easy solution is just to overwrite the files in the AoMII vanilla install with the update from AoMIII.
But anyhow, thanx!
StanK told me to copy from III and then paste over the relevant files in II, where called for by the installation guide, but that's the same thing. Sometimes though, it calls for copying contents and sometimes the whole file, you have to pay attention to exactly what the guide says. He also suggested I copy II, the extra is insurance that I didn't f-ck up. I think that's a good idea, but you want to delete it after you're sure III is up and running, unless you would still want to play II for some reason. You would need another copy of the CTP vanilla files also, if you would ever want to play that game, unmodified
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
I hereby promote Generaldoktor to official assistant. Thanks mate.
I am going to do a full upload of the complete AOM III before I go overseas, in fact, probably early next week.
I have been sick ( and in bed some days) for nearly 2 weeks. On the mend now though.
On the mend!
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
Why didn't apolyton announce this...I sent the news thing to Locutus...
Thats great Stan!
Im glad I picked up the CD AOM and supported the project. I recall before Civ4 came out the CtP2 forums were filled with what could be done with the game and the releasing of the code .But you went past what was even thought of.
I hope some of the old timers give their thoughts on AOM3.
Well, "old-timers," there is some talk over on the old AOM II thread, including some contributed by me, that Apolyton's interest may be waning for AOM. They still haven't transferred to forums to this site, after promising to do so late last year, from what I understand.
"Say it ain't so," and I hope not. As a short-termer here, overall I've come to rather like the organization, in general; and even made a small donation. But, despite coverage of other games, Poly revolves mostly around Civ and besides taking a lot of their time, they are heavily beholden to Firaxis to maintain their input into and coverage of, Civ. The fact of life is, AOM competes with Civ, in concept and the attention of people who might otherwise be playing and buying new versions of Civ. Maybe this has some bearing on why "the news" is getting out so slow this time, especially since AOM III is from all appearances a pretty refined product of the genre and indications continue to be that the professionally-produced Civ4 in many ways is not.
By the way also, "old-timers," I find some of the "birthday-punching" and pecking order based on seniority of membership here at Poly a little obnoxious. I bought CTP when it came out in '98 (and thus didn't need to buy a disc from Stan, but I respect his work and may be able to donate later this year when my finances look up.) I was too busy playing it and CTP2 in the intervening 7-8 years to bother with Internet forums. (And also Civ3, which I bought due to good advertising and still think is better than the now-frequent criticisms. Civ2 I bought and never loaded into a computer, it now rots in my garage. Thought at the time it was just a cruder variant on CTP.)
Point being, I think my opinion, after I've had a chance to play it some, of AOM III is as good and valid as any Poly "old-timer."
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
I think it is a combo of some other things...
People are drawn to a communal experience when gaming. Because civ4 has a large community, people tend to play that game because they can participate in discussion about the game with a lot of other people.
You can blast the Apolytoneers all you want, but I see little discussion in the Apolyton CTP2 forum by the AOM loyalists to create a positive buzz themselves, despite Apolyton admin. dragging their feet.
After all, AOM is an CTP2 Mod...Start there.
Perhaps they could come in and start a lot of AOM threads in the CTP2 forums and rationally discuss AOM strategy, so a positive buzz can spread. Perhaps the admin. here will see a vibrant community and then take action.
Even if they do not, AOM increases exposure.
Ironically, I've challenged them on MANY occasions to do so, but sadly, they are either b*tching and moaning about people who dare enjoy civ4 in their own AOM forum, or occasionally coming into the civ4 forums here to continually blast civ4.
If you think small, that is all you will get. So I blame the AOM loyalists as much as the Apolyton admin.
Secondly, and more importantly, there is a law of diminishing return in games that have the same type of focus...
Many of the hard core civvers cut their teeth on civ1 and civ2. Each new version of the game (counting both in civ and the CTP series) has a progressively greater 'been-there, done that' feel to it (even with the new features) as you move through the gaming cycle. If you notice, there are very few hard-core civ1-civ3 players in the civ4 forums.
They've moved on...
And just as importantly, there is a much wider range of different gaming choices to play now (TBS, RTS, Roleplay, citybuilder, shooters) - as well as different focuses in the subgenres (like sci-fi, fantasy, historical, present day, futuristic) offering even more variations to play.
I cut my teeth on CTP1 for TBS games - played it to death, got CTP2, modded, played other TBS variations like SMAC, EU2, CK, CoW, MTW, RTW, AOW2, civ3, and civ4...
I valued each game for what it brought to the table too. SMAC had a great storyline, and very strong game characters, EU2 was an nice history lesson that starts each game with a good reflection of what the entire world was like in 1419, 1492..., and then let the player run with it and make his own history (same with CK), CoW, MTW and RTW gave me the feeling of actually deplying troops on a battlefield that was unique from other TBS games, AOW2 created a fantasy world format, and civ3 and civ4 merely continued on the path created with civ1 and civ2.
Add in the various city builders I played (Pharaoh, Zeus, Emperor, Children of the Nile, 1503)...
...and I promptly burned out on most games - especially any game that becomes a huge timesink because it requires a lot of time to complete it.
Hence I do not play AOM.
I greatly admire it for what it does, but the game is structured to require a lot of micromanagement. (In fact, smithldoo already pointed out on the AOM forums that his current game took 20-30 minutes per turn, post t300)
Sorry...but I'd rather use my time in other ways.
I like to play a variety of games - and most importantly, games that can be finished in a few nights time. Most times I am only on the computer 2-3 evening a week and only for an hour or two. Some weeks I skip altogether.
I'm guessing that is the way with many gamers too. When they first started gaming, they would pull all-nighters. Then 'game variation' B comes out, and players find they do not play it as much as 'variation A'. Repeat the cycle and the shelf life of any game becomes less and less compared to the 'first love'.
And it is human nature to focus on the new. AOM is based on a six-year old engine - and no matter how good the game, people usually do not want to go back, other than for nostalgia sake.
I can get a quick civ fix in civ4. I cannot in AOM.
The current civ4 patch has finally speeded up game performance on my system to an acceptable level, and I eagerly wait for the stacked combat mod currently in development.
Meantime, I can enjoy life. Read a book, go to my daughter's softball games. Wacth a movie with my wife.
Yes, let's be optimistic until we have reason to be otherwise...No, let's be pessimistic until we are forced to do otherwise...Maybe, let's be balanced until we are convinced to do otherwise. -- DrSpike, Skanky Burns, Shogun Gunner
Well, I guess I like micromanagement, but am still playing Civ4 and contributing periodically to its forums. The recent patch improved my early game, but it still drags in the late game a lot, this on a P4, 512 mb RDRAM. I never liked the map generator or the terrain, find the 3D redundant and possibly contributing to the technical issues, dislike the arrogance that the addition of viable multi-player has brought to that gaming community, well that about covers it, other than general criticisms that apply to the whole series. (Again I'll repeat from above, I loved Civ3 and haven't "moved on." )
Reading books and doing other things is great, but when I commit to play games, I do expect and want an investment of time. Guess that's just me. I think we do have a lot of AOM threads now in the CTP box, but I was just generalizing from specifics when someone asked why the new version hadn't made a bigger splash. Seemed to me to be a tie-in with the AOM vs. Civ4 issue or the delayed transfer of the forum issue.
General comments:
Interesting, Hexagonian, I thought I heard you did some mod work on AOM, or at least CTP2. A shame you're so jaded on it now.
Thank you for expressing an opinion without playing the "old timers" card on me. That does get a little tiring although you have indeed played some titles I haven't tried over the years since sophisticated gaming became viable on computers; and other equipment.
I can get a "quick fix" in Civ4 only if you discount the time I spend shutting down background programs on my computer (unnecessary otherwise) and waiting for the d-mn thing to load, post-v.161 and before. Funny, I have no such problems with the more modest "requirements" of that creaking, old CTP game engine used for AOM.
Having a wife to watch a movie with is great if you've got one. Like many archtypical gamers, I missed out on that, though an overlong career in backwater journalism had something to do with it. Presently, I mostly prefer gaming to the Social Darwinistic pain of dating after 40; I may change my mind.
"Moving on" in the gaming world. Well, maybe its my Napoleon complex, but I will always prefer grandiose intercontinental strategy games to "man-in-the-street" shooters, aside from the fact that since childhood, I've never had much eye-hand coordination, needed for RTS'. (I play lousy pinball and billiards too, but have learned, with great pain, to type 60 wpm.)
Anyway, we all appreciate differing opinions, especially me, since I usually have one.
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
well what would happened to ctp2 if we made a ctp3 or aom4 for civ4?
It seems many have posted in other game forums the same thing. Civ4 is a system hog and would mean a very costly ugrade to computors even under a year old which mine is. I just dont think that 200 to 300 dollars is worth the investment to play a game.Maybe in a year from now . P4 512 ram 128video card -AOM3 turns zip along for most of the game even on large maps with 12 civs. Its a good selling ponit .
What is needed is a rerelease of the game CtP2 which Activision owns and Stan has posted that the cost to buy the rights is way too high for him to pay.
So for the hard core fans AOM3 is next best thng. I feel its a lost that many of civers will nerver know about this game.
Agreed. By the way, Protra, you and I have similar systems, with the same bad experience trying to run C4.
Huang, you can't copy a game for profit without buying rights to it, that violates copyright everywhere. For illustration, back in the Eighties, a friend of mine designed a highly enjoyable variant of Parkers Brothers "Risk" and was foolish enough to tell Parker Bros. about it. They threatened him bigtime with lawyers, guns & money (apologies to the late Warren Zevon) and the kitchen sink. Oh, and they had absolutely no interest in his clever variation on their tried and true (and profitable) concept.
Stan has done a very unselfish and very rare thing, putting all this time and some of his own money into revising CTP2 as AOM I, II & III, agreeing up front with Activision that he would do so for free, charging nothing to nobody, (except cost recovery on some old stock of CTP2 discs, which I didn't need myself because, crazy man I am, I kept mine even after updating to Windows XP, which it amazingly runs on fine anyway, see also below.) Stan has said for financial and domestic tranquility, he can't do it again; there will be no AOM IV, thus it is reasonable to assume there will be no CTP3. (Activision has repeatedly said they want no more to do with it, but won't sell the rights cheap, either.) This was an incredible one-shot act of individual philanthropy, kids, enjoy what you got.
AOM on the Civ4 engine to me would be laughable, but I am a frequent critic of Civ4. Continuing technical problems with Civ4 aside, the AOM game as it stands uses a lot precepts from CTP, like combat and trade, that just don't transfer to the competing Civ system. It would be a substantial rewrite; Stan's not going to do it; and it wouldn't be fair to him, if somebody tried, even for no gain, as they would be circulating an inferior version of his design, due, if for no other reason, to the differing game engines and concepts of the two game systems.
Getting back to "CTP3." there is something to be said for Hexagonian's comments above about the aging of the game engine and system, especially in lieu of further support from Activision. It was great, especially for the Nineties and as a competitive alternative to the early versions of Civ, but its a little long in the tooth now and maybe its time to put it to bed. It is an amazingly sturdy game engine, even on XP, where it was never adapted to, except maybe a bit by the 1.11 patch. But like Burt Lancaster's last few movies or Frankie Sinatra's last few concerts, this is the swan song, the icing on the cake.
I am still playing and evaluating AOM III. When it's time to put it to bed, I'll be ready to move on, but grateful to Stan for giving me a little more enjoyment and life out of a disc I bought almost eight years ago. In the computer world, that's an eternity.
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
I have a 2.7 Ghz Celeron with 1 GB RAM. (not a high-end gaming system by any stretch of the imagination) RAM is cheap thoughOriginally posted by Generaldoktor Well, I guess I like micromanagement, but am still playing Civ4 and contributing periodically to its forums. The recent patch improved my early game, but it still drags in the late game a lot, this on a P4, 512 mb RDRAM.
I had lousy performance until the latest patch. I couldn't play anything more than standard maps. In fact I had tabled the game until just this past week.
I would never upgrade a system for a game. I have enough of them as it is, and I haven't played most of them to the extent that I could.Originally posted by Protra 3211 It seems many have posted in other game forums the same thing. Civ4 is a system hog and would mean a very costly ugrade to computors even under a year old which mine is. I just dont think that 200 to 300 dollars is worth the investment to play a game.Maybe in a year from now...
At the same time, I do not begrudge players who are able to get the game to work on their systems either. Unfortunately, some of the hardcore AOMers (and they know who they are, and it is not you Protra) seemed to think that because of their own experiences with civ4, they have an inherent right to call people who enjoy civ4 morons...
3-d was not needed, which is why I know I will not be able to get EU3 when it comes out.Originally posted by Generaldoktor I never liked the map generator or the terrain, find the 3D redundant and possibly contributing to the technical issues...
I work in advertising/marketing. You go where the potential client base is instead of making them look for you.Originally posted by Generaldoktor ...but I was just generalizing from specifics when someone asked why the new version hadn't made a bigger splash. Seemed to me to be a tie-in with the AOM vs. Civ4 issue or the delayed transfer of the forum issue...
I REALLY blame the loyalists on this issue - especially the loudmouthed, vocal ones who spew off about the intelligence of civ4 players, but can't be bothered to positively promote AOM based on its own merits.
Their excuse???? Apolyton has not transferred the forums directly here. But there is an AOM forum here.
If you look in this forum directory, you will see a specific AOM forum. In fact I just tested it to make sure it works. (it has a total of two threads - the one I just posted and a general thread stated by Stan.)
Tell me why should the Apolyton admin. take the time and effort to transfer the forums, when since that forum was activated here, no-one, and I mean no-one, has posted there? No strategy threads, no helps, no status reports. Even in the general CTP2 forums, there has been little discussion...
Fans can provide links onsite to important discussions there - cut'n paste good points. Start new threads...
I guess their rabid loyalty can't be bothered with such details though.
I have a lot of good memories of CTP. AOM used my Cradle Mod as its basis. In fact playing and enjoying Cradle was what motivated Stan to do AOM. Stan and I played some Cradle succession games together in the past.Originally posted by Protra 3211 Interesting, Hexagonian, I thought I heard you did some mod work on AOM, or at least CTP2. A shame you're so jaded on it now...
However, I had walked away from Cradle a while back too. At that time, Stan approached me about helping him. I did so because of his enthusiasm of Cradle, and I knew the files inside and out, so I knew I could speed the process for him. I saw the plan for AOM and had confidence that he could pull off his vision in the scope of a Mod, but I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was no hope to get a deal with Activision. But if the plan had gone through as he had hoped, and we could have reaped a financial benefit from it through Activision, I would have maintained more interest in the project.
However, I will also be honest and say that my gaming tastes and interests had also broadened during the time I worked on AOM - plus I was also slowing burning out on epic-style gaming altogether.
So my personal goal became more along the lines of getting AOM I out the door, and then hoping that the fanbase would rise up to do additional work for Stan - and I would retire from any future involvement.
I have the upmost respect for Stan - at the same time, I do not have fanatic loyalty to ANY game that would cause me to badmouth one game merely to build up another one - even one where I had a personal stake - nor badmouth a person because he prefers one game over another. (...and that mindset has only come about over the past few years too - I spent a lot of time in the CTP/civ debates)
So for me to say that civ4 stinks would be a lie. I like it.
AOM is taylor made for epic gaming - it also suffers from what I call 'bigger is better' bloat (most TBS games have it to some degree)Originally posted by Protra 3211 Funny, I have no such problems with the more modest "requirements" of that creaking, old CTP game engine used for AOM...
"Moving on" in the gaming world. Well, maybe its my Napoleon complex, but I will always prefer grandiose intercontinental strategy games...
And the AOM scoring system is weighted toward larger empires, and the most efficient way to get large empires in AOM ultimately is to conquer. You prolong the game immensely if you choose any other way.
So you spend the early part of the game establishing yourself in one of two ways (peacefully or conquest) - then the game becomes an endless cycle of city conquest with an occasional peaceful city build thrown in. Taking city #67 is little different than taking city #43. Only the units have changed.
Following are my opinions, based on my own experiences. You may enjoy these things - if so, more power to you.
Pillaging has become the new worker tedium. I spend more time selecting units to move 'n pillage in AOM than I would spend moving workers in civ4.
Same with army management. An endless cycle of grouping and ungrouping AOM stacks simply to move them around the map becasue the cap does not allow armies to pass through one another. By the time you get to 40-50 cities and the armies those cities allow me to build, the tedium (for me at least) outweighs the enjoyment.
It's a TBS vesion on Age of Empires. All you end up doing is fight another battle until you finally win as the biggest bully on the block.
Contrast that with civ4, or EU2, which I feel offers more diverse means to play them. In those games, you are not always locked into a single overriding MAIN strategy (conquest) supported by diverse sub-strats.
Your MAIN strat in those games can be more diverse. This greatly increases replayability for me, because each game become more distinct from the previous one.
You can play EU2 with a focus on straight colonialism, or you can play it as a warmongor, or a combo of the two, and many times you have an equal chance of success no matter which way you go. Nor is overall empire size the determining factor.
Same with civ4. I can play the game with different ways to win (spaceship, UN, cultural, domination, straight conquest...)
And as far as I can see, there still is no setup for a small map in AOM3. To do so would require adjustments to the city caps, advance/units/building/wonder costs, as well as adjustment to barbarian spawns, and the entire scoring system.
Contrast with civ4. The game works on small maps, and has been scaled down even on the largest maps. I do not need 60+ cities in civ4 to succeed. I do in AOM, and that entails all the extra micromanagement.
I still enjoy playing, but it is not the overriding factor in my life - at least not anymore.Originally posted by Generaldoktor Having a wife to watch a movie with is great if you've got one. Like many archtypical gamers, I missed out on that, though an overlong career in backwater journalism had something to do with it. Presently, I mostly prefer gaming to the Social Darwinistic pain of dating after 40; I may change my mind.
Last edited by hexagonian; June 4, 2006 at 18:50.
Yes, let's be optimistic until we have reason to be otherwise...No, let's be pessimistic until we are forced to do otherwise...Maybe, let's be balanced until we are convinced to do otherwise. -- DrSpike, Skanky Burns, Shogun Gunner
Oh, the quote about the smooth performance of the "creaking, old CTP game engine," was mine, not Protra's, so was the query about your prior mod work with CTP, Hexagonian.
When I said I "contributed" to C4 forums, I was talking about in a positive way regarding strategy threads. I knocked one out on the "Marathon Mode" thread yesterday, actually. I don't personally recall disparaging Civ4 players, since I am one.
Lately; and I've only had AOM II for a couple months, being sold on it by some "fanatics" as well as Stan's small attempts at promotion, I alternate the games.
But here's how I have to do it. AOM; plug in CTP disc, wait for game selector screen, play.
Civ4: close a dozen background programs, run disc clean-up, insert disc, hold down shift for 5-minute booting of disc to make sure uncached, select game, usually "custom" and yes, I like real big maps, as I have in all other "epic" games I've played. (If you're going to go epic, go "epic.") Wait for specific game to load or for previous save to load, another 5 minutes. Wait to adjust on grid, square values and specials, because I like to read them as I play. Wait for system to acknowledge I've joined the game. Hit "new turn," if it is a save and wait for that to load. Five minutes more.
No, I'm not one to say you have to be a moron for playing it, just a bit of a masochist.
I was disappointed to see no new AOM forum entries after about January too, when I made Stan go to the trouble to enroll me. But I think some were waiting for the transfer because they were told to; and some were waiting for AOM III, because for the majority, (not me) AOM II was kind of "old hat" by spring. (Expansions or not, I bet C4 is kind of old hat by next spring.) Anyway, my bringing it up was just a conjecture, based again on the fact that there also wasn't a flashy announcement with Poly support on the new release.
The Vassal State concept and Royal Wedding introduced in the new version appears to try to get around the "conquer" endless cities syndrome, without pirating a "culture" concept from Civ. Religion has been beefed up and may have some bearing in nonviolent acquisition also, I need to check.
Moving armies around each other doesn't bother me; entangled lines of communication were a bane of independently moving corps in both the Napoleonic Wars and the American Civil War; maybe it should be allowed, but it would be foolish. Probably as far back as Darius' loss at Arbela, such confusion spelled disaster for armies. (Oh, and there's those great scenes in "Patton," which have historical basis, of the George C. Scott character straightening out traffic jams as late as WWII.) Maybe overstacking should have been allowed, for a unit loss penalty, but I guess Stan or the CTP designers couldn't think of everything. Stan denies, by the way that this is "blob versus blob, where bigger blob wins." I need to play more, but I buy his reasoning.
I personally have had AOM III for about a week, but have read the strategy guide and also played enough AOM II to feel it is a rich and varied game system. I will try to initiate personally some more strategy threads in the forums Hexagonian suggests and see where it goes from there, once I have a little more time in with the game. Hopefully, those unnamed "fanatics" that have been so criticized will come forward and do the same.
In the meantime, when I have time for Old Sparky to load up Civ4, I will continue to play that and comment on game aspects. I've already given up on the technical beefs, but at one point this year, opinions were actually being solicited on problems and drawbacks with the expectaton something might be done about them (with Civ4.)
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!
Sorry 'bout that...cutting and pasting mistakes on a long post...too lazy to retype the quote codingOriginally posted by Generaldoktor Oh, the quote about the smooth performance of the "creaking, old CTP game engine," was mine, not Protra's, so was the query about your prior mod work with CTP, Hexagonian.
However, there is the AOM goody hut bug that usually takes 2-3 minutes every time you or an AI gets an advance or free unit...Originally posted by Generaldoktor But here's how I have to do it. AOM; plug in CTP disc, wait for game selector screen, play...No, I'm not one to say you have to be a moron for playing it, just a bit of a masochist.
That said, I do not dispute players who have a problem with long wait times. It is why I am only now playing civ4 after getting the game in Novemeber. And I do have to say that civ4's game performance on my system with this patch is now as good as AOM.
When you are dealt lemons, make lemonade.Originally posted by Generaldoktor But I think some were waiting for the transfer because they were told to; and some were waiting for AOM III, because for the majority, (not me) AOM II was kind of "old hat" by spring. (Expansions or not, I bet C4 is kind of old hat by next spring.) Anyway, my bringing it up was just a conjecture, based again on the fact that there also wasn't a flashy announcement with Poly support on the new release.
There still was ample opportunity for AOM loyalists to set the tone, and try to create a vibrant community here. AOM I and AOM II were very playable and stable - and as an indie project, players would cut Stan some slack.
They still could too.
I guess that wasn't too important to some of the so-called 'loyalists'...I am glad to see your efforts on this though.
I would be interested in objective reports on how this affects strategy. I am not convinced that these features will swing the pendulum out of the warmongor camp though...but I want to hear unbiased reports, rather than the company line.Originally posted by Generaldoktor The Vassal State concept and Royal Wedding introduced in the new version appears to try to get around the "conquer" endless cities syndrome, without pirating a "culture" concept from Civ. Religion has been beefed up and may have some bearing in nonviolent acquisition also, I need to check..
Remember, I am interested in OVERALL MAIN strategy focus, not sub-strats. You can use a sub-strat to lie low for 50 turns via diplomacy, but if the nature of the game still HEAVILY emphasizes city conquest, post t250, as the means to win, then it is a game that is not as varied and flexible as it could be.
After all, Age of Empires may be fun to some players, but the overall focus on that game is primarily to conquer everyone else. Not diplomacy...not peaceful economics expansionism...not trade... but kill your opponent. The rest are merely tools to get you to that point.
My definition of blob vs blob is that you tailor your forces so that you always have clear numerical superiority. If the blob is spread out over two or three tiles, it is still a blob. In fact, because of the unit cap on tile occupation, you are foolish not to use multiple stacks in a blob-like fashion.Originally posted by Generaldoktor Stan denies, by the way that this is "blob versus blob, where bigger blob wins." I need to play more, but I buy his reasoning...
Loyalists would argue that with the 'no ZOC' rule in civ4, there is no frontline tactics, so you always stick everything in a blob on a SINGLE tile. Civ4 does take the tack of using bombardment units to cause damage to multiple units to help spread out the forces though.
I do find that the CTP2 ZOC rule is not realistic because it creates an artificial constraint. Thus, a lone unit can sit on the middle of a plain and block a large army from entering any adjacent tiles. Realistically, if I had 20,000 men, 1,000 men would not block me from entering a block of land 30 miles to the north of those 1,000 men.
My thoughts is that if you want to stop an invader, you eventually have to attack it. If you want to block it, you could throw up a screen. The invader then has a choice - either destroy the screen or walk around it. If the invader chooses to walk around it, you, the defender, have to either attack it to slow it down or cry in your beer in fear.
Don't depend on an artificial forcefield created by a ZOC rule do the job for you.
Ironically, the loyalists doggedly use realism to support their arguments (especially regarding combat) and the conveniently forget realism when it does not suit their purposes.
And in AOM, you have a feature that allows you to retreat during battle, while that AI cannot use this feature. You end up hitting an enemy stack with 2-3 stacks on a turn, retreating them in the middle of battle to minimize your losses. Bottom line is that you lose few units while the AI loses a bunch.
You also score multiple slaves and increase your chances to get generals and heroes.
Ask the loyalists how often they use this feature. The argument is that this a balancer for AI cheats. It may be realistic for the player, but it certainly is not realistic for the AI...
Related to this, I have yet to see a lone AI in CTP/AOM CONSISTENTLY (and that is the key word, CONSISTENTLY) launch multiple attacks on a SINGLE TURN against a player when it has the opportunity. (but I have not played AOM for close to a year though) If you have multiple fronts against a particular AI and it does not leverage it's advantage with lightning-fast strikes (multiple attacks on a single turn), then the model is flawed, unrealistic, and it not at the level it could be.
This happens all the time in civ4 and EU2, and at least gives an impression of coordination. The AI will attack from multiple directions, and at multiple points on a SINGLE turn.
In AOM, the result of this is that the player ends up with a tactical advantage because the dual benefit of player-only retreats and the inability of the AI to use its own numerical superiority when it presents itself to the AI allows the player to preserve his forces. He may get hit, but it is a half-hearted hit. That is a different type of blob vs blob with a clear advantage to the player.
If this happens in your game, let me know. If the AI does leverage it's strength on a turn-by-turn basis, then AOM has truly evolved.
AOM is a very good game in that Stan has really taken CTP to a much higher level - and it does offer solid and creative gameplay - but like any other game it is not perfect, and it is not for everyone.
In many ways, it is superior to civ4.
Simply respect people who may have other preferences. I believe you do, and you offer a perspective that goes beyond the simple knee-jerk reactions of some of the AOM loyalists I've dealt with in the past (BTW, I do not count Stan in this camp)...
Last edited by hexagonian; June 5, 2006 at 11:44.
Yes, let's be optimistic until we have reason to be otherwise...No, let's be pessimistic until we are forced to do otherwise...Maybe, let's be balanced until we are convinced to do otherwise. -- DrSpike, Skanky Burns, Shogun Gunner
I'm glad to see some of the AoM forum guys bringing life to these threads.
I've done some research into merging AoM3 into the playtest. Here's what I wrote here
Okay, E; what I get out of the thread link you posted above is that people are using the finally available CTP source code to do some sort of a "CTP3" and you are considering including parts of AOM into it, but it would not be AOM; which last, from what I can see, downloading the AOM III "update" last weekend is of itself sort of a "finished product," albeit of a different form than what you're working on.Originally posted by E
I'm glad to see some of the AoM forum guys bringing life to these threads.
I've done some research into merging AoM3 into the playtest. Here's what I wrote here
I'd be interested, but as I have no programing skills at all, (look how I struggled from prior posts in this thread with Stan's simple "cut and paste" instructions,) I would personally only be interested in a finished product.
Hexagonian: Your criticisms of AOM are many and detailed, glad you and StanK are still speaking. I haven't played enough to answer you, which is something I need to work on this week. (Also because I simply want to play the game, now that I've downloaded the latest! )
I will answer on this simple level. Stan himself has said that some of the prior products in strategy series' were too wimp on AI participation, i.e. aggression. This did not reflect the real course of world history, which involved in most of that history virtual non-stop war and aggression; an analysis I accept. Ergot, if AOM is heavily about warmongering, it is because it draws a basis from world history, which is also mostly about warmongering. (I should have some nice quote from an old "Star Trek" episode here about the millennia of depravity of most of human history. )
To me it is a little bit of a shame, as I'd like to just diddle with his trade system and some of those extra cool wonders some game, without having to worry about churning out endless hoplites to fight off the inevitable unprovoked attack. I may dumb down the difficulty level below recommended for a game or so just to try to do that, but don't tell Stan or any of the "loyalists."
Also, on the individual issue of one warrior stopping many; we have the example of Thermopolyae, which admittedly was a choke point, but from what I understand a fairly wide one, for the bold Spartans trying to block the Persian horde. The better example I suppose was the "mobile defense" tactics of Field Marshall Von Manstein and others in the Russian steppe during the German defensive period 1943-44. I think ZOC, originally developed in old cardboard board strategy games of the Sixties and Seventies, was inspired by these types of things.
BTW, I'm glad you don't lump me with the still unnamed "knee-jerk...loyalists" who have evidently so offended you in defending the concepts of and participaton in AOM.
You will soon feel the wrath of my myriad swordsmen!


text:
in partnership with
a place to talk about Olympic style shooting, rifle or pistol, 10 meters to 50 meters, and whatever is in between.
maintained and moderated by
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Thu 12 Dec 2013
Fri 13 Dec 2013
Sat 14 Dec 2013
Sun 15 Dec 2013
Mon 16 Dec 2013
Tue 17 Dec 2013
Wed 18 Dec 2013
Buttplate Placement in Prone
TargetTalk Forum Index
Olympic Rifle - Air and Smallbore
View previous topic
View next topic
Dave IRL
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:00 am
Post subject:
Buttplate Placement in Prone
Had someone advise me recently at the range that I should try have the buttplate seated further into my shoulder, more towards the neck, and offset the hook accordingly. I thought maybe I should get some more feedback as well as to whether the buttplate seems too far out on the shoulder.
He simultaneously had me offset the buttplate pretty substantially. Initial impressions are that the placement further into the shoulder seems to make sense as it allows the arm to move to load and grip and trigger a lot more autonomously, but the offset gives me a very sideways recoil and with the gun further in, I'm not sure the offset is needed. Just thought I'd try get some opinions, since thinking about it only gets me so far, and with college finals upon me I'm not going to be flush with time to go and field test!
Photos or indications of good placement in the shoulder would be very welcome, as well as thoughts on whether I'm initially putting it too far out into towards the shoulder. Comments on offsetting the buttplate are also welcome, as I'm just looking for ideas to make the whole thing more comfortable and repeatable.
Back to top
Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Posts: 244
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:05 pm
Post subject:
You might get lots of try this and that, but this is not a simple solution unless we know a little more.... And the solution is going to be how it feels to you, and the consistency of it getting back into the same natural spot every time. Where your cheek likes to be in relation to getting the eyes straight through the sights. Do you cant or not. There are some steps to take that are straight forward, but will take some trial and error. Get all these right and most likely the recoil will be vertical and consistent.
First what led you to follow the suggestion of changing the cant angle of the butt in the first place? I guess something was just not going right?
How long have you been shooting prone?
What distance are you shooting?
What discipline?
What kind of scores are you currently shooting before the change?
I see your a left hand shooter... A pic of the back end of the buttplate with the rifle level on the ground would see how you have it better. Also one of you from the front straight down the barrel where the butt inters the shoulder.
These questions just help me find out how long you have had to tinker with it all..... Hair pulling trial and error comes your way...
Assuming you have a comfortable LOP that allows you to reach the chamber and without you bending the wrist too much to get on the pistol grip we can start the process....
Do you like the rifle level or does a cant come naturally?
1. start with everything straight... buttplate straight up and down and aligned horizontally with the barrel. Many just assume the offset to the outside (cast off) is correct, but it is not for everyone.
2. gradually cant the buttplate a degree at a time counter clockwise until it likes to stay put and the rifle is were it wants to stay without you muscling anything.
Back to top
Dave IRL
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:41 pm
Post subject:
Been feeling like I'm struggling a lot to get things consistent and it's taking a good while each shot for it to feel right. Scores have been around 580 in 50m ISSF prone. Been shooting about four and a half years. Hoping to get proper regular coaching over the summer and thereafter but just looking to get advice as I can get very stuck into tweaking things and find it hard to evaluate results against my own performance.
Back to top
Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Posts: 555
Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:56 pm
Post subject:
Hi Dave,
Tenring make a number of good points about starting neutral and working slowly out. A few more pictures not just from above might be helpful as well.
Something to realize is that most modern target shooting accessories will adjust far beyond the range that is useful for good position development.
First, the good news, your jacket fits nicely through your shoulder, you may even have the takeup strap on the back of the jacket a little too tight. How tight is the jacket across the back. With the jacket on and your normal shooting underclothing you should not be able to raise your arms and touch your elbows in front of your chest.
Just from these pictures I get the feeling that either your length of pull is too long or your handstop is too far forward or both. The left shoulder (for you) looks like it is pushed back bending the top of the spine to the left.
Next thing, it is common to try and get the butt plate to wedge into the shoulder with the curve from the top and the hook forming a vee that traps the shoulder. Not enough wiggle room. Eric U talks about using the hook to set the rifle into his shoulder then pressing down with his cheek to release the hook and have the curve of the butt anchor the rifle on the upper part of the shoulder. (Forgive me Eric if I have paraphrased too much.)
I am going to echo some of what tenring has already said, start with things neutral. I might even go so far as to take the hook off!!! Work with the position until you feel the sling and handstop are correct, get into position with your eyes closed and see how things line up. This might suggest a whether you need to cant or rotate the buttplate to get a better fit to your shoulder. When that is all done, put the hook back on and add that to the mix realizing for prone it is more a guide pin than a anchor device.
Getting the butt dialed in for comfortable repeatable shooting is a long painstaking process and in the end except for the vertical adjustment you will find that it is not going to be very far from the neutral point.
Good Luck
Back to top
Albert T
Joined: 02 Apr 2011
Posts: 35
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 6:35 am
Post subject:
looking at the pictures your LOP seems a bit to long just like Justadude stated. The contactpoint of your shoulder should be almost square tot the centerline of the rifle.
Placing the buttplate more ofsett towards the neck is not always the best option. Too far to the neck and you start using muscles to keep everything in place and the position becomes uncomfortable. The best way is to place the buttplate in the most comfortable place in your shoulder then move the stock sideways in or out until you can place your aiming eye in the center of the rearsight keeping your head straight (not canted to either side) and only lowering your head to the cheeckpiece with a "yes" knodding motion.
Also, you stated that you put the rifle closer to your neck. I assume you did not compensate your cheeckpiece for this sideway displacement. Result will be that your head is not resting on the cheeckpiece with a force straight down but down and to the side. This can result in a sideways motion of the rifle during recoil - assuming that your buttplate is resting evenly across the shoulder over the entire width of the buttplate. Is the b.plate resting in your shoulder with the rightside only, you will have a recoil to the left and v.v.
Make sure the hook of the buttplate does not rest against either your side or the innerside of your arm this can result in sideways motion as well.
Albert B (The Netherlands)
Back to top
Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Posts: 244
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:29 am
Post subject:
I cant tell much about the LOP from the pics. Except that it looks like it pushes the left shoulder back some. Looks like you might have it as short as it goes??? If that is the case you can shorten the handstop a little and get a little more behind it. As Albert said. These changes made all have great affect on the cheek position. Which was true in my case. When I got it all pretty close my cheek position became more consistent and my groups got smaller.... Neck quit giving me so many probs too. One other thing that surprised me too was adjusting the pistol grip (angle and twist) to give me the most relaxed and straight movement of the trigger pull. When I got it perfect I found it affected how the rifle set in the shoulder I suppose from the hand on the grip. I had to make a small adjustment to the butt angle to get consistent shoulder pressure and cant angle again.
Again more pics of position, rifle setup from all angles would help. Also how tall are you? and what is your LOP (end of trigger finger to the bend inside the elbow with it bent at 90 degree angle)?
Back to top
Dave IRL
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:31 am
Post subject:
With the rifle as is, I do have to lean left to place my head on the cheekpiece, which I've found quite disorienting at times. Getting it closer in lets me place my head much more naturally. I did fix both the cheekpiece and the hook to allow this placement in the shoulder. It's also got the gun much more vertical for me, which is nice. In terms of LOP, I've wondered whether it might be too short rather than too long. My head sits way out on the very far end of the cheekpiece, almost touching the bolt shroud, and my wrist is slightly kinked to operate the trigger. Have thought about a comprehensive rebuild from the back forward after the exams to try get a better head position on the cheekpiece and a more natural relationship between shoulder, elbow and pistol grip. Any thoughts?
Back to top
Dave IRL
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:36 am
Post subject:
tenring wrote:
I cant tell much about the LOP from the pics. Except that it looks like it pushes the left shoulder back some. Looks like you might have it as short as it goes??? If that is the case you can shorten the handstop a little and get a little more behind it. As Albert said. These changes made all have great affect on the cheek position. Which was true in my case. When I got it all pretty close my cheek position became more consistent and my groups got smaller.... Neck quit giving me so many probs too. One other thing that surprised me too was adjusting the pistol grip (angle and twist) to give me the most relaxed and straight movement of the trigger pull. When I got it perfect I found it affected how the rifle set in the shoulder I suppose from the hand on the grip. I had to make a small adjustment to the butt angle to get consistent shoulder pressure and cant angle again.
Again more pics of position, rifle setup from all angles would help. Also how tall are you? and what is your LOP (end of trigger finger to the bend inside the elbow with it bent at 90 degree angle)?
I'm 6'. Hoping to get some coaching pointers over the summer. I've shot some okay scores so far but I'm just trying to figure out how to make it all more comfortable and intuitively repeatable at the moment.
Back to top
Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Posts: 271
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:55 am
Post subject:
Dave, just curious, have you moved the top half of that buttplate in yet? (i.e., slid it back along those two rails.) I never used to be able to get a decent shoulder position with that style buttplate until I actually removed the pivoting portion (with the pad on it) and flipped those two little J-shaped rails around, which acted as sort of a hook on the top side. The resulting profile ends up being much more like the later style Anschutz hooks.
Back to top
Dave IRL
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:38 pm
Post subject:
Yeah, it's set up to contour nicely where it is. I'm just not happy that where it currently is is optimal. Should get a chance to shoot this week however so I've got my few notes to try things anyway. First is going to be with no offset, hook turned out to fit, and if necessary, whatever degree of rotation is necessary to have it fit the shoulder uniformly.
Back to top
Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Posts: 4
Location: Western Australia
Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 7:46 pm
Post subject:
Like the other guys have been saying, looks like your LOP is too long - setting your left shoulder back slightly. Looks a tiny bit uncomfortable from the angle shown.
This has the effect of pushing the butt out on your shoulder, giving difficulty with sighting, head position and recoil most likely.
Leaving the buttplate (LOP) where it is, think about doing these steps:
1. move the rear sight back towards you
2. move the handstop back towards you the same amount as 1.
You will find that your position should straighten up slightly in relation to the target.
Your shoulders MUST be square in relation to your spine, neck straight, head turned to one side.
Back to top
Dave IRL
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 177
Posted: Mon May 14, 2012 1:33 am
Post subject:
I've not gotten to experiment much at all with final exams here. I turned the hook out a little more so I can tuck the buttplate in closer. This gave me much more autonomy in my loading and triggering arm and hand and better control over the zero position. I will have to shorten up the buttplate slightly to match though. Finished tomorrow so going to have a look at it in the next few days.
I tried moving the handstop back as well. This just increased the pain in my front hand. With a heavy barrel and a tube, there's a lot of pressure on it as is, so I'm keen to keep as much weight behind the handstop as possible. Will try leave the handstop, shorten the LOP slightly and keep the buttplate tucked in a little closer to my head. Should solve some of the issues I had with leaning over to the left to reach the cheekpiece too.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:
All Posts
1 Day
7 Days
2 Weeks
1 Month
3 Months
6 Months
1 Year
Oldest First
Newest First
TargetTalk Forum Index
Olympic Rifle - Air and Smallbore
All times are
Jump to:
Select a forum
Shooters Lounge
Olympic Pistol
Youth Shooting Programs
Olympic Rifle - Air and Smallbore
Buy, Sell, Trade
Bullseye Pistol Talk
Collegiate Coach Forum
Disabled Shooter's Chat
Biathlon Discussion
International Skeet
International Trap
post new topics in this forum
reply to topics in this forum
edit your posts in this forum
delete your posts in this forum
vote in polls in this forum
post calendar events in this forum
attach files in this forum
download files in this forum
Powered by
© 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Regional Forums » USA • Canada • Africa • Europe • China • India • Indonesia • Pakistan • Central/South America • Australia/NZ | Algae | Alternative EnergyBiodiesel » FAQ • Production • Cold Weather • Advanced Methods • Business • BioHeat • Vehicles • Marine | Classifieds » Vehicles • Equipment • Jobs • Oil
Hello All,
I'm looking into purchasing a 2010 Chevy HD2500 pickup with a Duramax 6.6L TD V8 engine in it. Does anybody know how this engine would fare with 100% bio??
Thanks, Thomas
Merry Christmas to All
100% Biodiesel is certainly untested.
Your Duramax engine is quoted as B5 compatible on the GMC specification. I read that folks are using up to 20% Bio on a standard tank of diesel. Lots of other places asking the same question. I would try starting at 20% for two successive tanks, and then ramp up in 5% increments every two or three tanks. There have to be other people trying this out.
Anyone here tried Biodiesel in the Duramax?
Nick Harrington
Thank you. I also hope there will be more replies to this engine.
Well, ity's threee months later and I finally bought a 2010 Silverado 2500HD Duramax and was wondering if anybody else out there would put B99 in the tank without any reservation.
Boy, is this forum ever dead.
Thomas SchwaigerBoy, is this forum ever dead.
"'To be neutral and to be passive is to collaborate with whatever is going on.' Democracy is not just a counting-up of votes, but a counting-up of actions.'" ~Howard Zinn
Yes you can use B100 but you will void your waranty .
All diesels will run on B100 and a new engin better then an old one with diesel sludge everywere .
2 - 7.3 Ford cube vans , 3 Ton International ,2 Benz and my house and hot water all running on B100 My fireplace burns what I call Bio-logs made from the waste glycerin after making Bio-diesel 150,000 liters and counting
terryrretAll diesels will run on B100
Careful issuing blanket statements like this one. There are engines with post-injection (something GM/Chev has implemented) that should not be fueled with biodiesel (or done so under a monitoring regime). There are other few other engines with known problems as well, though they are more the exception. It's always wise to research before your engine becomes an experiment.
I have a 2004 duramax. Started making and using Biodiesel around 75,000 miles. I now have 162,000 miles.I usually run B 50 during the summer and B 20 in the winter. When I kicked it up to B 100, I popped a high rail pressure code and backed off to B 50. I have changed 2 glow plugs but nothing else. Filter change every 10,000 miles. Skip
Sorry, haven't been on it for a while either :-{
I came across the idea of using a "DPF delete kit" to eliminate the 2010 Duramax/B100 incompatibility.
Is it true?


text:
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE!
From the folks who brought you High Rankings!
More SEO Content
Requesting A Review!
Posted 01 October 2003 - 11:08 AM
You would be better off to spend the next month learning about website usability, copywriting, and SEO stuff before making any changes.
I certainly would not pay $900 to any company that wanted to make no changes to the visible copy. Why should you do all the work to get top rankings - only to reward them with your $900?
Posted 04 October 2003 - 06:02 PM
that grill looks pretty interesting, is it too late to qualify for it? haha
Looks to me like you have two issues that you need to deal with if you want your website to be the sales channel you hope it is. First off, you need SEO to optimize your site for the right keywords (this seems esp. crucial in your case) and get people to your site, then you need to do something with them when you're there.
I will leave the SEO stuff to the others here (but I will mention that you should probably do more with your <title> and <alt> tags, and i don't think that the presentation on the homepage works in your favor).
Here are some of my ideas of what you can do with the visitors once you get them there:
1. Use permission marketing to get people to sign up for a periodic newsletter -- something akin to "To sign up for our monthly newsletter of barbecue tips and recipes...", and then hit them up with special offers and promotions. You will want to make certain your newsletter has recipes for both users of your grill as well as people who don't use your grill yet.
2. Set up the free cookbook you offer in a digital format and put it up on your site. It should be a great tool to encourage repeat visits as well as what I call "peripheral traffic": those people who come to your site looking for one thing, and wander into the other parts of your site.
2a. If you have the room in your budget, try using other forms of digital media as a way of getting your point across. For instance, a side-by-side cookoff of your grill vs a competitor done in flashware could be pretty impactful.
3. Re-evaluate your homepage: I think you want to have the goal of, if a visitor visits only your homepage, he/she should know exactly what the cooker is, why it is special, why he/she should want one, and how to get it.
4. This is just a personal picky thing, but condense your "About Us" information and "Contact Us" information into a single page -- though i imagine some might disagree with that statement.
5. You mentioned radio ads, and that is good, I think a trap too many people get locked into thinking they can only use the web to market their site: I think another great secondary way to market a site is direct mail marketing. And don't forget promotional giveaways that prominently feature your URL.
6. You might want to consider using those "Tell your friends about us" links as a way to promote your site.
7. As far as measuring the response to your radio ads, you might also want to consult your server logs. Much in the same way that you can determine the success of your ads by looking at order zip codes, you can also determine where your web visitors live by examining their IP addresses.
8. You might also want to consider "intra-site advertising". I know some people don't like this, but my experience has been that a pop-up ad or banner ad on your site advertising a special promotion or a particular product can generate some good traffic. If you could implement it quickly, I would say an ad or promo targeting tailgaters could be huge.
9. Re-think that login link on the top of your homepage. If there is a customer support page, put it in your toolbar. If its for admin purposes, hide it in the bottom left or right hand corner.
10. I think you might want to be a bit more aggressive in the branding on your site.
11. This is out of left field, but I would recommend that you try to incorporate more photos of food (without the cooker) in your site. I think your best bet is to get people to focus on the great results they will get with your cooker, and not the actual machine itself.
Anyways, hope this helps. Don't hesitate to send me a message if you have any questions.
Posted 04 October 2003 - 06:26 PM
Those are not your first worries. Alt atributes are ignored unless the picture is clickable.(but I will mention that you should probably do more with your <title> and <alt> tags...)
Be carefull with heavy graphics,.. most people still use a dial-up modem to connect to the internet.2a. If you have the room in your budget, try using other forms of digital media as a way of getting your point across. For instance, a side-by-side cookoff of your grill vs a competitor done in flashware could be pretty impactful.
Makes sense.but condense your "About Us" information and "Contact Us" information into a single page
Correct, most people don't like pop-ups. Why not put a promotion in the page it self? Also, be aware that pop-up blockers are getting more popular.You might also want to consider "intra-site advertising". I know some people don't like this, but my experience has been that a pop-up ad or banner ad on your site advertising a special promotion or a particular product ...
I think most importantly is getting your web site in the top 10 of the search engines. Other marketing stuff has little value without visitors. Spend your time first on the search engines.
Posted 05 October 2003 - 06:59 AM
Many thanks for your responses. They are all food for thought and I will be discussing them with our web developers next week in a general meeting about optimising the site.
It's interesting to note, re the search engines, that last Wednesday our traffic on http://www.thecobb shot up from 20 a day to 193 then settled to around 150 a day - most of the hits coming from a PPC site called About BBQs that I'd signed up and paid for, with some from Google and Yahoo, neither of which I have submitted the site to. How can the site appear on the SEs if I have not submitted it to them? Does it get there through the backdoor of appearing on About and other shipping sites/directories? Traffic on the cobb.earthfireusa.com URL, which the SEO company supposedly submitted to the search engines, is still chugging away at +- 20 hits a day.
Another point worth mentioning is that the SEO company are confident of the cobb.cearthfireusa.com site appearing in Yahoo even though they are not spending the $299 to sign up. What do they know that we (I) do not?
I'll be focusing the next couple of weeks on optimising the content on both the sites and waiting for the first report from the SEO company!
Posted 05 October 2003 - 07:51 AM
Yahoo is just a normal search engine that will find web sites on its own. Perhaps you have a couple of links pointing at your web site from other web sites. You don't have to pay yahoo to get ranked. You pay to be included faster.
The same goes for all other search engines. Even when you don't submit, it still will be found. The simple fact that you posted a link in this forum can already be a reason that some search engines found your web site.
When they find your site through a directory, that is not called a back door. That is just a normal back link.
As you see, a normal web site with a couple of links pointing at it will get indexed. SEO will help you get higher rankings, and with that more traffic and sales.
Posted 05 October 2003 - 11:46 AM
How can the site appear on the SEs if I have not submitted it to them? Does it get there through the backdoor of appearing on About and other shipping sites/directories?
You never have to submit to the spidering search engines, because yes, they will find your links from places like About and other directories you submit to. There are many threads on here where we discuss this.
Peter said:
Yahoo is just a normal search engine that will find web sites on its own.
Which isn't actually true.
Yahoo is a directory, which at the moment also pulls results from Google's database. You will be shown in Yahoo results if you're being shown in Google's results, but you won't be actually in their directory (thus not having to pay the $299).
What I find disconcerting is that your SEO company did not tell you this, and instead apparently is trying to make it sound like they know something special and secret to get you into Yahoo for free. That bothers me a lot. Why would they not explain it to you the way I just did? Companies like that give us all a bad name because they take advantage of their client's "ignorance" about the search engines and directories.
Posted 05 October 2003 - 12:13 PM
You are right,... Sorry about the confusion. No idea where that came from,..
Posted 06 October 2003 - 12:47 PM
Another point worth mentioning is that the SEO company are confident of the cobb.cearthfireusa.com site appearing in Yahoo even though they are not spending the $299 to sign up. What do they know that we (I) do not?
Originally Yahoo was a free directory. Those sites which were in there a long time ago never had to pay a fee...and thus still do not have to. Also non comercial websites (content sites) can be included free if they fit one of the non commercial categories.
It is important to note that most people use Yahoo search when they use Yahoo. A much smaller portion of their user base comes from people searching the directory.
Posted 08 October 2003 - 04:36 PM
I wouldn't mind giving you a couple of design ideas while I'm looking at it.
The VERY first thing that pops out to me is, where is your phone number? Do you take orders over the phone as well, or are you trying to push ALL internet sales?
If it were me, I think I would ditch the black bar above the grey and use the grey bar to house my phone number, link to contact page (ie. Contact Us Online) and shopping cart link (login if needed). The black bar is a waste.
Speaking of logging in. My personal opinion is they stink. No one wants to keep up with more passwords and user names, if I could ditch it, I would! Use a cookie to remember the customer if you really want to, but otherwise, just let them buy it and make it as easy as could possibly be.
Back to black... If you could get around the black nav bar I would. I think the logo carries enough black and black is heavy, stick to a sexy color thats not rough on the eyes. Light grey, light blue, light something.
The awards are GREAT! As mentioned, use the heck out of them, but Id use them in a side bar on the right of the main picture. Not only would they show better, but they would allow you some space to type what they are for, and that can carry keywords. IE: The Cobb Grill won the 2003 Vesta Award as the Best Charcoal, Wood Barbecue Smoker. Think Right column, ad, text under, little space, ad, text under. Or both ads and one bit of text. Figure something else to do with the pics in the right. Use a sentance under the main pic to highlight the fact that this thing is fun traveling, camping, sporting and adventuring.
Speaking of the pics... Ask your guy to lose the rounded faded pics. One, I think they kinda hose the feel by being funny shaped. The fade not only increases the size of the pic but also can be hazy and distracting. Lose the red circle around the product, use nicer fonting (and bigger) for the tag line...matter of fact, that tagline is good...I would try to work it in as text somewhere near the top of the page, maybe that black bar at the top would be handy for something.
Also, the pics at the top, to either side of the product are canted with a nasty shadow. Cut the shadow, straighten the photo. Keep everything as crisp and clean as you can.
All of this will for sure help your conversoin rates. clean and sexy... can make a huge difference.
I also dont think that I would like my nav to refer to the cooker as "the product". Im out of ideas at the moment, but maybe The Cobb Cooker at least. Folks out there will search for this thing by name im sure, and that would help further that cause. Im confused too, cause when I go to thecobb.com, it redirects me to the erathfire site. I fully believe that you should keep your own domain. None of that .earthfire stuff.
Want me to draw up a design platform for ya (since I just picked that one to death) Seriously...
anothet note, your only notion to buy this thing from your hompage is buried under the nav. tsk tsk...
Inner pages for grilling, linked from home page.. would be great if the copy next to the photos was real text. looks cleaner and helps you, drops file size ...all kinds of good reasons.
Posted 08 October 2003 - 04:41 PM
<title>Barbecue smokers, bbq pits, smoker grills, barbecue grills, bbq grills, meat smokers</title>
Just use common sense on the titles, i noticed yours at the top of my browser and it looks funky.
<title>The Cobb Barbecue Cooker, the best little cooker you'll ever own.</title>
or something like that. A good normal sentance that describes the page.
Posted 17 October 2003 - 10:36 AM
Sorry not to have replied sooner to your splendid post - thanks very much for your excellent suggestions. I will talk to our web designer and think very seriously about taking up your offer of design services.
I think your are top of my list so far for the Free Cobb offer I made when I started this forum!
On the question of the URL, we are waiting until Nov 4th for the report from our SEO company before we switch over to thecobb.com URL, but I take your point exactly.
Posted 17 October 2003 - 10:45 AM
Posted 17 October 2003 - 08:17 PM
They said they would create 10 Directory Information Pages (DIP's), each with a unique URL and domain targeting our keywords,
Are DIPs considered "unethical?" Does Google figure out the trick, eventually?
I hadn't heard of that one before!
Posted 17 October 2003 - 08:43 PM
Posted 28 October 2003 - 03:28 PM
if obviously shows up in the browser at the top of your page.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
Please enter your travel dates.
Classic Room, 2 Double Beds, Non Smoking
Classic Room, 1 King Bed with Sofabed, Non Smoking
Suite, 1 King Bed with Sofabed, Non Smoking
Standard Room, 1 King Bed, Non Smoking, Jetted Tub
Uncompromising service, friendly faces and comfortable hotel accommodations.
Universities nearby
Located in historic South Bend, Inn at Saint Mary's is nestled on the campus of Saint Mary's College and adjacent to the University of Notre Dame. The local airport is 3 miles away and a shuttle is provided.
A complimentary full buffet style hot breakfast is served daily in the Cafe. Unwind in the evening with drinks at the Faculty Lounge. The extensive 24 hour fitness center also features a jacuzzi and sauna.
The spacious guest rooms provide a 32-inch flat screen plasma TV, complimentary wired and wireless internet, luxurious bath products, pillowtop mattresses and premium bedding.
Hotel Amenities
- General
The luxurious Inn at Saint Mary's Hotel in South Bend, Indiana lies just a stone's throw away from a diverse collection of world-class universities, health care institutions and corporations. Inn at Saint Mary's is nestled on the campus of Saint Mary's College and is adjacent to the University of Notre Dame. From the moment you arrive at this luxurious boutique hotel via the complimentary airport shuttle, you'll admire the Inn's unique and stunning lobby … a treat for the senses, featuring soaring ceilings, curved walls, and modern furniture. Drink in the unique atmosphere of South Bend while enjoying the personalized service and stylish ambiance that only a luxury hotel can provide. A daily breakfast buffet will delight you with hearty hot items including eggs, sausage, bacon, waffles, potatoes and biscuits with gravy.
- Free self parking
- Sauna
- Air-conditioned public areas
- Free parking
- Audiovisual equipment
- Safe-deposit box at front desk
- 24-hour front desk
- Express check-out
- ATM/banking
- Gift shops or newsstand
- Airport transportation (complimentary)
- Laundry facilities
- Elevator/lift
- Ballroom(s)
- Fitness facilities
- Number of floors - 3
- Banquet facilities
- Bar/lounge
- Coffee/tea in lobby
- Complimentary newspapers in lobby
- Free breakfast
- Dry cleaning/laundry service
- Event catering
- Express check-in
- Technology support staff
- Free Wi-Fi
- Free wired high-speed Internet
- One meeting/conference room
- Total number of rooms - 150
- Concierge services
- Microwave in lobby
- Multilingual staff
- Restaurant
- Room service (limited hours)
- Area shuttle (complimentary)
- 24-hour business center
- Meeting facilities size (meters) - 1394
- RV, bus, truck parking
- Free guest parking during stay
- Year Built 1992
- Train station pickup (complimentary)
- Number of buildings/towers - 1
- Technology helpdesk
- Television in lobby
- Wedding services
- Dial-up Internet access - complimentary
- Meeting facilities size (feet) - 15,000
- Internet
Available in all rooms: Free Wi-Fi, Free wired high-speed Internet
Available in some public areas: Free Wi-Fi, Free wired high-speed Internet
- Parking
Free parking, Free guest parking during stay, Free self parking, RV, bus, truck parking
- Room Amenities
- Premium TV channels
- Premium bedding
- Private bathroom
- Complimentary weekday newspaper
- Voice mail
- Multi-line phone
- Free local calls
- Coffee/tea maker
- Daily housekeeping
- Designer toiletries
- Shower/tub combination
- Hair dryer
- Iron/ironing board
- Window opens
- Desk
- Clock radio
- Cribs/infant beds available
- Air conditioning
- Cordless phone
- Speakerphone
- Cable TV service
- Free Wi-Fi
- Free wired high-speed Internet
- Climate control
- Complimentary newspaper
- Egyptian-cotton sheets
- Dining
Inn at Saint Marys Hotel and Suites has an adjacent restaurant serving dinner only. Room service is provided during limited dinner hours.
- Recreation
The extensive 24 hour fitness center provides a treadmill, stairmaster, eliptical, excercise bike, weight machines and free weights. The fitness center also features a jacuzzi and sauna.
- Golf - driving range nearby
- Golf - miniature nearby
- Snowboarding nearby
- Skiing - downhill nearby
- Skiing - cross-country nearby
- Ice skating nearby
- Dock nearby
- Swimming nearby
- Rowing or canoeing nearby
- Kayaking nearby
- Boat launch nearby
- Yoga classes/instruction nearby
- Pilates classes/instruction nearby
- Aerobics nearby
- Running track/path nearby
- Basketball nearby
- Bicycle rentals nearby
- Hiking/biking trails nearby
- Horse riding/rental nearby
- Fishing nearby
- Playground nearby
- Golfing nearby
- Golf lessons available nearby
- Accessibility
To make requests for specific accessibility needs, complete the "Special or Accessibility Requests" section of "Trip Preferences" when you book your hotel.
- Accessibility equipment for the deaf
- Accessible bathroom
- Accessible path of travel
- Braille or raised signage
- Accessible parking
- In-room accessibility
- Roll-in shower
Policies & Fees
- Check-in
Check-in time starts at 3 PM
Minimum check-in age is 21
- Check-out
Check-out time is noon
- Payment types
Accepted at this hotel: American Express, Diners Club, Discover, MasterCard, Visa
- Pets
Pets not allowed
- General
Extra-person charges may apply and vary depending on hotel policy.
Government-issued photo identification and a credit card or cash deposit are required at check-in for incidental charges.
Special requests are subject to availability upon check-in and may incur additional charges. Special requests cannot be guaranteed.
No rollaway/extra beds available
- Additional Details
Children 18 years old and younger stay free when occupying the parent or guardian's room, using existing bedding.


text:
What's News: Apple and China Mobile sign a deal to distribute iPhones on the world's largest mobile carrier. Wildlife workers are trying to save stranded pilot whales in the Everglades. U.S. economy grows 3.6% in third quarter. Joanne Po reports. Photo: AP
Money flow gives a snapshot of relative buying and selling pressure in a stock.
A ratio above one suggests greater buying pressure, below one suggests greater selling.


text:
lets go partner
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lakewood,Colo
Posts: 40,916
Adopt-a-Bronco: Woodyard |
UHL (lmao!)
UHL throws the book at Edmonton tough guy Flint Generals enforcer Ashlee Langdone was suspended for 20 games by the United Hockey League on Thursday after being assessed three game misconducts in a fight-filled 7-2 loss to the Quad City Mallards last Friday. Langdone, a 23-year-old winger from Edmonton, lost it after the second of two altercations before the second-period faceoff. # Oct. 31: Full story Fan charged after player sucker-punched in UHL game A Quad City Mallards hockey fan has been charged with aggravated battery after the United Hockey League's leading goalscorer was sucker-punched as players left the ice following the second period of a game last Friday. Police in Moline, Ill., have charged Chad D. Oberbroeckling, 45, of Dubuque, Iowa, with a felony that carries a sentence of two to five years in prison, probation and a possible $25,000 US fine. # Mar. 26: Full story Goalie suspended 15 games, then waived LAKE ST. LOUIS, Mo. (CP) -- A Canadian goalie who threw a tantrum after giving up the deciding goal with 16 seconds remaining in a United Hockey League game has been suspended seven games for his antics. Jeremy Symington of Camlachie, Ont., was in goal for the Elmira (N.Y.) Jackals when Glenn Stewart scored the winner for the New Haven Knights in a UHL game Dec. 21. The Knights were on a a five-on-three power play at the time. # Mar. 26: Full story |
Sponsored Links |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |


text:
Peugeot Vans
Stylish in use with proven safety benefits from increased visabillity to other road users.
Auto-Sleepers well deserved reputation for delivering unrivalled top of the range motorhomes, Alloy Wheels provide high value enhancements befitting of your luxury motorhome.
Auto-Sleepers Panel Vans come as standard with colour matching front bumpers to your choice of 4 body colours (inc 3 metalic finishes)
LED lighting offers bright illumination, whilst having a 70% lower drain than traditional lighting making them practical and battery friendly.
User friendly feature with safety isolator, allowing easy connection of Gas appliances including BBQ's to make the most of summer evenings in the great outdoors.
Roof mounted Status Aerials with internal connection sockets and all models come prewired for satellite installation.
Peugeots' factory fitted Cab Air-Conditioning option, ensures optimum driving comfort whatever the weather outside.
Peugeot Euro V 130bhp Engine - 9% improvement in fuel ecconomy and 7% lower CO2 emissions than Euro IV 130bhp engine
Athermic glass is bonded into the panels for vehicle security, fits flush to the body enhancing the external appearance & reflects heat in both directions, keeping the vehicle cool in summer & warm & dry in winter.
User friendly, external socket prewired to internal Television station, allowing freestanding TV/Satellite systems to easily be connected to the vehicle on-site.
AL-KO AirTop upgrades Peugeots twin-leaf rear suspension, fitted to each rear wheel allowing the abillity to balance internal loading whilst providing unrivalled road holding & delivers ultimate driving comfort.
Full colour wide angle viewing lens with LCD screen built into the rear view mirror. This camera can also be used as a permanent feed to provide rear vision throughout the journey.
Practical & reliable, the 20 litre liquid capacity tank is economical in use with LPG costing typically 75p a litre. The tank is hassle free in use making middle of the night change overs a thing of the past.
The Pedigree wind-out canopy awning, allows easy expansion of living space when on site and can be easily upgraded with the addition of side panels from your local retailer.
No compromises, all Auto-Sleeper van conversions come supplied as standard with a Spare Wheel & Tyre plus an easy access pressure check valve to ensure total peace of mind in use at home or abroad.
Peugeot factory fitted options enhance the car like drivability, cruise control makes the longest journeys a breeze and bluetooth lets you wirelessly connect your mobile devices for safe and legal use.


text:
Mutual funds and ETFs
Exchange traded funds (ETFs) Comparing ETF's, open-end, and closed-end funds
⇐ Use this menu to view and help create subtitles for this video in many different languages.
You'll probably want to hide YouTube's captions if using these subtitles.
- So far we looked at open end mutual fund
- that can kind of grow and shrink depending on how many investors
- want to invest in that fund and they can grow by creating new shares
- and selling those shares to general public
- and they can shrink because someone who wants their money back
- goes to the fund and said
- "you have to buy this back from me
- at the NAV (net asset value) per share."
- But the problem with this actually there's a couple problems
- is that the manager here has to always keep a little cash
- set aside in case some of the investors come to him and say
- "Hey, I want you to buy my share back. I want liquidity."
- And the other thing that they have to worry about
- or at least from the investor point of view is
- they can only buy or sell at the end of the day
- and that will only happen onnet asset value per share
- and on top of that the fund manager or whoever is running
- the fund has to worry about all of these actually transacting between
- all of these different investors. On the other side of
- thing we look at the closed end funds, the closed end funds
- couldn't kind of dynamically grow and shrink by creating
- new shares or by buying them back but what
- was good about them is that they are freely trading on exchanges
- may be on the NASDAQ or New York stock exchange.
- And because there was non of this kind of back and forth
- between the fund managers or whoever was a kind of doing
- the operations of the fund and the investors, they didn't
- have to put cash aside or they didn't have to have
- kind of all of the overhead in dealing with the investors.
- Now, you're probably saying "well, isn't there a way
- or maybe there's a way to get the best of both worlds of fund
- that could grow dynamically, that could create new shares
- when there was demand from investors.
- But in the same time, those new shares could be
- traded on an open market and that combination
- or you can kind of view it as the combination
- of the due actually exist and they're called Exchange Traded Funds.
- Exchange Traded Funds. or ETF for short.
- And you might say "Hey wait, isn't a Closed End Funds Exchange Traded?"
- And it is. These actually do exchange trade hand
- on the stock exchanges, but these aren't officially ETF.
- So someone told you an ETF, the way to think about it is a combination of both.
- But what it does is, it limits the interactions.
- So when you have this regular open end mutual fund,
- any individual investors can come to the fund and say
- "Here is my share, buy it back from me," eliminate that share.
- That creates a lot of ever head here.
- On an Exchange Traded Funds, only approved people only and these are usually large institutions
- can go to the fund and say "I want to buy or redeem a big block of shares."
- So an Exchanged Traded Funds instead of creating one share at a time,
- it might create 5,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 shares at a time.
- And on the other side of a thing, if someone wants to redeem their shares,
- they would redeem 5,000, 10,000, or 100,000 shares at the same time.
- And what's good there from the funds point of view is that
- they don't have to deal with all of these small transactions,
- they can do big transactions with big entities so that saves
- them cost on over head. And since these big people
- are going kind of buy these big blocks of shares, they can go and sell them
- in an open market, they can trade them in the open market.
- So if you want to buy into the ETF instead of buy it directly from the ETF,
- you would buy it from one of these big institutions that buy big blocks of shares.
- So they're now buying, you know a big block of, you know
- may be a 10,000 shares right over here and will trade in the open market.
- So you kind of get the best of both worlds.
- And in general, ETF also have lower fees.
- They have lower fee, one because they don't have to do all this back and forth
- between each individual investors and most ETFs are not actively
- managed and when I say "actively managed,"
- I'm talking about the situation where you had Pete, and Pete said
- "He's just an awesome stock figure, he can beat the market,
- He can you know, do all of you know.
- He really researched his company and he thinks that
- there are some values that he creates by doing that.
- When something is not actively managed, and Exchanged Traded Funds
- tend to not be there, saying
- "Look, we're just gonna buy the market or we're just gonna buy some commodity."
- So when you go into the Exchanged Trade Funds,
- you're really just trying to buy some assets classes,
- maybe it's the SNP500, maybe some types of Exchanged
- Traded Funds that buys gold assets or maybe it's buying some other type of commodity.
- And so because it's not actively managed,
- the argument would be that they don't do as much as managing fees.
- So they will have lower fees.
- They will have lower fees.
- So the combination, they can go arbitrary large,
- and some of the largest Exchanged Traded funds are super huge.
- They have much lower fees and they have this tradability,
- you can trade them at any kind of second on the market,
Be specific, and indicate a time in the video:
At 5:31, how is the moon large enough to block the sun? Isn't the sun way larger?
Have something that's not a question about this content? |
This discussion area is not meant for answering homework questions.
Share a tip
When naming a variable, it is okay to use most letters, but some are reserved, like 'e', which represents the value 2.7831...
Thank the author
This is great, I finally understand quadratic functions!
Have something that's not a tip or thanks about this content? |
This discussion area is not meant for answering homework questions.
Report a mistake in the video
At 2:33, Sal said "single bonds" but meant "covalent bonds."
Discuss the site
For general discussions about Khan Academy, visit our Reddit discussion page.
Flag inappropriate posts
Here are posts to avoid making. If you do encounter them, flag them for attention from our Guardians.
- disrespectful or offensive
- an advertisement
not helpful
- low quality
- not about the video topic
- soliciting votes or seeking badges
- a homework question
- a duplicate answer
- repeatedly making the same post
wrong category
- a tip or thanks in Questions
- a question in Tips & Thanks
- an answer that should be its own question
about the site


text:
Red Planet details
Format: | 12 DVD |
Starring: | Terence Stamp, Val Kilmer, Tom Sizemore, Simon Baker, Carrie-Anne Moss, Benjamin Bratt |
Director: | Antony Hoffman |
Genres: | Action/Adventure, Sci-Fi/Fantasy |
Studio: | WARNER HOME VIDEO |
Collections: | Top Sci-Fi |
Name | Discs | |
Red Planet |
12 Feature |
DVD Information
Run time: | 1 hour 46 minutes |
Rental release: | Limited availability |
Main languages: | English |
Dubbed: | French |
Subtitles: | Arabic, Dutch, English, French, German, Italian, Spanish |
Hearing impaired subtitles: | English |
Most helpful review
great film, keeped me ...
By dal#1 from SUFFOLK , 11 Feb 2004[Highly rated reviewer]
great film, keeped me watching all the way through,
a film for any sci fi fanatic,one to watch- Was this review helpful to you?
- (21) Yes |
- No (6)
All reviews
(50)Rather have a Mars bar.
By Loopgrinder (176 reviews) , 08 May 2013This may well have seemed good on paper but on the screen it's a mess. Terence Stamp did the right thing and got out after quarter of an hour. And the whole thing would have been so much better if they hadn't included AMEE the rampaging robot as an extra suspense element. This just made it ridiculous. No. Not for me this one.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (0)
Borring, Borring!
By a customer , 03 May 2013unoriginal storyline. Don't make em like star wars anymore. Or Star trek. Its just what the description says. In these kind of films the characters lack depth and its impossible to connect with them. In the end you start taking bets on who will die firsts. That's when you know a film really does suck!- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (0)
Was pretty good!
By Tartan1971 (92 reviews) , 30 Apr 2013I thought after reading some of the positive reviews that I would give this film a watch. I am not into this type of movie without some aliens but it was a good watch . The acting was good and the affects very convincing .- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (0)
Great Movie, still has its flavour, plus wow factor
By a customer , 29 Apr 2013Great movie, highly recommended. Its no surprise that old movies retain their flavours compared to new movies. Like the saying: the old is better than new. Simple, classy and got the wow factor. You can't go wrong with this.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (1) Yes |
- No (0)
Good evo, red going green
By Wishes (3 reviews) , 28 Apr 2013Worth a watch if you like sifi, kills some time nicely. Hope we don't have to try to move to Mars- Was this review helpful to you?
- (1) Yes |
- No (0)


text:
Big Data is everywhere. And at the center of the big data discussion is Apache Hadoop, a next-generation enterprise data platform that allows you to capture, process and share the enormous amounts of new, multi-structured data that doesn't fit into transitional systems.
With Microsoft HDInsight, powered by Hortonworks Data Platform, you can bridge this new world of unstructured content with the structured data we manage today. Together, we bring Hadoop to the masses as an addition to your current enterprise data architectures so that you can amass net new insight without net new headache.
Attend this webinar where we will:
- Distill the hype over reality of Hadoop
- Outline how Hadoop is being used today
- Demonstrate the simplicity of Hadoop with Microsoft HDInsight in action
Jim Walker, Director of Product Marketing at Hortonworks
Saptak Sen, Senior Product Manager, SQL Server Team at Microsoft


text:
The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Volume 1The first of two volumes arranged and published by Francis Darwin |
What people are saying - Write a review
Review: The Life & Letters of Charles Darwin Including an Autobiographical Chapter, Vol 1
User Review - Katya Epstein - Goodreads(Review of all three volumes:) A must-read for any serious Darwin fan. There's a lot of chaff to wade through, but every once in a while there's a gem that makes it all worthwhile. I was often tempted ... Read full review


text:
Members Only Catalog
Or, try (509) 334-4410
Durondell - Finishing Profiles - Profiles for Tiles
Straight-edge tiling profile for wall and floor.
Height: Choose from menu
Material: Anodized Aluminum – available in gold and silver
Powder coated Aluminum – available in white, beige and silver gray
Please choose profile height from pull-down menu.
Application: DURONDELL quarter round profiles from Dural were developed as a handsome edging profile for the corners of external walls. They are smoothly rounded and available in a variety of materials. Aside from their protective function, they can also be used for attractive design purposes. They are also suitable for use as a covering as skirting for tiled or carpeted parquet or natural stone floors. High-quality formed pieces are available for joining profile sections together.
Properties: DURONDELL aluminum anodized and aluminum powder-coated profiles are specially treated so that their surfaces are not usually likely to change. Visible surfaces must still be protected from cement materials. Items that scratch or scrape the profiles may cause damage.
Maintenance: DURONDELL profiles do not require any special maintenance. If they become dirty, they can be simply cleaned with conventional cleaning agents. Cleaning agents should be free of hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acid and should not contain abrasives. Layers of oxidation on brass or aluminum profiles can be removed with brass polish, though it is not possible to eliminate such oxidation on a permanent basis. Cleaning agents should be free of hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acid and should not contain abrasives.
E-mail a friend about this item.
Return to Catalog


text:
This mod is based on the Various Stargate Franchises for Sins of a Solar Empire Entrenchment 1.051 , Diplomacy 1.34 and Rebellion !! We have many downloads in our downloads section that are being updated regularly.
Here is a quick tutorial on how to get the BC304 to work in both Sins and Entrenchment.
Here is the tutorial for adding the Missiles and Beam weapons to the 304 minimod.