Software french

1. A Bridge Too Far Mac Os Download
2. A Bridge Too Far Cost
3. A Bridge Too Far Mac Os X
4. A Bridge Too Far Ost

1. The classic account of one of the most dramatic battles of World War II. A Bridge Too Far is Cornelius Ryan's masterly chronicle of the Battle of Arnhem, which marshalled the greatest armada of troop-carrying aircraft ever assembled and cost the Allies nearly twice as many casualties as D-Day. In this compelling work of history, Ryan narrates the Allied effort to end the war in Europe in 1944.
2. Details about Close Combat A Bridge Too Far Windows Mac OS PC Game Microsoft 1997 Strategy See original listing. Close Combat A Bridge Too Far Windows Mac OS PC Game Microsoft 1997 Strategy: Condition: Good. Ended: Jan 05, 2021. Price: Discounted price US $3.15. Shipping: $3.50.

Definition of a bridge too far in the Idioms Dictionary. A bridge too far phrase. What does a bridge too far expression mean? Definitions by the largest Idiom Dictionary. 'A Bridge Too Far,' Original Motion Picture Score, Music Composed and Conducted by John Addison, on UNITED ARTISTS Records, 1977, Stereo. Bridge Utils in Linux Use Bridge Utils to create a transparent bridge in Linux on a machine with 2 or more Ethernet cards. By default the bridge will have the highest MAC address. Brctl is the main utility to configure a bridge in Linux: brctl addbr br0 # create a bridge device called br0 brctl addif br0 eth1 #.

Close Combat is the name of a series of real-timecomputer wargames by Atomic Games. In the Close Combat series, the player takes control of a small unit (platoon or company sized) of troops and leads them in battles of World War II from a top down2D perspective.

History[edit]

Close Combat was developed as a computer game version of the acclaimed Avalon Hill board game Advanced Squad Leader (ASL). The primary consultant for the morale model was Dr. Steven Silver, a specialist in combat-related trauma. Atomic Games had already developed several games for Avalon Hill, such as Operation Crusader, and Stalingrad. However, with Avalon Hill embroiled in a financial crisis that would ultimately lead to its demise, Atomic Games took what work they had completed, severed ties with the board game franchise and completed the game's development for Microsoft. The first three Close Combat games were notable, at the time, for being among the few games published by Microsoft. The final two games in the original series were, however, published by Strategic Simulations, Inc (SSI).

Close Combat I and II were distributed for both Microsoft Windows and Apple Mac OS. Later versions were released for Microsoft Windows only.In 2005, Atomic Games was bought by Destineer. Destineer licensed the game to Matrix Games to develop three more Close Combat titles. Matrix Games hired first CSO Simtek and later Strategy 3 Tactics to develop these titles.

The five original Close Combat games were real-timecomputer wargames, with a top-down perspective and two-player capabilities. Each was set in a different European theatre of the Second World War. Each game included a mixture of infantry and armoured units, whilst the later games also included artillery, mortars and air support. Although viewed from a top-down perspective, the later games modelled terrain elevation, and included buildings with multiple floors and viewable sides. The overall tone emphasised realism, and modelled the emotional or physical state of the soldiers and equipment which included, panicked, berserk, burning, incapacitated, pinned and many others.

Games[edit]

Gameplay[edit]

The game contains a number of gameplay elements:

• Mental condition: Close Combat used a psychological (morale) model for each individual combatant. The combatant's morale would be affected by factors such as being near officers, being supported by other units, being under fire, taking casualties, and being left without orders. Troops would be Stable when they were in no danger; Cowering when pinned down by enemy fire; or Panicked when surrounded by dead comrades, wounded or near enemy flamethrowers. The use of a psychological model made certain tactics, common in RTS games where the units will follow suicidal orders, impossible in Close Combat. For example, attempting a 'rush' in Close Combat would result in units seeking cover, refusing to obey orders or even deserting.
• Experience: In Close Combat, reserve units or newly replaced troops would fire and move more slowly and be more likely to panic. Because of this, they would be unlikely to prevail against veteran troops. This is unlike most RTS games where all troops of a particular type act similarly.
• Ammunition levels: The game also modelled the amount of ammunition each unit possessed. Troops in a heavy fire-fight would quickly run out of ammunition. Once out of ammunition they would resort to bayonet fighting, or surrender to any enemies that approached them, although they could also scavenge weapons or ammunition from fallen friendly and enemy soldiers. This is in contrast to most RTS games, where units have unlimited ammunition supplies.
• Scavenging: Starting from the third installment in the series, soldiers that expended all ammo could be moved into close vicinity of dead soldiers to take their ammunition. If no ammunition was present at times they would pick up whatever weapon the dead soldier had. Enemy weapons could be picked up as well. However, enemy ammo cannot be scavenged by itself.
• Physical state: In Close Combat, troops could be Healthy; Injured by enemy fire (in which case they would move and fire more slowly); Incapacitated if enemy fire caused the soldier to be unable to fight; and finally Dead. This is in contrast to most RTS games, where units fight and move regardless of their closeness to death.
• Stamina: In Close Combat, troops could be Rested; Winded after exerting themselves, in which case they would move slowly until they were rested again; and Fatigued, after prolonged exertion, slowing them down for the rest of the battle. This is in contrast to most RTS games, where units do not tire.

Tactics[edit]

The factors above meant that the game required realistic military tactics, such as careful placement of troops in cover, ambush, advancing under cover and using terrain or smoke-screens to cover advancing troops. Effective management, such as keeping teams near their officers, not sending green recruits on assaults and maintaining fire discipline so as not to run out of ammunition were also necessary for the player to prevail.

Players also have to make effective use of combined-arms tactics to be successful in Close Combat. Infantry assault require support from machine guns, tanks, and mortars, to suppress enemy fire. Armor units also require screening from infantry units. Although they possess superior firepower, tanks are vulnerable to ambushes from bazooka or panzerschreck units, especially in close quarters such as a town or forest, where the ambushing infantry can wait to have a shot at a tank's vulnerable flank or rear armor. Tanks are also vulnerable to fire from concealed anti-tank guns, or ambushing tanks, which may wait to fire until the enemy presents his flank or rear.

Multiplayer[edit]

All versions except Close Combat: Modern Tactics offer only one vs one multiplayer. Modern Tactics offers three on three and Close Combat: Marines offers four on four, although these versions added more multiplayer ability.

Remakes[edit]

Four of the five original games, A Bridge Too Far, The Russian Front, The Battle of the Bulge and Invasion Normandy have since been remade with new units and maps, updated graphics (maps and sprites) and sound, updated map editors, menus, as well as fixing the compatibility issues that the older iterations of each game had with modern operating systems. Each remake, with the exception of Last Stand Arnhem, also includes the original version of the game that can be played without any of the additions included in the remake.

Reception[edit]

Close Combat was commercially successful,^[1] with worldwide sales of roughly 200,000 units by 1999. Zabalaoui said that the game outsold Atomic Games' earlier efforts by around ten to one.^[2]

Like its predecessor, A Bridge Too Far achieved worldwide sales of roughly 200,000 units by 1999. Atomic Games' head Keith Zabalaoui said that the first two Close Combat titles each outsold the company's earlier games by around ten to one.^[2]

In the United States, Close Combat III sold 45,438 copies during 1999,^[3] and was the year's best-selling wargame.^[4]

The first five Close Combat games totaled 1.2 million units in sales by April 2004.^[5] By 2018, the combined sales of the series' 17 entries had surpassed 5 million units.^[6]

References[edit]

1. ^Coleman, Terry (October 1997). 'Does Microsoft Know Games?; Briefing'. Computer Gaming World (159): 307, 309.
2. ^ ^abBates, Jason (February 4, 1999). 'Close Combat: The Interview'. IGN. Archived from the original on June 13, 2002.CS1 maint: discouraged parameter (link)
3. ^Staff (April 2000). 'PC Gamer Editors' Choice Winners: Does Quality Matter?'. PC Gamer US. 7 (4): 33.
4. ^Dunnigan, James F. (January 3, 2000). Wargames Handbook, Third Edition: How to Play and Design Commercial and Professional Wargames. Writers Club Press. pp. 14–17.CS1 maint: discouraged parameter (link)
5. ^B2B Staff (April 2, 2004). 'Due nuovi titoli targati 'Close Combat' per Take2'. Multiplayer.it (in Italian). Archived from the original on August 23, 2004.CS1 maint: discouraged parameter (link)
6. ^Robinson, Joe (February 6, 2018). 'Matrix & GOG Are Bringing Back Close Combat'. Wargamer. Archived from the original on February 18, 2018.CS1 maint: discouraged parameter (link)

• Trotter, William R. Microsoft Close Combat – A Bridge Too Far: Inside Moves. Microsoft Press. ISBN1-57231-634-9.

External links[edit]

• Close Combat series at MobyGames

A Bridge Too Far, directed by Richard Attenborough, is a war film on an epic scale. It follows the men who fought through one of the worst military blunders of World War 2: Operation Market Garden.

This is the true story behind XXX (30) Corps, during Operation Market Garden.

The Plan

Operation Market Garden was intended to be a two-day assault, with four elements. The first three were separate airborne drops, at Eindhoven, Nijmegen, and Arnhem.

These three cities contained bridges vital to Allied progress to Arnhem, from where they could swing into Germany. They also sat along a single road, in theory allowing them to be taken by an armored thrust.

This was the fourth element; XXX Corps, who would rush up the road, covering 64 miles in 48 hours.

Initially, the plan seemed simple enough to work; XXX Corps had tanks, infantry, air support, and enough engineering equipment to replace almost any bridge which might be destroyed. For the operation to succeed, however, a very strict timetable would have to be followed.

The US 101st Airborne Division, in Eindhoven, 13 miles behind enemy lines, would have to be met within the first 2-3 hours. By the next day, they had to reach Nijmegen and the US 82nd Airborne.

Then, by 48 hours, they had to be in Arnhem, with the British 1st Airborne Division.

Days 1-2 Assault, delays, and blown bridges

A Bridge Too Far Mac Os Download

At 14.15 on September 17, 1944, 300 guns of XXX Corps artillery opened up on the German front line. A one mile wide, five miles deep, rolling barrage, preceded the numerous vehicles.

An advance by the Irish Guards followed, rolling tanks forward to suppress any resistance and allow the rest of the column to proceed. They soon ran into problems.

The ground was too soft for tank operations on open terrain, restricting them to the small, single lane road. They were easy targets when German infantry and anti-tank guns ambushed them, just 30 minutes into the operation.

By the end of the first day, they had advanced only 7 miles. They were already 6 miles behind schedule.

The second day saw XXX Corps advancing by 06.00. Again, they were bogged down by stiff resistance, and ever increasing traffic jams. If a vehicle was destroyed, broke down, or even lost a wheel, every vehicle behind it was held up during repairs or removal.

A Bridge Too Far Cost

They did not reach the 101st in Eindhoven until late in the day, hours behind schedule. To make matters worse, the bridge over the Son, vital for advancing further, had been destroyed.

A Bailey bridge was brought forward, and construction ran throughout the night.

Days 3-5

By day three, XXX Corps had advanced from Son towards Nijmegen thanks to the Bailey Bridge. They were 39 miles from their final objective, and already 36 hours behind schedule.

This day XXX Corps finally achieved the speed which was envisioned in the planning, within 2 hours after leaving Son the lead elements reached the 82nd Airborne Division at Grave, around 08.20. By noon strong units from XXX Corps were on the outskirts of Nijmegen.

Much to their dismay, they found the 82nd Airborne had not been able to take the bridges at Nijmegen; every attempt had been beaten back by stiff resistance. A combined assault of paratrooper and ground forces was quickly planned but despite heroic efforts the bridges could not be taken that day.

Boats were needed to cross the river, and attack the bridges from both sides. XXX Corps had assault boats available, but these were far to the rear of their column.

On day four the boats had finally arrived, and at 15.00 a hasty assault force went across the river. Many hours past the worst timetable estimates the Paratroopers of the 82nd and the ground forces of XXX Corps were finally able to achieve their next big objective: taking the Nijmegen bridges.

XXX Corps advanced from the south, while Paratroopers established a small bridgehead to the north. There was now but one objective left: Arnhem, only 8 miles away, but the operation was already over two days behind schedule.

Day five was spent consolidating and preparing for the final push. Every soldier in XXX Corps knew that every second counted in this battle, but it was pointless to make a push if they could not continue the thrust all the way.

Gliders and parachutes provided supplies for the Paratroopers, and British armor and the American Airborne held off continued German counter-attacks which succeeded on more than one occasion in cutting the road and stopping all traffic. Strong units from XXX Corps, needed for the assault on Arnhem, were send back to Veghel to help reopen the road which had been dubbed “Hells Highway”.

A Bridge Too Far Mac Os X

Days 6-9 The Final push, and retreat

By day six, XXX Corps had linked up with the Polish Airborne Brigade which had landed on the South bank of the Rhine River, opposite the British Airbornes now trapped in Oosterbeek.

XXX Corp’s supply lines were continually harassed by German counter-attacks along the long road leading back over 60 miles. Soldiers

Day seven began with most of XXX Corps watching the 1st Airborne, trapped in Oosterbeek, just outside Arnhem, inch ever closer to annihilation. By day eight a rescue was attempted.

Men of the Dorsetshire Regiment crossed the Rhine in small boats, but misjudged their destination, arriving at a German position. Of the 315 troops who went, only 75 made it to the 1st Airborne Division, the rest being killed or captured.

Day nine and hope for taking the bridge at Arnhem had been abandoned. There were still over 2,000 men of the 1st Airborne Division in Oosterbeek, and they needed to be evacuated. Using boats replaced after taking Nijmegen, they were finally able to pull most of the embattled British Paratroopers out from certain destruction but a lot of wounded soldiers had to be left behind.

For XXX Corps, Operation Market Garden almost proved to be a reluctant success. They surmounted every possible obstacle in their attempt to reach to Arnhem but arrived too late to save the operation.

A Bridge Too Far Ost

The men fought tooth and nail for their achievements, but they were too little, too late.