Bannon DC

Your (U.S.) tax dollars at work.

Superpickle -- I would add that you should also assign the best commander to the task. Your platoon and company commanders have various strenths and weaknesses with their bonuses (moral, command, stealth, combat). Chose carefully which commander you send on which mission. If you send a platoon through the woods to flank a position, you may want to send your commander with the best stealth bonus. If one of you platoons is going to hold the center of your position against the brunt of the enemy attack, you may want your commander with the best moral and combat bonuses. If all your platoon commandes are weak, your company commander is going to play a critical role; keep him near the action and maybe pull your platoon commanders out.

I have to admit, this entire CMC forum is really one of the strangest things I have seen. Hunter is obviously not a "marketing" type. That is not a bad thing. He is a programmer. But you would think someone at BF would come in and tamp down the flame and throw a bone, if not once a month but "once in a long while." For goodness sake, this entire forum bleeds from lack of information sharing. There is no need to reply to every "where is it, Hunter?!?!?" thread. But to leave the "fans" out in the cold is also inexcusable. COMMUNICATION... it isn't that hard. It has been 2 years since the "Hi There" thread opened which was the announcement of this project. High hopes... but they hit a wall and found out it wasn't going to be a snap. I think most of the eager fans could deal with it. From what I see here and with the other "in development" games it isn't one of BF's responsibilities to manage communications. They are the publisher, not the programmers and developers. However, whether they like it or not, their name pops to the front with these in-development entities. When CMC, being developed by Hunting Tank Software, promises and doesn't deliver... Battlefront bears the brunt. Even more so in this case since Combat Mission is really the flagship product. I'm not really worried about the long delay of this game. You hit a wall... you work around it. I really wouldn't be upset if they announced the game couldn't be pulled off as envisioned. What is really puzzling is the lack of communication from anyone involved. The forum was opened for the single purpose of marketing this game. Hunter is not a "marketing type" as we now know... Battlefront's name is all over this product (even if a product does not exist at this point). What has been happening in this forum for the last year and a half is anti-marketing. No communication at all... built up frustration and nagging. Who should be throwing the bone? Whose "fan base" is this game tapping? Whose web site is this forum on? Who has the most to lose through lack of communication? Who are the negative consequences going to effect? Just tell it like it is, we can take it. [ September 27, 2007, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: Bannon DC ]

Agree with the above. For in game viewing, once I updated my graphics card, I was much happier. If that is your problem, don't delay. For $100 to $150 bucks you can really buy happiness. I have an old computer by today's standards but my new graphics card has given it a second life.

Thanks for the links. Great read to get a better understanding of this "accessory."

We've seen this chap before. That is all he has to say. A real fool. Il est un âne stupide,

Look for some of Sergie's scenarios. The Scenario Depot Click on "scenarios" and search by author.

Moved to The Scenario Depot. Head-2-Head and AI versions.

John K -- "Ring" is now posted on TSD. I'm playing it now in the tourney. "Big" in terms of the map but not in terms of the units. It is a thinking scenario.

John K -- I'll recommend two of mine that I had fun with and another that I playtested from both sides. CMBB Artillery Sword Late war scenario with scratch German force trying to check Soviet advance. * make sure you pick of "Sword" not "Artillery Shield" which is balanced to play against the AI. TankodesskyH2H Newly arrived Pzr IV longs vs T34s. Good scrappy battle that will test your nerves. Well rated. Author: VON SCHWENDEMAN CMAK Brit Inf AT Tactics 1940 This one is designed to play 2 player only. About 24 turns and 2000 points. Better player should play as the British and be a scrappy player. Good luck

Sudowudo -- Here are a couple of my scenarios that are very difficult. They are on The Scenario Depot. CMBB Combat Outpost Ukraine Battalion level attack against a fortified position on the steppe. Suggest you do NOT increase AI experience more than 1 if at all. Bad Harvest at Stubienka Another attack across open steppe. Same warning about increasing AI experience. CMAK Bridge Building American engineers must build a bridge under fire so armor can advance. (daisy chains on bridge represent work to be completed).

I've got to get my scenarios on that map. A brilliant idea. I did a search on the Scenario Depot. Found 3 set in "England" (that is the key search parameter). Han's SB Englishmen at War 1940 Andreas' New Bridge And one from me: British Infantry AT Tactics 1940 I'm not familiar with the other two. Mine plays best as a two-player game with the Brits having the tougher job. Works OK as Germans vs. AI. The British brief is a comedy piece... here is a redacted version if you want to avoid spoilers Redacted British Brief I know there are other Sealion scenarios out there. Junk2Drive would know... haven't seen him in a while.

Here's one of mine that received favorable reviews at the old Scenario Depot. Combined Arms, South to Kiev 6 Battles, 20 each. Fictional German attack against Russian town. Germans fight against over 100 Russian tanks (mostly light) and supporting positions to reach crossroads town about 3 or 4km ahead.

Always a bonus!

MrSpkr -- The "new" scenario depot started fresh with only scenarios that designers decided to post. I think it has been up about a year and a half at this point. With about 800 scenario (some from predating the site), it is good to see the CM community is still interested and still cranking out scenarios. The site works in tandem with The Proving Grounds. TPG is for playtesting. TSD is for "finished" works. Maybe more info than you needed, but hopefully helpful for others. To answer your question, check the CMMODS site. I believe the old Scenario Depot database ended up over there. (www.cmmods.com)

"Give Back My Men!" This is a "just for fun" scenario. The object is to recover your men that will surrender in the opening sequence and exit them from the map. Small map with about a company of infantry and a few AFVs for each side. Designed to play Allies vs. AI. 25 turns fixed. CMBB. To make this work, I've rigged a company of conscript Russian infantry to surrender to the Germans in the first two turns. (Before you get too excited, most of them get killed in the process, but the average prisoner total has been 30 men and 8 units so you have something to play with). If you choose to review this one, please keep in mind this scenario pushes the CM engine in a direction it was not intended to go. The measures I have taken to get the resulting surrender may not look pretty on the map and I have had to compensate with a point bonus. And... I can't guarantee you will always get enough POWs. I think it comes off as well as possible... the result being a fun scenario to play. "Give Back My Men!" at The Scenario Depot

While on the subject of arty commands... I seem to recall that you could delay your preplanned (turn 1) artillery strike. Is my fuzzy memory correct? If so, how to? Does this apply to both CMAK and CMBB? Thanks

Hello Menace -- I guess SP is single player? In any case -- go here and used the advance search and you will see a field for "best played as." You need to sign up for the site, but no worries -- you never get junk mail or anything else negative. A very friendly community site. The Scenario Depot, search page

Renaud -- I'm copying my last post from TSD here since we are getting off topic in that thread. Besides-- some folks here might have good sources as well. Regarding the Russian landings at Feodesia -- I'll look into the landings at Feodesia. I doubt I will find anything of depth. It was a very dramatic action, for sure. I understand the weather was increadibly bad... I wonder how many were lost to the sea. I do have a good detailed map of the area. Regarding the final assault -- Rudy did a scenario that included the cross bay landing. I enjoyed playing it. Sevastopol Port AI -- Rudy's scenario at The Scenario Depot I wouldn't mind playing the 2 player version against you. I haven't looked at it yet. Bannon

Too bad only a few of us could actually see the movie for ourselves. Squatdog -- I think the review board has issued their judgment. It has gone decidedly against you. You have been found to have committed user error which resulted in the lose of the squad operating under your command. Numerous circumstances have been pointed out to you by people who viewed the footage. Those that commented have been playing this game for years and have distinguished themselves as veteran CM players and scenario designers. As for your credentials, it appears to be 35 posts arguing a minor gripe. You will retain your rank and priviledges. You are, however, forbidden to continue to whip a dead horse. Everyone here will agree that the game has flaws. Get used to it and get over it. The best way to play this game is to play it against a human opponent. You are lucky that people here will continue to tolerate you and many would still be willing to play a game against you. edit - typo [ May 25, 2007, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: Bannon DC ]

Here is a test done by some Unfortunate Aged Crank. Might have been the same thread you saw, Cabe. Most likely cross posted on other forums. POS's Bridge Destruction Tests Lesson I take -- heavy bridges are virtually indestructable in the scale of a CM scenario. And -- Very little difference in the sturdiness between medium and light bridges. Both are very fragile. In terms of play -- I say it is "all fair" to destroy a bridge in any scenario... unless crossing the bridge is instrumental to the play value of the scenario. (IE, if the designer didn't count on the bridge getting destroyed and it is the ONLY way to cross a river in order to exit units, etc.). In this case, players should have house rules where it is agreed the bridge should not be destroyed on purpose.

That's right, baby.

Heard about this on the radio this afternoon. This site has millions of records of U.S. service persons on file. They are running a promotion where searching the site is free until June 6, 2007. Revolutionary war to present. They also have hundreds of newsreels available. I haven't looked too deeply yet but it looks interesting. They will ask you to register but that is free.

If it was in the game is certainly would have been discovered by now. As for me, I have had success with the Human Wave attack and encourage it for the right conditions. Urrah!!! If the game was programmed a little more complexly, I would welcome the "commisar effect" as a realistic feature. :eek:

Feed it by getting about 10 PBEM games going.