LongTom

Thank you!

Hubert, Thanks for this patch. That DirectX video thing was annoying and it's nice to have things smooth. The bug fixes are appreciated of course. Continue to love the game. Jim

I would recommend lighter colors for shallow water rather than darker. Other than that, looks great!

LOL. OK, Rambo, enough tough talk. Put yer money where your mouth is. Email me at jledererATtwmi.rr.com (replace AT with @) for a game.

Interesting discussion. But I'd leave the game as-is because: 1) Historically the British were able to determine that a SeaLion was imminent quite easily by spotting all the German barges piling up in channel ports. Sounds like SC does this exactly right 2) Similarly, I would say that if the Axis committed enough resources to the med in ww2 they could have take it (they BARELY were stopped short of Suez at El Alamein - what if Rommel had a bit more air power). Axis resources committed here can't be used elsewhere at the same time. So it seems reasonable that the Axis *can* take the Med *if* they are willing to commit enough resources. Jim

Since my last post was so "down" on HOI I felt I should add...HOI has a huge "coolness" factor going for it, and I'm really hoping it will get patched into the kind of fun game I think it has the potential to be. Compared to SC, it has: 1) Much higher production values (photos of techs and leaders, prettier map and units, etc.) 2) That "monster game" appeal (e.g. I played War in the East a few times and it was very cool, never got to play War in the West, tried CWIE but never got a PBEM past a few turns). The potential to game the entire world, starting well pre-war and including all that diplomacy and war build-up - all at a much more detailed level than SC - hold a lot of appeal. 3) Detail (in research, leaders, convoys, weather, diplomacy, events, ministers, *ability* to micro-manage many things like "tac bombers attack at dawn, then the armor an hour later, then infantry an hour after that to mop up") are cool. HOI's problem is getting this all to work well. Play balance tuning (cost of things, resources allocated to countries), AI that can handle this complexity, micro-management, trade, bug fixes...a lot of work ahead before this will all really *work* (IMHO) in some kind of semi-predictable and more realistic manner. I really applaud the HOI developers for how well this is working so far...but it's got a long way to go. Bottom line...if the game can be "whipped into shape" it will be very cool AND fun. But no matter what HOI becomes, SC will be on my hard drive for a long time to come because HOI will never have the straightforward "ease of play" (even though there is a surprising amount of depth underneath it) that SC does, which means they are two different games that don't overlap as much as one might think in terms of the game experience they aim to provide...and I very much like the PG/SC "beer and pretzels" game just as I like more detail-oriented complex games. Jim

Haven't got the game yet (on order for me and my brother in Ireland so we can PBEM) but I wanted to add my kudos to Hubert for a fabulous game - as I've been able to ascertain from playing the demo about half a dozen times First of all, thanks for the "final" update (I hope it is final, fingers crossed, you made a *lot* of changes in that update and I hope they all work bug-free, and the game balance is not shifted too far *away* from the Axis...but I'm hopeful at this point that you've done it right. In terms of some comments on the game itself... I LOVE it! I always wanted to play this type of game (like 3rd Reich, but the game system was just a bit too cumbersome...your computer game seems more realistic to me than 3R while at the same time all the drudgery is removed and the "forgot to move piece X in phase Y" crap is gone. THANK YOU. Here's what I think you've done right: 1) I didn't realize it when I started, but I recognize many of the game mechanics are very similar to PG, one of my favorite games of all time. I issue this as a compliment because I think that game "did it right" in terms of simple game mechanics that work, seem "internally consistent", and is FUN. 2) SC is FUN (did I mention that). I bought HOI a couple days ago and while I think it has the potential (once it's *finished* - it's appalling how incomplete/buggy it is at this point but most of the problems should be fixable) to be fun, I don't think it will ever be as FUN to play as SC because: a) SC's scope/scale is just right in terms of being able to "get your arms around it" and feel like you making a semi-optimal move each turn. HOI is so much more complex and so much is always happening...which so far gives me the feeling that I'm having a much harder time being sure I'm playing well. For example, if I spend a lot of time micro-managing a group of air units in the north, maybe some combat starts in the south, and by the time I can pause and get down there (unless I'm playing at the slowest settings) it may be too late. If I set the message pop-ups to pop-up EVERY time one of my units encounters an enemy unit and pause the game for me, I can get around this...but I haven't played enough to say whether I'm ever really going to feel "in control" which, although it may not be perfectly "realistic", is part of the FUN equation for me. SC's handling of air units is so easy and intuitive and avoids micro-managing completely. I love degree of control HOI is giving you (e.g. who will escort who) but I'm currently FORCED to engage in that level of micro-management if I want my bombing missions escorted. In the end, SC's approach seems more FUN...I can exercise some degree of control depending on where I base my air units as to which bomb runs they'll be *able* to escort, so it's kind of indirect control, but in the end, I generally want my bombers escorted if possible, so SC's default is what I would generally want anyway. c) HOI seems prone (at least at this point) to very ahistorical behavior (I get silly messages about the Spanish attacking Moscow with air units playing the 1941 scenario which just make no sense...the minors don't seem to understand "sphere of influence" - a concept from "Balance of Power" that I think HOI needs. SC, on the other hand, has much more believable behavior (there is wiggle room for the minors (or the majors) to act ahistorically based on conditions in the game, especially with the latest patch, but not *too* much). d) HOI is not giving me enough feedback about what's going on in combat...if I find out too late about a combat progress I can't even find out what it was that my boys faced, what losses each side took, etc. Again maybe if I set the messages to pause each time a combat starts...but what if more than one combat is going on at a time...hard to keep track of it all. By contrast, SC is giving me simple, immediate feedback on the results of a combat. Anyway, the net is, I can sit down and play a game of SC to a conclusion relatively quickly (e.g. in a matter of hours, which is what married guys with kids can find the time for most easily), and I'm having a ton of FUN the entire time. I really look forward to PBEM with my brother (and others) with SC. Playing HOI with my brother in Ireland is probably almost impossible due to the time difference, length of the game, and crappy INet connection he has. I've really got to get more HOI time under my belt. But it's telling for me that although I have the full (1.01) version of HOI on my PC for only a week, I've spent most of my free time the last week playing the SC demo which I found while waiting for HOI to arrive. Jim P.S. Thinking about PG for a moment, one mechanic I notice was left out of SC was the whole "suppression" and "retreat" mechanic. I was wondering if you ever considered putting that in...did you consciously decide to leave it out based on impact on gameplay or a feeling that it didn't make sense in a strategic game?

Meet another computer guy (20 years in the business) who started playing wargames at 8 (Dad bought Luftwaffe for my brother and me). CM is a dream come true. Next best thing to Tractics on the sand table we used to have in our basement when I was 15. But a lot easier to play nowadays, whenever I want, without having to get a bunch of gamers over to the house Welcome to the club! Jim

We used to play Tractics with 1/36 (or was it 1/72) scale miniatures, on a sand table in our basement that was 16'x7'. I used to ref, and we'd have 2-3 guys on each side, playing a massive battle, BLIND play (each side had to leave the room while the other side took their turn, then they left, then I'd remove all their unspotted pieces (marking the sand a bit so I could remember where they went), then invite the 2nd team in to make their move... Ah, the memories.

It's support like this (which we got with CMBO as well, and you guys are really in a class by yourselves) that made it a no-brainer for me to plunk down my $45 (or whatever it was) for CMBB. Thanks.

Thanks Steve for starting this thread. I'm in your camp - I *want* to have more fun with CMBB, but I haven't completely figured-out how to do it yet. I *hope* that I will get there, because in my heart I value realism and love wargames (and want this franchise to succeed). While I'm sure it's more realistic, CMBB's infantry (and MG) modeling does a few things to the game which seem to make the infantry less of the "queen of the battlefield" than in CMBO, in my limited experience so far. So some of what CMBO taught us, and which made CMBO "fun" for us as we learned them (it's fun when you learn a technique, practice it, and find it bringing you success), we must "unlearn". So if CMBO taught us "infantry was queen", and now it's more of a princess (especially on the attack in open terrain), then... We may now have a game in which tanks are likely more important to success as the attacker, relative to infantry, than they were in CMBO. After all, tanks were what broke the WWI trench warfare model - which is what infantry-only CMBB can look like, especially with trenches I mean, if CMBB is a good simulation, why wouldn't infantry (and MG, and artillery) combat, sans tanks, bog-down into trench warfare? So perhaps playing battles with more armor (especially on the attack) and less infantry will be more "fun" (read attacker succeeds in breaking defensive lines and goes off to drink beer). I have fond memories of CMBO QBs where all my tanks were gone, but my infantry (and PIATs) were able to run from cover to cover and take-out a lone tank or two. I'm sure that is still possible in CMBB, but probably harder to achieve. When I achieved it in CMBO, in my mind was a vision of heroism from some war movie or "Combat!" show. So I had "fun" when it happened, even if it wasn't nearly as common on a real battlefield. I think CMBB games with a lot more armor (especially on the attacking side) should be fun, they shouldn't require excessive micromanagement. I believe (based on my boardgaming experience at least) that the steppe country of Russia was considered *wonderful* tank country due to the wide open LOS (ok, except in rain, snow, or mud conditions . In real life, I suspect tanks and MGs *were* much more effective vis-a-vis infantry on the Russian steppes than they were in bocage country...so to have fun on the attack (and being successful on the attack once in a while helps make it fun) perhaps we need to look at playing battles with more tanks on the attacking side. Jim

My thought is, as long as you play each scenario from both sides, then LOS bug affects both players so it should even out. Similarly, split squad issue will affect both players when scenario is replayed from both sides so again it evens out. In other words, you don't have to have a "perfect" game (and no game will ever be perfect, everyone will always think some things about the game are incorrect (e.g. Borg sighting)) to have a good tourney. LongTom

Thanks for the great Scenario (Gefechtsaufklaerung). Spoiler........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I decided to blow up most of the town before advancing anything. Set my arty strike on the town as a pre-bombard, and systematically used my stug and infantry gun to blow up most of the buildings. Thought to myself...ok, that ought to soften them up. Then I tried to advance my infantry, a squad at a time, in command, through the scattered trees by the road....and got pinned down by guys in both fields, as well as some guys shooting from rubble. Ack! I hit them with the stug, the infantry gun, the halftrack, the MG, the 50mm mortar...ran out of HE on almost everything, finally tried to advance again...and there were STILL too many Russians left and they crushed me. Argh! Definitely going to play this one again LongTom

Yee-ha! Ordered on the 24th at 8:30pm and got my copy just now from the mailman. And it installed just fine. I was order number 91875. THANK YOU BFC! Excellent customer service, as always (and the manual looks terrific)...off to CMHQ to find an opponent

Thank you, thank you, BTS. I've sold one copy for you so far, and probably another soon to follow. Jim