Polar

Artillery is good... or so it seems. The rule of thumb is, don't drive a tack with a sledge hammer. Fireflies are all gun, no armor... so why endanger a heavy armored (read: expensive) piece of machinery to take it out? I mean... ANY anti-tank weapon will do. Try and recon the field early, and if you see FFs, hit them with arty if they are stationary, or move light armored low calibre AT gun platforms in to hit it from two sides at one. #1 Thing to remember... fireflies are pointy on one end and soft on the other. If you get on two sides, one attack will always be be on the soft vulnerable side. Joe

Someone set us up the bomb!! Man oh man... I first here about this two days ago, and already "All your base are belong to us" is seeping into everything! Thanks for all the hard work Madmatt! But you have no chance to survive make your time! Release all Zigs! Joe

The trouble is, you can't take anecdotal evidence and use it to model all, or even just "elite" troops in CM. The trouble I see, is that people are always willing to crack open some book and say "well right here, this (fill in nationality) soldier killed 40 enemy soldiers, and took out 15 enemy AFVs using only a pen knife!"... but, be it true or not, does that mean that a squad of infantry with pen knives should be neigh unstoppable in CM? No. Audy Murphy reportedly turned back 3 German tanks and several german rifle squads all on his own using nly the .30 cal machingun on a destroyed tanks turret... does that mean that my U.S. Rifle squads should all be fearless in the face of the enemy? No. I don't think, therefore, you can take anecdotal evidence of heroics for any nationality and say it was due to their training. In many cases, these heroics are in SPITE of the individuals training. Joe

5 1) 4 2) 6 3) 41 4) 23 5) 19

1)3 2)7 3)6 4)0 5)0 6)0

As always,if you test any piece against its weakness, it looks weak. When you use bunkers effectively, they are effective. When you place them on a firing range with a bunch of fast shooting and MOBILE tanks, they are toast. Bunkers were not designed for the specific role of protecting the gunners from frontal assault. They were designed so that stationary artillery (and HMGs) were not sitting ducks to artillery. The one knock that seems valid here is that there is really no smaller covered foxhole style bunkers. These types of bunkers acted primarily as camo for the gunner though, and really didn't offer any more protection from arty and groung weapons than a foxhole did. But come on... given the design of these bunkers, an unmolested tank, or MG, or ANYTHING, should be able to put one through the slit in a few shots. They work really well if you use them right. Don't use them if you don't... because you will be wasting you points. Joe Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

My personal favorite combo? Depends on the map. In a town or hilly setting, I take the obligatory US rifle squads... those guys eat Germans for lunch. But that is standard... The REAL fun cheapo Town buster combo is as follows (for 1200+ battles): 2 British Wasps (Light Flamethrower ACs) they kick ass once you know how to use them! 1 Churchill AVRE... low on rounds, but nothing evicts the HUn from their homes like a healthy dose of 290mm dirrect fire!) 1 Sherman 105 You can clear a large town using just this combo. Keep the troops pinned with the 105, race the Wasp up and set the building on fire, level the block with the AVRE... rinse, repeat. If you set your Rifle squads covering all the open streets, its lights out for the Germans. Anti Tank? Heck, all of the Allied tanks need to be micromanaged to some extent, so I choose Greyhounds. There abilities are well documented on the board. Haven't fiddled much with on map arty like the Priest... but I haven't gotten tired of the Wasp/AVRE/105 combo yet. (and yes, it's gamey as all hell! ) Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz [This message has been edited by Polar (edited 02-05-2001).]

Interested bump.

Isn't that what Hitler was operating at the end of Wolfenstein? ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

I can't remember all that well, but I don't think that the movie meant to give the impression that the main characters were the ONLY GIs in Romell (sp?... ah what does it matter... it's made up anyway. )... They might have been the only GIs right around the bridge? Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

Also, for those who don't want to download the movie... here is a link to a preview. (I know... game sites are grog repelant. ) http://www.gamespy.com/previews/january01/opflash/ Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

Anybody seen the demo movie for this? It looks like a RTS/FPS hybrid... so it's not for those who despise the quick twitch... but it looks like a modern era game with a Battlezone like interface. You can download the movie here: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ Joe Ps. It graphics even at this early stage look incredible!!!

1. When they add a rarity function, they could add rangers... not sure rangers would be all that effective given the operations that CM depicts though. 2. A wounded mans ability to fight could not be changed by an on field medic... not in the 30-40 minutes that CM spans anyway. A field medic is only there to insure that a wounded man will survive long enough to get to a hospital where, if he's lucky, he'll recover fully. 3. That probably couldn't be done based on the engine today. Well..... maybe you could, but you would have to always have the land to on one side of the map. The sky tiles all have horizons to simulate the blurred distant terrain... if you turn that into all water, then you wind up with water behind the Axis as well. If you did a half and half sky, the land would alway wind up on one side with the water on the other... and I don't think you could make it all that convincing. Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

You'll never go poor betting on the stupidity of the human race. The problem is, everyone puts a LOT of weight on what other people say regardless of the source. Nobody can collect all the "knowledge" they hold personally due to many different constraints. People who buy into anything, regardless of their intelligence, is somewhat naive. I know that sounds kinda heavy... but without first hand knowledge, there is no way of one person determining the intelligence of another based on what that person choses to believe, as the person judging makes a similar choice too. Every piece of data is impeachable. There is no truth. Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

I finally found a picture of it! Quite retro! Joe ------------------ "I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz