Jump to content

Peaveyyyyyyyy

Members
  • Content count

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Peaveyyyyyyyy

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    94561649

Converted

  • Location
    UK
  • Interests
    strategy gaming
  • Occupation
    Software
  1. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    CM comicstrip # 6

    keep those cartoons rolling. I had't been on these forums for ages till these things started! Good luck with the baba...
  2. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    Invincible KV1 s and KV2s

    Area fire at the ground beneath his tracks. 75mm and up should do it.
  3. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    Armor help.

    Well I see we've moved this one! Not all tracked vehicles can do it. I dunno how many WW2 AFVs could, I do remember being told not to do it on a road (I have driven the odd AFV) as it would simply tear the top off the tarmac while you were doing it. Trouble is I can't remember what I was driving at the time..! I think it depends simply on the powertrain. If each side is totally separate gearbox-wise, then you can. Otherwise, if you have one main gearbox selecting speeds and some other way of reduction operated by the sticks. The Italian ones just reverse whatever you do with the sticks...
  4. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    A problem with aircraft spotting

    OK I did a test. 8 x 88mm AT guns (not FlaK) on the Axis side, one Il-2 version 3 on the soviet side. I HID 3 guns in woods/pines and 5 in scattered trees. The aircraft made 4 passes and scratched 4 guns, all in scattered trees. I rest my case m'lud. Aircraft are not behaving reasonably. Perhaps the trees were REALLY scattered......like one every 50 yards and they were just saplings, really..... Anyway, IMO if they are supposed to behave like that, then we should be told to put guns in the woods. What we do with our tanks is anybody's guess. I'd rather not have them on the map if they are going to be free points for my oppo.
  5. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    A problem with aircraft spotting

    :mad: It is August. Maybe the heat of the Southern summer just plain BURNED the leaves off the trees. OK massive whinging moan coming up... from a born loser, obviously. This is the second game I have had ruined by the randon attrition factor (AKA aircraft) Both sides had aircraft. If neither had had them it would have been a good scenario. After his Il-2 had made 2 passes, I had lost 2 88mm AT guns, which I had hidden in scattered trees. Also, my 4 20mm AA guns unhid unbidden, allowing my oppo to guess where they were and kill them. As one of them had another AT gun nearby that died too. End result: after 2 weeks of PBEM and without having fired a shot or unhidden anything, I have no AT assets left to speak of. I am exaggerating here but not too much. Totally spoiled the game, and I had exactly the same thing happen in CMBO in another defensive scenario. I will be avoiding scenarios with Aircraft from now on because their effects are too random. I play this game as a test of skill. Just to rub it in, when my plane appeared it got shot down. Hah!! IMO, Hidden AA assets should stay hidden. If I want AA cover I'll unhide them. If I have hidden unmoved units in scattered trees, then the chances of them being spotted should be very small. In woods, zero. Air power is broken and silly. <pathetic whingeing ends> Love the game, by the way. :cool:
  6. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    The CMBB manual . . .

    Someone could always upload one to this forum..... save BTS the trouble. I bet there is something suitable on someone's HD
  7. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    Probe, Attack, Assault

    I don't mean to come down on what is the best game I've ever played, but I stick with MEs and scenarios now, as I find the attackers advantage to be too great. Not played too many assaults/probes though. Just what I've noticed over 20 or so games. 1.5:1 seems a bit arbitrary, and scientifically you'd expect it to favour one side over the other over a lot of games. just my 2p
  8. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    Communication between units

    This is just about the only quibble some people (not me)can have about the game. The commander (you) can see everything. All units are thusly assumed to be in communication with one another. Communication IS modelled, in the command bonuses of the HQ units, and it works really well. Just see the effect of losing an HQ or moving too far away.... Personally I don't care 2 hoots, because: 1) I can't think of a solution. How could you police it any other way? How could you stop a unit reacting to what a distant unit sees? You can see what's happening, and you send a distant unit to help or whatever. The game would never know which of your orders should be barred for this reason. 2) The game is just sooo awesomely good as both a sim and as a fun experience, especially against another human. People can complain all they like, I'll defend the authors to the death. They rock.
  9. I've never understood the moaning about the flak truck. I buy them occasionally in QB's. Not only are they easily knocked out with rifle bullets, but they are poo at picking targets that aren't vehicles on their own. The only thing I can think of is that they seem to be hard to knock out with mortar fire. Can someone explain to me why they are despised and seen as a gamey pick? To be fair, I've only picked them in QBs using the recon rules. I needed an edge as the Stuart tends to be a bit good in those games.
  10. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    No Pz III?

    Were there really no Panzer III's at all in the Western Front campaign? It would make a nice tank to choose against the Stuart in games played under Recon rules. It's pleasing on the eye as well. Ah well, I can't imagine it being left out of CMBB, so I'm sure I'll be happier soon.. [ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: Peaveyyyyyyyy ]</p>
  11. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    QB points preference

    forgot to contribute, so: I like either 1250-1500 pt QB's large map, 75 rules, 40 turns. 40 means you can take your time to recon a bit, as you need to on a large map. ammo is quite an issue. Modest hills and moderate trees allow a lot of sneaking about out of sight. Troops would not be rushed around blindly in real life, and 40 turns lets you be careful with them. Also, it allows the battle to have distinct stages. The 1500 pointer gives you 3 tanks each, which is the minimum I'd want otherwise each one has to be husbanded just too carefully. ME's only now, as I reckon the attacker's bonus is too high. The other way I'll play is on a double-blind scenario, so there's trust that the opponent won't look at your OOB and reinforcement schedule. The maps are just way better than QB's. Try looking at reviews where more than just one or two people have rated it as even. "Vossenack- a second job", is the closest-matched I have seen. get it at Der Kessel. South of sword, off the CD, is almost right. I screwed it up playing as the Germans, and felt slightly underchanged, but it was a blast, about 4000 points each I reckon. At the end I think I'll count the points to see if I was just rubbish! Anyone got any recommendations? I need to start a new one soon, and I do fancy a scenario, preferably not an attack/defend one.
  12. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    QB points preference

    65% Ceasefire. Now that IS a good idea. Thinking out of the box. Begs 2 questions: 1) Why as high as 65%? My pref would be 40 or 50, so I'm just interested in the consequences of 65. How does it change the way you play? 2) It would be a nice feature in CM3, along with being able to tweak other things just for fun, so you could make sharpshooters supereffective, or change flag values to like 600 points, or make one unit count as the game so it has to be protected, whatever.
  13. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero: Originally posted by Peaveyyyyyyyy: [qb]It seemed to me that your first job was to lead the platoon, think and plan for them etc, so they can concentrate on firing their bullets in the right direction. You shouldn't be joining in too much. In the modern Finnish army the platoon and the squad leaders carry tracers so they can direct fire. Or that was the SOP in the mid 80's. QB]<hr></blockquote> Tracers work BOTH ways, so I'd rather wear a white fur coat. At least I'd be warm! The only weapon that had ANY tracer was the GPMG, and I don't think the lads were that keen on using it! [ 11-09-2001: Message edited by: Peaveyyyyyyyy ]</p>
  14. As an ex-Officer in the British Army (in the 80's) I was told I could pick my own personal weapon. I realise this may only have come in as a doctrine after the war. Subalterns tend to either be interested in leading from inside the platoon (take a rifle so you are one of the lads), or from 'the top' take a pistol as it sets you apart. I had no real leaning either way. It seemed to me that your first job was to lead the platoon, think and plan for them etc, so they can concentrate on firing their bullets in the right direction. You shouldn't be joining in too much. I chose an SMG (Sterling) as I decided that I would really only need to be armed if we were actually overrun, so I went for the lightest thing with the highest ROF! IN WW2, I would have thought reliability was a factor, too. Maybe the carbines were better in this regard than SMGs To my mind, the Officer is there for his brain, not his marksmanship. Oh, and the story about the Para with the umbrella is true, AFAIK. When I get home I'll look his name up!
  15. Peaveyyyyyyyy

    PC Specs to play well

    I thnk you may find that your system will p*ss upon it. I run it on a 500 with 128 and have no problem.
×