GerryCMBB

Hello: Maybe some of these things have been addressed already? 1. The loader of the ATG sees a juicy tank but the ATG cannot fire as the Gunner cannot see it. IOW has it been changed so that the ATG team can make a small adjustment to the gun so it can fire at the target. 2. Moving tanks being able to spot ATGs too easily? 3. In the CMFI AAR there seemed to be a problem with setting up bunkers where units seemed to have LOS but then when the game started the bunker dropped a bit into the mesh so there was no longer good LOS from it. Thanks, Gerry

Any chance of a screenshot to see this new view in action Steve. Thanks, Gerry

I know it is only one game but remember how useless GAJ's ATGs were against Bil's moving tanks. Spotted easily, etc. They could look at those files. There have been many other complaints as well. Also the gun having LOS but the gunner cannot fire. Not a realistic situation. One of the crew sees the tank in RL I am sure they will nudge it to the point they have LOF. The way people defend parts of the game you would think it was their baby. Gerry

I am the odd one out here. CMx2 was a gateway to CMx1 for me. If I play any CM, it is CMBB. Too much focus on the looks, mods, etc. in CMx2 for me. And the crazy issues where the ATG crew can see the tank but it so happens the gunner cannot see it and fire. Incredible content out there for CMx1 - all sizes and varieties of scenarios and operations. Gerry

I will have to check again tonight to see if there is a hull-down position available in the setup zone. The map is very open. We don't know, of course, the ATG is there or has LOS close to the setup zone. I got the tanks to hunt forward. The problem for me is all T-34s can get killed in a minute so you don't have the time to tell them to pop smoke. How much CMx1 are you still playing compared to CMx2? Thanks for your help. Gerry

Hello All: Hope someone could help with this. It is the one where the Russians have 3 x T-34s along with the infantry. The Jerrys have an ATG which takes out my T-34s in the first minute or two close to the starting line How can you combat that? In RL you would not know the ATG is out there in that location so you wouldn't know to target it with artillery. Thanks, Gerry

Seems really interesting. Maybe it won't take off as CMBB is not so popular anymore? Actually isn't this what players of CMBN and CMFI are looking for. A way to play PBEM CM campaigns? Gerry

"CMBN 2.10 or MG module Required" from Bil's site. Gerry

Thanks Bil. I assume there are times when to use the Squad Attack versus the Fire and Maneuver drill? Would one prefer the former when only one element has weapons like MGs that are good for support/suppression? Gerry

Hello Bil: Sorry for being dense but this seems like some of the other techniques where you have a maneuver element and a support element? Gerry

One of the reasons it's so hard to play the game. There are all these tricks needed as nothing like this is in the manual. Only some seem to have found them. Why not have a stance option? For example, they could hunt to the wheat field and then on the waypoint you could set the kneeling stance. For people that think there are already too many orders, they can choose to ignore the stance option. Gerry

My apologies. The "issues" of any player with the game are all valid. However, many people come on to these threads and try to make little in some way of a complaint. I thought you were doing that. Gerry

You were bellyaching. But really what we are all trying to do is to suggest improvements. Gerry

If you don't want the game changed in any way you don't have to complain. So LOS doesn't bother you. And yet you seem to start quite a few threads yourself complaining about the game or predicting a horror show re MG. Gerry

Another thing I think that changes is if you set up a MG in a bunker. This came up in GAGs AAR with Bil. Seemingly the bunker sinks into the ground, or some such strange thing, after setup. To me it doesn't matter how many beautiful unit models there are if you cannot apply normal tactics (set up a MG with good LOS, have your stationary tanks have a better chance of spotting than his moving ones, etc.). Gerry

And don't moving tanks still spot better than stationary tanks? Or has that changed? This is huge as it takes away a normal advantage stationary tanks had over moving ones in a tactical sense. Gerry

Ian, it could be that or could be LOS shows only when the gunner can see the target. But this issue also applies to ATGs as in Erwin's example of the 3rd loader can see the target but the gunner cannot and the AI cannot move it a smidgin to be able to fire at the target. I assume there are players that have no, or very little, problem with the way it is right now? To me this is getting way beyond a game. I do not mind some work when I am playing. I played tournament chess for years so I know pain and suffering in the gaming world. I could be in the minority of course but if stays like this I will not be purchasing any more CMx2 products. There is already so much micro-management (work) in the game and I do not need these extra challenges. To me it is more like a FPS when these issues arise (not in general of course) rather than a player making a tactical decision to move a tank to location X for reason Y. Gerry

Hello Steve: What about the LOS issue in the "Death of a Firefly" thread? Where someone can see but the gunner cannot. Will BF be doing something about this? Thanks, Gerry

Trying to get back into CM and am playing Silence the Guns - Brecourt Manor. A very small scenario. It's really nice to play a small scenario in terms of workload, time needed to play a turn, etc. Unfortunately the trend seems to be much larger scenarios with tons of units and tons of time needed (I know Bil said ignore the time as many are over in 40 minutes anways, but still ...). Gerry

One from Ian I would really like: "Head to Head Campaigns via PBEM I have so far tried three campaigns but never got into them. I know the majority of your customers play against the AI only but I just cannot. For me play by email is the way to go and I would really like to play campaigns against a human. Please - this is my number one wish. If you only do one thing this would be it." And these from Womble's list, numbers indicating my preferred order. Gerry

Something like this or Erwin's "A simpler LOS tool where if "the unit" can see the target, then "the unit prime weapon" can shoot at it " idea would make the game so much easier and enjoyable to play. A related question. Say you are plotting a waypoint with a tank. You can use the Target command from the waypoint to check LOS. From whose/what perspective does it calculate this LOS? Gerry

If the commander has LOS then this could result in the enemy unit showing up on the map. So the commander's eyes would not be wasted? Gerry

Another vote for Erwin's idea. Gerry

Thanks for the tip. For some reason I didn't think it worked with all games. Gerry

I agree with Seedorf. What is the point if you move a tank to a nice ambush area, check LOS and there is good LOS to that area, and then you find out the gunner cannot see it. No point if the gunner doesn't have LOS. There are people on here that will make little of this, claiming wargaming is hell, so hard to code the AI, etc. Why not have LOS measured from the most important person in the tank, the gunner. Same thing happens I thing with ATGs. Please BF, try and make the game a little easier to play in terms of these issues. There is so much work involved in setting up tanks throughout the game. Too much work will eventually mean less fun for players. Gerry