Jump to content

GerryCMBB

Members
  • Posts

    648
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by GerryCMBB

  1. 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

  2. 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

    It's quite clear that an argument that something is 'not useful' or 'not worth the points' will not move BFC to do anything.

    Prove it that CM does it wrong and BFC will fix it (after enough complaining :D).

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

    Not that this is needed for the people who post on this board, but I think CM2 needs this for getting people into the franchise:

    Super small scenarios, with a story to follow, with a campaign which builds up to larger units and actions. Shipped with the base game--not something that has to be downloaded.

    When I started CMBN, I was amazed at how many units were in the tutorial, and the degree of knowledge they assumed.

    Even the "tiny" scenarios--and I don't think I have played anything scenarios other than that size (I generally play the massive campaigns) are generally 30 minutes.

    At 15 minutes a WEGO turn, that can be 7 1/2 hours. And a platoon, if split in all its pieces, which I increasingly find necessary, can 15 or so pieces to contend with.

    How about 1 squad, 10 minute scenarios? Bunches of them. Campaigns of them.

    Put a German general, for example in a house with a few guards, and have a "special forces" type action with a squad or two to "take him out".

    This would seem to be such an obvious marketing move, to start people small (from StarCraft, to, really, most other games--whether Civ, or EU, or TW, where one inherently starts small and works up to complexity) that I must be missing some clear reason this was not done.

  10. 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.

    3. Being able to deploy to the map from a holding area/menu rather than having your forces already plonked down in a horrid jumble that you then have to sort out.

    2. Allow "lock camera to map location" without there having to be a unit there.

    4. Similarly with waypoints.

    1. Ability to see what your unit can see with LOS-fidelity, or at least have elevations match potential view heights for the selected unit.

    Gerry

  11. 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.

    I think there is a good argument for some kind of "primary weapon no LOF" warning to the player in this case.

    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

  12. 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

    Wouldn't real soldiers make sure they (TC and gunner) had their LOF and LOS in order? Certainly in a nice ambush position like this?
×
×
  • Create New...