Jump to content

Migo441

Members
  • Content Count

    269
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Migo441 last won the day on September 8 2015

Migo441 had the most liked content!

About Migo441

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. OK, understood! Bummer, but I find that's it's not too onerous to have two installations so as to finish ongoing battles and also be able to start new ones with the latest patch. Somehow we'll survive. 😛
  2. Question about patching. I've applied the CMRT 2 Engine 4 patch to get me from v2.0 to v2.1. However, I'm now unable to open a saved game from the previous version... To be clear, a game saved during planning phase and not a PBEM file where a movie is launching. The behavior is that the load screen progresses to 25% and then the app crashes and I'm back to my desktop. Initially I not re-activated with my licence but the experience is the same once I did re-activate. Is this something people have seen before? What's the recommendation? Uninstall and reinstall?
  3. Is there a chart showing the mission pathing for this campaign somewhere? I feel sure I saw one somewhere (possibly in this thread?!) but now I can't find it.
  4. @LĂ©opold, do not forget you can split apart campaigns and play the individual component battles against human opponents.
  5. Wait a minute... What am I missing here? I have turrets directed off-center all the time for tanks that aren't moving and aren't immobilized. I ran for several turns but the tank, on its own, never rotated the hull to face the center of the arc. My claim, until someone comes along shortly to clarify/correct, is that you certainly can orient the hull and turret independently. Now, previously, Circular Arcs were referenced and yes, in that case, I agree the turret will orient with hull (unless engaging on a different angle at a given moment, etc...) Alas @Matt_P, we're all in agreement that you can't do what you originally wanted to do which is have the TC say, "Hull gunner, scan forward for enemy infantry! Turret maintain orientation at 2 o'clock, scan for enemy armor!" Sometimes it does work out that way (engage multiple targets) but, as @IanL said, only at the discretion of the TacAI.
  6. I'd just like to take a moment to celebrate this example of civil and fulfilling discourse. On the internet! Huzzah for CMx2! @Matt_P, yep, 30m is the danger zone for armor regarding enemy infantry. As Ian mentioned, this is an abstracted "close assault" which encompasses a variety of potential actions that could immobilize a tank, cause the crew to bail, or outright destroy it. It's a dire situation when, facing enemy armor, it's your best option. But at least it's something. In close terrain, tanks have much to fear.
  7. That makes sense. I'm running latest upgrades but haven't had the occasion to use the new command yet. I started off thinking it was more flexible than it turned out to be, i.e., merge squads rather than consolidate squad. However, I've been annoyed by the "4 guys taking up 3 action spot" scenario before so it's still a welcome and helpful addition. Thanks for the clarifications guys!
  8. As we would want it to, correct? From what I'm reading here, this doesn't sound like a bug at all. The moral of the story is that moving in proximity (or through!) minefields is dangerous. If it is critical for the pixeltruppen to move ONLY in the cleared tiles, then we can already do that by placing a waypoint in each one. No? Or, as AKD is suggesting, does even that not work when moving diagonally?
  9. Yep, there are definitely some grey areas and it just goes to show how impossible it would be code in limitations without somehow nerfing legitimate area fire along the way. (I think this is the main reason that BF threw up their hands. Not because it's impossible to abuse area fire, but because they didn't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater.) If I want to order a unit to area fire against a spot where they don't have a contact but other units do (I play on Iron), I stop and ask myself: "Would they really take that shot?" Sometimes I can rationalize it and sometimes I can't. If the range is relatively short and other squads/teams from the same platoon are engaging (like MikeyD's example) or maybe the unit to engage has a nearby partial contact maker (just not exactly where The Borg wants to fire), then OK. If the range is relatively long and the unit is in a different formation, then no way.
  10. This is the biggest abuse of area fire I'm aware of. I agree with everyone who says that recon-by-fire is a legitimate tactic. My platoon is advancing and I suspect the enemy has an observation post in such-and-such building, that stand of trees and brush over there would be a clever place for the enemy to place an anti-tank gun, etc... Why shouldn't I be able to target those locations? It's cheaper to send bullets than lives. The gamey part is when a limited portion of your force gains a contact marker (partial or full) and then other portions of your force (without any contact marker in the vicinity) magically and instantly start area firing at that same location.
  11. Oddly, I agree with both WynnterGreen that this is annoying and inconvenient (at best) when it occurs in game but also (and even more) with gnarly that it's not obvious how the game should handle it. Plus, as others have pointed out, there are peculiar differences depending on the individual firearms that make this more or less complicated. In short, I'm happy (I guess?) to continue to be annoyed and inconvenienced by this and would rather the devs spend time on other things rather than "top off ammo" features or additional micro-management.
  12. I can see the complications of implementing this. Unlike small arms ammo which can be shared in seconds by tossing a bandolier, a belt, or a few clips from one team to another, transferring main gun rounds would be more a more prolonged process and require non-trivial movement and exposure outside the tanks by crews. Of course, I'm not telling you guys anything you haven't already thought of, but I'm wondering how people think it should work if it were implemented? Would it be enough to be in proximity to another tank with ammo disparities and both tanks unbuttoned? What about suppression meters? There's a danger in making it "too easy" in a game that prides itself on realism. Also a danger in auto-sharing occurring when the player doesn't want it, e.g., a Green tank "inadvertently" taking a Veteran tank's ammo. Should the crews have to dismount?
  13. Thanks for the clarification! I've seen the auto 50m not work but that makes sense that it would be due to other factors (terrain and stance) and not the difficulty level. The HQ with 50m circular arc is a nice SOP for all the reasons you laid out: it's a quick and easy voice command "footprint" reference and visual queue and you don't want your HQs drawing attention to themselves by engaging the enemy at long ranges in any case. Thinking about this from the other side's perspective, if you believe you've identified a Platoon HQ, it provides a nice center-point for a like sized area indirect fire mission! Noted: easier conceived than executed.
×
×
  • Create New...