Jump to content

Ithikial_AU

Members
  • Content Count

    936
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Ithikial_AU last won the day on February 5 2018

Ithikial_AU had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About Ithikial_AU

  • Rank
    Scenario Editor Junkee
  • Birthday 05/06/1984

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Perth, Western Australia

Converted

  • Biography
    Playing Combat Mission since "Beyond Overlord." Lurking forums ever since.
  • Location
    Perth, Western Australia
  • Occupation
    Public Servant

Recent Profile Visitors

1,815 profile views
  1. Ithikial_AU

    New CMMODS IV

    I had a poke around the old CMMODS CM1 warehouse a few months back for different reasons. It was a walk down memory lane. The only bits that I stole that could still be useful for the majority of the CM playerbase today was some campaign ideas/tracking sheets, (which need to be repaired to work with modern versions of MS Excel - not volunteering at this time ) and some textures for the UI. Porting over sounds for a greater sounscape maybe possible but would require a lot of work even just renaming all the files. I could see little point in bringing over most of the texture mods that make up the vast bulk of what's posted there.
  2. Ithikial_AU

    RTS & Wego

    After sandpaper-gate I don't think we play cricket in this country anymore.
  3. CMFB being more difficult I think also has got something to do with the weapons being used. At the tail end of the war you have a lot of heavy weaponary and and armour options available compared to CMFI and CMBN. Not to mention the prevelance of SMG's and LMG's across some infantry formations. It's part of the reason I love CM and the much talked about upgrade system. A collection of wargames with a consistent set of rules under the hood allows for the varying terrain and TOE's across the different theatres really shine through for the player. Not to mention how they change over the course of time. Still holding out for early war games for the same reason. You'd be scared of a lone T-34 showing up in 1941 when all you've got are 37mm PAKs.
  4. Ithikial_AU

    Camos

    Since I did that CMFB mod Umlaut has been kind enough to hand over his snow psd files. Should make life a little easier once Rome to Victory is released.
  5. Ithikial_AU

    Small bug when displaying Javelin ammo

    The text shows total ammo that the selected fire team can readily access in it's current position. Is the "A Team" right next door to this "B Team"? If so there's probably a pixel truppen ammo bearer that is within ammo sharing range. The final sixth missile is probably not available as it's in the tube of the "A Team" Javelin. Same principle as mortar teams sharing ammo when sitting next to each other on a map - becomes apparent if you have a mortar platoon in your roster.
  6. Agreed. Some French forces running through CMBN and CMFB would be nice. My thoughts on the matter have been expressed lots of times before. Go mid and early war. I always fear the day CM3 becomes a thing we're back to Normandy yet again.
  7. Ithikial_AU

    2019 Reporting For Duty

    Oh alright. The first pic is over the Austrian Alps, second pic climbing out of an ice cave in an Icelandic glacier. Apologies to Steve, only on the one off topic post I promise.
  8. Talking about digging up a thread from the grave. This one is for the somewhat dormant Arracourt collection of scenarios that are being worked on over at the FGM. We spent many posts/PM's discussing what variants of Shermans to put into the scenarios for Abrams' 37th Tank Battalion. We ended up settling with mostly your bog standard M4's across the board with the exception of 2x M4A1(76) in A company since there were a number of sources that said this company took in two of the 76's in time for Arracourt. A total of 20x 76mm Shermans were scattered across the 4th Armored following the Normandy campaign. We surmised the 37th TB didn't have many since Abrams was one of the tank officers in the US Army against the introduction of the 76mm at the time and from the unit history leading up to Arracourt showed little sign the 37th taking excessive vehicle losses prior to this point. Backing this line of thinking up was all the photos we found that supported the 37th TB with standard M4's.
  9. Thanks for the thoughts. Sadly no, many of the WW2 battlefields are still on the to do list. When you head over from Australia, it's a bit of a long trek both in terms of time and dollars so I'd want to make a decent go at it when the time comes.
  10. Ithikial_AU

    2019 Reporting For Duty

    Late to the news. Busy paragliding off the top off a mountain and ice caving under a glacier. Here's to a good 2019!
  11. Sorry I literally got off a plane following 3 flights over the last 24 hrs only a few hours ago, so I'm a bit jet lagged/all over the place. Two months of touring Europe over Chrissy. The mission with the Hobart's Funnies is the mission that comes next if you lost the mission to take the village and northern hangers before this one (the historical outcome). Though I think there are some Flail tanks in that first attempt to take the village. With regards to the mission in question you only get a platoon of regular Shermans, which is part of the reason why the scenario is called what it is - they were some words muttered by one of the officers stuck in the fields during this attack. The Canadian brass (in my opinion) didn't really plan this operation well and the poor suckers on the southern route were the poor cousins when it came to receiving armoured support. The northern approach was always the focus. The campaign was built almost wholly under Upgrade 3.0. There's been no tweaks by me since 4.0 came out nor has there been any report that there is a campaign crashing bug as a result of the upgrade.
  12. Sorry been away from boards packing a suitcase. Thinking some more on this I think what's compounded this problem was the 4.0 upgrade which seems to have taken a sledgehammer to the morale of infantry units. Bug or not, (see the array of other forum topics on this issue), infantry will break a lot more easily now than before. I built this campaign under Game Engine 3. Changing 'numbers' under the hood can have a big impact on balance for scenarios and campaigns. I remember the 'Blue and the Grey' campaign grabbed my interest when I saw it but it was built under engine 1.0. I downloaded it after 2.0 was released which increased the lethality of MG fire substantially. The balance of the first scenario on Omaha beach simply thrown out the window. I don't have any plans to go back and retest Carpiquet from scratch at this point. Too many other new ideas I want to work on already. The only scenario I've written that I may update is MG Joe's Bridge for CMBN... if CMBN ever gets tank rider functionality. (Tip - Spoiler) Your initial two companies should break in at all costs to allow the two follow on companies to exploit. If you win this battle the roles will be reversed and you'll force the Germans to spread out their counter attacks. I can't remember the exact text I wrote at the time but this engagement is a fictional scenario assuming the Operation Windsor plan was running on schedule. WriterJWA is doing better than history in this campaign. The approach I mapped out for this engagement follows the planned phase two of the 4th of July for Operation Windsor. The Queens Own Rifles Infantry Battalion of the 3rd Canadian infantry division was to move through the other Canadian forces and assault the control buildings of the airfield from the north. To the south and west was the open airfield itself so that was out of the question, while further east was unknown territory held of the Germans. The battalion would of been mightily exposed from all sides if it pushed any of it's forces further east. This is also why it's quite a narrow map as swinging around wasn't really an option. Historically this battalion was brought in to help mop up the SS holdouts in the village and hangers. It's good to get feedback, so hard to find testers and reviews of finished community works at the best of times. As for downloads, well before Bootie updated the Scenario Depot website and removed the download counter on the main page this little campaign was in the top five so I was already pretty stoked. I never could pip GeorgeMC for top spot however.
  13. Ithikial_AU

    CMSF2 Release Update

    Battlefront you have some evil timing for your releases. I generally always get the notification that you've released something as I'm on my way to work in the morning. Have to chalk that up to unlucky time zones. This time however it's just happens to release 48 hours before I board a plane to head to Europe for two months of winter fun. All working on this end so it will be waiting for me when I get back. All the best with the rest of the launch.
  14. <-- Author of the Lions of Carpiquet campaign. (Minor spoilers) The mission you are having a problem with is the one where you have to go after the airport control buildings on the eastern side of the airfield correct? Yes unfortunately you are squeezed in tightly to begin with and need to rush those front line buildings to gain a foothold. The good news is once that line if secure you're reinforcements should be able to move onto the map outside of enemy LOS. (Well unless you knock down those buildings completely). As the map maker I had a major problem with this slice of the southern master map since it butts right up against the northern map and the village. The entrenched positions with the 88 battery from the second battle would be exactly behind your deployment zone IRC. I had the problem of deciding whether to try and recreate that or not. I chose not to at the time. I didn't have a million and one testers (this isn't a stock campaign so don't have access to the beta tester pool) and those that I did have volunteer from the community didn't raise any problems at the time. You're actually on the 'doing better than history' track as the Canadians never actually got a shot at these buildings during the historical battle. They were held up too long in the village and hangers on the north side of the airfield. (ie the player loses battle 2 of the campaign). These control buildings were hammered by artillery and air power during the battle (as you get to control in the battle). The reaction to your air power especially should give you a big hint about what you have to go up against once they make their attack runs. You can also make the battle a touch easier if you manage to hammer the buildings during the previous scenario with your own platoon of Shermans... if they aren't tied down by other distractions. Glad you liked the other scenarios so far. It looks like the experience you had is what I was after when I designed them. Just a shame I you won battle 2, I think the follow up battle (instead of the one you are not fighting) is very fun since you get to use a lot more of 'Hobart's Funnies.' Sadly they only rocked up later in the day so I felt that I couldn't use them in the dawn assault. I'm heading off on holiday at the end of the week but thanks for playing. Keen for any other insights.
  15. I'd have no problem with that proposition what sover in the vast majority of circumstances. Combat Mission is a complex wargame, not an bog standard RTS like StarCraft where the objective for determining victory are pretty dry cut. There maybe the odd case where a narrative is laid out in a CM scenario where the objectives must be taken no matter the cost but it would be the exception rather than the rule. Receiving a Total Victory would suggest your forces are ready to carry on with further operations. If you take all your objectives but ruin your forces in the process the degree of victory should ideally probably reflect that. I've certainly had cases where it's gone the other way at times when I've fought the long hard slog, struggled to reach my objectives and my forces have taken a battering, only to be rewarded with an AAR saying 'Total Victory.' The first reaction I have is that "It certainly didn't feel like it!" There's probably a few cases where that's happened where I've been recording you TouTube. Actually.... (sorry putting the economist/analyst hat on now), we can probably measure this if there's a decent number of people out there using my little Excel data tool. That records casualties/casulty rates agaist the degree of victory. I just know from my own results that the number of times I've received a "Total Victory" is my greatest number of results, even though I know in quite a number of those it's been a virtual bloodbath on my side. IIRC thats effectively what was done with the original CMSF Blue Force campaigns and scenarios. They all had very harsh penalities on losing more than 10 - 20% of your forces if I remember correctly. This type of victory condition was sort of required to actually balance out the scenarios where only one side receives all the 'toys.' If you didn't force the Blue Force player to slow down in some what they could steam roll most Syrian opponents. Are you aware of this little tool I created years ago to test out combinations of victory point allocations? Pretty much allows you to test out what you proposing... just without the many hours of work within the game itself. http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=4236 As flagged previously, in my opinion at least, I think these are the better CM scenarios and helps reflect a better wargame experience that wargamers are after. CM has always been about realism (I'm sure there's a post or two floating around here from Steve on that point). This is particularly the case for larger maps that give players a lot more options to consider in how to tackle the problems in front of them. Having every unit modelled in detail to simulate a WW2 or modern era engagement can be let down if there's mission design that allows for, or worse, forces players to fight the engagement in a very unrealistic matter (such as with very restrictive time limts preventing proper recon etc). But yes at times we just want to jump into the editor, line up some King Tigers and IS-2's, and grab the popcorn. You didn't accidently let a cat out of the bag there did you? Or is this just a side passion project inside CMFI? (Sorry I'm a part of that CM: North Africa fan club).
×