Jump to content

HarryB

Members
  • Content Count

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About HarryB

  • Rank
    Member

Converted

  • Location
    Las Vegas, Nevada
  1. There is no need to move it out of the incoming email folder. When you click on 'Saved Game' on the main screen, it will automatically display files in the incoming email folder. I only play HTH PBEM and my saved game folder is empty, but all files from the incoming email folder show up.
  2. No, I have just noticed an inability of Stummels to fire through bocage in previous games; I don't have any in this one. In the game I am playing now, my opponent has a couple of Churchill VIII's that have been firing through bocage at my infantry. What bothers me is the inconsistency of it, as Baneman said earlier; either both of the vehicles should be able to fire through the bocage or neither should.
  3. Sounds like he sent you files from two different games. He is probably playing a game against another opponent and sent you the wrong file by mistake. When the files are named by the program they will keep the name they have with the number being incremented by one. If he chose a 'random meeting engagement', I believe he probably looked in the scenario folder and randomly grabbed a created scenario that has been labeled as a meeting engagement. That is not the same as a Quick Battle. When you get the initial file after he has done his first turn, the only thing you will do is select your password. When you get the next file you will do your purchasing, initial setup and I believe your initial movement ploting as well.
  4. I guess the bottom line is that not all sections of hedgerow are equal in real life, and the game abstracts everything into one (other than tall and short) 'average' hedgerow. It would be nice to have more variety, but I guess you can't have everything. I still don't get the logic of allowing the Churchill to fire through a hedgerow and not allowing a Stummel to do the same though.
  5. I think this points to the need for an extra tile for bocage, one that would allow map designers to insert 'firing holes' in the bocage where tanks and other vehicles could fire through, instead of allowing them to fire through it everywhere. There is also the inconsistency of The Churchill being able to fire through it while the Stummel can't. Really, anything that the Churchill can see through I would think the Stummel also could. Granted, I have never stood in front of actual bocage, so I don't have any first hand knowledge of what it is like to actually look through the stuff; I have only seen it in pictures. Much of it though, I know a tank would not be able to just pull up to it and have a line of fire to the other side; they just wouldn't be able to see anything.
  6. I have no doubt that he did, I would also have no doubt that this was from a prepared position. I would doubt that they just wheeled it up to the bocage, stuck the gun barrel through it and started blasting away.
  7. Well, the way it is now, tanks can shoot through the bocage anywhere, and I really don't think that is realistic. How about adding another type of bocage terrain tile? Kind of a 'shooters hole' that would allow vehicles to shoot through, but still be impassible. It could represent either a place that has been specifically prepared, or where the bocage is naturally thin.
  8. Something that I am having a hard time wrapping my head around is how a tank can pull up next to bocage and fire through it. Even if the gun can stick through it, how can the gunner see anything? The game clearly isn't simulating the tank knocking a hole in the bocage, because if it can knock a hole in it, it should be able to continue driving through. If you drive a Stummel halftrack up to bocage, the game doesn't allow you to see and fire through it. That makes sense to me, because the gun is short and can't stick through the bocage. What doesn't make sense to me is how a Churchill VIII can drive up to bocage and shoot through. Its gun is also short and can't stick through. The only way to get the gun through the bocage is to drive the tank halfway through it, and if it can do that, it should be able to continue on through. The only way I see tanks being able to shoot through the bocage is in prepared positions that have been cleared so that the gunners can see. Am I missing something here, or is the game handling this unrealisticly?
  9. There still are plenty of vehicles that could be added to the selection, so an odds and ends module would be nice; I'm still waiting for my favorite afv, the Brummbar. And yes, flamethrowers would be nice as well.
  10. In the game I'm playing now, a panzerschreck team took out one of my Shermans. Shortly after that they came under fire from another tank and tried to surrender. The tank blasted them anyway and when I zoomed in on the tank commander I could swear I heard him say "Look, I washed for supper".
  11. Most of the time that I am loading these files I may be listening to the radio over the net or just don't want to have to turn down the volume while the file loads. I would like to be able to disable the music if possible. Can it be done?
  12. The problem was that the tank spotted infantry briefly, lost sight of them and then just parked where it was, in a position that was obviously vulnerable if the infantry it spotted had any kind of anti-tank weapons. If the commander was a real human being he would most likely start blasting away with HE where he last saw the threat or back away to a safer distance. He did neither because the AI in the game doesn't recognize anything it has lost sight of as a threat. He just sat there in the danger zone polishing his helmet and waiting to be killed. The reason you want him to continue on is so that he will have a better chance to regain contact with the threat he lost sight of. When you say that I should have used a different command you are absolutely correct given the way the command is currently set up in the game. That is why I am arguing to get it changed back to the way it was in CMx1, so that my tank may continue moving The key here is the AI. If, to the AI, units it lost sight of didn't just cease to exist and it could respond to them appropriately, it wouldn't need such detailed instructions. I am asking the AI to trust my orders rather than just sit there and do nothing.
  13. Well Amizaur, I think you said it pretty well. The differences in spotting between the two games have an effect on the Hunt command whether the unit continues forward after losing sight of the unit that caused it to pause or not. I think that in general, having to choose between the options of continuing forward vs. staying put; more often than not it is better to keep moving along the assigned path than to stop and stay there for the rest of the 60 second turn. Cheers
  14. Well, after all that I still think it would be a good idea to modify the Hunt command to allow units to continue on their path after they have spotted an enemy unit, stopped and then lost sight of that unit. I know I will never get the last word against the man of 8000 posts, so I will just leave it at that unless someone adds something interesting to this discussion that compels me to respond.
×
×
  • Create New...