Jump to content

DasMorbo

Members
  • Content Count

    227
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DasMorbo

  1. Now for the Panthers Of the seven Panthers I had knocked out in the last two games, only this succumbed to less than three solid penetrations. Took three PIAT hits to go KIA, while just two show. The solid penetration on the turret side didn't show any effect, I looked it up in-game. Three solid, one partial AT penetrations, two solid PIAT penetrations, just 1 crew fatality. This one took all this hits at 150m to catch fire. This one took half the hits while still operational. The other half after it was abandoned with the engine still running. I have been a scale modeller for 20 years, and the Panther was my favourite subject. So I spend many hours studying original pictures, and all I can say is they are very vulnerable to side shots. One to three penetrations were sufficent to set the vehicle afire or disable the crew in the pictures I have seen and the accounts I have read. Again, just wanted to make clear I am not making this up to troll. I will do some testing if I have the time left. In the moment I am at home with an illness, why I started to write about this the first place. Regards, Olf
  2. Here are some pictures which are intended to highlight why I came up with the idea there might be something odd with the hit-reg/damage model. Situation: three Churchills with 57mm and 75mm guns versus this Wespe. It took some time to score hits due to obstacles. First hit was on the muzzle brake - it kept firing for another two minutes. The hit on the gun assemply did not impair its ability to fire. These three 'deflection' hit decals come from AP rounds which actually deflected off the gun shield.
  3. Hey guys! Okay, I guess I was wrong with the pathing behaviour. I think about some testing though. But to give you an impression how I came up with the idea, here are some more screenshots. Green line - intended way, set with two 'quick' waypoints, one half way across the field, roughly on the green arrow the other one at the end of the field. Red line - the way they took, there was an hMG 42 down the road, which I knew is there but not the AI (no contact icon) What I don't understand is why the AI didn't choose the passage in the Bocage, which obviously was the shorter and easier way (no gate to jump over). Result. The guys at the passageway are about to start their dash (20 seconds delay). Waypiont of the second team. Looks like the AI sticks to roads tenaciously. This is not to press my piont, but just to show you how I came to the conclusion there is something odd with the pathing. Hope this shows you that my intention was not to troll.
  4. Stuff like that is what I like English language for - you don't have such an 'auto-pun-function' in German.
  5. May I present to you - the very young Chuck Norris at his holiday job: When young Chuck was attending the University of Applied Badassnes he sought, like every other colledge student, after a job to improve his financial situation. Luckily there was a war going on over in Europe. As he didn't want to work too much (lazy college student) he only volunteered for the US Paras, not any serious assignment like the SAS or such. Still the regulation armament was a bit too flimsy for his tastes so he did some little improvements.
  6. I am not that much frustrated as it sounds - this referred some other more rude comments and the amount of contra I am receiving. About the amount of CMBN hours clocked, I have the game for at least 3 years now and have been playing near constantly with some weeks pause here and then. Before CMBN I used to play Close Combat and I consider myself a crack in wargaming tactics (wanna play me for verification?). As I have an old PC, I didn't switch to newer titels and thus stayed with CMBN all the time. So I went through V1.0 to V3.0 steadily with my gameplay skills nothing but improving, and I haven't noticed this ever before. IIRC downgrading from V3.0 to V1.0 means reinstalling. So this option gets ruled out as I am nearing my maximum activations. I could work it out but it is just too much work to fit into my real life, besides I have some PBEMs just about to start and I don't want to annoy these guys. I am thinking about some tests though.
  7. I don't really get why you guys jump at me like you do? Do you think I totally ignore all the great things Battlefront has come up with? Do you think I don't see all the improvements? Of course I do. For example I was really eager to see nice little hit decals on my tanks in CMBN and thus was really hyped when the V3.0 upgrade came out. But after playing a while I noticed the aforementioned flaws and have been waiting for a fix ever since. Considering the last Patch for CMBN came out in November 2014 I got to the conclusion that there is no support for a looong while, if ever. Same was my impression for CMSH - I have been waiting for a V2.0 and now V3.0 upgrade for one and a half years. Now I am in the situation that CMBN is on the edge of unplayable for me and I can't buy any of the other titles for various reasons. When I heard BF is making a title about the Bulge I decided to finally say something. That is the whole story. Just for an example: This is what I am referring to in my first statement as botched pathing behaviour: Clusterf**k 1 Clusterf**k 2 This happened with the port to V3.0. It is so dominant that it is hardly possible to use a workaround. You have to place waypoint as close as 20yards/meters apart to avoid it. And this slows movement down, as the troops use to pause for a moment at waypoints, when they get seperated. Best regards Olf
  8. to 1) I just want to bring this to BFs attention because, maybe some of the issues are due to the V.3.0 migration and can be easily fixed. to 3) Already waaay into the discussion, just have a look at the posted link. Not too much poo-flying as of now, which I appreciate
  9. Here is the most compact yet informative tactics tutorial I have come across. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ6dDlqye9Q&list=PLmW_vcwM_qxukdDjpfUEerpICUzTrTKek Part II especially deals with a tactical problem similar to yours - attack over open terrain against dug-in troops with hMGs and ATGs Hope it helps you Olf
  10. Hey everyone! This is a thread which deals with some problems and bugs I mentioned in another thread. http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120091-operation-tumbleweed/page-3 As it started quite a discussion I try now to migrate the discussion to this thread. Thus the other thread isn't hijacked by off-topic discussions anymore and people know where to look if they want to re-read about this topic. Here is my original post: Posted 21 July 2015 - 08:57 PM Oh no, not ANOTHER new Release. Who is supposed to play through all this content? I am not even through all the game content of CMBN, and I own it for about two years. Haven't they got enough to do? I mean, have you looked at CMBN in its V3.11 state? Pretty skewed if you ask me. Infantry movement behaviour is all I say. They should keep ironing the older titles instead of releasing a plethora of unripe new installments that differ only marginally in gameplay... Just my 2 cents. Olf And here are my key arguments when I say Battlefront should keep maintaining older titles. Posted 25 July 2015 - 07:18 PM The bugs I am referring to are the following: Fisrt of all the movement system is skewed - troops tend to bunch up way more than in earlier versions. You can spread out a whole platoon 200 yards wide and give them parallel movement orders and you have them all bunched up in one thick line after 30 seconds. Nice when enemy artillery is present... Secondly the Panthers (and some other vehicles) hit and damage registration is still bugged. This was present already in version 2.12. The vehicles won't get destroyed before receiving 3-6 partial and solid penetrations (by 57, 75mm, 76mm guns) even in areas which hold ammo and fuel. Just recently a Wespe 105mm SP gun received about 6 direct hits from 3 Churchills without showing any sign of reduced combat readiness. In this match I have one enemy Panther destroyed (5 solid penetrations needed) and 3 active (between 1 to 4 penetrations each). Just one is unscathed. Remember our match with your invincible Tigers. How many PIAT hits did they recieve with very little damage? Thirdly the spotting system acts really weird at times. You pile up all the spotting advantages on your side and the enemy still spots and shoots first. Just had a match (EDIT: in the CMRT Demo) where my Stug III with an unbuttoned veteran crew looked straight at a T-34/85 through some trees and bushes. The T-34 was at an 30° angel, buttoned and with regular crew. Guess who shot first and killed the Stug? This is really no single incident, with vehicles staring straight at other vehicles 150 yards away in the open, and no identification happening. That is about it. I will upload some pictures as references soon. So lets discuss!
  11. Ok, with so much to say by everybody I start a special thread about the topic. Look out for it!
  12. Oh yeah, I remember that stuart. Still I would appreciate it if Battlefront would review the hitreg/damage system. To me it seems to produce results which are too random and incoherent at times. I am talking of tanks getting their ammo racks and fuel tanks shot through without harm. Maybe we should start a thread of its own on this?
  13. Instead of mocking people right away, I normally ask if their statements are correct. In this case it was a situation in the 'Combat Mission: Red Thinder'-Demo which, for your information, is based on the same engine as CMBN. Funny that I bump into these flaws permanently playing CMBN.
  14. Hey Guys! I just wrote an email to Slysniper about this topic, here is a copy: The bugs I am referring to are the following: Fisrt of all the movement system is skewed - troops tend to bunch up way more than in earlier versions. You can spread out a whole platoon 200 yards wide and give them parallel movement orders and you have them all bunched up in one thick line after 30 seconds. Nice when enemy artillery is present... Secondly the Panthers (and some other vehicles) hit and damage registration is still bugged. This was present already in version 2.12. The vehicles won't get destroyed before receiving 3-6 partial and solid penetrations (by 57, 75mm, 76mm guns) even in areas which hold ammo and fuel. Just recently a Wespe 105mm SP gun received about 6 direct hits from 3 Churchills without showing any sign of reduced combat readiness. In this match I have one enemy Panther destroyed (5 solid penetrations needed) and 3 active (between 1 to 4 penetrations each). Just one is unscathed. Remember our match with your invincible Tigers. How many PIAT hits did they recieve with very little damage? Thirdly the spotting system acts really weird at times. You pile up all the spotting advantages on your side and the enemy still spots and shoots first. Just had a match where my Stug III with an unbuttoned veteran crew looked straight at a T-34/85 through some trees and bushes. The T-34 was at an 30° angel, buttoned and with regular crew. Guess who shot first and killed the Stug? This is really no single incident, with vehicles staring straight at other vehicles 150 yards away in the open, and no identification happening. That is about it. The 'abandon older titels'-claim points in the direction that Battlefront is a very small developer. And with every new Installment, their limited rescources for technical support are spread further.I hear about the Shock Force Upgrade to V3.0 for the first time. An overhaul of that titel I have been awaiting ever scince Upgrade 2.0. So this point is somewhat less significant now. I still have the impression that the Upgrades for CMBN have been made quite hurredly with the above mentioned issues not having been noticed, due to limited rescources. Best regards
  15. Can't help with the problem but I know you need some patience - this forum isn't overflowing with users.
  16. I would recommend to use the 'split team' command. It gives you equal firepower and mobility in both sub-units (given you have a standart 'two-MG42-squad'). If you use the 'Anti-tank team' command, you have one very small group with not much firepower and one with two MG42s - which is quite some overkill in my opinion. This firepower is easy to neutralize as well - just one well placed HE tank round or a lucky mortar hit can strip you off your precious 'ammo throwers'. Best regards
  17. Thanks for all the PM-Answers! Didn't expect so many answers in such a short time. Demand fullfilled.
  18. I know they don't make a lot of money with this. Just look at the viewer numbers on their Youtube-Videos! My point is, they are churning out games faster than people with a life can play through for the price of abandoning the support for the older titles. I am stuck with CMBN because I don't have neither the money to buy new installments of the game nor a new PC to support the larger maps they come with. At the moment I am in the situation to have spent 10$ for the Version 3.X upgrade to render a 75$ game horrible to play.
  19. Oh no, not ANOTHER new Release. Who is supposed to play through all this content? I am not even through all the game content of CMBN, and I own it for about two years. Haven't they got enough to do? I mean, have you looked at CMBN in its V3.11 state? Pretty skewed if you ask me. Infantry movement behaviour is all I say. They should keep ironing the older titles instead of releasing a plethora of unripe new installments that differ only marginally in gameplay... Just my 2 cents. Olf
  20. Hi Folks! Even though I am not active on the Forum , I am still around - and playing CMBN! I am in the final stages of finishing the last Campaign I had to get through... ...and starting to get bored by the silly AI - again. So who wants to play me in PBEM Battles? I favour Scenarios, as I like realistic matches over balanced ones. We can counter that by having re-matches or me taking the more difficult part. My version is CMBN + CW V3.something. A little note: I am pretty good at this tactics-thing. Hope to hear from you! Olf
  21. You are not only guilty of reckless commanding (and tank driving) but also of reckless hacking!
  22. Too bad about your ATGM Boys as they will be missed dearly dealing with those Abrams MBTs. You need to keep your Krizantema alive if you want to kill those thick-armoured trolling machines. About my hints: You figured it out on your own already, no need to help. If there was jurisdiction for Combat Mission, c3k would be fined for reckless commanding. This leads to my next point: c3k should have played the Russians - it is more fitting his playstyle. ATTACK!!! Cheers Olf
  23. Hey DMS! Want some little hint on the playstyle of your opponent? There is an old DAR made by him, I could give you the link. It can give you an idea of his playstyle - which is very distinctive to say the least. It might give you an advantage. How do you think of it? How do the other readers think of it? Give the link now or just after the match? Good hunting! Olf
  24. What coward needs a buddy to cover him, when he can ATTACK!? Threefold 120mm-devastation (powered by Rheinmetall) is all you need! A milion thanks for digging up the old 'White Manor'-AAR! Propably the must insane and entertaining AAR there ever was on the BFC Forum - up till now... Cheers
×
×
  • Create New...