Jump to content

Zveroboy1

Members
  • Content Count

    444
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Zveroboy1 last won the day on February 4

Zveroboy1 had the most liked content!

About Zveroboy1

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,022 profile views
  1. JasonC regularly posts on Boardgamegeek. He is into tabletop wargames these days, mostly the operational kind I think. Just register there and try contacting him, he'll probably reply. He has a rare quality : he is incredibly knowledgeable AND actually enjoys sharing what he knows. Sure he was abrasive, didn't play nice with others, was blunt, didn't suffer fools gladly and would call you an imbecile at the drop of a hat. Yet he possessed incredible insights on military history and tactics and the forum was a lot more interesting when he was around.
  2. Yes actually this isn't even a proper road, it is just a foot path really. I don't know how much it reduces bogging chances but it is probably minimal. Also it is barely visible normally without snow, which how I first did the map. I usually take great care not to have jagged roads but in this case you should just drive your vehicles in a straight line along the path and not bother about all the little twists and turns.
  3. Thanks for taking the time to give some feedback. This is really useful for me. Concerning AI plans, yes there is not much in the way of AI plans in this battle. With a map of this size, it gives the attacker a lot of freedom; you can decide to attack toward the centre, left, wide left, right and wide right. But on the flip side, so much freedom makes it impossible to predict the movements of the attacking force. So rather than having the defender launch blind counter-attacks with several plans in the hope that one might connect, I decided to have them stay static. Also personally, I find that in most cases when I play a scenario against the AI, counter-attacks usually make my job easier as the attacker because they often just get slaughtered in the open, in the case of infantry in particular. You got unlucky to have a vehicle bog down with these ground conditions. I picked frozen ground on purpose because the single tank is kind of crucial to the success of the attack and I didn't want it to get immobilized. I think I must have played this scenario 4-5 times to test it and never had a vehicle bog. But hey that's part of the fun, friction and all. Good point about the placement of doors. I have thought about this problem before. This might lead me to change my mapping technique a bit in the future.
  4. I was thinking Poland would make the most sense too. I'd love to see these armies in a future game though. France and Israel would fit in SF2. China I don't know, there is Taiwan but it is pretty limited in scope and it feels like the whole affair would be decided at sea and in the air.
  5. Right yes it won't be historical. We don't have the right models of tanks, lots of equipment is missing and it won't be a battalion sized force like in reality. And even if we had all these things available in the editor, I am not sure it would be possible to portray this type of fighting accurately anyway. Too little is known about the battle. The time frame would be hard to reproduce. Real engagements are much more slow paced. And the way I understand it, these clashes are much more about long range firefights with one side pulling back early before getting within small arms range, without house to house fighting. But it won't stop me from trying to make something fun and interesting. It will be like what you sometimes see on television "based on real events". The map is as accurate as I could make it though, just think of the scenario as a bonus.
  6. Thanks. Let me know what you thought about it when you're done : whether it was too easy, too hard, if you found it interesting and it was fun or not. I am working on part II. Hopefully I can make it a bit closer to the real events than part I which is fictional.
  7. True but it is a bit unfair to compare the two though. Mark Ezra has to make hundreds of QB maps for each game. He can't spend weeks or months on a map like some scenario designers do.
  8. Welcome back. I remember you had a good looking reskinned panzer in CM1. At least that's what I think it was. But I definitely remember your name.
  9. I hope that that this can be added to the game, probably in CM3. Weren't there rumours or an official word from Steve that they were working with a military? I forgot which one it was. It doesn't seem impossible that they would have some specifics requirements and have Battlefront modify the game engine to add some features. This might be one of them if they use CM as a training tool, it would make sense. Also having a "game master" or a referee that could observe and spawn stuff on the fly, a bit like they do in Arma.
  10. You sort of can. Unmask a unit, cancel its covered arc then give a fire order, pause 30 seconds and give a quick or fast move order to pull back. If the timing is not right or a cloud of dust or what not gets in front of the unit then the ambush will be blown though. But yes especially in modern warfare, it often feels like this is the only way to stay alive. Repositioning otherwise you're toast. And often it is not a matter of minutes but seconds.
  11. Yes this is what I want the most too in the next module, fairly low tech stuff like DShKs, ZU-23s, BRM-1s and GRAD launchers rather than the latest developments in tank technology. Well ideally both of course but if I'd have to pick it'd be real stuff that actually saw some action on the field. How are air assault units equipped differently than what we have at our disposal now?
  12. Thanks. By the way Haiduk, you should go ahead with your project. I doubt too many people who play CMBS know more about this war than you. And you shouldn't worry too much about being 100% accurate. If the tactical situations are interesting and you manage to capture the feel of the conflict, that's good enough even if you don't have the exact model of tank.
  13. Heh no one is arguing that cover and basic tactics don't matter. Not sure what good it does to reduce our position to a caricature. Not sure either why you appear to take this personally to be honest because this isn't about you. It is about a mistake some people make. Being so reluctant to attack over open ground that they systematically take the cover no matter how crappy or obvious it is. I have seen it several times and it wasn't against the AI. All I am arguing is this : If the drive for cover is so strong that you become a/ predictable or b/ bunched up as a result, then the alternative, attacking over open ground is -sometimes- preferable and it is not something to be feared or avoided at all cost. It is perfectly feasible, albeit clearly not ideal and a bit painful. I don't see what's so controversial about this. This is just pointing out a potential pitfall that some people fall into. That's all.
  14. Damn, that's funny. Maybe a pity to be both working on the same area though. Yes you're right; you have to be a bit creative for the industrial areas, it is not easy. There are lots of pictures on google earth and wikimapia though, it helps a lot. Here is a good link. This is what gave me the idea to map it. https://medium.com/dfrlab/minskmonitor-ukraine-takes-control-of-village-near-horlivka-54f29260b5c0
×
×
  • Create New...