Jump to content

Matt_P

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Sure, go for it. Will be curious to see what you do for the AI. My guess is that it will be much better played as the AXIS against the AI as the scenario design is one where the Germans probably have to play well to win while the Russians have to setup well to win. So if you can come up with a good setup, it could be a real challenge for the Germans. The Germans are going to inflict more pain on the Russians than vice versa regardless, but can they take enough objectives without taking too many casualties is the challenge...? And just so you know for AI Planning, in my HtH first test game, the Germans took the easternmost 4 objectives and the game was a draw. So they probably have to take one of the 2 western ones to win.....
  2. Thanks Kevin, that would be great as I'm sure a lot of folks play vs the AI who might like (or hate) it.
  3. Well, that's not good. Many situations where you want the hull facing one way and the turret another... Thanks for all the guidance folks, very useful stuff. I'm sure the more I play, the more I'll figure out the right balance and workarounds for the various limitations. Just need to remember that this is Combat Mission, it's not Advanced Squad Leader......
  4. Since you guys are chatting about Winter Mod scenarios, I thought I'd share one that I made. I have most/all of the winter mods downloaded and it looks pretty cool with the mod, though if you don't have the winter mod it looks just fine as well. But as the action took place in the winter, better feel to use the mod with the snow and whitewashed tanks etc..... The Scenario is called "Nishne, Nyet!" and is an adaptation of an Advanced Squad Leader scenario of the same name. It takes place in February 1943 and features the Germans attacking the town of Nishne-Gnilovskaya in order to eliminate the Russian bridgehead over the Don river to protect the escape route of Army Group Don. Myself and a friend have played it through once resulting in a draw and some refinements. So consider this v 1.1 of the scenario. Please note that it's a H2H scenario only as I don't have the strength to put in AI Plans and such and as I only play H2H, well, I have no interest in AI games. ;-) I am new to the Combat Mission series, but since you all were chatting about scenarios using the (fantastic!) winter mod and engine 4, well, here you go. Perhaps once finalized one of the more initiated can add AI to make it single player. Hot off the presses and unapologetically bloody. If anyone does play it, I'd be curious for feedback as I'm still refining it and have a few more test games lined up. You can download from the link below.... https://www.dropbox.com/s/jg0s2ah1hsp1ujs/Nishne Nyet.btt?dl=0 Thanks for looking and pardon the interruption. ;-) Best, Matt
  5. So I've noticed Migo, so I've noticed re the 30m. I actually created a scenario for the Winter Mod (will post soon in the other thread about winter scenarios, currently playtesting it with a buddy) and it takes place in a town with lots of large buildings and I'm learning that the seemingly invincible Tigers aren't really so........
  6. As an update to this, I tried the same tactic in a different game I'm playing and got the same result. A German Tiger had wandered too close to a building where I had a few SMG teams so with this in mind, rather than stay in the building that the Tiger was methodically pounding, I charged them at the Tiger and sure enough got the same result. Apparently they immobilized the Tiger and then threw a bundle grenade of sorts that really isn't listed with them and killed a few crew and then the rest bailed out. Very interesting. Nothing to do with covered arcs, but interesting to understand better the infantry assault capabilities of infantry seemingly with no AT weaps.... My new tactic in close quarters...............
  7. Thanks for the detailed response, it's appreciated and all that you have advised makes sense. Unfortunately in this particular situation, the do nothing would have resulted in the tank firing on the infantry and his tank destroying (or at least getting the drop on) my tank if not for the bizarre LOS blockage. My tank had no LOS to either at turn start and given the situation I could see what was coming as earlier in the game a somewhat similar situation came up and a tank prioritized the infantry. Was trying to avoid the same thing happening. Anyway appreciate your thoughts, but it still would be nice if the tank would have fired on the infantry in that situation as they got closer and closer or even better to be able to specify the target priority of the main gun. I understand the desire to not add more micro management to the game, but really I don't think it would as no one has to use such a feature, but it would be a nice option to have. In many cases already in my short experience I have wanted my tanks to fire at infantry with their MG's but not with their MA or to fire simultaneously at two different targets and you can't really do that despite the tank having the capability. I guess I'm too used to ASL and how things work there. So while I'm at it,. It would also be nice if you could set the turret facing on a tank without setting a covered arc. I'm assuming circular target arcs with tanks will always keep the turret facing forward?
  8. I'm not sure where the correct place to post this is so apologies in advance if it should be posted elsewhere. I'm pretty new to the game, so I also don't know if this has been discussed previously. I had a situation where I had a tank that was facing enemy infantry and an enemy tank. My assumption was that my opponent was going to rush the infantry at my tank to draw fire and then advance his tank to shoot my tank. So, being clever, I decided to give my tank a Target Vehicle covered arc. Not so clever it turned out as though my opponent did in fact do exactly what I though he would do, his infantry charged and then his tank came forward, but because of a small wreck the two tanks never had LOS to each other. His infantry (Russian) waltzed right up in line of sight and spotted by the tank and proceeded to "destroy" the tank (a Panther). Well, I'm not sure they destroyed it as Russian infantry doesn't possess anything that could actually hurt a panther, but the tank crew decided to abandon the vehicle with the Russians about 1 foot away and were of course mowed down. Now for me, this is a bit strange on a few levels. I'm not sure why the tank crew would abandon the tank when the safest place for them to be is in the tank. I understand that the tank had a vehicle covered arc, but the infantry literally ran right up to the tank through the covered arc in LOS for about 50 meters and the tank didn't fire main gun or MG's at it. Fair enough, lesson learned, don't give a tank a vehicle CA with enemy infantry about even if the enemy infantry has no way to actually harm the tank. But thinking about this has lead me to ask for an enhancement request to the game. To me it would seem that a tank should ALWAYS use it's MG's to target infantry in this situation. But really what would be cool would be if you can set CA's and target priority types for EACH weapon (or weapon group) on a tank. So in this situation to be able to set the target priority type and covered arc of the main armament to one setting and the target priority/CA of MG's to another setting (or don't set target priority or CA at all for MG's, only the Main Armament). This would allow a tank to reserve it's main gun usage for threats of enemy armor while using it's MG's to protect itself from enemy infantry. I really don't have enough experience to understand if this type of things happens a lot or if this was a 1 in a million chance of it happening as it did in this particular game. But nonetheless it would be cool to be able to set the CA's and target types individually of each weapon on a tank. I guess this leads me to another question as well - which is what happens in a situation where you have the Tanks covered arc set to the side for example but the tank has a bow mounted machine gun which obviously can't face the side, but only forward. Will the tank use the BMG to fire at targets to it's front even though it's out of the Covered arc set? Just wondering. Anyway, thanks for looking. Matt
  9. Thanks for your response, much appreciated. As the scenario I'm working on is actually February 1943 (conversion of excellent ASL scenario), I guess I'm best off setting the CMRT mission date to the earliest date. And to think I was wondering why (and still wondering I guess) the Panzer III N isn't available..... It will work though as with all things ASL, the idea is to give a flavor of the action and the map is based on the ASL boards used for it, not on the real area. Thanks again! Matt
  10. Thanks so much, really appreciate it. Needed the confirmation before setting up countless walls. While I'm at it, will push my luck with one more question - is there anyway to change the scenario start date from 1944 and to months other than those in the menus? Thanks in advance!
  11. Hello all, I'm looking for some guidance on interior walls for modular buildings for a map I'm making. When the buildings are placed directly next to one another, I understand that you can delete the interior walls and thus troops can move from building to building. However, I'm wondering in a situation with two abutting walls, can you delete one of the walls and then have a door in the other wall and will troops use the door to get from building to building? I just want confirmation of this before I setup this many walls that it works this way. Thanks in advance! Matt
×
×
  • Create New...