Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Today
  2. At the start of a mission I preplanned two missions with a time delay using my FO. Some ten turns into the scenario I wanted to adjust one of the missions and did so. Problem is both missions get adjusted to the same place. Is this a bug or intended behaviour? I have seen it once before but can't remember where. I'll hang on to a save.
  3. Exactly. Ban him, ban him - BAN HIM ๐Ÿ๐Ÿ•๐Ÿคฎ ๐Ÿ˜‹
  4. Hi John, I wondered, too, but your question finally made me searching. This is from Wikipedia (search for Hill 262): โ€žOne of the few westbound roads in the area runs from Chambois through the pass, heading towards Vimoutiers and the River Seine.[31][33]Historian Michael Reynolds describes Point 262N as offering "spectacular views over much of the Falaise Pocket".[32] Viewing the feature on an Allied map, Maczek commented that it resembled a caveman's club with two bulbous heads; the Poles nicknamed it the Maczuga, Polish for "mace".[33][34] The ridge, known to the Allies as Hill 262,[5] f
  5. Gotta love @Warts 'n' all posts. He can even do a geographic definition with a flourish.
  6. The Poles called the local ridgeline Maczuga or mace in English, because it resembled a club. Rather than the more decorative mace that we have in the House of Commons to bash the Royals with.
  7. D'oh... typo in my email address I gave you. I pm'd you with my correct email. Please send it to that address. Sorry about that.
  8. Although my discussion is exclusively about H2H gameplay (and QBs in particular),I would say interesting and enjoyable games are always going to figure in to whether a player choses to play particular SP or MP game. This typically gets evaluated if and when you might read some recommendation/review/AAR about a scenario or QB map somewhere, or when you just look at the map in the scenario editor and reading any text/notes you might find relating to the QB map or scenario in question. I believe the whole concept behind mirrored battles is to introduce an element of "fairness" between
  9. Most certainly intended that way, yes ๐Ÿ˜† Apologies if anyone is reading this post in a serious tone, I'll go back to eating my pineapple pizza now ๐Ÿคช
  10. This is @MikeyD's department. "Literally Unplayable" sounds like hyperbole but Mike will be able to explain why it is the way that it is.
  11. If I am playing against the A.I. I am concerned with having an interesting and enjoyable game. I am not much concerned with balance. If I am playing against a human then the battle can be offered with an option to mirror. Nearly all my opponents are more interested in competitive fun. Everybody is pretty honest about doing their best to make battles equal to both sides. There are many variables, as you noted. I have read that most historical battles were not equal or balanced. Perhaps thats the answer.
  12. ๐Ÿ˜Ž Merci mon ami. Great, atmospheric screen shot, as always. As one US officer noted at the time โ€œthe enemy can be ten feet away and be undetected. He can fight up to spitting rangeโ€ ... Our beloved and feared bocage is almost ready, one tree to finish and then I can release the new version.
  13. Yesterday
  14. Yeah, I don't have a problem with U.S. 37mm penetrating the PZIVs Turret Face of 50-60mm Armor out to medium range...However, I've always had a problem of it reliably penetrating its Turret Mantle of 80mm rounded.
  15. The concept of what determines if a particular scenario (or QB) is "balanced" or not can be a very subjective thing to try and grapple with. For the sake of this discussion I will limit this discussion to "head to head" games between two players. I'm not sure how others might define what makes a "balanced" scenario/QB, but I think of it in statistical terms: for instance, if the particular scenario/QB was played "double blind" by multiple pairs of "equally" rated players many times (ideally (though impossibly) an infinite amount of times), you would expect the win/loss distribtion to ap
  16. Just as a small follow-up. I was just playing a Fortress Italy battle as Italians. With a smile on my face and no expectation of success I was advancing 5 Renault R35s (with 37mm guns) cautiously towards the US troops I knew were waiting. To my surprise, they started spraying canister at anything that popped it's head up. I have more respect for R35s now ๐Ÿ˜‰. Sadly they don't carry many canister rounds though...
  17. redoubtable efficiency of the 2 inch mortar special dedication @lucky_Strike hedgerow hell !! in some meters the Germans will open fire point blank and turn these men into heroes
  18. Thanks for your empathy and your welcome
  19. Hey Umlaut. I noticed you previously had "Umlauts Snowy US Various" which included the Chaffee. They seem a little different. Is one the "desired/best version"?
  20. Ok... Generally I didn't d/l H2H scenarios as I don't have time to play em vs human (as much as I would like to). I only played CM1 H2H cos the AI was much less sophisticated than CM2, but CM1 was also a lot easier and faster to play.
  21. I feel your pain ๐Ÿ˜”. Hopefully a 37mm afficionado will come along and comment. On a more positive note, welcome to the forums.
  22. Nice (and extensive variety of) mods! Unfortunately, the none of the uniforms (or faces) will work with the new models for CMSF2. Helmets should, as well as the vehicles for that matter.
  23. Poor quality German troops caught up in Market Garden buzz-saw. They were flanked by Brit Para Recce forces in Vickers mounted jeeps. But most of this damage was done by the trusty 2inch mortars.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...