Other Means

If the Russians joined as Blue...and we could make Blue on Blue scenarios..? Anyway, I'd prefer to stick to the road rather than divert, simply because it'll take less development time and we can get to WWII.

Hey! Good news.

Personally, I'd like to see announcements here as I never go there and like to know what's available to play. Also, designers put a lot of hard work into scenarios - let them get some recognition.

More importantly, will it be able to pop a wheelie?

The main thing about snipers is the fact that they can't be seen. Use them as recon assets and hold their fire for special units. On attack, have them 200m in front of your men, I use 4 evenly spaced. Make sure you get down the flanks. Move them up to sound contacts to try and resolve them. If you find the enemies armour, get your armour into a position to engage them and get a sniper in between them, so you can pop his TC's when they appear. On the defence I tend to use 4 as well, move up to where you can see the main body of his men then you can position your reserves accordingly. Try and get around to find his main support weapons, IG's or especially spotters. Don't forget, if you find his spotters you can drop some of your arty on them to break them then pick them off with your sniper. So - don't think of them as killers think of them as your eyes and ears. Use them to give you an advantage in armoured combat & break up the enemies support weapons. You can get within 40m of the enemy if you're careful. Hold you fire & hide and they will go right past.

Dorosh is an ass. But he is kinda /our/ ass. Like the dog that can no longer hold its bowels or the toothless cat that sits and dribbles in your lap, putting its claws in places you wish it wouldn't; he's an utter pain but somehow comforting, if only as a reminder that you shouldn't invest so much of yourself in an online presence. So I'd be OK with him coming back, but I'd understand if he couldn't. Steve had given him more than enough rope and he's turned himself into one of those weird Japanese fetishes that look so much hard work before hanging himself. You know the ones.

The quotes at the end of this are quite good. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=59885_4207

Could you explain what you mean by "refreshing"? Do you mean the low quality map shows then paints on windows on buildings, bushes etc?

That's exactly it though Steve, any "hunch" should be handled by the ? icon and therefore allow targeting - or less of a delay in getting support fire, and any supporting fire must be asked for in advance or have a line of communication between the advancing units that are in contact and the supporting units that are not. If the supporting unit then gets a ? in an area where fire is originating it takes care of modelling their SA to the extent they'd be willing to fire. So you have to plan for supporting fire rather than use your God-like position as player to be able to know exactly where to support, which I feel would add a lot of realism to the game, especially when we move to WWII.

This is the 2 main posts I did on it conflated into 1, hope no-one minds the cross-post: Suggestion: Area fire should have a delay and weight dependent on tactical situation + C&C (up to a maximum value). Issue to be addressed: The players ability to support with fire anywhere, given their “God like” ability to be everywhere on the battlefield. Associated issues: </font> Lack of player feedback causing an involved area fire process stemming from the unit spotting system.</font>Command delays in movement orders.</font> I’d like to discuss these separately to not diffuse this discussion. Improvement in game-play change would bring </font>The C&C framework would assume proper, realistic importance.</font>The level of planning the player would have to make to play the game well would increase.</font>The tactical decisions would mirror those made by a commander in the field in sighting overwatch, ensuring C&C etc.</font>Ambushes, hit and run tactics, fighting withdrawals, etc would all be more useful as less instant firepower could be brought against them.</font>Unrealistic “lone sniper” recce where the sniper is out of C&C would become less useful.</font>I feel all these add to the tactical depth of CM - and that’s what I’m playing the game for. Description I believe we play CM at 3 distinct levels: </font> Squad leader - we tell each squad where to go</font>Company commander – we form the plan that the units conform to</font>God – we can see everywhere and have access to all info our units have and can give instantaneous orders to them</font> The player sees all and knows all, so can act as God. So I think it might be an idea to start limiting his powers. One of the innovations that CM1 brought us was command delays. I really liked these as I think they illustrated the command net and brought a level of planning to CM. I’d like to see them re-introduced but I won’t argue that here. What I would like through is similar delays when ordering area fire. In the situation above, the unit with the thick red line has LOS to the enemy unit, but the MG on the right has no knowledge of it. How would it know to fire on it? In the game he can fire straight away, so what does this do to our tactics? </font>We can advance a squad anywhere out of C&C and not suffer penalties to the way they integrate with the rest of the company.</font>We can leave support weapons anywhere and rely on them being able to instantaneously support an advance.</font> Our tactics are changed because we suffer no penalties for unrealistic play. Proposed solution Model the command net in the calling of area fire, the main way the player acts as the central nexus of information. Give area fire a delay and weighting attached to it dependant on the firing units perception of the enemy positions, either via the C&C network or self spotting (all figures etc TBD): </font> If the unit can see the enemy - no delay, maximum fire density</font>If the unit has a sound contact - minimal delay, 90% fire density</font>If the unit has a tentative contact - medium delay, 70% fire density</font>If the unit has no sight of the enemy, the shortest communications delay between any unit that can, via CoC, OR some upper limit (more for WWII), to simulate ad-hoc contact, 40% fire density</font>If there is no enemy unit visible to any unit, maximum delay and light “recon by fire” 20% fire density</font> I'm going to illustrate what I mean with a few examples. Take this situation I got myself into (purely for demonstration purposes of course). I ran a Stryker plus squad into a copse of trees, the Stryker came under fire and the squad was basically hung out to dry. But doing stupid things like that *should* have a penalty: But around this I had support units attached to the same company that could see - or get through C2 - that there were enemies to be fired on: Therefore under the system I'm proposing - "If the unit has a sound contact - minimal delay, 90% fire density". This definition should be expanded to include C2 delay (an omission on my part) Therefore they could area support fire with a slight delay. The player could select each one and give it an area fire order, which would have a countdown above it saying "15 seconds to area fire" or some such. So after the delay the organic support would start to support with fire. However, at an even greater remove from the action I have M1's in overwatch: These under the proposed system would be "If the unit has no sight of the enemy, the shortest communications delay between any unit that can, via CoC, OR some upper limit (more for WWII), to simulate ad-hoc contact, 40% fire density" Therefore the supporting fire from the M1's would take a significant delay in being brought to bear on the enemy. The player would select each M1 and give it an area fire command, but as the M1 has no *direct* perception there was an enemy there the call for area fire would have to go through the C2 link "They've got out guys under fire, hit the western area of the woods". Which would mean the M1's would support after the C2 delay, and with less ferocity, as they are less convinced by the info (if there is any "ferocity" difference due to this is up for debate of course - I just think if you've been told to hit an area and you're not sure where it is or what's there, you're less likely to hit it with everything you've got). So in this little area of the battle, the player can be everywhere at once, but cannot *act* everywhere at once, so he receives a punishment for poor tactics. In this actual battle, what did I do? I brought the M1's HE into effect like the hammer of Thor and blew the enemy into mist. What should have happened, and what I feel this mechanic may bring into effect, is that the platoon gets badly shot up before the area fire can make things better for them. I feel as a play mechanic this would bring a level of planning, tension & reality to the simulation that would have war-gamers (that strange lot) a lot of enjoyment, as you introduce a "strategic" C2 element into play and reward proper, realistic tactics. I know that there may be an impression that gamers hate having anything "taken" from them, but I think the holy grail for wargamers is reality, and I think this introduces a little more reality to the sim. IMHO of course

Yep. I made a massive suggestion about this in skunkworks ages ago - I think it needs to be delayed via the CoC (including ad-hoc "within shouting range") or via the units own perception. IOW, if the unit giving fire has a question mark icon, the delay should be reduced etc. I feel it would model the command net and actually find a use for it. Currently it means very little. It's also predicated on command lines being re-introduced, as you need to see the command net in order to use it. What I think it would bring to the game is that element of forward planning and tactical "within command" decisions you would have to make. Fighting withdrawls would be possible, the sighting or support weapons and maintaining of communications would all become more important. Issues like going for a flanking manoeuvre would be more important, as the flanking units might then be out of comms and so isolated from support - real decision that need to be made in the real world, especially for WWII.

Here's a clue, they served at Bastogne.

He's one of our bravest *salutes while weeping openly*. God bless you squirrel. Wasn't he the same that Hassel wrote about, but his just used his paws?

Are you sure it's not jam?

Meach - I always enjoyed your posts. I've seen people banned for the same language, usually with no warning, so I know it's not victimisation. So please give it a couple of weeks and send the email fella. No-one is asking for more than that. {edit} Sorry, just read Steve's post re multiple accounts, not sure if this is still valid. [ April 15, 2008, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: Other Means ]

I played and earlier version of Hammertime so I might try that. Any other suggestions anyone?

I enjoy it too - has a big effect on tactics.

All the whizz bangs, armour, Strykers etc and some nice MOUT fighting. I also want a fair fight vs the AI - no more walk-overs. Recommendations anyone? Cheers.

"OK men, we're going to take the easier South route." "Pff. Bound to be mined Leftenant."

TBH, I don't see the big deal with water. Sure, I'd like it in one day but I must have played less than 10 CM1 games where it has had an effect on tactics, out of hundreds played. I'd prefer, say, a rough tile AFV's can't traverse, as that kind of thing channels one part of the CA arm while it doesn't do another, leading to more interesting tactical decisions. There's a ton of stuff I'd prefer in first.

No, I don't still get it is my point. I'll post all my settings when I get home.

Sorry Ken, no idea. When I get home I'll post all my settings. I'm running XP though so I don't know if our experiences are comparable.

I'm pretty sure it was something Steve mentioned was on the list, but you'd have to search through an awful lot of posts to find it. </font>

I'm pretty sure it was something Steve mentioned was on the list, but you'd have to search through an awful lot of posts to find it. </font>

I've seen it before and raised a bug rep, which was addressed for 1.08. I have the same card as c3k. c3k - is it fixed for you?