Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by MikeyD

  1. Well, you'll be disposing of more cash with FI because there are multiple modules. If you're only talking basegame purchase that's a harder choice because FB and FI basegame are as different from BN and RT as they are from each other. Add a module to FI and you've got winter but its a different feeling winter than FB. A joke of mine (that I've said before) is to know which one to buy have a friend make your decision for you. If you feel disappointed in his choice that means you always wanted the other one all along.
  2. Another example of real world casualties exceeding CM would be the siege of Poznan, February 1945, which saw seventeen thousand KIA and an uncounted number of wounded over approx a 4 weeks. (I threw together a scenario covering that for Fire and Rubble.) In CM we're witnessing the 'tip of the spear'. We don't see the logistics tail stretching back a dozen miles where basically nobody dies. Its like the NFL. Statistically, a very low percentage of NFL company employees find themselves being tackled. The few NFL employees that we see on TV, though, experience it on a regular basis.
  3. What were the casualty statistics for the Battle of the Bulge? Roughly 200,000 casualties, 1300 tanks lost and 1800 aircraft lost. All over the course of just 5 weeks, give-or-take. How many CM battles would it take to reach 200,000 casualties?
  4. Its been a very long time since I looked but off the top of my head I *think BMP-3M (ERA) lacks smoke dischargers. The real world BMP-3 with ERA blocks can't swim, but I don't think the included that detail.
  5. Surrendered infantry eventually raise a white flag and disappear off the map but I've never seen 22 men surrender/disappear! I've also never seen anyone stick 22 men into reinforcement limbo to keep the scenario from prematurely surrendering. Maybe 5 or 6 but 22 sounds excessive. A third possibility is there were some genuine reinforcements due to show up but never made it for some reason. Maybe it's the J in the picture box and the j in the name, you misread him as a 'J'unior member. I think i did the same thing when i first read the post. 😁
  6. If exit points are awarded there must be an exit zone. That's different from routing off the map. That involves troops going to a designated spot as instructed and being teleported away
  7. Hah, that 2011 thread I spotted a forgotten old post of mine where I suggested we don't have many photos of the round because it was so UGLY. 😁
  8. Getting better draw distance on the terrain is a bit counter-intuitive. Try lowering the 3D texture quality, turning off anitialiasing and turning tree detail to low. The point is to lower the burden on the graphics card. If its struggling terrain draw distance is the first place the game goes to lower processor load. Highest quality graphics setting is important if you play at camera level one looking over the shoulders of the infantr. If you play camera level 3 or above you're missing much of the fine detail, regardless.
  9. Close-in bocage hedgerow maps tend to turn CMBN into a maze game that other titles don't really replicate. It may be the same AI intelligence but in CMBN it has different sorts of problems to figure out. In CMRT if a tank needs to get from point A to point B it simply drives over the hedge. 😋
  10. Normandy hedgerows are impassible to vehicles and need dynamiting to get through. Bulge battle hedgerows (and hedgerows in every other title) are just roadside brush than can be easily driven through. Historical Bulge battle didn't have impassible snow drifts. They didn't get that blizzard snow we see in all the picture books until January when the Germans were already on the run. The deeper the snow in the game the more road types disappear until there's no more roads on the map. Scenario designers rarely use deep snow in scenarios because its a pain to fight through. Troops get exhauste
  11. Back in CMSF1 days I did a 3rd party scenario that involved a hundred or more civilian 'spies' rioting outside a UN compound. Then BFC changed the coding on how spies operated in-game and killed the scenario. I don't know if it was coincidental or if they had deliberately targeted the scenario. Anyway, no civilians in the game and they aren't inclined to put them in either.
  12. Only playing a scenario you like once or twice is like only listening to a song you like once or twice. Or refusing on principle to watch your favorite movie when it pops up on late night TV.
  13. There's no indication of what theater and what gun was involved. Some AP rounds include a burster charge, just enough to break up the round which makes them lethal to anyone close by. If I wasn't lazy I'd look up which rounds would apply. I've been playing more than usual lately (testing and stuff) and my examples of 'death by AP' usually involves the round taking the soldier's head clean off (judging by the intersecting trajectory of the tracer).
  14. CM can be used as a 'tactics tutorial'. If played as a learning aid you'd have a different goal than merely 'having fun'. Steve in that podcast interview said that's what the British MoD is using CM for. To wargame-out certain tactics, to test their combat doctrine, to see the effect of a mix of different weapons systems on the battle outcome. "Whats the best way to approach this situation?" The only way to answer the question is to repeat the process several different ways and see which has the best outcome. Then you can learn something from it. In that same interview Steve also talked o
  15. This is all dependent on the 'size' and type of building. Barns are particularly porous to incoming fire. Cathedral pieces aren't. Large size modular buildings, peppering them with fire will only suppress the enemy. Small size building you're more likely to hit them as they're laying prone. To your advantage you've got 'big bullet' 7.62 rifles. Carbines and smg's firing on buildings don't do much at all (unless someone's standing in front of a window).
  16. The thought of CMFI Brazilian troops performing capoeira on the German enemy is... amusing.
  17. I recall someone quipping waaaaay back in CMBB days that 'amateurs play Tigers versus US-2s while veterans play Italian vs Romanian infantry', or words to that effect. I was watching a recent Youtube video of someone playing CMSF for the first time and promptly he got all of his Abrams KO'd in a night engagement. I suspect he would've had a pleasanter first time play experience maneuvering infantry squads around. I'm still attracted to playing with tanks, especially with monster tanks, but I realize the engagement is liable to be brief, brutal, and one-sided.
  18. I didn't think I had a favorite unit but after reading other answers the one that popped into my head is Shilka AA. CMSF2 Marine module, I think. Even now, when I see it hose-down a target, I have an 'oh WOW' reaction. Especially when its breaking EVERYTHING on the exterior of an Abrams or shooting down a valuable fighter-bomber.
  19. Steve's avatar pict is a screenshot of an early Beta of CMBO.
  20. The important thing is there are new eyeballs falling on the product. You don't need a doctoral dissertation on the CM game engine to tell folks 'Hey, have you seen this cool combat game?' Steve mentioned that traffic has gone up on the Battlefront store site after CMSF2 showed up on the Steam store site.
  21. This topic is why I'm often on the board talking down the notion of maxed out map sizes and maxed out scenario times. The AI functions admirably (1) if the scenario designer is sufficiently adept to make it perform logically, and (2) if the the scenario is within the game's 'sweet spot'. Event the best scenario designer is at sea if he can't anticipate where the opponent is likely to be on a 4km map after 3 hrs 30 minutes of gameplay. You may have noticed the occasional huge scenario show up with the tag 'Play (X) side only'. That means the designer's given up on formulating offensive AI plan
  22. Early on, when triggers were first being designed, there were all sorts of ideas on how to implement them. Steve rejected all suggestions that would have put a 'programming language' burden on the end-user. I don't think they used the term but their concept was 'KISS' (Keep It Simple, Stupid). It would have been easy enough to code-up an AI orders feature that only 20% of users would be able to figure out. I wonder what percentage of users can figure out the AI as it currently stands.
  23. The problem with talking generally about this topic is answers vary widely depending on whose calling in what. Americans calling in artillery in CMBN are very different from Syrians in CMSF2, or Russians in CMRT, or Russians in CMBS, or British in CMFI. Call in times on some equipment is so absurdly long its only useful for preliminary bombardments, other stuff call in can be as short a 2-3 minutes. Some artillery has a wide dispersion pattern, some a tight dispersion pattern (I've seen battleship hvy artillery strike the same crater over and over) It also varies depending on what difficulty
  24. You need to replay scenarios a lot when building & testing. I play it as though I hadn't played it before. It's sorta like self-hypnosis. I start the game and maneuver in a common sense manner as though I didn't know where that hidden AT gun was. If I know where triggers are I ignore that knowledge and follow 'best practices' in deployment and maneuver. For a scenario designer its not about being surprised, its about creating a logical chain of events. So you play thinking 'if I go this way will the scenario play out logically? if I go that way will the scenario play out logically/'
  25. While hunting for venues for scenario battles I looked up the history of Donetsk. Turns out it went by the name 'Stalino' back-in-the-day. No notable 44-45 battles that I know of but the Nazis leveled the city to the ground for spite before retreating.
  • Create New...