aka_tom_w

Yes it was just a test It was a real battle field test (no islands were involved) but it was still battle and a real 30 minute scenario. and yes "There are 1995 points worth of Reg Rifle 44 squads (19 platoons = 57 squads)" so yes I did edit them ALL so they had no AT capability at all only small arms and grenades for the purposes of the test (ont he battlefield) I am very glad someone tried it with the German infantry and won, I thought it was a good example to highlite the specific nature of the issue here, and that is close assaults on HT's by infantry without any AT weapons. The game the way it is now is wonderful and it now as all those wonderful anti gamey tactics things like no more fast jeep recon rear area suicide joy rides and things like that. I really like the new accuracy algorythms. I hav not been reading about any body complaining their main weapon can't hit the broad side of a barn. Instead now there are concerns (by a few) that there is too much first shot accuracy. I like the game fine the way it is and I think a GREAT deal of effort and research and sweat and attention to detail has gone into it and it shows! Great Game. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-19-2001).]

I can't really see anything exploitable in this bug. To successfully "exploit" this issue you would have to KNOW that the infantry you are about to drive thru have no AT capability or heavy MGs at all. (and that there in fact ONLY infantry with grenades and small arms present beyond the immediate infantry that you plan to drive through). You are NOT likely to likely to find those favourable conditions IMHO. I do not think it is very likely that this issue is exploitable in any way. The HT's will still die, in close assault it just takes longer now and its a little more dificult. I would be interested to see one of my opponents try to exploit the "indestructable HT bug" and beat me with only HTs they are still not that hard to kill with plenty of other kinds of weapons. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-19-2001).]

OK Yes I did put the VL in the HARD place to hold BUT I'm really gald to see someone take out all those Half tracks. I tried and instaed of waiting for them in cover I tried to chase them and swarm them and I was very unsuccessful. Mostly because I was an IDIOT German commander I think. I'm thrilled to read about so many dead HT's. Did you think the HT's were too hard to kill or would you conclude that that close assaulting the HTs is fine the way it is? Thanks for testing that scenario Did you think it was a fair test? -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-19-2001).]

Its good the way it is It used to be far too diffucult to get first round hits. There are still plenty of first round misses and the way the game is now is the result of MUCH lobbying (largely on the part of Rexford) to include in the game stats that were dervived from known sources of targeting accuracy. I would say MOST folks playing the game at this point in v1.12 are now fairly comfortable with the way first shot "to hit" accuracy percantages are modeled. I think it is more realistic now than it ever was. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-19-2001).]

I'm hoping someone will attempt to download this scenario and let me know if the download works: http://142.55.231.199/aka_tom/httest2.zip Can you get to that file and download it? If so can you play the germans? There are 1995 points worth of Reg Rifle 44 squads (19 platoons = 57 squads) against 428 points of US M3A1 HT's (8) 2 x Green 3 x Reg 1 x Vet 1 x Crack 1 x Elite So Play the Germans and tell me how you can win this one? I'll bet you can't. those 8 HT's under AI command will advance toward the one and only Major VL Flag and other than button them up and shock them there is VERY little those poor Rifle 44 squads (all 57 of them) can do to pull a victory out of the hat. My appologies to MadMatt.. I said I would stop ranting about this one (oops I guess I was mistaken) BUT when there is no way for 1995 points of Infantry with no AT weapons to take out 428 points of UNSUPPORTED U.S. M3A1 Half Tracks I think there is an issue here that should be looked at. Try it Play either side, Play the U.S. and be an IDIOT commander you still can't lose, even if the Germans swarm the VL Flag the U.S. still can't lose. so 428 to 1995 that's about 4 :1 in points and in my humble opinion there is NO way for the german infantry to play to victory in this one. This is not a 40 x 40 Island It is a Scenario that you play in 30 minutes with one major VL in the middle of the field. Good luck I would be very interested in your results. And again Thanks to Matt for reminding us that this is a Dead issue and that there will be no more patches So Why do I bother? Well I'm just that kind of guy...... -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-19-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-19-2001).]

Hello, I'm sure Matt knows by now I'm not really the confrontational type and I was only trying to suggest that some folks here feel as though something had changed in v1.12 when infantry close assult HT's. We have been all over this issue and so when I said "it's just that some folks here have become "used to" the capability of a squad of guys to be able to take out an HT at 10 m without much difficulty with ONLY small arms and grenades within a minute. It now does not work that way any more." I meant that its "seems" to some here (and myself) that what used to be a routine close assualt operation to take an HT out with a squad of guys is no longer a given within the first minute. So the point was that myself and some others here feel that it looks like there has been a change. I think if we all now KNOW that this is the way HT's work we can plan around it, and work around it.I think this issue is managable and not a "deal breaker" by any means. I would like to humbly suggest that any close assault of any AFV with only small arms and grenades and no AT weapons will have the same effect as the HT. As others here have posted the Hellcats are also not equally hard to take out. I have attempted close assualts in games in "real" combat situations with US infantry (no AT weapons) against both a Tiger and Panther (ok only two expamples and possibly only "isolated" expamples) but in multiple close assault attempts against these two big cats all CA attempts were complete failures.! I would say Be VERY wary of any close assaults with ONLY grenades and small arms on ANY AFV of any nation. I think it is a little different now in v1.12 and I am not really sure is it such a bad thing? Maybe it was all too easy before to CA AFV's without ANY AT weapons. AT weapons like PIAT's 'zooks 'shrecks, and 'fausts are still every bit as effective as they always were and MG's like the .50 cal and the MG 42 still work the same way they always did so I'm not sure this is a REALLY BIG deal. I thank Matt for is response and the statement that this is the final version of CMBO and v1.12 is the final version we will see. Thanks Matt ! -tom w

Ok the issue is not with 'fausts they work fine it's just that some folks here have become "used to" the capability of a squad of guys to be able to take out an HT at 10 m without much difficulty with ONLY small arms and grenades within a minute. It now does not work that way any more. But it now sounds like it is a dead issue I think we can live with it buit I suspect some here will continue to rant about it. -tom w

Just a question..... Is that the "official" last word on the matter of patches and updates to v1.12? -tom w

I would like to concur and agree with that. There have been other concerns posted here about the 'generous" survivabillity of other open top AVFs like the Hellcat against close assaults. Perhaps all open top AVFs should be tested? I would like to guess or propose that this issue is somewhat of a challenge for Charles and Steve and Matt and Dan at BTS as we can see they REALLY want to get on with CM2 and I'm sure Charles was confident that once v1.12 was out the door coding work on CMBO was complete. I am still not sure if they are willing to admit there is a problem here that they will address and patch or if they are trying to tell us it is "fine" the way it is and there will be no patch. I have been reading this thread and following this board trying to figure out if they figure it is fine the way it is OR if there can see a problem here that they will address and patch. Does anyone else know if they have come out firmly and directly on either side of this issue. Perhaps they are still undecided internally and some factions are saying we can live with it, and other factions are suggesting it "should" be fixed but there is really no time left to fix it? Now thats all just random conspiracy based conjecture and speculation on my part, but in lue of any firm "official" statement to the contrary I suggest internal disagreement as to how to deal with this one. I think Charles was hinting earlier in this thread that it was fine the way it is and he has looked at it and is now focusing his attention back to CM2. any other comments suggestions or speculation from the peanut gallery? (I'm also in the peanut gallery BTW ! ) -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-18-2001).]

OK.... Does that mean we are to understand that the v1.12 code stays as is and all is fine? so basically just get as close as you can to that vehicle and roll the virutal cm dice? I would guess this line "Just a quick note here then it's back to CM2. " means there is not going to be any change or update to the v1.12 code? What do you folks think? -tom w

I agree with this. Is it unreasonable to request a quicker way to have the game interface let you know in some graphical user friendly way (flashing bases for example) that one of your units is under fire? I do agree with those that say FOW should not exactly tell you where the fire is coming from. Thats fine, just let me know right away which of my units is being fired upon. -tom w

Fair Enough! You have me smiling now too -tom w

oops Flood control nailed me so I tried to post twice. Doh! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-16-2001).]

NOW thats mulitasking at its VERY finest! I bet you just wish you had two or MORE fast computers to work on.... -tom w

YES it is VERY stable on my Mac. I'm running Mac OS 9.1 and CMBO v1.12 and it is ROCK solid stable. It does not crash and that is really a BIG compliment to the programmer Charles. It is a joy to buy software that is so well maintained and updated and so solid and stable that you don't have to deal with the frustration of loosing everything when it crashes. Ocasionally a TCP/IP connection is lost, but that is not the fault of the program, and even then the Delightful AUTOSAVE feature will bring you right back to where you were when the connection was dropped. This software is coded EXTREMELY well because it does not crash. Since v1.12 was released I have been playing the snot out this game and I have not had one crash yet! Thanks and KUDO's!! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-16-2001).]

OK Now we are getting somewhere. I think that is a good real life test. BUT I would like to add that if it was a half track, any grenade that rolled under the engine compartment that "should" immobolize it. And yes in CM grenades can immobolize HT's. I still feel that the HT is "a little" too resistant to the close assualt and too resistant to grenades. If the HT is Shocked and is not firing back then 8-10 infantry soldiers with grenades and small arms close assulting at less than 10 meters "should" be able to at least immobilize the thing within a minute 80- 95% of the time and I would say there should be a 90% chance of knocking it out within 2 minutes. So again 8-10 guys with only grenandes and small arms close assaulting an HT that is not shooting back (shocked or buttoned) within 10 meters should have about a 90% chance to KO that HT within 2 minutes. Maybe I'm wrong here, in some of my assumptions but in my tests, many more than 8-10 guys have swarmed US HTs and at less than 10 meters and those targeted HT's have lived longer than 2-3 minutes, although I admit in my tests of US HTs against overwheling odds (all grenades and small arms) they WILL all die at some point but it usually takes longer than 3 minutes.( all HT finally got KO'd under this swarming activity in 4-5 minutes of constant close assualt.) MaddMAtt and Kwazy Dog have been sent these files. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-16-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-16-2001).]

Hi Matt GREAT thanks for the prompt update! I just sent you two files that illustrate the nature of this issue quite well. (I think) I hope you will check your e-mail and run those files. Good luck -tom w

Hi Steve Thanks for your latest post. I have sent two files to both Dan and Matt. I have found HT's hard to kill with grenades and close assualts without any anti tank weapons. Others have commented here that the HTs will die and succumb to the grenades it just takes many many attempts. Perhaps this is realistic and the way it is intended to be? For all the others here I have sent two test files to both Dan and Matt that are played as the US with M3A1 Ht's against LOTS of german rifle squads (about 10 plattoons) without any 'fausts or 'shrecks or any vehciles or tanks of any kind. I have sent files that show LOTS (like 10 -15) grenades being tossed at the US HT's without result. Maybe this is realistic? Maybe it is intended? We'll see -tom w P.S. In all honesty the HT's WILL die it just "seems" to take alot longer with grenades and rifles, if they say its fine the way it is and there is NO bug or "undocumented feature" I can live with it, it just means all those guys throwing grenades have REALLY lousy aim, nothing more really IMHO. [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-15-2001).]

Jeff Says: "They just want a better way of seeing information that is already available. They *could* pause the game every second and go through and check every unit individually, but that is a bit tedious." I think this is the heart of the issue. The info is there on the screen but you have to look at every individual unit during the movie play back to see who was fired on. Some of us really enjoy the timer on the TCP/IP function and like to set is a very low setting for speed play to make the game feel like an RTS to get the adrenaline flowing. With that in mind I would like to have ALL the info I can get as fast as possible including who is taking fire and what is the effect of that fire, "Are my men dying?" "Can I see where it is coming from?" As the Player of the game do I REALLY need to get down on the ground and "poll" every unit to see if that is the unit that was being shot at? (at this point I do, and Germanboy thinks thats OK and thats the way it should be, as you can see some folks here disagree) I like the idea of some how alerting the player (ME) that a specific unit is under fire. OK, maybe flashing the unit base is not the prettiest way to do this, I would be happy to settle for a warning label like the Shift G for routed and Broken units. How about shift F for "unit under fire" ? (is F taken?) I'm sure that can find a modifier key that is not "busy" for a warning label for "unit under fire". OK here's another really crazy idea, (Hair brain scheme perhaps?) AFTER the movie stops you can show firing lines and see the yellow line the indicated that unit is targeted. CRAZY Idea here, how about the OPTION (no one is forced to play this way) the option, to show those yellow targeting lines during the movie playback. I understand that this proposed option would have to be enabled and turned on before the turn was crunched and the movie was rendered as that lines likely could not be "rendered" and turned on and off on the fly during the play back, but would be nice to toggle on the yellow targeting lines to be seen during the movie? (This, in all actuality, may really be techincally infeasible, and or impossible but its just an idea). -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-15-2001).]

I agree with this one all the way I have also been frustrated during the game trying to find out where the fire is coming from and who is receiving it. There is no good way that I know of (while wathcing the movie) to determine who is being fired at, and it is not unreasonable to suggest that as the player of the game (or commander of the forces) we could somehow "option on" some form of flashing bases or alert message to let us know which units are under fire. I REALLY like the flashing bases idea (does any one actually play the game with the bases OFF?) Great Idea, maybe it can make it into CM2! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-15-2001).]

bump same as the titanium HT thread but this one was first -tom w

Hi John It is my understanding that this issue is more closely related to the effectiveness of hand grenades and the close infantry assualt of the HT than its omnipotence to .50 cal MG's I say this because in my experience in a scenario I tested in v1.12 playing the the 251 HTs against the U.S. .50 cal bearing HTs the U.S. HT's KO'd all the german HT's with in 2-3 turns, with only one or two U.S HT losses from MG fire from the German HTs. So John I would predict that German HT that is under .50 cal fire "should" give it up within the next turn or two at the most. I'm not sure that the German HT's are any more impervious to .50 cal fire than they every were, but there seems to be some good evidence that U.S. HT's are now much more difficult to take out in a close assualt when your units don't have any fausts or 'shrecks handy, in other words rifles and grenades arn't getting the job done the way they used to. IMHO -tom w

That would be news to me? Do you have a reference or the thread it was posted in? Are you refering to something some one reported in v1.12? I'm curious now Thanks -tom w

Yeah, BUT.... you have to fire the Damn tungsten FIRST before the result of the hit gets modified by the slope of the armour it is striking. no? OR are you suggesting that the Tac AI for my Hellcat has "figured out" that firing tungsten against the sloped armour of the KT will be as ineffective as the reg AP so it doesn't "bother" to load the tungsten? I'm not talking about penetration, I have NO problem with reg AP rounds bounceing off the KT at 800 m. Thats great. but why didn't it fire even one tungsten round, if that bounced off or broke up that would be fine too, BUT to not even bother to "try" the tungsten was disappointing. -tom w

Now I hate to be alarmist about these things and this was only one incident... BUT.... I jsut played a QB and picked M18's (4) and greyhounds (4) in a 2000 point ME with the AI I was the yanks and the AI chose a KingTiger and some half tracks and a Puma for the germans OK .... I have 4 Hellcats so I'm thinking this should not be so hard BUT my Hellcats all had Tungsten rounds but REFUSED to fire them. From about 800 m One hellcat (hulldown) duked it out with the KT for about 2 tense minutes before getting a lucky Gun Hit on the monster. The KT (hull down on an elevated hill) had already toasted two hellcats and 2 greyhounds. So this one Hellcat is dualing head on at 800 m and it keeps firing round after round of AP and the damn thing is hoarding 5 (FIVE!) rounds of "t"! ANd the AP is bouncing off and/or breaking up! Finally since the KT was busy engaing other targets the Hellcat at about 800 m using reg AP finally (after the gun hit) gets a front turret penetration at weak spot K-KILL! and finally puts the damn thing out of my misery! SO anyone else? Why no tungsten use in this case? It was a Reg Hellcat and it had POSITIVELY Identified the monster as a KT? Curious? but not really alarmed just ticked it was not firing "t" after the first AP round bounced off. Any other comments? -tom w P.S. Long range and short range accuracy is NOW much improved there are IMHO ALOT more first shot hits at all ranges than before. I think this is more accurate more realistic and a GOOD thing in general BTW. [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-14-2001).]