aka_tom_w

WOW I can't believe I MISSED that whole "fire fight" last night while I slept.... Where did all that arty barage come from? Oh I see Laval Quebec... I feel like I have to read this board 24/7 so I don't miss anything... There is ALOT more threads and issues here now than there was just 3-4 months ago! -tom w

I have always been from the "camp" that is requesting more FOW and less information and no roster. I'm glad Colin brought this up. Its a good point. "What can my guys really actually "know" about the enemy units they encounter?" I think this issue is related to the question of whether an enemy unit's experience level can be known (i.e. Veteran Green Crack whatever). Some of us here would like MORE Fog of War and some here want things like Rosters and more unit info and more micromanagement ability. I have been on record here as stated the Map should NOT be able to be viewed in as much detail and totallity as is now afforded each player. Anyway this thread should stay focused on what kinds of things you can figure out about enemy units and knowing that this one unit is calling in a 105 arty barage is WAY too much info. If he is a lone man and he has binoc's maybe he could be a Sharp Shooter? maybe a commander? But that detailed info about how this one man can call in 105 arty is just too much. I think. BUT... This is still the VERY best wargame I have ever played. The design, AI, Game play and Fun Factor, (and replayability) are all WAY high! Thanks BTS. There is plenty of whinning and bitching in this forum but it is still THE BEST game out there! (and you can play the SAME CD on both the MAC and PC) -tom w

cool who has seen it yet? thanks for the huge effort -tom w

I'm not sure at all (I just don't know) if that .50 cal MG is realistically modeled or if it is modeled in CM as too destructive. But I know on thing for sure, it is VERY good bang for the buck when it comes to buying weapons, HT's and Jeeps with one of these weapons mounted on them can be VERY deadly indeed and I like to have a .50 cal crew located on wooded hills and in the second floor of buildings. Maybe it kills things too fast I'm not sure, but I know it is a very effective at taking out lightly skinned vehicles from a surprising distance. Is it too deadly? I have no way of knowing that for sure? -tom w

Its seems that in v1.03 crews in buildings or used in defensive positions can be "somewhat" effective, I think most here that have tried to use crews (and I would say most here have at least tried this against the AI) have found that AFV crews do not attack very well and they can't see the enemy to target it very well as they have their spotting ability reduced to about 25-50 meters I think. My opinion is gamey or not do what you have to to win, but with that said...I think BTS has programmed the crews VERY effectively in v1.03 and you can use them to try to attack with but mostly you will just get them killed and then you will have an opportunity to "learn the hardway" how to NOT use bailed crews for anything other than guarding prisioners which they seem to do quite well. Just my opinion... -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-09-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-09-2000).]

I believe Rattus is correct. they are like reinforcements and there is no local air superiority. -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rattus: I think that air support is treated like reinforcements - there is X% chance per turn (non-cumulative) of it turning up. Sometimes your lucky & it turns up early - sometimes late or never. I don't think there is any modelling of local air superiority - but there may be different % chance of axis & allied air suppot arriving. (Happy to be corrected here. )I have just had nearly all my armour wacked by Jabos... - pesky buggers turned up about 3/4 way through game & never left! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oldgamer: There funny run there guys. <g> To those who keep saying "go play, stop all this chatter" - I don't read this list at home, only when I'm at work. And while I'm bold enough to spend time dinking here during working hours, I can't actually load the game here, so this is my substitute. : (<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Fair enough... I write notes on here at work too and also I do not dare load the game (well maybe during lunch). So we play here -tom w

WOW Great work v1.03 Cost by Experience level would be REALLY great! Thanks Jeff That is a HUGE effort and I think it will really add to our collective enjoyment of the game. -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Anyone interested in downloading my unit charts can now do so by going to this site: http://home.online.no/~andhess/cm/main.html where Andre has been kind enough to put them up. This is a version 1.0, and there are some bugs. The unit costs are almost all wrong, as they are still from CM1.01, not 1.03. There are some other typos and such, but version 1.01 should hopefully be out soon enough, and that will address all the bugs that have been reported to me, and add some data, like availability and cost by experience level. Jeff Heidman [This message has been edited by Jeff Heidman (edited 08-08-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks Andreas I enjoyed your last post and it was orignal and humourous. I was about to suggest this thread is just getting silly now.... but I think we are beyond that. oh well I suggest (somewhat akin to Andreas) maybe we should all spend more time playing the Damn Game (or designing new scenarios, which you enjoy more) AND spend ALOT less time on this BBS arguing with each other or trivial details which are for the most part) completely beyond our control. It has become quite clear to me that there are some of us here, who would rather rant and flame and spout closely held and firnly believed personal opinions on this BBS then get into a good PBEM slug fest. oh well... Sad but, apparently, true. -tom w

Try this..... Engineer squads are good at close assaulting tanks from behind once the tank is immobolized. Those demo charges can knock out the tracks. The demo charges can KO tanks if they can get close enough. The demo charges can be thrown into buildings. They blow stuff UP! what could be more fun? -tom w

A Thought..... (Perhaps even an ORIGNAL thought...) Perhaps we could all agree here that some people who have played other war games are accustomed to a Roster. I think this is more of an issue than anything else. Those that have played cardboard 2D wargames or those that have become accustomed to Rosters in other Video wargames maybe looking for the same experience and style of play in CM. I have not really played any other wargames other than the RTS variety like Myth II and Age of Empires, so I must admit I do not know Steel Panthers or CC or Panzer General, although many of my friends enjoy these games. I like CM because it is FRESH new and original in its thinking and design. I really like the fact that most of the hard core stats and data are not exactly available at your finger tips and that the game is BEST played by focusing on what exactly is happeing on the actual Battlefield. I really think CM breaks new ground the way the WEGO system and the Full Fog of War gives you LOTS of surprises and makes the simulation of the combat well, foggy and confusing at times. In previous posts I have spoken out requesting MORE fog of war. I suspect that some players who have come to CM and are not accustomed to a Roster don't or won't really miss the roster. (I don't) But those who have enjoyed the advantages of the use of the roster in the past in other wargames are, not surprisingly, looking to have that feature included here. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-08-2000).]

So from what I've read... Steve and Charles put a great deal of thought into the interface and they designed it the way it is for a reason. I'm not sure that it is the most user friendly interface I have ever seen but it works. I have voted no for the roster as I like the way the game plays as it is. Now I know this could be another thread but the interface design on the Scenario editor is unjustifiably and unecessarily clunky and hard to use. I am LOATH to be critical of any aspect of this game at all, (ok, those who know me may recall I was perhaps overly critical of the "problem" with non-flaming AFVs not blocking LOS or LOF, just to be fair, but that too was a design and conscious decision by Steve and Charles) but the map editor in the scenario designer is a really good example of a User interface that could be made much more user friendly. This is hard to say as I know Charles has coded this game and has done AMAZING job to make it all work so well! Thanks a Million times over for this great game! But the user interface in the map designer is not at all user friendly, and need not be so "clunky" except that it was more than likely quicker and easier to code the way it is. It works, thats for sure the user can move around in it and design maps. No problem, but it could be alot mor user friendly like the tools and pallets and drop down menu's in Sim City for instance. I think Maxis DID a GREAT job with the user interface on Sim City or any of their Sim games. In those games instead of a button for EVERY tile you can use they are logically grouped so you can click and get a drop down menu for the tile you want. This is for SURE a GREAT game, but I would say Steve and Charles are not exactly interface design guru's. Before I am unnecessarily flamed here I'm a Mac Tech and I teach in a college Program in New Media Design and we teach Advanced interface design to our students here. But irrespective of that, these are just my personal opinions. -tom w

Hi Thanks Jeff for Sending me that chart. I'm sure it is GREAT but I can't open it. Am I the only one that is having difficulty opening the file. It was zipped so I un-zipped it with the Mac version of Zippit. Its shows up on the desktop as an Excel icon but it locks my computer up when I attempt to open it. I believe I'm using Excel /98 for Mac so that might be a problem. Anyone having any difficulty with Jeff's file? thanks -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: anyone know when it be available? soon or not so soon?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The standard response was "Two Months" but that was a while ago. I think we'll be very lucky if we see it before the end of September. But that is JUST my opinion. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by stone_viper: I have not recived my game yet it is on back order but I was wondering can troops that are riding on a tank take offencive action ie shoot at enamy units<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> No sorry.... It is pressumed that troops riding on tanks are holding on for dear life and cannot engage the enemy, they must be dismounted before they can target the oposing forces. -tom w

oops double post [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-08-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: At some level I can get quite some satisfaction out of being ground to pieces by an opponent, if it is fairly and squarely. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK, ... but what exactly is the definition of "fairly and squarely"? In V1.03 the crews cannot see more than (if I understand this correctly) 25 - 50 m and they are, and always were, "brittle" in combat with an ! to prove it. In the case in question here one player left a Victory flag or location undefended, the other player had reserves left, and late in the game attacked that flag. How can these winning tactics be called "gamey"? The gamey use of crews as targets of opportuntity by adavancing armor is questionable if you are also advancing armor in the hopes that your crews are being used as "bait" so your armor will not be targeted. I guess that's gamey but it is happeing with alarming frequency I understand. Does the AI do it to me. NO it does not. But I think the real problem here lies with the fact that the tac AI for some armour will target advancing crews and overlook legitimate threats like opposing armour. BUT if the crew looks like an Antitank team with an antitank weapon, well then if the tank is buttoned and it cannot tell the difference then rushing that crew and hoping they are mistaken for antitank teams by the Tac AI may be a "questionable" tactic, but it seems to be somewhat effective even if it is labeled gamey? - tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-07-2000).]

Perfect! I agree with this completely! "war is a dirty game with dirty tactics" I agree with that, "Maximum use of available resources" and do what ever it takes to win. I'm not interested in hearing excuses that revolve around players allegeding they lost because their opponent used "gamey" tactics. Forget that! One player found a way to WIN and the other lost, the only thing truly gamey in this war (battles in CM) is actually hacking the code and changing the course of battle in PBEM files and that is (as I understand it) virtually impossible, now that is beyond "gamey" and I would call that cheating, other than that play the damn game and play to win using every trick and tactic it takes. -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Captitalistdoginchina: Victory flags are there for a reason - to gain victory points thus enabling you to win, if you choose to abandon them or to leave them undefended you should suffer the consequences. I have had an opponent use gamey tactics against me quite blatently, but i was not concerned at all because war is a dirty game with dirty tactics, i would play him again anytime. No worries. CDIC <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK Here it is, .. "GAMEY" or not I play to win, I play against the AI a great deal and the AI given the same opportunnity will ALWAYS make the late rush to the victory flag with what ever it has left. My consideration of "gamey" has to do with whether or not I would expect the AI to do the SAME to me. In this case I think the AI would use these reserves to make the rush to win. If I was your opponent I would do the same. Most of the REALLY gamey things in CM have been elimated by the way CM is coded. But I still play CM by the axiom that "ALL's fair in Love and War" and This has NOTHING to do with Love, so I'm one of those players who believe the Geneva convention was just a good Idea to keep some politicians busy for a while and that surrendering and advanceing with a Machine strapped to your back (the Japenese are alleged to have pulled this stunt) so your buddy behind you can open up and fire and kill all your would be captors, when you bend over while you are surrendering, is still a good idea. OK, you all think I sneaky now, fine I still play to win! The word 'gamey" gets alot of play around here. The new v1.03 took care of some gamey issues. I say play the game and play to WIN! No holds barred. If you have reserves and set them up for a late Victory flag charge then good for you, but don't call those tactics which are clearly designed to WIN and take advantage or a weak postion late in the game as gamey! -tom w

WOW! Joined this one a little late. I had no Idea this is/was such a HOT topic or issue. My vote is NO! The game is near perfect the way it is. Others here in the No-Roster Camp have fully and completely spoken and I agree with them I figure you "should" be able to sort of just "know" where all your units are. the Shift C makes them big if you want to find them. Their Dead bodies show up if you look for them. Thats good enough for me. The No-Roster way of doing things that BTS has adpoted is the the way I like the game. My vote is for no roster. But there are strong opinions here on both sides for this one. Nothing needs "fixing" more than the availability of TCP/IP play. That should be the next BIG thing. I can't wait for live action via my opponent (with timer via TCP/IP) Next issue please.... -tom w

I have my doubts that it was an arty smoke round. But if you look at your stats for the top turret armour on that Panther it is very light. I have KO'd that Panther in VoT twice with top hits from arty. But IF the Hatch was open, and if a Smoke round went down the hatch? Well if the gunner had a HE round in his hand and he dropped it? What if? Sounds like a million to one shot to me, but in CM I'm very often surprised how frequently those million to one shots come up. I understand every AFV has a 1% chance of taking a critical hit to a section of the frontal armour that is a weak spot. That means there is ALWAYS a 100 to 1 shot that a little Stuart or something with that Allied 37 cal pea shooter "COULD" KO (shot to the weak spot) somthing BIG and seemingly indestructable. I really like the fact that the 100 to 1 frontal armour, weak spot, "FLUKE" shot is in the game! Keeps it interesting and unpredictable. Your Smoke hit to KO the panther was probably a 100 to 1 shot as well. They happen sometimes. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 08-05-2000).]

This one is fun to play and I don't really think it requires any play testing. I think its ready right off the shelf. My e-mail (but NOT web surfing) will be down for the weekend, I'll be away anyway) But when I get back on monday, I will send this new scenario to anyone who posts here and requestes it. heres the brief: Title: Even Steven Type: Fictional Meeting Scenario (A test of Tatical Skill and Leadership) Date: August 1944 Location: European country side (Wheat fields, Trees, Rivers, small Hamlets and Bridges) Weather: Clear Ground Conditions: Dry Length: 45 turns Points: Each side has over about 1700 points worth of units. This scenario is played on a Map that is 1360 m by 960 m. Both sides have similiar (but not identical terrain) advantages and challenges. There are two small Flags and one large Flag on a centrally located bridge. Both sides have nearly identical forces. There are AFV's and infantry of very similiar quality. It is a meeting engagement and was designed as the ideal PBEM map and battle to be so equally balanced as to be ideally suited to put the tactics and battle skills of two commanders to the test. There are no individual Allied or Axis briefings as all you have to do now is click "Done" and go and take a good look at your starting force and plan out how you will best use the terrain and your forces to take and secure the three victory flags. They are obvious and centrally located and fair for both sides. There are no reinforcements. What you see is what you get, and thats all. I have played both sides against the AI and it plays this scenario VERY well. If you think the AI is too easy, just open this one up in the editor and Set the side you want the AI to play to be the Attacker and then you will really have your hands full. Scenario Designed By Tom Wilcox tcw@mac.com Aug 5/00

I have a Huge Walled City Scenario I can trade you. I'll playtest yours as well. I have no e-mail this weekend. So Maybe by Monday night I'll be back online again. -tom w

not that I know of... I don't think there is any form of illumination. -tom w

The next BIG thing should be the TCP/IP connection. Everything else can wait. I'm looking forword to online TCP/IP head to head action with a turn timer to simulate the real time presure and stress of battle (ok I should have just used the word pretend stress as, there should be some stress to get the turn done in certain time limit agreed to by both parties. -tom w