Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by aka_tom_w

  1. Hi Pfalz XII I have never had that much difficulty with the Hunt command. I expect that when I "hunt" an AFV to the crest of a hill it will stop and fire when it acquires LOF and LOS to a target. I have been playing under the assumption that if I tell an AVF to target another AFV that it does not have LOS to, that it will load the appropriate AP round (or HE round for soft targets) and swing its turret in the appropriate direction and open fire with that Loaded AP round the second it stops (hopefully) hull down and acquires LOS to the enemy AFV. I have not had any difficult excuting this ta
  2. Hi Doug ok, I understand your position and interpretation BUT... If, in Lorak's example, you as the commander, can see the enemy unit them you can tell unit 01 to target that unit, I guess actually I'm assuming an LOS so the target line turns blue and gives stats related to firepower and exposure, but in this case, if the LOS is broken, I'm pretty sure that you can still tell friendly units to target the enemy unit it can't see and then direct them to move towards the enemy's last known position and I expect through the magic of radio communication that unit 01 that cannot see the ene
  3. hey Lorak how about this this is whole website dedicated to spreading the word about free HTML authoring software: http://datacreek.com/design/editor_soft.html how's that I suspect you can find something GOOD and free to download and start to play with. -tom w
  4. Yes I like eye candy too and I would love to see a secondary explosion where the turret pops or jumps up or the tank explodes again a minute or two after the initial hit, the the associate collateral damage of an HE shell to near by units. Does anyone know how this is Modeled in Panzer Elite? I have a Mac so I have not seen much of the game, but what I saw of it looks like it has plenty of nice graphics and some nice eye candy. Does PE simulate the secondary explosion? If so how and when? For that matter has anyone ever seen any war game model the secondary explosion with the turret popping
  5. If you are interested in this thread you might also consider reading the "Silly Infantry -- bug? " as similiar comments and suggestions are posted there. As well as a good juicy post by Steve regarding this issue(sort of). -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 06-07-2000).]
  6. Hi Thanks again Thanks Steve for the prompt and informative reply and Thanks Charles for getting right on top of that bug. I'm sure we all can't wait to see that patch posted. Hopefully sooner rather than later so we can all start playing the FULL Gold version. Thanks AND yes that's COOL! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 06-07-2000).]
  7. Hi Lorak this is a VERY good example -> movement x=enemy unit O friendly the square is woods. .........:---------------: .........:---------------: ...(O1)->:-----------(X)-: <---(O2) .........:---------------: .........:---------------: nice job but it would be my opinion that you are describing a model of spotting that I thought Steve refered to as relative spotting and I'm sure that relative spotting is not in the game. I have been playing the game (perhaps mistakenly) believing that all my units behaved as though they were in theoretical state of the art (y
  8. Hi Lorak I was asuming that everyone plays with full fog of war on. That could be an issue here. I was figuring that full fog of war is the only way to play. You have a point about tanks cresting hill, yes they can't see the enemy tank but if you can you can tell your tank to target the tank it can't see and it "should" crest the hill with its turret facing in the right direction and the appropriate armour piercing round in the breach, even if it can't see the enemy tank but you can, this we assume is due to excellent radio communications because the concept of "relative spotting" (spotting
  9. Um I'm not sure about that one Lorak... I thought all your units could see EVERYTHING you can see and you can see everything your units can see. That is why there are differnet levels of spotting. If Stuka could identify his target as "a US platoon HQ with 2 of their 4 men already dead (2 casualities)" then they must have been spotted and clearly identified at the highest and most accurate level of info you could have on an enemy unit. That's just my personal interpretation of how spotting works. -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorak: a
  10. Did you "sneak" them toward their target AND give them the order to "Target" the enemey unit while sneaking towards it? Where they Green or Conscripts? just asking? -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stuka: Was the danger posed by the 2 HQ guys not enough to let the squad override my sneak order? Any thoughts? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 06-06-2000).]
  11. Tankersley makes a good point here... In the past I have never had any problem when I target and enemy unit and tell my troops or tanks to advance toward it while targeting it. BUT perhaps there is a need for an additional "move to and Close Assault" command. I think the game should simulate reality and not try to simulate 2D turn based Board game play. BUT I still like it the way it is. Let me expand. The decision was made (as I understand it) to make the game turn based with simulanetous execution of the turn, this is like the pinnacle of 2D board game play, it is NOT Real Time Simu
  12. Hi I've had this problem too, but... The problem has been "worked around" The problem appeared around turn 10 in VoT the turn after the American's got their reinforcements as stated two Shermans could not be issued orders to (very bad english I know) But now the file works fine on a Beige G3 at work Both Computers are macs, I think the file was sent from a PC, the file was large over 250k and it did include a movie file that I watched before I could plot my turn Both are G3's the one at work that ran the file successfuly is a Biege G3 running 8.6 and it "saw" the file as an Adob
  13. I would like to voice my opinion to keep this thread open. To MG's credit they have never used abusive language or flamed, or hurled nay personal insults of any kind. I while I disagree with their position, and research, I would suggest that the thread not be closed as a punitive action to "silence" them. I don't think at this point that is fair or necessary, it is clear that most here (if not all) disagree with them, but that is no reason to close the thread. I commend Steve for leaving it open and, as he suggested, the thread remaining open does serve to highlite their "exposed" posit
  14. Yes BUT.... I have seen this PBEM bug/feature more than a few times and I have never seen the this feature (whatever) do that for 6 turns in a row. Every time it has effected me it has only ever lasted one turn and orders could be given the next turn every time, I've seen it three times. This undocumented PMEM feature, that stops tanks cold seems to be specific to Ami Sherman's in PBEM games between Macs and Pc's. In my experience anyway. -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott Clinton: If it was a PBEM game it could be the bug that BTS sa
  15. In my own experience the VERY first game of VoT I played I was the Ami and used the arty to target the Panther which was sitting Pretty up on hill 209 and Low and behold to both my and my opponent's amazement one shell landed right on the turret and Knocked out the Main Gun and caused one casuality, it was the third turn after the the Panther showed up, see the "stats" below for odds as calculated by Captain Foobar.... see the thread "can Geram 81 MM arty do anything against tanks. -tom w There is a thread here that shows the results of an Ami Arty Attack on the Panther that was teste
  16. Let the forest not echo without me.... WOW All I can say is wow.... This is too much, I must heap the highest Praise on Steve and Charles for their incedible patience with MG. They have shown tolerance beyond what I would consider humanly possible when dealing with individual such as MG. ok now I'm going to RANT! The GAME is GREAT! the new members come here and say things like "This is exactly like the kind of game I've always dreamed of!" and things like that. Yes I too have nit-picked and complained about a few "features" and ommisions here and there, but the game is bein
  17. OK The problem has been "worked around" The problem appeared around turn 10 in VoT the turn after the American's got their reinforcements as stated two Shermans could not be issued orders to (bad english I know) But now the file works fine on a Beige G3 at work Both Computers are macs, I think the file was sent from a PC, the file was large over 250k and it did include a movie file that I watched before I could plot my turn Both are G3's the one at work that ran the file successfuly is a Biege G3 running 8.6 and it "saw" the file as an Adobe Acrobat file type when it c
  18. I must admit I did not look at the file size and that issue never occured to me the game is being played without any additional forces for either side. and the file in question might be the movie file, COG says its not but I'm not sure I plan to take another look at it on a different computer this morning when he sends it to my work computer it has just arrived -tom <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikester: It does sound like it's a potentially larger problem. I still find it hard to believe that just a regular turn plot file (i.e. no mo
  19. Hi CoG thanks for re-running the turn, at this point I'll plot the orders for this turn and wait and see if they come back in the next turn, neither one of them is in any danger so it s not big deal. I have seen this exact problem before in the Beta Demo in CE and it happened twice, once it cleared up by quitting CM and reloading CM and the e-mail PBEM turn, the other time I could not get around it and let it go and the very next turn the tank was available for orders. I think others have experienced this problem, at this point it is a minor inconveince (even thougt "its only a GAME") this
  20. Yup I have two shermans that I can't issue orders to The file size may have jumped because as the american's my reinforcments have just arrived when they first arrived I could issue orders to all four of them, on the next turn after their arrival one of the new Shermans and one of the original shermans were not available to issue orders, neither tank had eitehr been shot at and both are out of enemy LOS and LOF (a little spoiler info or intel there for COG) I suspect the two tanks will be ok in the next turn but for now we are at an empasee as I'm reluctant to move on with two tanks I
  21. "2 more weeks? Dooooooooohhhhhhhhhhh!" !!!!! ROTFL Very creative Mike! nice job! blessed be the speedy delivery of the holy grail of wargaming! now, bring on the GAME! -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikester: Charles, 2 more weeks? Dooooooooohhhhhhhhhhh! Ok, ok, let me help you out. By the power vested in me by the, uhhmm, er, well, the Beer Gods, yes that's it. I do hearby repeal Murphy's law for you and any other law that may stand in the way of BTS bringing CM to my door and the doors of all the rest of the fai
  22. I really like games like Myth II (RTS) and Age of Empires (RTS) and Warcraft (RTS) I'm sorry I have no experience with any of the CC series. I should look into them because I REALLY enjoy the rush of the real time action, and yes it has been pointed out (correctly) the AoE can have up to 100 units (I think) that can keep you VERY busy in a real time sense of taking care of your entire army and production effort all at the same time. I Love CM, I really do but I also really enjoy the thrill of the click fest and would humbly agree with Pak40 when he says... "hmm, Age of empires (100+ units)
  23. Hi I'm good to play PBEM 23- 30 of June so I'll be up for a double blind match early in your vacation if not before -tom <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikester: Bauhaus/Sniperscope, Yeah, unfortunately I think you guys are right. I'm just trying to be an optimist for a change. Damn, I want to start playing this gem. Oh well, good news for me is that my vacation is now scheduled from June 24th through July 4th. As long as the game gets here by then, I'll be sitting pretty! 11 pure days of gaming enjoyment. No work, no school, just pure
  24. what Geneva convention??? I never knew I had to sign some damn convenetion agreement to be "nice" to POW's to play CM! All Kidding aside the way troops surrender and then try to escape is EXTREMELY well modeled! This is an added bonus. I'm a little sorry the game is not Black and white, with respect to WIN or Lose then killing "escapeing" POW's would not matter, to my mind anything that is not a loss or a tie is a VICTORY not matter how marginal or decisive and if a few POWS got wasted trying to escape? oh well I think it is great the way they are disarmed and it is good
  25. is that true? That sort of take the fun out of it... If captured prisoners are worth more than dead bodies KIA I guess we should be more careful with our prisoners. I had no idea they were "worth" more as captured prisoners. But I figure if I'm at the point where I'm capturing prisoners and they are surrendering I have already won the scenario so what difference does it make if I waste them if they try to "escape" ? thanks -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikester: As I recall, live prisoners are worth more to you in the games victo
  • Create New...