hoolaman

What I particularly like in 1.08 is the tendency for suppression to induce your guys to duck down and take cover under fire. I think it is producing better results based against morale/motivation.

What I particularly like in 1.08 is the tendency for suppression to induce your guys to duck down and take cover under fire. I think it is producing better results based against morale/motivation.

What I particularly like in 1.08 is the tendency for suppression to induce your guys to duck down and take cover under fire. I think it is producing better results based against morale/motivation.

I think 1940 would have been a great first ww2 game. It's not so played out as D-Day, and plenty of the type of people that buy wargames would be interested. In many ways it meets BFC's stated goals to make more limited but more engaging games, or the depth over breadth approach. We have a complete campaign that is both geographically and chronologically short. For this reason there are relatively limited vehicle types, low tech, a strong infantry and small arms focus. You can start Germans vs French then add Brits and/or Belgians as beefy and worth-buying modules. You get the French terrain sorted out but you don't need bocage and any Normandy specific stuff. So yes it would be nice but I don't think it's going to happen any time in the forseeable future.

Well yeah. Proves you were such an utter shower in life that you couldn't even find a forked stick. </font>

It would be nice if there was a manual or automatic way to get guys in craters/foxholes/crestlines to seek LOF on a certain point. I know that is easier said than done. One trick I have found to get prone guys up on a knee, is to plot a move order (other than SLOW) to the same position they are in. This will make them stand up but not move much. The different move orders give your guys different dispositions. Still if they are shot at they will go prone. Its better err on the side of them taking cover, at least they stay alive that way.

I don't really care if the CMSF soldiers are like a clone army, never communicating with each other, milling about randomly. This is a game, and the animations are more than good enough for me to believe what I see. Although I hesitate to raise the tired old comparison, they are an improvement on CMBO IMO, while still requiring a bit of imagination. What I do take from c3k's post is that even with generic animations, you need pathing that gets your guys from A to B in a realistic manner, and you need a capacity for your guys to deploy against a target and make use of terrain cover in a realistic or at least believable way. If these two things don't happen you get dead guys and a poor result in your simulation. These are obviously very subtle behaviours and will continue to be tweaked I am sure, just as they have been all along the way, and I know any constructive reports of things that look weird should be encouraged.

Hi Ken, I know the exact spot on that map that you are referring to, and I have seen some funny things going on there before, with the rooftops being at the exact height of the road, it's an unusual terrain setup. Can you send the save to the email in my profile if you don't mind, I'm curious to see exactly what you are talking about.

That's one nice screenshot papertiger.

If a unit pops up on the roof, can you fire at it?

That's a great shot! Capra-esque! </font>

I just spotted the tracks of a rare and elusive creature...

1. No way except to judge it visually. 2. I find a manual TARGET command is the best way to ensure this happens. Left to their own devices the TacAI doesn't seem to fire (and waste) as many heavy weapons. 3. The TARGET is the LOS tool. This is by design as it has (mostly) the same funtionality. I don't think I miss the old LOS function. 4. ALT-I to turn off icons. As stated above that's about all you can turn off, but you can crop the rest out. 5. This game is pushing a lot of data, some save games are 17meg so it's possible your bandwidth is getting pushed to its limit. But I don't really know what your problem is.

Yes, it is squad based, the smallest unit being a team like a sniper of machine gun 3 man team or a split squad. You plot target and movement orders for a whole squad. The game AI controls how the individuals get from a to b (what we refer to as TAC-AI). It can be played in real-time, but due to its realistic scale and plenty of things happening in different places, only smallish missions really work this way. For bigger missions, you can play WEGO as mentioned above, which is kind of like an enforced pause ever minute, but during the minute neither player can make moves, and at the end that one minute playback can be watched over again and again so you can zoom in on the cool explosions and RPGs flying across your bow. In wargaming jargon WEGO was in contrast to IGO-UGO turns where players would make moves in turn like chess or panzer general or that sort of thing.

My point above was that the swords-waving myth and the SS grandpa stories are actually based on a real event. So "it" did happen, only the retelling of the story took a LOT of poetic license.

The forum is not restricted to members with tours in Iraq, but you are right that such political discussion is out of place here. In conclusion, Tuomio, you are right, an army should ideally not be set up as a police force, but it has always been a blurry line in occupied countries. You either send police ill-equipped for combat, or soldiers ill-equipped for enforcement of civilian laws.

No, it wouldn't. It never happened. </font>

Yes this seems to be a bug. Infantry is unable to mount up with vehicles in a different zone, but only from the setup turn. This is only very likely to happen in the training mission because virtually every scenario designer will put a mounted formation in one zone with its vehicles. Try playing the training scenario in real time mode, as soon as the scenario starts you can reissue the orders.

Definitely there. An enemy infantry unit will often surrender when outnumbered, surrounded and isolated, with low morale. The trick is that often your troops will wipe out the enemy in that situation. He will raise his hands and come under your control. You can send him to your rear area, but he needs to be near a unit of yours or he will revert to an enemy status and not count for capture points. He is also disarmed, so if he goes back to enemy status the worst that will happen is he will be found crouching in some bushes at the end of the battle.

Yeah I think sometimes crappy Syrians are given an advantage because they technically have heavier calibre small arms, but instead of being too overwhelmed and suppressed to fire them, they are able to blast away and gain an unfair advantage through building penetration etc. It's always more likely that poorly trained and motivated troops will not stand their ground but run away or surrender. I guess this sort of thing will be tweaked along the way. I would like to see a surrender implemented, but I'm pretty sure this has already been knocked on the head.

Yeah I think sometimes crappy Syrians are given an advantage because they technically have heavier calibre small arms, but instead of being too overwhelmed and suppressed to fire them, they are able to blast away and gain an unfair advantage through building penetration etc. It's always more likely that poorly trained and motivated troops will not stand their ground but run away or surrender. I guess this sort of thing will be tweaked along the way. I would like to see a surrender implemented, but I'm pretty sure this has already been knocked on the head.

Yeah I think sometimes crappy Syrians are given an advantage because they technically have heavier calibre small arms, but instead of being too overwhelmed and suppressed to fire them, they are able to blast away and gain an unfair advantage through building penetration etc. It's always more likely that poorly trained and motivated troops will not stand their ground but run away or surrender. I guess this sort of thing will be tweaked along the way. I would like to see a surrender implemented, but I'm pretty sure this has already been knocked on the head.

I think your assessment is pretty much right Adam, I am sure from what I have seen and what BFC has stated that every shot is tracked, and any 3d object that gets in the way is counted as a hit. I think the hits that don't kill are either stopped by body-armour, or statistically (dice-roll) counted as hitting some abstracted small dip or mound of cover that can't be shown graphically. Remember even perfectly flat terrain is given some cover (no such thing as perfectly flat IRL) and this seems like the way its done.

Hiding troops should in general not open fire at all, this is more or less a "keep down and hold your fire" command, but they will return fire to preserve their lives if enemy units start getting close or they take a lot of fire. I can't say for I've ever noticed that hide provides a bonus to concealment, but I assume it does within the bounds of the terrain they are in. A hide unit with a cover arc should break hide and fire upon whatever strays into the arc, the prerequisite obviously being that your unit spots the enemy. It's easy to manually break hide in RT, WEGO ambushes can be slightly imperfect if the unit hiding hugs the dirt they sometimes can't spot over obstacles and you can't unhide them until the start of the next turn. In my experience it's better to be unhidden if you want an ambush to go off well in WEGO. What you lose in cover and concealment you gain by having all your guys ready to open up instead of eating dirt. As others have said a cover armour arc would be handy to ambush armour instead of opening up and giving away your position for whatever 3 man scout team wanders into the arc.

All I could suggest would be to remember that any town or city exists because it is (or was) at some sort of trade crossroads or has a watercourse running through it. In any city that spans a river there will be several crossing points and roughly equal numbers of building on both sides. In any town on a major road or highway, often the centre of town will straddle that. Also remember there will often be an "old city" maybe a modern CBD and more sparse suburbs built around, and further out there is going to be farming or smaller villages, just think where the nucleus of a city is built, usually on the riverbank or the more favourable land, then build out in circles like people do for real.