Bannon DC

I would not object. It is "gamey"... no way around that. But I'm not for making rules. If someone comes up with an unusual tactic... good for them. If my opponent asked that this tactic NOT be used, I would agree to that.

:eek: Where is Wicky when you need him? Just buy another copy of CM -- Battlefront is kind of a "garage" company. They are not a big huge corporation (not that I support pirating big huge corporations). Buy the product so they can continue to stay in business and make more good games... and feed their families while they are at it.

I strongly suggest posting them to the Proving Grounds first. Even if you think they are ready to rock, you may be surprised at the results of playtesting. The guys at TPG will give you some good input. Please be patient, you may not get feedback right away. And, as they say -- one hand washes the other. If you want people to playtest yours, it is appreciated if you playtest other people's as well. See you around! Bannon

Guys, I hope you can provide some details. In static operations, there is a toggle for "Attacker Casualty Point Factor." This is not discussed in the manual. I understand this is a way to balance the final score. Can you please explain how it works? I have re-opened an old thread in the "Scenario Discussion" forum, but no one seems to have a answer. Link: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=002637 I have an op which needs point balancing. I need to favor the defender. Which way should I toggle (down toward 10% or up toward 1000%)? Any addition info you can provide on the mechanics/calculations or this tool would be helpful. thanks

Wicky -- My CMBB manual is 262 pages. I think a new member of the community can be forgiven for not having memorized his manual. Given time, certainly he will. His request for help seems to have offended you in some way and you were quick to point that out. In addition, you were more than cautioning him on the evils of piracy -- you were indirectly accusing him of theft. And now you are asking him to thank you for your curt reply? Doesn't that seem a little over the line to you? I guess not. You are under no obligation to reply to his post. Your self-appointed role as piracy police is not welcomed. As helpful as you may think your are, you are quite the opposite. As a member of this forum, you don't speak for me and in fact, you and some others give this forum a bad name with such conduct. Bannon

Gentlemen: In polite discourse, it goes without saying to assume the one you are speaking to is your equal. To say it bluntly, the first rule of conversation is to assume that the person you are speaking to is not a liar unless you are given cause to assume he is a liar. To tell you the truth, I myself am often hesitant to post in this forum for fear of the self-appointed piracy police and the "RTFM" wags. If "RTFM" (Read The Frickin Manual) is your most helpful response, then you should reconsider posting your reply. Exeter -- Welcome to CM. It is better than this. Trust me. To expand on Fredrock's answer, I know of no way to create a partially damaged building. The process for placing a damaged building is similar to bridges. Place "rubble" (I think you need to avoid "high rubble"), view map, go back to editor, and place the building type you want over the rubble. (Same as bridges, I might have the steps out of order -- I have to "re-remember" it every time I do it.). Good luck. BTW -- you can use similar methods for placing some "nasty surprises" (some of which I learned from Fredrock) on your maps... like AT guns in buildings... or even tanks in buildings! Visit the "tips" section at The Proving Grounds if interested. (www.the-proving-grounds.com). Cheers to all, Emily Post

I've updated the Dukla Pass scenario. Note: new link --- Dukla Pass - Slovak Uprising Thanks to playtesters for valuable feedback. Version 1.1 is the latest version. Changed name to "Dukla Pass -- Slovak Uprising" since the action really takes place in Slovakia rather than the Czech Republic. Lots of fun... different from most head-on battles. Came across a very good web site worth checking out: http://www.duklapass.org. Good description of the lead up, battle, and aftermath of the 3-4 month long uprising which occured in the Fall of 1944. ---> EDIT: Looks like this great site has disappeared. ---> EDIT: It's back up again! Same address [ May 09, 2005, 05:58 PM: Message edited by: Bannon DC ]

I'm pulling this thread back in... I have the same question. This thread provided part of an answer but still not a complete answer. So... If I want to favor the Defenders' score... which way should I adjust? The range goes from 10% to 1000%. Come in Battlefront. Do you copy? Over.

I've updated the Dukla Pass scenario. Note: new link --- http://www.the-proving-grounds.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=671 Thanks to playtesters for valuable feedback. Version 1.1 is the latest version. Changed name to "Dukla Pass -- Slovak Uprising" since the action really takes place in Slovakia rather than the Czech Republic. Lots of fun... different from most head-on battles. Came across a very good web site worth checking out: http://www.duklapass.org. Good discription of the lead up, battle, and aftermath of the 3-4 month long uprising which occured in the Fall of 1944.

Count my among the happy non-ATI card users!! Fog!! I had an old 7200 series with only about 32 video RAM. I have a new BFG GeForce/Nvidia with 256 MB on-the-card RAM. Even better than Fog... I can now use TREES! Lovely trees on "extreme" setting... and dense wheat fields, endless fields of wheat... and roofs, buildings with actual roofs on them! I had to turn all that stuff off just to avoid graphics lag. I can now play my own scenarios without scaling the graphics down. Real gun graphics and wire that does not disappear! I love designing larger scenarios... so look out! You may see a few new ones from me. Now... back to the lab!! Muhahahahahah

Wouldn't that be something? A what if post-WWII scenario where things went terribly wrong in the Allies relations. The ultimate match up of Shermans vs T-34s. I'm sure I would have heard about it by now if someone had figured out a way to make it happen. Is it possible with CMBB or CMAK?

I've been playing for years and I have never tried it. How long can you stay in the sewers? If something does "go wrong," do you lose the entire unit, or just take casualties? And how do you know you have been effected by casualties? I imagine you have to check these guys regularly.

This has probably been mentioned before: We need the ability to give troop carrying vehicles a "dismount" order. This way, they after troops actually dismount, they are not sitting around for the better part of a turn and then a portion of the next turn "pausing" to digest new movement orders. The converse is true as well... waiting for new orders once troops load. We need an order something like "load then go." You get it.

Yes... I saw that show. Very good information. It is a wonder why more men in WWI did not mutany. The movement vs. machine gun fire was a good demonstration. I've always wondered why even the most basic tactics were not employed until late in the war. By 1916, they had ample knowledge about advancing against machine gun fire... yet they did it all over again time and time again.

I have noticed -- and others concur -- that there are definately bugs with Air Support. My experience was different from Fredkors' -- in testing scenarios when an airstrike was 100% scheduled for a certain turn, the strike came in much later. Not only that... the airstrike REPEATED later in the game. For example, in one scenario ONE strike was schuduled for turn 10, at 100% certainty. It came in around turn 20... then again at turn 30! Two strikes when only one was in the unit pool. This has happened one more than one occasion with different scenarios.

Oh... and can I have a graphic for barns? Maybe even a few cows in the fields too. Chickens? Nah... what good would that do?

Maybe the ability to control the rate of fire for units. For example, a vet 50mm mortar will go through its entire 30-40 rounds of ammo in about 2 minutes. How about the ability to slow them down -- like order "suppression fire" where it shots at about half its maximum rate? Also, using mortars as an example, does "area fire" have to mean fire at that exact spot? How about within 10-30m... this would help in suppressing a platoon instead of just a single squad. I've grow appreciative of "green" mortar crews of late for this very reason... they aren't on target! -- -- Regarding the often made comment about the AI's use of leading point with it's HQ units -- how about some sort of command or moral bonus for when the HQ leads the way? This is the sort of thing you read about or see in the movies... the Lt. charges out in front and the otherwise "pinned" squads get off their butts and charge out behind him.

I've got a sense of humour, I'll test it if you provide the beer. You could upload 'em to The Proving Grounds, no? </font>

Patton's orders were to shoot the hell out of any likely place an AT gun might be. He regularly chided his tankers for saying they were afraid to run out of ammo. (I wish I had my books handy... but packed away right now). The Sherman generally carries a sizeable ammo load. Fire it off! Don't wait for the AT guns to open up on you... fire at likely spots for 3-5 turns. The American tactic was to use their massive firepower advantage. Remember... a Sherman that dies with all of its ammo is just as dead as a Sherman that dies with almost all of its ammo gone, except the fully loaded Sherman usually dies early in the battle.

Recently?!? I found the thread I think you were refering to. That was from Dec. 2003. You've been at the computer way too long! Here is the thread: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=009236 Unfortunately, they came to no conclusion. I guess it is open to one's imagination.

In operations, between battles, I'm wondering how the computer resolves issues with men in squads that have taken a large number of casualties. For example -- a full infantry squad that has only one or two men left, will not reappear in the next battle. That squad is completely eliminated for the rest of the op. However -- some squads will be replenished between battles. Does anyone know for sure what is happening with casualties between battles? It could be one of three thing: 1) inf squads with one or two men are deemed not-combat ready and are taken off the field. Survivors of these units are taken out of play. Period. 2) inf squads with one or two men are deemed not-combat ready and are taken off the field. The remnents are absorbed into other squads. 3) Some small percentage of casualties are deemed minor casualties and are patched up and go back to their units. I've also noticed that surviving tank crews usually get replenished (not always completely) at the time they re-appear in battes.

Is there an underlying difference between infantry units from the same country? For example, a squad of SS infantry has identical equipment and the same number of men as a Luftwaffe infantry unit. Are these units identical in every way from the perspective of how they will fight in CM? Or is their some underlying variable that makes an SS unit -- or any other unit -- different? Maybe some higher % of going fanatical or something like that? Anyone know?

Jab. Jab, jab, jab! Are you down yet? Good... jab, jab, jab.

pardon duplicate posts