BDW
-
Posts
294 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BDW
-
-
Yeah, I was just bummed out because I was having fun sneaking those guys forward.
I wonder if something weird happened because my troops were at the same "latitude" as the Germans units, just on either side of the map (me on the left, Germans on the right) wehnt he scenario ended. Maybe the game could not figure out where to redraw the line so it just ended the operation...?
I wish someone had some insight on what the heck happened. I miss the good old days when Steve responded to every post!
-
No, it happened with me getting "Total Victory." But that is strange, considering all of my armor and most halftracks had been wiped out in the first scenario. However, I did have two halftracks and ALL of my reinforcement units.
I checked the map, and there were many Germans that I had not engaged. In this operation, I thought the point was to advance quickly. I did so, up the side of the map that I thought the Germans would probably not be protecting as well. My plan seemed to work, but then the operation ended itself 4 scenarios too early!
[This message has been edited by BDW (edited 07-14-2000).]
-
On the operation Drive to Mortain (playing the allies), it ended after the second scenario. Anyone have this happen? Moreover, I got ALL of my armor wiped out on the first scenario, yet at the premature end of the second scenario it said Allied Total Victory. Me very confused.
-
Charles and Steve,
OK I buy the damaged main gun thing....HOWEVER: why in the world would the Panther continue to travel deep behind my lines - all alone?
Maybe I did not make this clear: the Panther manuevered all the way down the road and up the hill and around the trees to get behind the US forest on the right hand side of the map (from the US perspective).
At that point I was able to gang up on it and knock it out with infantry that was not too far away.
I guess what I don't understand is: if the main gun was damaged, why didn't it retreat?? Cleary it was safer to retreat than to advance! Right?
?
[This message has been edited by BDW (edited 05-12-2000).]
[This message has been edited by BDW (edited 05-12-2000).]
-
***GOLD DEMO SPOILER INFO WITHIN!****
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Steve - it's been a while since the old days when I hassled you so bad about the AI. I'm baaaaaaack.
Actually, I am blown away at how good the AI is now. However, one very strange thing happened today...In the Valley of Trouble I played the US side. When the Panther appeared, it stayed on the German bunker hill for a few turns, then it headed over to the US side. I had no armor left and I thought it was moving over to chase my remaining infantry down. I watched it as it went around and behind the large forest and and then backed into the absolute corner of the map on the US side. Then it shut of it's engines and that was that for the remainder of the scenario until I finally ran at it with two infantry squads and easily killed it.
Why in the world did the AI take that Panther completely out of the action? It could have done some serious damage, and while it was hiding in the corner I was able to take out a wooden bunker.
Bizarre...! any ideas??
(I have the saved game to prove it, too)
-
***GOLD DEMO SPOILER INFO WITHIN!****
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Steve - it's been a while since the old days when I hassled you so bad about the AI. I'm baaaaaaack.
Actually, I am blown away at how good the AI is now. However, one very strange thing happened today...In the Valley of Trouble I played the US side. When the Panther appeared, it stayed on the German bunker hill for a few turns, then it headed over to the US side. I had no armor left and I thought it was moving over to chase my remaining infantry down. I watched it as it went around and behind the large forest and and then backed into the absolute corner of the map on the US side. Then it shut of it's engines and that was that for the remainder of the scenario until I finally ran at it with two infantry squads and easily killed it.
Why in the world did the AI take that Panther completely out of the action? It could have done some serious damage, and while it was hiding in the corner I was able to take out a wooden bunker.
Bizarre...! any ideas??
(I have the saved game to prove it, too)
-
Everybody - thanks for the replies - there are some good ideas here for a war movie.
von Lucke: do you know of a good source for more information on this Frank Luke character?
Sosabowski: Do you know of any personal accounts of the action in Poland? Your idea is good, but a little broad - especially for someone who knows little of the war in Poland.
you can email me at bdwhitne@pepperdine.edu (or anyone else who has any good ideas)
thanks
-
In my opinion, the problem with Spielberg movies, in general, is that they manipulate the audience. Spielberg wants everyone to come out of the theatre feeling the same way. Liam Neeson noticing the red colored jacket in the black and white world. Tom Hank's hand shaking. etc etc. Not too many interpretations left for the audience after those kinds of devices are used... In other words, his films lack real subtext and do not challenge the audience.
Of course, American audiences love this type of filmmaking because it makes them feel intelligent when really they have just been steered into an intellectual dead end.
-
Fionn - I agree, and it has to happen at the conceptual stage, before writing even begins.
The key is to find some historical event that lends itself to a good film without having to alter the facts in order satisfy the "rules" of filmmaking and story structure.
Then the challenge is to stay TRUE to the historical event from a technical and story perspective. Has there been a war film yet that has done this?
What about "Hamburger Hill"?
-
Berg-Saccani Entertainment. New Co. formed by two ex studio execs.
-
van Lucke - thanks for the info. No twigs are being wiggled, BTW
-
PanzerLeader and co. -- what is "The Forgotten Soldier"?
Also, if any of you guys have a script, treatment or just an idea for a "real" war movie please email me. Let me explain:
The company I work for in Los Angeles has a production deal with one of the major studios and we are actively seeking material for development. I love war movies, personally. And I agree with the people who think SPR was lame (although very impressive from a technical perspective). I would like to see some of you WWII buffs put together a REAL war story. Hell, you guys have read all the books and you know all the history - technical and otherwise. And now that you've seen SPR, you know what we can do out here in Hollywood! I'm betting that some of you guys have some pretty good ideas for movies. If so, get a screenwriting how-to book and get to work (there is still time to write before CM comes out!)
I'll check back to this thread occasionally, but if any of you guys have any material, please let me know ASAP via email at bdwhitne@pepperdine.edu. If you send me any "ideas", please remember that mere ideas are not copyrightable, nor are historical facts.
-
OOPS - didn't realize I wasn't supposed to vote here.
seems the "ship its" are winning by a 94% margin anyway....
cool
-
The post represents 2 votes for shipping w/o TCP/IP.
-
I have the same question (as of yet unanswered) in the "my $.02" thread.
I'd like to be able to do this move, too.
-
Fionn, when I put a tank into "hide mode" I have also noticed that the engine sound quiets down considerably. Since the tank is "quiet" that also means that it will be less aurally spottable - correct?
Also, how do you actually order a tank to do the: move forward, target, fire, move back, wait, move forward, target, fire...?
How does this work when you are issuing the orders to the tank is the "moved back" positions - when it does not have LOS to the target you want to shoot at?
I've been wanting to do that move, but I can't figure it out. If the move can be done, can it be done more than once per turn? How would the order sequence go?
Also, what if you wanted to go: move forward, fire at target A, move back, move turret to target B, move forward, fire at target B, move back.
Are these moves even *possible* in the demo? In the full version?
ok enough ???? for one post!
-
I vaguely remember this discussion, too.
I agree that there should be some impact on spotting and LOS. It should be especially easy to spot units that are backlit by the blaze where they would otherwise be hidden in the darkness, right?
As for the graphics, I can wait until Combat Mission III for the fancy lighting FX! Just as long as the basic science in the game is correct, that is all I care about.
I hope that these special nightime considerations are not falling by the wayside.
A long time ago I asked about those little parachutes with the "flare" on them and BTS said they would have those in the game. I wonder if that is still the case and I wonder what other nightime developments have been made since then.
Fionn - you have the floor...
-
"you must all be putting troops into situations out of cover where they are being fired at constantly or something."
Yes I think that was the case in Chance Encounter for me when my guys were running out of ammo. It was a pretty crazy scenario - but still, it seemed like my German guys on the east side of the map kept firing across the battlefield to the tree-covered hill in the west.
Fionn, do you think it made a difference that many of the Germans in that scenario are Conscripts or Green? Do they have a tendency to waste ammo? Obviously, they miss more often, so that is a waste of ammo in a sense, but what i am asking is if they are less effective at conserving and rationing their ammo.
thanks
-
As I understood it, the next "demo" will actually be the "gold" version of the game engine.
Basically, I think it is just BTS being very nice to us by giving us something during the 2-4 weeks it will take to print/ship the game so people don't go crazy during the wait and chew their fingers off.
-
I like SS_P's idea suggestion for better fire control.
Very simply, I'd just like to see an option in each units orders menu: "Conserve Ammo"
It would be a simple on/off like the "button" order for tanks. Also, just like the buttoned order, the unit can turn it off if the situation calls for it.
That would be useful. Especially in Chance Encounter. I had many units run out of ammo during that scenario because they were madly firing at targets at the limits of their effective ranges. It would have been useful to be able to tell those guys to conserve ammo - at least until the bad guys got closer!
Fionn? Steve? Why can't we have this? Surely it would not be difficult to add the "conserve ammo" switch. More likely there is a reason why it would actually suck that I am overlooking.
-
Well, I think it really should be on the list.
Also, if BTS adds more "shell hitting armour" sounds, then I think it will be even better.
Because as it stands right now, you know if you got a penetration just by hearing the sound.
Which brings me to another point. I think that the sounds of the enemy forces should be available to you, the player, only as to the extent that your troops in the game can realistically hear the sounds. (has this been discussed before? I don't recall - but sound issues have been neglected on this board, for the most part).
-
Thanks, Fionn.
It is always good when you reassure us that CM has been designed with good old fashioned common sense
It is really quite refreshing to play a game that does not force you to constantly "suspend disbelief" in order to enjoy yourself. Follow-up question for you:
One thing I noticed the first time I played Chance Encounter was both sides were SO depleted in forces at the end of the game that ALL of the VLs had reverted back to grey "?" flags.
Was this because there were simply not enough men on the battlefield to control *anything*?
I'll also ask you: is the ebb and flow of the VL's taken into consideration for the score? In other words, does the fact that I controlled most of the VL's for most of the game get me more points?
-
That reminds of a question I was going to ask you, Fionn.
I notice that the VL flags change during the game. For example, in LAst Defense, I pulled by forces back into the town the first turn. The flags turned to the grey "?". Pretty soon, though, they changed to German flags.
Was this becuase the game was telling me something I should not know, or is it because I had LOS to those VLs and my troops knew that the enemy had taken them over?
I can't remember if I had spotted any Germans entering those VLs or not.
I think you know what I am trying to ask here.
thanks
-
OK, this is probably asking for WAY too much, but WTF:
One of the cool things about playing other humans is their personality and mood.
I was wondering if it would be possible or if BTS has thought about the idea of having the AI's "personality" change from game to game. Like "agressive", "timid", "reckless" etc. Or what be even cooler is if you were going up against a particular commander with a distinct personality and you could read about him in the briefing. (even if they are fictional it would be cool and add depth to the game)
Operation Ending Early?
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
Just wanted to get this back to the top of the list, to see if anyone has any explaination for why my operation ended after two turns (see above)
thanks