Bil Hardenberger

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>When i read this AAR first, i thought it was a joke! Please tell me it is one....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Seeing as I was there, I can assure you it is no joke. Bil

I don't know if I agree with Fionn about edge hugging. It really is no different than using a boundary with your neighboring friendly Battalion to protect your flank. Although in reality that boundary is not always what it seems, and many units have gotten in serious trouble by depending on it. Something CM cannot duplicate.

LOL. Yeah that was it. You know I love your tendency to exaggerate. You were fighting with 75's because all of your 76's had been killed off... or did you forget that too? I believe I only lost one JT in that one. You did do real well against my KT's and Tigers though, that I will give you. As for a rematch... sure

Fionn are we talking about the same game? You were attacking a town that I held, your troops couldn't keep a foot hold in any building for longer than a minute at a time, and that only happened twice. Sure your artillery and tank fire took a heavy toll. But who's attacks withered in front of my concentrated fire again and again? Your forces limped back into the woods, I held my objective, and annihalated your force so it was no longer viable. I held every objective, and was still in a position to defend. The point score was 55-45 (my favour) which is scored a draw in the game, but in reality, if we are going by objectives won and lost, we know who really won that game, don't we? Oh, and as for the record: 1 win (how easily we forget that one), 1 draw (this game), and two losses.

Gee Fionn, that sounds an awful lot like a game we just completed... where the German's (you) ran screaming from the field Had a run of bad luck lately?

Dave got it exactly right, you can play around with using different sets of elevations 0-4, 8-13, 16-19, etc. and the color combinations will be different for each (This is a rather simple 1 keystroke change in the editor). CoolColJ, CM's elevations took a lot of time, and A LOT of tweaking to get perfected. Wait until you get the full game, I do not think you will be disappointed.

You would be correct... There are 20 elevation levels in CM and each has a corresponding texture.. the way these are set up, the higher in elevation you go, the lighter the map is, also the color changes slightly.. it goes more brown at higher elevations, and more of a green at the lower end. Where the map is, relevant to sea level, is irrelevant If you make a map that uses elevations 0 - 10, you will have a greener colored map, if you use elevations 11 - 19 you map will be brown in color.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Question: Can you create a 2km x 2km map for battles or is the width fixed to 1.2km?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Width is not fixed to 1.2Km Short answer, you can make the 2km x 2km map you want. The width is dependant on the height however... if you have a map that is 3km high, your max width will be around 1.6km...(I just made one that size as a test)you can make some really large maps. Believe me when I say that these maps are huge, and really are hard to play on, there is just a tremendous amount of space to cover.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>1) Sunken and raised roads - both very important features in France. The area south of the Normandy beaches had raised roads crossing marshes, and the hedgerows were crisscrossed with sunken roads.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You can make very nice sunken roads in the editor, my scenario "The Sunken Lane" features a historical battle fought around one of these. They make for some nasty defensive terrain. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>2) Orchard and vineyard - Mainly a decorative difference. Light Trees looks different than an orderly orchard, a Wheat Field looks different (and might have different LOS characteristics) than a vineyard.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You will have to use scattered trees for orchards. This would be a visual difference only anyway. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>3) Ditches or gullies - Real important! A ditch on a battlefield is major cover. I haven't ever seen a screenshot that featured a ditch. Best would be a narrow addition to a map tile, just like the walls are implemented now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ditches are tough, as it is now you will end up with wide ditches... gullies are possible if you know what you are doing with the elevations in the editor. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>4) Cemetary - To spuce up a village. A lot like a rubble area for combat purposes, but again, looks different.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> To my knowledge, these will not be included in the release version... would be a nice addition I agree. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>5) Multi-tile buildings - I want some big ass cathedrals (e.g. Aachen) municipal buildings apartment buildings or rowhouses. Of course big factories can wait. Yes, I know buildings have been discussed many times before, I'm just saying I want a few big ones.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You can make these by inserting a line of large building tiles end to end, you can make large cathedrals by doing the same thing with the church tiles... these will not be one large building though, they will be seperated, but the appearance will be as if they were one. Hope that helps.

Actually there are 20 levels Fionn (0 - 19) and JonS, you can either only have the elevation step be 2.5 or 5 meters (there is no 10 meter elevation)... you cannot mix them on the same map, I can also see where that would be handy. As Fionn can tell you, it is very possible to make some very high hills in CM. At the 5m interval level, the hills can become quite dramatic. Hope that helps. [This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 02-15-2000).]

Thanks guys. To tell you the truth I got very lucky. If one of Bill's Stugs had gotten a lucky shot in or two, and they did go down fighting, it would have been a very different game. Once he lost the third Stug I knew the game was over. He gave it a try though, and lost a lot of Infantry trying to assault, without support. Same thing I just did against Fionn in our current PBEM game... Damn!

Sorry to disappoint you Fionn. I refuse to respond on principle. This will be my last post on this subject. I refuse to get into this type of public display, which just feeds your ego. See you on the battlefield.

Okay Fionn. I was sending you a gentle jibe, and you take that as an attack? Very well, send me the setup file, enough stalling! Let's settle this like men. Bil (1-1 against Fionn PBEM)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Bil's armoured column is gonna pay for fighting through there<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I like how you spell armor... I suppose you spell color; colour, and aluminum; aluminium! How do you spell lose? louse?

Actually, to set the record straight, I had 3 tanks left along with the 1.5 Platoons [This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 12-30-99).]

Fionn, 18-0? I suppose you are only counting the 3 beta demo scenarios, eh? Keeping the other games a secret? Sneaky bastard. Guys, Seriuosly, anyone fixing to play Fionn, a word of advice: Don't let him psyche you out in the e-mail. Ignore him, tell him to shut the hell up! Whatever it takes. I had him beat in Riesberg, took a bad blow to my flank and got flustered... he talked me into a ceasefire when I had him by the nostrils. FoW in this case really did me in, it didn't look like he was taking any casualties, when in fact he was hurt as bad as I. He did a masterful job of disrupting my attack formation though. The next time we played (an all tank affair, quite fun), I beat him. But not until I took a licking. He is tough but is no superman. On the subject of FoW. Playing without it turned on, and NOT informing your opponent is dispicable and should have some sort of ramifications. Amazing what's happened to our youth's values. [This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 12-30-99).]

I wondered what happened to you Doug! Thought maybe you took your troops and went home.

Scurlock, You need to notify Fionn. He has proposed just such a Campaign system as you describe. So far there are about 50 players that are interested and Fionn has made up a mailing list so we can discuss the topic in detail. Just so you know, there will be about 25 players per Division in this system. There will be GM's that keep all the information together and maintain FoW. His e-mail is: fionnk@thegamers.net

SS, Some of this you can do. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>the prepared defense would allow for things such as purchasing dummy tanks/at guns<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not possible. This would be more of a strategic asset anyway. Dummy tanks were not used on the battle field. Their main purpose was to fool Aerial recon. I know Rommel used dummy 88s in Africa on the battlefield, maybe that will be a feature in CM3... <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>ratholing or destruction of buildings, additional mines laid<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You can place rubble in the editor. You can also have burning buildings placed there. You can purchase and place as many mines as you want. However this is a function of the scenario designer. You may set it up though so the player can place the mines. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>allow for the preperation of buildings to accomodate reasonably sized AT guns<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not possible unfortunately.. I would like the option to hide tanks in some buildings added also. Perhaps for CM2. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Dragons teeth<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Again, not represented. You can however place roadblocks and wire in abundance. The roadblocks would do nicely to represent dragons teeth IMO. You can with some imagination set up a pretty nasty prepared defense. Even without all the aspects you mentioned above.

Fionn, Now this is why I am excited about CM! An e-mail is on the way to you.

North Africa and the Italian theaters are planned for CM3

Dan, This is something that has been discussed before. I agree that this feature would dramatically increase realism. Only problem, can you imagine how long a PBEM game would take?

I am going to have to go against the PTO. Although I could go for a Korean War CM! As a fellow beta tester (with Wild Bill) I have made and played several scenarios that are tank/mechanized heavy (one with over 50 tanks), and I have to tell you that the CM engine works just fine in representing this kind of combat. What is the draw for North Africa, you ask? I think the long range gun battles and the maneuver aspects of that war are what get me excited. I would rather maneuver using the terrain to shield my tanks, than slog through a dense forest fighting with strictly Infantry. Hell, you can make those kinds of scenarios right now. In my opinion, I think CM is great at representing combined arms. This is what I love about the game. I love the Infantry only actions too, but in small doses. Give me the European theaters, Russia, North Africa, Italy, France 1940, Poland, etc. In fact I believe that this is what is planned for the future iterations of CM anyway, so I win!

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/000816.html

Those have been in for quite some time.