Dschugaschwili
-
Posts
792 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Dschugaschwili
-
-
As I said in another thread: If you want to blow up a bridge, buy a Sturmtiger.
Dschugaschwili
-
Think about it from the bright side: Finally there's an answer to the frequently asked question how to destroy a bridge!
Dschugaschwili
-
Units can spot mines from a distance. Once in a game against the AI on the "Grafenwohr" training scenario I spotted an AP mine field very early in the game. My nearest unit was more than 700m away!
Dschugaschwili
PS: Forgot to mention: IIRC the mine field was in scattered trees (definitely not in open ground).
[ 06-20-2001: Message edited by: Dschugaschwili ]
-
That's because no timer is saved into the next turn. The same problem as arty shells falling at the end of the turn, not at the start of the next one. Maybe this will be changed for CM2.
Dschugaschwili
-
In one of my recent PBEM games I had a sharpshooter target an enemy Sherman and kill two men from the company HQ and one from the Bazooka team that were both riding on the back of that tank.
Forgot to mention: All this in one shot!
Dschugaschwili
[ 05-29-2001: Message edited by: Dschugaschwili ]
-
During the beta days of CM I also wondered if the PBEM file encryption method was adequate, so I tried to break into the files once using a few test battles I started, but without success. Although I still can't imagine how you can encrypt data in a way that's decryptable with two different passwords, BTS has done a pretty good job at hiding possible weak points. Perhaps extracting the decryption code from the CM executable could give you a hint about the password thing, but that would most likely be illegal.
So I guess you're out of luck.
Dschugaschwili
-
This sentence is indeed ungrammatical. Especially the "er" in this sentence looks suspicious. Apart from that it's just a bit informal.
"I'll look into this." is quite a good translation. The "mal" indicates a certain lack of urgency though.
Dschugaschwili
-
* Edited to correct the values after looking up the mentioned thread *
I asked the Panzerfaust question some time ago too. Charles' reply was about 215mm for the PF and about 60mm for the rifle grenade.
Dschugaschwili
[ 05-02-2001: Message edited by: Dschugaschwili ]
-
Another idea: Let the player setting up a QB specify the length and width of the battlefield instead of just having small, medium and large to choose from.
Dschugaschwili
-
Bump.
It seems that your mail server is indeed down again.
Dschugaschwili
-
It seems that I can't send mails to you (engy) right now. Every time I try, they just bounce back. Am I the only one having this problem or do you have problems with your mail server again?
Dschugaschwili
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by von shrad:
1) Display Unit Info in the purchase screen. I feel this will really help to better understand the forces you are choosing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I knew I had forgotten something.
I can only second this one.
Dschugaschwili
-
For number 1, I was thinking about displaying those armor penetration values at 0°, 30° and 60° and 100m, 500m, ... in the info screen, just as it is done for guns. Of course, your idea sounds good too.
As to number 2 being difficult to implement, it will mostly be a matter of having (number of men in the squad) ammo counters per squad instead of one.
Dschugaschwili
-
Note: All these suggestions should be (from my point of view) reasonably easy to implement. If one of them will already be included, I apologize.
Please don't clutter this thread with very complex ideas.
1. I'd really like to be able to see armor penetration values for infantry weapons, especially machine guns, perhaps also squads. Not knowing if my MG can penetrate an enemy halftrack (or the other way round) can be a pain at times.
2. Per weapon ammo tracking. I'll admit that this may be slightly more work to implement, but I'd really like it if my heavy SMG squad would have some close range firepower left after the LMGs have fired most of their ammo at long range targets. The detailed information would be available in the info screen, for display on the normal user interface this value could of course be averaged out.
3. A completed targeting order for arty (read: the delay timer has already gone down to zero / a small value) should leave a kind of TRP at the target that is usable only for this spotter because all the coordinates have already been calculated.
Any comments? Corrections? Additions?
Dschugaschwili
-
-
Small correction to my suggestion above:
Letting the second computer generate the map solves the problem only if the players are allowed to purchase their own forces. If the computer picks the troops, it's not that easy. In this case, an additional file exchange would be necessary:
Player 1 sets the options, picks his password and sends the file.
Player 2 picks his password, does nothing, his computer generates the map and he sends the file back.
Player 1 does his setup and the game continues as always.
Dschugaschwili
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:
The first computer generates the map that is used, not the second one. This is very easy to test if you think about it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
And this also gives a very easy fix for this problem: Let the second computer generate the map (including weather and night/day randomization) when player 2 selects his forces. After that both passwords are in place and no player can see the map before his forces are fixed. The only problem I see: The players might waste points on airplanes that won't show up because of bad weather.
Dschugaschwili
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson:
This is by no means gamey!
It's strange that your mines and roadblock didn't stop it though, they usually do...
... unless you didn't have any. In that case it's bad tactics from you.
Cheers
Olle<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
From one of his previous statements I get the impression that this game was either a non-QB scenario or a QB with AI purchase on. In that case you really can't blame him for not having any/enough roadblocks and mines.
Dschugaschwili
-
I think (can't check it right now) that tanks won't fire smoke instead of HE when area firing. So I guess all those guys who haven't had any problems with leveling buildings have used area fire. Of course this might be a dirty workaround in some situations (read: stationary target). Can somebody test this?
Dschugaschwili
-
This looks strange indeed. I wonder what BTS has to say about this...
Dschugaschwili
-
Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann:
Wilhammer, the reason why they aren't treated as very lightly armoured vehicles is beacuse once that is done then infantry units won't target them due to their inability to penetrate armour with their light arms.
Already now there are infantry weapons that have both a firepower and an armor penetration rating (at least MGs, possibly arty/mortar shells too). It shouldn't be too hard to give infantry squads a similar behaviour as MGs already have, targeting vehicles if they have a chance of knocking them out. And giving squad weapons a (small) armor piercing ability shouldn't be too hard either. And if that's implemented, it's surely better than anything else that's been proposed here until now.
Dschugaschwili
[This message has been edited by Dschugaschwili (edited 04-03-2001).]
-
Originally posted by Wilhammer:
Why not just give unarmoured vehicles very light armor, like 1 or 2 mm?
Sounds like a viable way of dealing with this problem to me. Infantry should still be able to knock out such a vehicle because even now infantry weapons (at least MGs) have an armor penetration value, although it's not shown to the player (could this be changed in CM2?). And guns could finally hit those unarmored vehicles.
Dschugaschwili
-
Another question: How are units that have exited the map treated when it comes to calculating victory points? Or in other words: should I keep my empty arty spotters on the map or do I still get the same amount of points for them if I exit them?
Dschugaschwili
-
I'm currently playing a game as the Brits, and I must say that my PIAT gunners must have eyes like a mole. From about 10 shells fired at ranges of about 80m on average, not a single one hit anything (veteran gunners). I don't think this is representative, but I guess I won't buy PIATs next time if I have the choice. My 2" mortars were much more effective at destroying enemy armor.
Dschugaschwili
------------------
Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.
HQ stuff and tanks in CMBB.
in Combat Mission Archive #3 (2001)
Posted
Actually, there's no such thing like "no bonus" for HQs. Even being in control of a HQ with no visible bonus to, say, combat increases the effectiveness of a squad. Of course, the +1 and +2 types give a larger bonus, but even +0 is better than nothing.
Dschugaschwili