Justin Hoerter

I've ordered.

I twy me besd boss, I wily willy do <pant> <pant>... Should probably pop over to CDMAG's site and pester Scott Udell into writing more about his foray into the CM's operations. Sounds like he's going through the unlearning process a bit too. His preview not long ago was quite a teaser. Justin PS That map is something! Addendum: Yeah, 16 81mm's at once would be devastating, but didn't they have a fixed spread? Still, I wouldn't be eager to do much after seeing that go off! [This message has been edited by Justin Hoerter (edited 12-14-99).]

Couldn't resist chiming in here. You're welcome to send Shrodi my way. Some of my research is with super-acids. In particular, I've been working with neat HF. Most journals briefly warn you of a chemical's toxicity if it's particularly noteworthy. However, this one typically warrants special notice. The Inorganic Dictionary goes at length describing and showing the severity of burns this simple gas causes. A medical journal mentions that an individual who suffers from HF burns often complains of severe pain even without visible scarring. Another handbook just states that the pain is "exquisite"... And this is just one of our arsenal: Fluorosulfonic Acid, Antimony Pentafluoride, Magic Acid (IIRC remains the strongest known) and others. While these may not quiet him much, they'll probably cause enough of a distraction that we'll gain some peace on the board. Actually I'm a sucker and wouldn't wish that on anyone, but maybe the points clear Justin PS I kept my mouth shut on the old P4 (WP) discussion as we chemists have a tendency to run off at the mouth... "So your new in the lab? Mind holding this piece of chalk for me?"

I'll give my hand at trying to answer these, as most have been discussed to some degree in the past. 1) The operation is basically just a drive by a unit over the course of a day (or days). Ie. clearing a town, Joachim's troops attempt do drive those Yanks out of that Sanitorium in Stoumont (I'm guessing Stoumont's in to some degree likely talking garbage though). In any case, a series of fights that involved a unit over a short course of time. Pegasus Bridge might be another good candidate, reasonable sized engagement that lasted a day and a half IIRC. This included plenty of decent firefights and building exchanges. Although the Germans threw some bizarre French/German hybrids into the fray. (Hey, lets strap a bunch of 81mm mortars on the back of this here half-track; Gee, ok boss, that would be neat) 2) Units will not upgrade as the timescale is so short. Although replacements are in. I'd like to here a bit more on how replacements are modelled if someone has some spare knowledge. 3) As I understand, damaged tanks in friendly territory have a chance of being repaired/recovered. I'm not sure if you get a new tank if yours was turned to a flaming wreck. 4) Not sure on this one. I believe that pre-designed operations will not allow this. However, there are DYO operations and IIRC you have a chance to purchase from a pool of units. These pools can be set as Armored, Mechanized, and Infantry. Please point out any mistakes if I've made them. I personally think Operations will be the greatest attraction for me. I like the responsibility of retaining my troops to fight another day. If Steve or some of the other beta testers could give a nice example of an Operation, I'd appreciate it greatly! Justin

Great, I'm not terribly color blind myself, but it does come up. Nice to see such quick response, as always, from the Charles and Steve. Justin

I'm partially color-blind as well. I found the command lines difficult to differentiate as well, but with a little practice I can spot them now. As far as other problems, the woods to open difference seemed awfully small. However this has been changed, so it is no longer an issue. I'll let you know when the final's out if there are any other problems, but as it is the demo's fine. Justin

I have trouble seeing the command lines when they are clipped by terrain. In particular, it occurs when the two points are lower than the intermediate terrain. Basically, the terrain is drawn over the line. It would be nice, and tedious I imagine after some of the shadow comments, to have this draw on top of all terrain. As it is, I'm used to it now. Justin

I've had this happen a little too. The first I thought it was a freeze as well. The second I noticed that the bar was actually moving. I let it go and the turn finally played. The following turn was slow only part way through, then it pick it for that and every subsequent turn. I've noticed sound effects randomly playing during turn calculation. It seemed that the frequency went up for slow turn resolution, but not certain! System specs: P3 500 Diamond V770 ultra (TNT2 card w/ 32M) 128M system RAM a few gig. free space on the drive (didn't notice a great deal of HD activity, sometimes nice for spotting memory leaks). SB Live Value. Please feel free to ask for more info. I might have a saved game. I did save one and replay and it continued to be slow, so let me know if you'd like the file to look at, seems reproducable. Justin

Regarding the group move comment. I can see a bit of use for this one. Drop a move for your infantry platoon to get the blue lines about where you want them, then tinker a bit for fine control. A bit of a time saver. Justin

I believe buttoning up open topped vehicles drops the crew behind the armor. So rather than having your gunner exposed to fire the MG42 (SPW) or .50cal (M18 Hellcat) they keep their heads down below what's available. Should reduce spotting dramatically as well, especially close topped vehicles. Actually not sure if open and closed topped are penalized equivalently. Open topped are still quite vulnerable to falling fire (ie. mortars and infantry with height advantage or grenades ) Hope that helps and that I didn't go overboard with the explanation. Justin PS Buttoning up also makes the AA MG on Shermans unavailable, but the late StuGIII's top MG mount is remotely controlled.

Great game. I think most people that are posting with FOW issues are getting used to the game mechanics. Most of these people have said good things about the game. Like BTS said, a bit of unlearning is in order. Although I've found that it hasn't taken all that much. I've been following the board for a while and I guess I knew what to expect to some degree. Although those Hellcats on the hill were a suprise! Justin

I agree with Sage. I like sticking to standard OS GUI. 'esc' means cancel and alt-tab for changing tasks. Not a big issue as I only hit it about 3 times per game rather than 20 from before Eventually it'll be completely out of my system. Justin

This was the first scenario I played. I attacked as the Yanks, and did suprisingly well. Well, with a bit of luck at the start! I had a 60mm mortar team immediately identify a "gun?" at the far hill. It tossed a few rounds that way with little effect (nearly 1km, so wasn't putting them on target). I had a sherman who was hunting forward gingerly around a stand of trees. I thought the Sherman was just out of LoS at the moment, so I didn't fiddle with him and left the 60mm to plug away at the gun. Well, the following turn I found that the LoS from Sherman to gun was good (the delay in stopping it carried it a tiny bit further). The "gun" fired 2 rounds before the Sherman responded, both missing. With some time left (30s ?) the gun placed two round on the sherman hull, with the sherman flinging some shells into Cleveland (the first one sailed WAY off map, not hard since the hill was high elevation and "off-map" was at zero). Well, the turn ends and given two ricochets and a little bit of acquisition on the Sherman's part, I decided to let things stand. At this point I figured it was a 50mm or some type of infantry gun (hadn't calibrated myself to crater size at this point ). The 60mm mortar was still plugging away as well. Turn 3, my Sherman wins the gun duel, no doubt with the help of suppression effects from the 60mm. I didn't give it further thought 'til game end when I took a look at the map. I found that it was another 88mm (I'd taken the first with infantry after suffering some losses to HE fire). On looking at the unit data, I found that I had been lucky for two reasons: 1) long range, the 88mm's AP penetrating power was reduced to something less than a sure kill (1km range) and that all the hits (4 total) had occured on the hull, better and slightly angled armor. Still pretty remarkable! While playing as the Germans, I ended up placing the 88m on the hill as well. I was deploying to cover as much starting area as possible, rather than just cover the approach to the town and found this to be the most satisfactory position (similar to the AI ). The computer must have been feeling kind and my 88mm survived the game with two Sherman kills (and some annoyed infantry). An amazing game, I've learned a fair amount of tactics from Martin and Fionn, so this helped me make some good choices. I beat your unlearning a little . However, I would play the scenario very differently than I did. Not just from force knowledge, but due to the way this game models combat. Well, less chit-chat and more play! Justin

I'd like that as well. Of the many nice features of OtR and AS!, this was one of my favorites. Particularly the brief comments on strengths/weaknesses and tactics, brought some of my less grognardly friends up to speed. Not to mention the fact that my memory doesn't always work perfectly. Justin PS If it needs to wait for a patch to be implemented, no complaints.

As a bit of an interim solution, perhaps shielding (LOS-wise) the entry point may help a bit. A little bit of cleverness in scenario design may allow for a small copse of trees to cover the road where units enter. This would help alleviate the problem of not knowing reinforcements are arriving, then seeing them burst onto the map in enemy gun sights. While not appropriate for all scenarios (ie exact historical reproductions), it might be a solution until something could be worked out for the next release. Another small consequence is a bit more map at the edge to allow for covering terrain.

Sorry, fairly far off topic, but I'm quite a big fan of the Onion. For those of you who haven't taken a look, I strongly recommend it. The Onion is a sarcastic take on today's news. However, it is written from a fairly adult perspective. In any case, here is the article's address under there occasionally appearing column point & counterpoint: http://www.theonion.com/onion3534/oped_abortion.html Enjoy at you risk. I apologize in advance to the more sensible among us Justin PS Any comments on force deployments? I think a few Blackhawks may not be sufficient air support...

1st wargame: - Air Force (AH) Boardgames: (favorites, I have quite a few) - SL & ASL (own far too much of these series, have a good chunk of ASL in duplicate as well....) - Firepower - MBT - Airforce (of course) Computer: C64, Amiga, and PC (favorites as well) 1st and almost all time favorite: - Combat Leader (put WAY too many hours into this one, sort of CC's precursor) - Computer Ambush (was quite a lot of fun, had a system similar to CM's. Plotted moves with simultaneous execution. Wow have UI's changed, to move a guy north 1 square was something like mr11l ) - Overrun (modern combat, CM style. Was not very well implemented, but I've been a fan of the simultaneous move games The unit database was similar to Steel Panthers too. I sort of think of this as a precursor to that series...) - WGCS: I and II - Steel Panthers (Despite its flaws, it was fun to play) - Close Combat 1 & 2 (Really innovative at there time) - Over the Reich (Enjoyed AH's Air Force, but plotting moves could get tedious. OtR simplified that and let my friends and focus on aerial tactics) - 101st Airborne in Normandy (Computer Ambush revisited! Well, with a better interface realism etc... but C64 vs '98 PC...) Have to mention Underfire (UF), one of AH's early forays into computer gaming. WWII squad level combat with simultaneous execution. Fairly realistic spotting and OoB's, on a C64. Can't help but think of this one as the precursor to CM... Talk about UF's hardware limitations... Took ages to calculate a turn, nearly unplayable. In fact I spotted CM's earlier incarnation when reading up on OtR and thought of UF. I remember seeing a very distant target date for CM. I've been lurking since then , pre-FAQ and Board. I still remember the excitement of reading the first FAQ! Justin PS Oh, sidenote, wasn't Close Combat initially BSL (Beyond Squad Leader)?

I think I'm with Bil and Moon here. While the idea of having corpses line the battlefield to show where some of the heavier fighting occured is interesting. I'd rather see the computer's limited resources focused on creating a good vehicle for demonstrating WWII tactics (good and bad). A good argument could be made for corpses when making the game more visceral. But, as a gamer, I'd like to see what's represented on screen be more informational in this case. I suppose the pile of bodies in front of the ambush site might be a good reminder, but somehow I believe I'll remember on my own . Just my thoughts, Justin Hoerter

I made the CC3 comment before... Just got CC2 back from a friend I'd lent it too, maybe that'll go back on. What else have I played: SFC - Initially I really liked it, but I wish it was turn based. I'd like be able to manage larger forces. East Front II - I've been playing smaller scenerios, sadly trying to force it into CMishness. (hmm... new word) Everquest - Not at all in the same vein. This has taken up most of my gaming time by far. One of those horrible massively muliplayer role playing games. The biggest drawback is the large numbers of immature people (from all age groups). However, after some time (much time) you'll find a good group of people of the same maturity and the game really takes off. I've stopped playing lately because I need to start writing up a thesis... If you're of only casual interest to RPG's, stay clear, this one requires a vast amount of time! Justin Hoerter PS Moon, I've readied my lucky bastard seeking missile. However, I'll stay my hand if you keep the great AAR's coming...

Hehe, I agree. Nice to see your implementing suggestions that everyone seemed to agree weren't absolutley necessary. I recall a company who wouldn't respond to a broken unit database (not to mention maps). A certain real-time small level game (ahh, 3rd in the series) located randomnly on a eastern front... The funny thing is some of the more grog-friendly games like ASL are full of large abstractions. Granted, non-computer games impose greater restrictions with record keeping. I guess my point is that, except for an unusual few, people are willing to take a few hits on ultimate realism if the game is more playable. It'll be nice when the demo's out so that we can better qualify our comments. Justin Hoerter PS Just to get a fix I reinstalled CC3 on my machine. After a couple of battles it was removed again. For the record, CC2, while not perfect was a much better game... Although Atomic seemed to listen better to the requests from CC1 back then...

I seem to recall the British landing with bicycles on D-Day as well. I think they were mostly left on the beach though. Well, with a bit more scratching of the noggin, I thought there were a few who rode into a town, capturing it... A bit anecdotal, but maybe worth considering. Justin Hoerter

Excellent idea Lokesa. I'd like to see more like Fionn's AT gun ambush as well. Justin Hoerter PS might be a good case for showing CM's scouting mechanics. Something in the vein of Steve's suggested battle in the scouting thread. A non-turn-by-turn portrayal of the 20 minutes of initial scouting, then the entrance of the main force.

I agree with the general sentiment here. I find the AAR's educational, but I wouldn't have the time to read swarms of them. I've enjoyed Fionn's and Martin's work a great deal. Perhaps, to save Martin, Fionn, and the beta testers some time, shorter AAR's would be a good comprimise. I'm willing to see some sacrifice in the depth of future AAR's so that our writers can actually get a bit of free time It's nice to see so much effort being put in by people without a stake in the game. A very good sign. Justin Hoerter

Hi, I understand your position Steve, and tend to agree with you. However, perhaps its worth implementing ammo for vehicle MG's so it does not become an exploit. As you mentioned, a vehicle often has better things to do than fire MG's (Hide, remains hull down, operate main gun, etc...) So with relatively ample ammunition, no risk of losing ammo carriers (Inf. MG team), and fewer firing oppertunities ammunition should be less of an issue. It seems like a decent concession to make. However, I'm curious if people will drag combat out to seek that last casualty or two. I understand CM monitors the pace of combat and should stop a game once this starts to happen. OTOH, perhaps ammo tracking for MGs should be in to create more of a player driven cease-fire. Regarding ammunition depots on map. I don't see this as an issue. I understand CM to represent (in campaign mode) a series of fire-fights over a day or so. So ammunition resupply should coincide with a break in the more intense action. I understand from my reading that even in hotly contested areas (Arnhem, Stalingrad, etc...) that there were several breaks in combat. IE. 10-30m. firefight with possible manouvre broken by rest and refit of the now exhausted and out of local supply troops. IIRC ASL's Red Barricades had the players fighting a scenario per day (or night). Their abstraction was to have this scenario, again IIRC 2min. per turn with 10 to 20 turns a scenario (poor memory) represent a DAYS combat. This is a bit of an extreme case, as the fighting was so brutal and slow, to abstract in ASL terms what reasonable gains were for a day. End result, we have maybe 20-30m. of combat (ASL) with rearming and minor repositioning occuring the rest of the day. ASL's logic was that while there are several smaller firefights, they were focusing on the big pushes. In any case, this is how another game system choose to handle rest & refit. Of course ASL didn't monitor ammo either... Well special ammo had its own abstractions (I think ASL and WP was brought up in the past ) I loved the ASL system, but they had to make MANY abstractions. The above is a bit of a severe case, but it is also one of the more highly regarded products of the ASL system. After much babbling, I'm trying to better understand CM's methods and relate them to what I'm familar with, so bear with me. I'm looking forward to a game that more closely matches what I've read. While I dont quite have your library, I'm building what I can I'd like to hear others comments. Justin Hoerter

Hi, I'm thoroughly enjoying reading the AAR's as well. A passable substitute for not having the game/beta demo (of course I'd rather have something in my hands ). I'm of the reading over viewing varity as well. Thanks for your effort Fionn and Martin. Justin Hoerter