Joachim
-
Posts
1,548 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Joachim
-
-
Andreas,Originally posted by Andreas:Joachim, I guess my opinion with this is quite simply summed up in saying 'So what?'. Is it unrealistic that a unit that gets shot in the rear while bailing from a position is more likely to rout than a unit attacking? In my (admittedly naive) opinion, that is consistent with the little that I have read (and can remember) about such occasions.
It appears to me that true 'grit' (groans from the audience) is easier to generate in soldiers when you are moving forward trying to get to grips with the enemy than when you leave the field to him. I would be interested in other opinions on this though, in particular based on Real Life experiences/tales.
now this is a totaly different question...
While I think that it helps a lot if you have suppressive fire in all case, there is an abundance of factors to compare the moral effects for attacking or retrating:
Attackers have some moral benefit, as they usually have local superiority. If they attack blind with bad leadership, I don't know if that effect holds.
OTOH if you just pin, the others will do the dirty work. Routing and running is only bad (in terms of incoming) if the others pin.
Standard troops retreating to a 2nd line should have the added benefit of knowing that they get probably pulled out of the line once they reach the 2nd line. Pinning will keep them in danger. Routing but running to safety would be ok.
Plus all the other factors - like penal btn.
But I have no experience, no abundance of data and thus all is just a theory.
My point is just that suppressive fire is not a solution to the problem - though it definitely helps.
Gruß
Joachim
-
Me, too.Originally posted by MAUS_TD:Iam for the campaign mode,
When compared to a built-in campaign mode, BCR comes in 2nd
Gruß
Joachim
-
Maybe he has the opinion that suppressive fire should work for advance and retreat exactly the same, so the result of his test that retreating causes more causalties (and suppression) than advancing will hold with suppressive fire alike. But the firing Soviet plt represents just the unsuppressed element of the enemy.Originally posted by Scarhead:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:
So you are not of the opinion that suppressive fire has a role to play in achieving a decent break from the enemy?
For the retreat a viable test would see 3 Soviet plts firing on that 1 moving GE plt while a single other GE plt and maybe a HMG42 provide covering fire. I'd bet that there is at least one plt of the Soviets firing unsuppressed. Thus I would expect more or less the same results as in MASTA_KSF's (sorry, just had to change those letters) test (Force ratio about 1:1.5).
On the advance, I'd put 2-3 MG34 and a mortar in support, have null unsuppressed enemies and expect less casualties (and suppression). (Force ratio about 1.5:1).
If there is a favorable local force ratio for the defenders, suppressive fire would reduce the effects on the moving plt, too. But I'd guess the overall tendency would still hold - the effect increases with the amount of unsuppressed fire until a threshold, when there is so much incoming that every squad gets annihilated or pinned fast and there is no difference between attack and retreat
Gruß
Joachim </font>
-
Maybe he has the opinion that suppressive fire should work for advance and retreat exactly the same, so the result of his test that retreating causes more causalties (and suppression) than advancing will hold with suppressive fire alike. But the firing Soviet plt represents just the unsuppressed element of the enemy.Originally posted by Andreas:So you are not of the opinion that suppressive fire has a role to play in achieving a decent break from the enemy?
For the retreat a viable test would see 3 Soviet plts firing on that 1 moving GE plt while a single other GE plt and maybe a HMG42 provide covering fire. I'd bet that there is at least one plt of the Soviets firing unsuppressed. Thus I would expect more or less the same results as in MASTA_KSF's (sorry, just had to change those letters) test (Force ratio about 1:1.5).
On the advance, I'd put 2-3 MG34 and a mortar in support, have null unsuppressed enemies and expect less casualties (and suppression). (Force ratio about 1.5:1).
If there is a favorable local force ratio for the defenders, suppressive fire would reduce the effects on the moving plt, too. But I'd guess the overall tendency would still hold - the effect is proportional to the amount of unsuppressed fire.
Gruß
Joachim
-
First guess is the command delay well above 1 minute.
2nd guess is a bug. If you are in the corner of a large stone bldg which is in a row of large stone buildings, moving out across that corner sometimes does not work. I had a lot of these problems in a city battle, until I moved the first waypoint a bit. Maybe it is a restriction for the path finding algorithm. In similar situations (moving out of a local optimum when there is a step threshold near), I expect many optimizazion routines to lock up. A more common example is the behavior of vehicles near bridges, they often seem to hang around and do weird things instead of just moving onto the bridges if you don't set a waypoint where they are to enter the bridge and into the middle of the bridge.
Gruß
Joachim
-
Second this.Originally posted by Scipio:I guess this has been requested already, but just to be sure...
Well known, BTS doesn't like the idea of implementing any kind of campaign modus into CM. Well, okay, they have there reasons, and partially I understand them. However, campaigns were requested many times by many people. BTW, my personal idea of a campaign is a bigger version of operation, not a whole war issue.
So, if BTS won't do it, I don't see a reason why they shouldn't support third parties to develop something if they want to. The worst thing in a campaign is to keep track of any casualties. So I guess it would be a good idea if the CM scenario editor could be altered to
a) export/import a forces table into an extra file
(IMPORTANT) extract the surviving forces from a closed battlec) join forces tables
The rest could be done manually without extraordinary effort, as I think.
Would an official please respond?
Gruß
Joachim
-
Casualty rates do not affect the effective force you can buy:Originally posted by Emar:Designing a couple of operations and cant quite figure this one out. Search turned up nothing and the manual is kinda vague about whether more points help the attacker or defender. What I want to know is do you increase the points to help the attacker or decrease them? In other words does setting it on say 70% give the attacker a bonus or setting it on 150%.
If you have 1000pts at 20% casualties, you can buy 1250 points, of which approx. 20% or 250 pts will be casualties. Thus you have about 1000 pts left for setup.
Nevertheless casualty rates help a little bit as you can often buy bigger formations, whose parts are cheaper than bought on its own. (Read: 3 single companies cost more than a btn with exactly those coys plus the btn HQ).
Gruß
Joachim
-
If you'd say "cannon" and point in a direction, holding up 3 fingers, I guess the Panther crew and the Romanian would understand.Originally posted by NG cavscout:Borg Spotting means, I think, when one unit sees something, everyone, effectively, knows it is there. Since if your single survivor of a rumanian rifle squad sees 3 Soviet 76mm AT guns ready to ambush the Panther rolling down the road 4 KM away, you can then stop the Panther, even though, realistically, the single Rumanian not only doesn't speak German, he also has no way of telling anyone what he has seen.
Gamey means using quirks of the game in an unrealistic manner to acheive a beneficial result. This game is pretty good in not permitting gamey tactics though.
But you have to be damn close to hear it.
Gruß
Joachim
-
It only works as first command on the ground floor of two-story stone bulidngs if the scenario allows for it. Only then this command shows on the command menu.Originally posted by WOLFNUTTS:thats right i am weird all those who agree and name here ( ) no wonder the doc gives me all those pills lol
ok answered a few of my qwestions thier any one else have a though or story of sewer travel.
damm i hope my opponent doesnt read this he will see i dont no nuttting nutting hey just like sargent shutz i know nutting nutting
To test if you find the command, play a QB in a large town with sewer movement allowed.
Caveat:
- 10 m in 1 minute... very slow
- 10% will lose their way and perish in the sewers (see manual)
- experienced troops are better at finding their way (not sure if the manual is right with that...)
- only regulars under comand or veterans out of command (IIRC, but OTOH RTFM
)- units pop up in odd places, approx a third are back where they were a few minutes later (Make sure a Coy HQ is there to send them on their way again)
- I once lost a crack squad on its way to the next buildng.
Gruß
Joachim
-
Just a few ideas - this is no walkthru. Make up your mind and think about the ideas. Put them together with other info. You can improve your tactics, the AI can't (until CMAK or CM2, that is)
Borg spotting only works in the command phase.
Make sure the team attacking the tank is not seen in the turn before and the tank is buttoned (sharpshooters, MGs, infantry).
A suppressed team or squad will not fire as accurate as an unsuppressed team - I guess threats to tanks are a high priority target once discovered by the tank.
Make sure the quality of the infantry is good. Having them in command of a stealth or combat bonus HQ helps.
Keep the tank occupied by other threats. If he goes for another tank or a speeding AC a mile away, the squad will have much better chances.
Hunt like animals do: separate a tank from the herd (ie infantry and other tanks), and then attack it. Creating local superiority to get an unsuppressed shot at the tank is key. (Local superiorty means to have more and better units involved in the fight than the enemy, not to have more men in the region[/]. If it is a hidden ambush by one team, you have local superiority. If your arty pins the accompanying infantry and you move in to kill the tank that is a bit too much forward, this will do.
If you have an AI that coordinates its units, you have to coordinate your units even better. The AI does not coordinate its formations as good as a human player, so this should be possible.
Gruß
Joachim
-
First heard of these Panthers in SP3 (maybe a mod), SPWaW or SPWW2. It was fun to include them in your battles.
Gruß
Joachim
-
An organized withdrawal of scouts or single squads - yes. (IE keep running if shoot at as it is safer to run that stay behind). No reduction of command delay - this is organized, after all.
A company has to organize its withdrawal all by itself by using boundary overwatch in reverse. If troops keep running backwards, this is possible. Apart from the occassional panicked squad, of course. Organization under fire is very rare.
Gruß
Joachim
-
[ July 18, 2003, 10:40 AM: Message edited by: Scarhead ]
-
ad 1) For the real battle, you select unrestricted forces, unrestricted division type at unrestricted quality.Originally posted by BRO, JD:The BCR looks great--a great way to get a better feel for the whole campaign and to give you more of an incentive to preserve your forces instead of making last-ditch suicide attacks as the time runs out on a normal scenario.
But I haven't gotten started yet.
I keep thinking that I have a grasp of the paper rules, even though I'm using BiltAid. Still, every time I try to start a battle, I hit another stumbling block that gives me a headache and tells me it's time to go to bed instead.
A few questions:
1) BiltAid rolled up an INFANTRY force mix battle for me. But if I enter that into the QB, I won't be allowed to purchase my organic 3 tanks, right? How do I handle that?
2) Latest battle was a 700-point Axis Assault. However, there weren't enough points included for me to buy my 3 organic tanks. Do I fight sans my Panzer II?
3) One time I rolled up a SECURITY division. No Aussklarung infantry company (isn't that the one I'm supposed to use?). What to do?
4) Hungarian, Romanian, Italian forces? Will I be able to keep my regular inf. company, three tanks, etc., if play a battle as those forces? How does that work?
Thanks for any help. I've read the rules and these posts, but am probably overlooking a lot of this.
Thus you can buy your core forces and the auxiliary troops
ad 2) In the paper rules there is the provisional force size. This is
a) your core force
the attached troops (that stay with you for a while, bought from attachment points awarded after battle)c) your auxiliary forces specific for that one battle, e.g. from Romania
The value of a) for the first battle is about 653 (rarity standard), but can vary due to more experienced units or weakened troops
The value for
varies, for the first battle it is 0The value of c) is say 300 inf, 150 vehicles, 100 armor and 150 arty = 700pts.
Your provisional force size is 1353.
You have no casualties, the battle is assault
(battle type factor =1.7)
Exp = regular and fit troops
So you get
force size for CM battle = 1353 * (1- 0 casualties)/1.7 = 795.88 points.
As you cannot select 795 points, you have to choose the next higher value, which for this example is 800. If you select an allied assualt, CM will award you with 1.7 times the points as the defender, who gets 800. Thus, from thos 1360 pts you should be able to buy your 653pt core and thos 700 auxiliary troops
Now you make a mock battle with only 700 pts (auxiliary) from the battle parameters per Biltaid or the rules sheet. You get 2 security companies, several HMGs, a 81mm and a 105 mm spotter, a lone SdKfz 221 but no armor. Write down the forces for that battle.
The real thing is the unrestricted battle, where you buy your core, 300 inf or support, at least the SdKfz 222 and some other vehicles of your choice for a sum of at most 150 pts (if the AI in the auto-generated batlte did not spend all pts in one category, you can buy what you like), then you chose to buy the 81mm FO (87 or something) and can't afford the 105mm anymore (148 IIRC, 148+87>150), so you add some cheapo 75mm FO at 54 pts. You choose whichever tanks you want, but spend less than 100 pts.
Now there should be some pts left, but these are a hidden bonus for the AI.
Oops... 2) should be answered above, probably you did not notice the attacker gets mor epoints or to calculate the provisional force size for the real battle or that there is a mock battle before.
3)and 4) The real battle is unrestricted, see above.
Have fun!
Gruß
Joachim
-
Only if we get a different bmp for dirty soldiers afterwards!Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):I wouldn't mind a dirt tile to add a little more spice to the map.
Gruß
Joachim
-
The worst, yes. The most numerous, certainly not. Memoirs by British soldiers are quite frank about the times they were attacked by their own planes in France, and elsewhere.Originally posted by Andreas:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Yeah, but McNair was carpet bombed by heavies. The same thing happened to Major General Rod Keller of 3rd Cdn Inf Div in Normandy. Again, the worst friendly fire incidents involved heavy bombers, not the tactical fighters we see in CM.
I fully agree - a TRP for air attack (could be coded in as a nice red smoke signal) should do it, and would make the handling more flexible. Players can either place it themselves during the battle, or it could be pre-placed by a scenario designer. </font>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:I think the problem with CM's depiction is not the number of FF incidents but the manner in which CAS is called down. Ground troops really should be required to use air/ground recognition signals, as was the case in real life.
-
It seems the AI pulls back his forces. After all, they probably get surrounded and cut off in the next battle. And They do not get resuppliedOriginally posted by MAUS_TD:I agree with Joachim,
sometimes when i attack i use this bug in my advantage by leaving the hard spots nearing them and try to pass by them then the next battle i get it anyway, without losing many soldiers. I know this is a gamey way to win but what the hell.
This also happens when iam defending a point with most of my forces kicking the ia back and the next battle i have leave this area because the frontline is put back a mile and you cannot change there position in that area so the most your forces are standing in the middle of knowhere
get shelled by the ai the first turn so you have to retreat.
so my question is: if there is an area where many troops are and frontline is pushed back still give that area under your controll so you still can change your positions in that area.
(maybe it's not true but i usely see those area's for the ai but when you put there forces there is always nobody to be found, does the ai always retreat behind the frontline??? or can you let them stay in that area especially when it's good to defend.)
(checked the last and first files fro each battle after an operation), so they are not the best front line troops. If I have troops out of my area, I check their ammo (they don't get supplies!) and use them so they get supplies next time. That usually means taking them back - apart from the occasional team left behind for scouting purposes.
Gruß
Joachim
-
The same advantage is given to human attackers.Originally posted by tooz:A lot of the Forum hounds tell me that the AI DOES NOT give itself some advantages.
Yeah, right.
From my experience, I'd guess that a line is drawn between the forces, and the neutral zone is put on both sides of it - with the occasional room for fixed units and small deviations from a straight front line.
To me it seems that the line between the players is based on the numbers or values of troops they have close to it, maybe even some kind of least squares approach.
As an attacker in a huge CMBB op, I reached the map edges with some recon elements while the mass of my units were finishing off one of the remaining AI pockets. My new setup line was only a few metres behind my forward ACs (their position remained fixed). I got the whole map - and except for some 40m kept it for the next battle - despite lost of SO inf in those pockets.
In the first battle of that op, I achieved only a small breakthru with a few recce forces to exploit it - and most of those units foundthemselves fixed in place way outside my new deployment zone - but nevertheless the AI enemy was moved back.
The 4th battle had me advancing towards a river. I ignored taking the city, only a foothold to protect my advance from flanking fire. Of course I got the city after the battle. Not to mention I was rewarded with both sides of the river, while I had merely reached my side - far from the bridges.
In short:
BFC, fix the new front lines in the defenders favor, allow for more flexibility (ie a small breakthru does not shift the whole front), and make them terrain sensitive (esp for rivers!). If this calls for a bigger battle window - this is the designers problem, along with his playtesters.
Gruß
Joachim
-
Thanks for the kind words...Originally posted by Biltong:Hi Guys,
It’s official. Scarhead will be taking over from me. He’s a statistician, which should come in very handy
Good luck Scarhead!! Hope you get as much satisfaction out of BCR as I did.
Biltong
As I was raised in a region where "not bad" is about the most praise you can get, I just lack the vocabulary to praise BCR. Guess taking over the work says it all.
Now to outline what I will do (and what not)
a) try to keep the spirit of BCR just as it was. Catering the grogs, those who want to improve their tactics and those just seeking fun. Of course the latter group will automatically be pushed into the other groups.
If during a battle you bang your head on the desk out of sheer frustration, I know I did my job right! Just make sure there are no sharp objects on the desk
expand the rules further, but I am not sure whether I will buy CMAK - East front is fine for me. So it is more likely to get '45 than El Alamein.c) I will probably not create any battle packs. If anybody feels like doing some special maps and a theme, please mail me (or advertise on the forum)
d) I plan to change the rules sheet a bit, partly inspired by Max Bauhaus' autoparameters. If it works as planned, everybody who understood the old rules will be able to understand the new rule sheet, as there should be only slight adjustments necessary to ease maintenance. There should be 3 more sheets: Auto-Rules (where you get auto-generated battle parameters), Auto-Experience-Calculator (for the after battle calculations) and a parameters sheet where the parameters are machine readable.
Just like most of the people here, I have a RL that consumes too much time, but 26 workdays left for holidays this year
. Gonna see what I can do.BTW: If anybody from BF.C wants to include a campaign system in CMAK or CM2, I'd be happy to volunteer and help.
Gruß
Joachim
-
Go ask Alice. When she was just small. </font>Originally posted by Seanachai:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ales Dvorak:
In CM I would like to see corn fields. How can simulate corn field in CM?
-
Now this is something I have to try!Originally posted by flamingknives:You can command the remaining tanks with infantry HQs.
This is nice as it gives access to combat bonuses and possibly stealth bonuses
Gruß
Joachim
-
Basically, I went through the sheets and made what changes I thought were appropriate (the key word being "thought"; I don't know enough to call these more than educated guesses). It all seems to work OK though.Originally posted by atiff:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scarhead:
Uuupuups... Memory failure.... But now that you mention it - yes, then thou art a veteran!
How exactly do you play as Soviets? Most things should work, except for the battle group sheet and the force size modifiers (+25% etc).
Counter and immediate attacks should switch more or less.
I'd like to investigate this and maybe have a look how to twitch the rules to allow playing both sides - if it is only a minor twitch of a few parameters. Only problem is playtesting, but it seems there is a Soviet playtester around
.I can send you the Excel file if you like, just let me know.
A couple of things I did change was the extent of many of the tables. In BCR 41 v2.3, the tables are all 1-10, but modifers can often take the number outside of this range. So I extended the range to the min and max possible, and added in a few values for variety.
EG: the "summer" weather table has Hot weather as far down as "1", but modifier can actually give you a number as low as -3, I think. So I extended the table to -3 as follows (roughly): 1 to -1: Hot, -2 Warm, -3 Hot. The Warm is thrown in for a bit of variety, but usually a low roll will give you Hot weather.
Similarly for ammo (and this is also relevant to the psots above), a modified roll of "10" or more in v2.3 gives you 10% ammo, and the modifers can be as bad as +7 IIRC. On my extended table, "10" (and 11) is 40% ammo IIRC, and then 12-13=30%, 14-15=20% and 16-17=10%. So you only get really low ammo if you roll badly in bad conditions (ie, with heavy modifiers)
Anyway, that's the deal so far. Like I said, I can post to anyone who wants it but it is still version 1.00. </font>
-
Remembering the quarter of Jena where I lived a few years ago, there were many coloured buildings: yellow, green and pink. Freshly renovated "Gründerzeit" (ca. 1900) buildings just like in Berlin.Originally posted by theike:Its true about the pink not being uncomon.
But im kinda viewing the citys in a whole here, in flight, and since there are only these few option buildings, that pink will be pretty much all over the place.
(and then everything gets a slight pinkish admosfere about it, if u know what i mean)
I think its best to go with the greys more, and the light ore dark more 'uncoloured' like colours, in more of a black to white tone. In general city's have a pretty grey/brown/white feel to it, in oversight, with just few coloured buildings. Well old city centers have grey to white buildings sometimes, and some regions go with white, but believe me in general its all set to a grey tone.
And as i said, there are only these few bmp's to go on.
Thats why i was so very happy with this grey building.
That one will make it all so much better.
Man im so glad.
JUJU is my man of the month...)
I dont know if i have seen this in the pic's already or not, but two slight different rooftops might do alot also.....
(Yes i think i see it now...)
Looking at Weimar - same thing
Heidelberg, Speyer, Düsseldorf - colours
Grey only as a result of air pollution (cars, industrial areas, fire...) and an overdue renovation. More likely in working class neighborhoods, in the industrial regions and in seasoned combat areas.
I opt for colours! Even if it is just to tell my troops "Storm that green building while the sIG flattens the pink one!"
Gruß
Joachim
-
If I have any favor left, I spend those 10 points for the ammo +1 modifier. That way I get at least 20% of ammo.Originally posted by j0ker:So I've finally made it to Week 2 of Jan. '42 (hooray for me) and this continuous process of getting about half my troops on the field with only 10% ammo is beginning to not be so much fun anymore.
I can understand that this was probably the way it was back then but - sheesh - having to crank out multiple games in one night because the AI calls ceasefire and hands me defeats because I don't have enough ammo & troops, I get the point already.
Any suggestions on how to tweak the #s a bit to make it more interesting? I hate to just go with 100% ammo, or with 100% troops, i know that's not entirely fair either.... (neither is repeatedly facing Allies +100%, but at least it's realistic, or so i've been told)
okay, can i whine any more. thank you. j0ker.
Some thoughts:
If the AI has only 10%, by pressing the "ceasefire" button, you can end the battle immediately. If this happens and you are on the defense, you have a total victory. For a meeting, you have a draw. On the attack, you have a total defeat. In those favourable cases - don't even set up :cool: . But you still have to do the replacements and other after battle calculations... :mad:
Conclusion:
Guess I have to change the rules so each side gets at least 20% ammo (before favor is spent
). The attacker should get at least 30%. IIRC it is only with immediate attacks the attacker gets less than that.So especially for your dire needs, the customer service of BCR delivers some ammo crates. If you get 10% ammo, boost it to 20%, as attacker boost it to 30%. Not very much, but fire discipline is crucial. Wait till you can see the white in the eyes of the TC. Do not spread out. Only defeat a portion of the attacking enemy. Delay him, do not destroy him while on the defense. On the offense: Concentrate on one flag and wait for the counter.
Your casualties before battle are annoying, I know. Your companies exp is dwindling. But remember: 3 consecutive battles with 50% losses and you're decimated. Lose all favor, but jump one month ahead - which ain't so bad after all. As you will likely experience this: Spend any favor you have on where you need it the most.
BTW: You do not need to follow each rule in BCR. The most important goal is to have fun! The rules try to be realistic and teach you that this is war, and you don't get what you want. But their full application depends on your personal level of masochism (Yes! beat me! whip me! give me rude names!
).BTW2:
At the moment, I can understand your problem. Glad I reached the 2nd week of 3/42. I (3500pts) expect a large random forces assault with +100 (ie some 16000 pts) while I am at 20% ammo on a huge map. Setup is crucial...
Gruß
Joachim
(IMPORTANT) extract the surviving forces from a closed battle
End of Op. score
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
Victory levels depend on how fast you reach the board edge or how far you progress - depending on the parameter setting. It is in the manual.
Gruß
Joachim