Sten
-
Posts
353 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Sten
-
-
Congrats and Good Luck!
Sten
-
Bullethead said:
What are you calling "large"? In this French-Gebirg scenario, I had the better part of a battalion. And I was trying flank moves; 2
platoons in the middle with flanking help from 1 on the right and 2 on the left, with the 6th in reserve for exploitation. I was just
defeated by a combination of defensive terrain and lack of firepower to blast out defenders.
[/QOUTE]
This could happen to anyone. ("On any given sunday...")
I don't have CM right here (working) so I can't check out the specific scenario. But from your description it sounds like yo could try som other approaches:
1. Use only one flanking move. It sounds like your forces are a bit on the weak side for a three-pronged attack.
2. Improve the timing. Your right flank move could do some serious harm, but only if the AI was surprised by it. That requires that the AI doesn't even see it before the fighting is really started on the left flank. And the defenders in the middle should not have LOF to the right flank.
3. Exploitation with inf only is hard. Are they mechanized? If not, you might ne better off thinking "Shwerepunkt" (sp?) and just commit everything at once.
These are just a few ideas that usually work well for me. Other things might work better for you.
You prob have even better tricks of your own. I'd be happy to take you on in a PBEM, so you can show me some of them.
Sten
-
Bullethead, that is spoiler info. Please edit it.
I have replied to your post in a new thread called 'General battle feedback' in the CM-Scenario Talk forum. Come on over and we'll talk some more, k?
Sten
[This message has been edited by Sten (edited 06-22-2000).]
-
Yeah, you're right.
Sergeant Huang, thanks for the jokes.
Very welcome to the board.
Sorry for the cheap potshot at your jokes.
Sten
[This message has been edited by Sten (edited 06-22-2000).]
-
windstarz,
I'm one of the betatesters. And the 250 is a very conservative guess.
I thought some more about it and 400 is prob a better guess. Two games a day for the last 6 months.Sten
-
There was this huge flamewar about the amassed firepower or armor rating or something from 1000 would equal one Tiger, thereby making them equal on the battlefield. This was all said to exemplify what someone percived as a flaw in TAOW's system.
I wasnb't involved, and this is all IIRC, someone else prob knows more about the details.
Sten
-
I still wonder if Huangs real name is Sokwoo Lee.
Sten
-
Christmas eve, yes but with a difference.
Here everybody gets JUST what they wished for.
Sten
I'll let you know when I get it.
-
-
CrapGame,
In the beginning I liked to pick units myself. But I soon discovered that I rarely chose certain units. Nowdays I always let the computer chose for me. It doesn't pick 97 'schrecks, and I get to know all those units I'd never choose myself.
But most importantly, picking units yourself makes a Quick Battle a pretty easy win, if you pick the most efficient troops for the job at hand.
Sten
Sten
-
Well...
The rush, rush, rush tactic is OK for relatively small, quick batlle-like maps.
In a larger scenario it's more important to get the defender to commit someplace so as to create a possibility for a flanking attack.
Sten
-
Sergeant Huang, is your full name Sokwoo Lee?
Sten
csipgs internal joke
-
John,
go through the enemies units after the fight. Note exactly what he had.
(You know that when you click 'Map' in the after game screen, FOW is off?)
I've played a guesstimated 250 games of quick battle. 3 or maybe 4 of those games were unwinable, IMHO, from either side.
If you want to make things harder for the AI, go fast. Remember that while you are slowly reconning your way forward, the AI is reconning YOU.
Don't give him the opportunity to move his defences.
Don't show AFVs until you think you know where the AI has his AT capability.
Smoke is good. Smoke is the attackers friend. Deny him info.
Halftracks should not be visible to the enemy after setup, even a small AT-gun will take several out before you can spot it.
Try these hints out and let us know how it goes, ok?
Sten
-
The main thing to consider is this:
- How much do I want the player to be able to rely on this unit?
I might leave a veteran platoon without backup, I know they'll hold.
I NEVER leave a green platoon without backup, if I can help it. There's just no way of telling how it'll react under fire.
If you want platoons that just surrender on sight, make them conscripts and set fanaticism to 0.
STen
-
I'm at work now, so I don't have the game here, but IIRC, this setting is global right?
Sten
-
They're 'global' within the scenario.
But why don't you make an operation with a sloping map with dry conditions as the first battle, and then change the ground conditions for the next battle?
Sten
-
The previously hidden US 50mm AT gun fires at my Panthers front armor.
"Upper hull hit. Shell breaks up."
Three or four pieces of the shell ricochets in diffrent directions. Whew!
But, hang on. Where's that scream coming from?
Hit the back button. Replay. Let the camera follow the HQ that was running 20m away from the tank, not in the line of fire or anything. If I look really, really careful I can actually see the ricochet hit. And it manages to knock out two of the four guys in the HQ.
Does that answer your question?
Or how about this:
I once played a friend of mine who is a very good ASL player. Any ASL player worth his mettle knows the value of recon by fire. So, without having spotted ANY of my troops, he opened up with two .30 cals on a light two-storey building. He kept at it for two full turns.
I had one platoon and two LMGs in there when he started. After two turns I had lost one LMG and a total of eight men, two of them placed in the back of the building.
When I asked him later why he fired on that building he said:
- Well I was never going to run out of ammo, considering the length of the scenario and that house wasn't half-bad as a surprise strong point. I was right, right?
I wish I could send you a picture of the grin on his face.
Does that answer your question?
Sten
-
I'm not 100 but 99.9% sure that there won't be a problem. I think CM has been tested for that card.
Sten
-
Sorry. I forgot that the problem was new to you.
There are two smoke graphics. You can switch between the two whenever you like.
One of the graphics is sprite-based and NOT AT ALL as good looking as the other, but it works on all systems.
The other is polygon-based and looks absolutely fabulous on every system I've seen except on those that utilizes Voodoo2.
There is nothing BTS can do about it, apparently the problem lies in how DirectX interfaces against the Voodoo2 card. Look at my previous post to see how to work around the problem.
The problem is non-fixable in the sense that you simply can not get the good smoke graphics on a Voodoo2 card. All other cards work fine.
Accept the blockish smoke, use the not-so-good-looking smoke, use the workaround or get a new 3D-card.
I've been looking at the blockish smoke since january. Not a day goes by when I don't curse myself for not upgrading my 3D-card.
Hope this helps,
Sten
-
It is not a fixable problem.
Charles cursed over this back in november when we noticed it. But there is a way around it.
Delete your prefs-file.
Start CM.
When CM asks 'Do you see this?' don't click anything if the box says Voodoo2. After a few seconds, the box disappears and CM assumes that you don't have/don' want to use Voodoo2.
It will be a serious framerate hit, but it's ok, cause the smoke looks really cool.
Sten
-
WendellM gets 3 cool points for a correct answer.
I was telling my friend about CM and all the amassed knowledge on this board. He said:
- Oh yeah? How long do you think it'd be before someone comes up with the right answer for this question.
The question was obviously chosen due to its odd nature rather than relevance..
I lost the bet, BTW, my guess was under an hour. It took 20, and then it came from a lousy web-search..
I'll ask him to come up with a harder question.
Sten
"Keep your whiskey on the rocks and your tanks on the roll." - Old Inuit proverb
-
What was the name of Himmler's masseur?
Sten
-
Ciril,
"Does CM simulate the differences in vehicle profiles?"
Yes.
"For instance when a Sherman turns from frontal to side facing its silhouette
changes less than when an M3 halftrack does the same."
Yes, that is modelled. It takes some time to grasp, but when they say "true 3D", they mean TRUE 3D!
"What happens to the silhouette value when the vehicle is hull down?"
The silhouette value is unchanged, you just can't see as much of it as before.
(Sorry, couldn't resist.) Shots are modelled in 3D as well, so a shot that hit the lower front armour in a non-hull-down tank would hit a wall instead, if there was one. A shot that hit the turret in the same non-hull-down tank would still hit the turret.
Sten
-
BTS, thanks for the heads-up.
The last stridsvagn S was delivered during 1971 and the whole concept was based on an idea from mid fifties by a guy named Berge.
I know there was some discussion of scrapping it during the late eighties, but I thought they decided to keep it for a few more years. Apparently, I was wrong. (I'm getting pretty used to that, what with all the knowledge collected on this board...
Damn shame it's discontinued. It was waaaay cool.
Sten
100 Jeeps and 1 Tiger
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
I decided to test this. It was fun looking at the Jeeps scurrying to and fro all over the map. Like 100 mice trying to avoid the one cat. The Tiger only fired it's main gun 10 times. The rest of the Allied casualities was from MG fire.
Could someone try this in TOAW 1 please.
Her's the AAR.
Allied Attacker Axis Defender
28 casualities (6 KIA)
61 vehicles knocked out
Men OK: 147 Men OK: 5
Score: 0 Score: 100
Axis Total Victory
Sten