Wolfe
-
Posts
1,054 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wolfe
-
-
Yes, I definitely look forward to reading AARs to see how different folks use their assets. They're both informative *and* entertaining!
I assume the battle is over, and so we can freely talk about it? If not, then hopefully, I won't give away any spoilers. If it's not over, then STOP READING (especially Chris)!!!
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Fionn, I was shocked that you didn't pick any AT pillboxes. I really thought you would. Giving your opponent something they *HAVE* to deal with instead of automatically attacking only the objectives can help greatly with whittling down his forces as well as wasting his time with ancillary threats. And no really big German tanks? Awwww ...
I was also surprised at the low number of infantry you went with. Why do I get the feeling that we're going to see how well you can hold on by your fingernails?
Did Chris choose his units or did the computer? If he chose, then is there any chance Chris might write a little bit about his force choices as well as his overall plan of attack?
Thanks.
- Chris (no, a different one)
-
If your video card is an AGP card, then try going into your BIOS and set the Aperture to the smallest setting (4MB, I believe). On larger maps with many units, I would get complete system lockups (especially with smoke turned on). Schrullenhaft's suggestion in other threads to adjust the AGP Aperture setting seems to have solved this problem for me (knock on plastic).
Nice work, Schrully. Would be nice to see some of his (and other's) suggestions put into a FAQ for reference.
BTW, in general, having DX7 along with the latest reference drivers for your video card, sound card, and even mouse is usually recommended when running CM. Seems to solve lots of probs.
Click on the unit and hit Enter. If the unit has 'Should Exit for Points' in the window, then it will give you more points when exited. If it doesn't, then it won't give you the points. Also, if any of your units with the 'Should Exit for Points' message are killed, your opponent gets double the points; once for the kill and once for preventing it from escaping.
Good luck.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-20-2000).]
-
I think I got the same thing when playing Sherbrooke Fusiliers. Using a TRP, I tried shifting fire within the TRP's zone. I must have accidentally moved it too far (even though the line was still green for adjust fire the entire time). It showed '2 mins' as ETA. So that 'adjust fire' ability was lost. Frustrated at my mistake, I then cancelled the entire fire mission (hit the X key) to start over. But bizarrely, when I tried targeting with that FO again, the game still showed me the green adjust fire line instead of a new targeting line and it said '2 mins' when in fact it should have been 44 secs for placing it on top of a TRP. I kept canceling and trying over and over. I even tried targeting a different TRP, then starting to target again, but hit the spacebar to cancel the new target hoping it would correct the current target orders. Nope.
Even more strangely, I could move the line all over the map on places where there were no TRPs, even to the extreme corners, and it would still show as green adjust target with a 2 min ETA. I tried targeting different TRPs, enemy troops, my own men, and even switched to different units and the back to the FO to try to get rid of this weird setting. Nothing helped. I finally gave up, cancelled his targeting orders, and hit 'Go'. The next turn, he was back targeting normally again. I could target a TRP, and would get the correct targeting line with a '44 sec' ETA. Strange.
Unfortunately, I don't have any save files from it. Hope that's enough to point BTS in the right direction.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-20-2000).]
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Tchaikovsky: 1812 Overture; the one with Erich Kunzel and the Cincinatti Symphony Orchestra<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh puhleeeease!
If you want the 1812 get this recording:Absolutely superb. Also includes excellent Marche Slave, Steppes of Central Asia, Polovtsian dances, and Russian Easter Festival Overture.
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>running in 1152 res on the desktop, and I have never gotten a higher option available in the game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, you'd need to run your desktop at the res (or higher) that you want to run CM in. It's a Direct-X limitation. You can't run CM at 1280x960 while your desktop is at 1024x768. You *can*, however, do the reverse.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I'm one of those poor souls whose 3D card can do 1920x1440 but my monitor can't.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, CM can only go up to 1600x1200 anyway.
BTW, I run CM on my Voodoo5 at 1024x768 with 4xFSAA. FSAA (along with the LOD tweak) really helps with the sparkling trees and shimmering building textures in CM. And it makes the buildings and AFVs seem much more solid. I wanted to run CM in 1280x960 using 4xFSAA, but unfortunately, the V5 isn't quite that powerful, especially when there's lots of smoke on the screen. Still a GREAT upgrade from my V2. Though there's no PCI version yet.
I agree with KMHPaladin, the only real choice currently for PCI-only folk is the V3. There is supposedly a TNT2 Ultra in PCI form (Asus, I think), but I have no idea where to actually find the product.
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Any reference material you have, or even better yet photos of peoples own models<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You guys probably already know about this page, but just in case:
Their links page has a bunch of links to other scale model sites.
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What would be really cool, and which can't be done in CM at this time, if ever, is to have tanks with dismounted crews. It's a maintenance area, or refueling, or something.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, having unmanned vehicles would make Villers-Bocage a much more realistic scenario.
And it would be nice if CM were more flexible in the setup of Operations. Such as allowing text between battles in an Operation to explain different parts of the Op. Also allowing scenarios within an Op to be different lengths. I was hoping to create a 3 or 4 part Op with the first being a ~10 min job where US forces had to screen German bunkers with smoke while Polish Paras dropped in a nearby field in full view of the German MGs protecting the complex. The next battle would be a 30~40 min assault on the bunker complex. The next would be US tanks that show up having to cross the bridge (or road or whatever) the complex was overlooking without getting shredded by any remaining AT bunkers.
Also, having complete control over some units such as a command car that has a Colonel who drives up (ostensibly to give you your scenario instructions) and then drives off the map with no control allowed to the player. Or allowing reinforcements to be oriented in a certain direction when they arrive. I wanted to have a Panther reversing down a road as if he were firing on unseen US tanks pursuing him. Unfortunately, you can't control the orientation of arriving reinforcements (they always point to the middle of the map). These kinds of small touches would allow you to create a bit more ambience in scenarios. Oh well, maybe CM2.
BTW, BTS has said they hope to update older games with the newer engines as they're released. Hopefully, they'll be able to update CM1 with new features from the CM2 engine.
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All the fire for all the AAA guns in CM (AFAIK) has its fire amalgomated into a single "CM-shot".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hmmm. Well, I had a Churchill tank fast moving laterally receiving fire from a 20mm flak gun in a scenario. (see this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/007549.html )
I watched as 4 shells would come out of the gun, 1 might hit the tank giving one ricochet sound along with the ricochet message above the tank, and the other 3 would miss the tank, and give one sound of hitting the ground behind. Atleast that's what I _thought_ I saw and heard.
Try setting up a laterally fast moving tank against a Flak gun and see if some shots from the 4-shell barrage don't miss (both visually and sound-wise) while others hit. I'm *pretty* sure it wasn't multiple rounds from different guns, but unfortunately, I'm not completely certain.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-17-2000).]
-
Have been playing a Quick Battle against the AI. I chose Canadian Combination forces, and let the AI choose it's forces from German Infantry. I figured the AI would choose a pillbox or two and other AT guns. Nope. Instead, it chose a *whole* lot of Flak guns.
It was certainly enjoyable to watch all those 20mm shells bounce off the armor of my Churchill VIII tanks.
The first turn the Flak opened up, one Churchill was hit ~52 times by Flak shells. All in one 60 second turn! This tank was eventually immobilized, but many shells had hit the tracks, but did no damage. One finally got it. But I also had a decent number of gun hits, none of which did any damage to the Churchill's gun.While it was great fun to watch, I was a bit disappointed that the AI chose a force that was completely incapable of dealing with any heavy armor I might choose. Now if I had chosen to use Mechanized forces instead, I can see why the AI might choose all that Flak; my light armor would have been shredded by it! As it was, my armor was invincible.
If you'd like to try the scenario, it's at:
http://users.erols.com/chare/cm/Ricochet_Alley.zip
Good luck. Don't worry, you won't need it.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-17-2000).]
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>After the game, I found that under its kill listing, it had scored "1 Wespe".<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
LOL! I wonder how the game scores that. Do you lose points for losing the Wespe but also gain the same number of points for the kill?
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>the Marker SHOULD be along the edge.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
If this change is made, be sure to nuke the woods and scattered trees along the back edge at the entry point. CM will occasionally place reinforcements *between* wooded tiles in the small areas that are "open ground", making them very difficult to maneuver. Some units may even be completely trapped in certain circumstances.
And scattered trees with snow present an immobilization hazard.
*Great* scenario, by the way. Mucho fun. If you haven't been spoiled, then go play it NOW! And even if you have, play it anyway!
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-16-2000).]
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>First, a PSW234/3 armoured car stumbles across a lone Amis infantry squad. What do the "men of steel" do? Fire a burst at the Amis, who do not return fire, then *abandon* their armoured car!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sure there wasn't a .50 cal around? I lost a Puma to a M3A1 HT in one game (side armor shot). The .50 can take out German HTs with aplomb. A penetration chart:
http://www.bigtimesoftware.com/images/mgvsht.jpg
The Puma has the same amount of side armor as the HTs, but it's at a lesser angle, so is more vulnerable than the HTs. And your armored car is even worse!
Side armor (Turret, Upper Hull, Lower Hull):
HT 250 n/a, 8@35, 8@35
HT 251 n/a, 8@35, 8@35
Puma 10@25, 8@30, 8@30
A. Car 8@40, 8@25, 8@35
Just a thought.
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DEF BUNGIS:
Wolfe, I will be more than happy to test it when I get back from the bush. Be back on 22 July 00.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Cool, thanks. Hopefully the patch will be out and my scenario fixed by then.
- Chris
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Better rotate. As of now the rotate rotates around a camera spot, but usually I want to circle around my focus. As it is now I always have to follow up a rotate with scrolling.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Install the 1.01 patch and use Shift-J.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Key/mouse combination to rotate 180 degrees (i.e. reverse).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hit the forward slash key '/'.
- Chris
-
You looked at the JagdTiger from the side? Well, you might want to look at the side ARMOR while you're at it. Hmmm. 80mm at 25 degrees. Mix in a 76mm gun firing either AP or (gasp!) Tungsten rounds on said side armor at 1000m or less (2000 for the Tungsten rounds), and you'll have a very large, very expensive hulk of burning metal.
FEAR the scurrying little rats!
[insert hideously evil laugh here]
Just thought I'd point that out.
- Chris
-
You might be able to fit a Zook team in with them. I think you can with HTs.
- Chris
-
In creating a scenario, I had placed a tank dug-in (because I kinda wanted it there
) but didn't padlock the sucker. And the AI moved it during setup! Arrgh! So, yes, padlocking is sometimes necessary. I read there is a bug that, during setup, you can choose a non-padlocked unit, bring up the orders menu (spacebar), hit the plus or minus keys to cycle through your units, and when you come to a padlocked unit, the option to move it is supposedly there. I haven't tried it, though.
BTW, has anyone heard anything lately about the new patch (1.03?). I'd read it might fix the bug where units that have exit points refuse to leave the map. I have a scenario featuring a convoy. It's essentially finished (though I'm the only one who's tested it yet), but it's currently broken because of the bug.
If you're bored and want to try it anyway (note the AI doesn't handle the German convoy properly), it's at:
http://users.erols.com/chare/cm/
- Chris
-
Yeah, I get the same thing with mortars. See:
http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/006431.html
And I just lost an M8 Howitzer vehicle last night to a German 81mm mortar top hit.
Though I'm not sure I really want BTS to tweak the accuracy. In QB's against the AI, I'm often fighting hordes of HTs!
If the TacAI can see the mortar team, it'll take it under fire and, from my experience, also move away from it. Though they do seem to just sit there if the mortars are unseen.
- Chris
-
Use the Move command rather than Fast.
Be aware of their experience level. Regular vehicles take ~13 secs to start moving, Vets take ~8 secs, etc. You may need to use the pause command on vehicles near the back. Or use Fast initially on the lead vehicles for a short distance to get them more spaced out near the front, then change the command to Move so the rest of the convoy can keep up.
Also stagger the vehicles (i.e. one on the rightish side of the road, the one behind it rides on the left, then right, then left ... etc).
You may even want some vehicles to travel off-road next to the road. Such as HTs on Fast rather than having them within the convoy. Just be aware of any adverse ground conditions off the side of the road such as wet, snow, and tree-ed areas.
- Chris
-
Warning: ***Huge Spoilers for the scenario!!! ***
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Man, now I'm depressed. I intially ran into the ambush on the right side and had my entire platoon shot up, but I recovered and waited for my Arty to arrive. I managed to take out 3 AT guns with well placed 81 and 105 shells! At the same time I had managed to work 9 HTs and 2 nearly full platoons up the left side jumping from point to point behind the trees. I was also able to nestle a Pz-IV with them.
The guns were gone, I had troops supported by HTs, 81mm mortars, and a tank approaching the big hill on the left. It was only turn 25, and I was feeling confident.
That was until those damn M10's showed up. I thought, no prob; they're just open topped targets with very slow turrets. I'll just pop up my lone tank on the left out, my 3 on the right side of the map, and my 2 hiding nicely behind the mound in the middle nearest the German side. That kind of massed firepower that's spread out over a large area should give the AI's thin skinned, slow turning turreted AFVs real fits. Hell, it oughta be a slaughter!
I was right, it *WAS* a slaughter, but not the kind I had in mind. In 2 turns, I lost all 6 remaining Pz-IV's and only killed 1 M10. 5 shots from my 75mm guns ricocheted off that so-called "thin" armor. His 76mm shells were not so kind to my tanks. And that damned plane took out my 2 hull down Pz-IVs in the center; both of whom had an M10 in their sights and dialed in!
All that work using careful planning and purposeful movement completely washed away in two measly turns. *sigh* I guess I'll have lots of time to think about it during my stay in the POW camp.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-07-2000).]
-
Is it demonstrably faster than your TNT card? I thought I'd read the M64 TNT2 chips weren't much faster than the original TNT at resolutions higher than 800x600 and especially when using 32bit color depth?
Anand did a review, though unfortunately, he doesn't compare it with the original TNT:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1058
$54 is still hard to beat, though.
- Chris
-
Hmmm. Just thought of something. The force purchases are currently limited for QBs (i.e. you can't buy all armor in a 'combined' scenario). That might be enough to limit excessive arty purchases. So maybe it won't be such a big deal after all.
- Chris
-
I certainly can understand having overwhelming artillery available, especially as Allies. But the TRPs seem to me to make the Arty too powerful and too accurate. It can reach areas that you don't have LOS to and brings down arty in a hurry. The first 240mm shells begin to fall just at the end of turn 1. Without LOS or TRP, it would be more like ~5 mins worth of waiting.
I've tried (played through completely) a 3400 point scenario (2000 defender) that consisted of 8 smaller Arty batteries (mostly 81mm, 75mm, 4.2in, and 105) along with 2 81mm and 3 60mm mortar teams, 2 81mm mortar HTs, 2 Sherm 105s, and no TRPs. Even with a balanced force, the attacker can still afford a good amount of arty.
The scenario itself wasn't too difficult, but then I knew both force compositions and was playing against the AI.Even after a very long barrage, the defenders in the village still put up a fight whereas in the arty experiment, the town was nearly gone.
The experiment's defenders only had remaining ~1 platoon worth of ambush units in front of the town, 2 tanks behind the town, and ~3 platoons spread out among a couple of flag points behind the town. The bombardment completely gutted any type of centralized defense, leaving the remainder as easy, isolated pickings. Well, ok the Panther may have been a bit of a challenge.
If there were no TRPs available to the attacker, the shells would have been much less accurate (even with direct LOS), and I don't think the town defenders would have been made completely combat ineffective the way they were. There were a good many broken units in scattered trees just outside the town to go along with the 100+ casualties.
Certainly not every scenario is going to be exactly balanced, but I'm not sure I'd enjoy playing the defender in that circumstance. One experimental (and somewhat unrealistic) scenario may not be enough to invalidate the idea of attackers having TRPs available, but at this point I'd lean against the idea. I also think the defender's TRPs should be limited to his own setup area. Covering a likely route of entry for the attackers with a TRP is one thing; being able to drop loads of ordnance on his setup area seems a bit gamey to me. Just MHO.
Whew! That was longer than I intended.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-03-2000).]
-
With the new point limits that are coming in the next patch, I used the editor to set up a battle with the attackers getting 3400 points and the defenders 2000 points. As attacker, I could afford a company of infantry to go along with FO spotters consisting of: 2 240mm Arty batteries, 3 105's, 2 155's, 4 4.2in,, 1 4.5in, 3 81mm mortars, and 8 TRPs.
I set the 8 TRPs underneath various buildings in town, and proceeded to completely level it. One building died in the first turn, 2 in the 2nd, 9!!! in the 3rd, and 2 more in the 4th and 5th turns. These were the large heavy building types, not rinky dink little houses. Results: 113 enemy casualties (40% of his force) and 2 knocked out vehicles, and that was only 5 turns worth.
This makes the prospect of having the defenders with 5000 points and attackers with ~8500 points a truly horrific concept. Try it yourself and see.
Now I *do* think the QBs needed some more points to create larger battles, and am glad to see that BTS upped the point limit, but was shocked at how the TRPs turned voluminous amounts of artillery into highly accurate nuclear weapons.
So, yes, giving the attackers TRPs might not be a good idea. Even giving them to *defenders* with virtually unlimited buying power might be a bad thing.
BTW, I also noticed that TRPs weren't limited to their own setup zones. I could move them around at will, even into the enemy's setup area! Not a good idea, IMO. This is true in the VoT demo too.
- Chris
[This message has been edited by Wolfe (edited 07-02-2000).]
Fionn - please keep posting your excellent AAR's!
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fionn:
A pillbox is a stationary defence, and as with all stationary defences once it is noticed it can be avoided by careful use of masking terrain.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
True, but it can also effectively cut off a section of the battlefield, preventing it's use. And if the area covered by the AT gun is important enough to his overall plan, he'll have to deal with the pillbox. Either that or change his plan. Ruining other people's grand plan is *SO* much fun!
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I prefer my units to be mobile since that way an opponent can['t simply "avoid" one of my units by using some masking terrain. Mobility greatly increases the potency of a defensive unit and IMO it is better to buy 1 Panther than 2 pillboxes.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Guess I'm just more of a static-defense kinda guy.
BTW, Fionn, how long did it take Chris to realize that he lost a certain asset (your favorite, I believe
) very early in the game?
- Chris