Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

kverdon

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    106

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by kverdon

    Lighting a candle for the "Kursk"

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Well things are not lookng good frown.gif. Man I wish they'd asked for help sooner. It very well could be that neither the US, British, Norwegian or anybody's Navy could get to those trapped submariners but it would at least feel better that all means had been tried. I know there is the question of security but REALLY how much would US Submariners learn from assisting in the rescue? The ships systems are offline, its half full of water, the missiles are in their closed silos. The rescuers would have more than enough to do just comleting the rescue. I supose they could be worried about a US intel type getting loose on the sub but in its current state I doubt they would learn much of REAL use.

    As to whether or not she'll be raised and refitted. I'd doubt it. I'm willing to bet that the sub sustained significant damage in its uncontrolled dive to the bottom not to mention the damage that she sustained in whatever explosion causing her to loose control. There is mention of a debries field around the sub. They may raise her but I'd significantly doubt that the Russian Navy has the fund to repair the damage she's taken.

    Perhaps this disaster will help the respective parties think about how to avoid such a loss of life in the future. Its a start that we are training together on how to effect a space station rescue, maybe well start to look at other areas.

    Kevin

    0

    Tank-Grogs: plz Identify!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I was reading Steve Zaloga's, Colin Bane's "

    Dday Tank Warfare" and they mention that a German Arty officer by the name of Alfred Becker shipped a bunch of captured French/British vehicles back to his familly contacts in the German industry and had them converted to odd SP guns and Halftracks. Could this be one such conversion?

    Kevin

    0

    Lighting a candle for the "Kursk"

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    This really is a sad event. My heart goes out to those 116 trapped crewmen. The Russian reluctance to let the US assist may be two-fold. In the first-place there is the military security risk of letting US sub-types muck about with one of their premium subs. The OSCAR is the Russian's big hitter against US carrier groups and I suppose it is conceivable that they would rather let those 116 crewmen die than let us get near an Oscar. Life is cheaper in Russia. The other point is that the US resuce teams might not be able to do that much. When the US designed the DSRV program to rescue disabled sub crews, they offered the plans for the hatching mating mechanism to the Solviets who turned them down. Ergo, our DSRV's probably could not make with the Russian sub. All this is kind of ironic in light of the current joint US/Russian exercise being run to practise for a space station rescue opperation. Too bad we could not of had that kind of opperation earlier. Granted the Space station is not a front line weapons system.

    From what I've read, The reactors have to be shut down give the attitude of the sub on the bottom. The Reactor's cooling system pulls water up from the bottom of the ship and with those vents burried in the muck of the ocean floor, they can't run the reactors. They had estimated that the crew would have another 48hours or so but given that the Russians have 0 rubbles for maint, the battery system may not be up to snuff.

    keeping hope,

    Kevin

    0

    Relieving the Rangers Wild Bill?- Spoiler

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Wild Bill,

    you said,

    "but there is time to approach cautiously"

    you did this masterfully. Too slow and you'll be chewed up from the rear, too fast and you'll get bushwhacked. Very well done. I'd love to see you do a full Arnhem set. You could do a set like CC2 with 4 different Opperations. Son/Veghel/Schindel, Nigmeghan/Grosbeck,Arnhem/Ostrebeck. Pardon the spelling.

    Keep up the fantastic work.

    Kevin

    0

    Relieving the Rangers Wild Bill?- Spoiler

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    First Off, Wild Bill----Excellent Scenario!!!!!

    Spoilers Below*****************************

    **

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    Wild Bill,

    Thanks for doing the excellent Relieving the Rangers scenario. What a fight!!!! I managed an allied Tactical Victory and wonder if that is about all you could expect to achieve given the cicumstances. I lost two Shermans to the initial Tank ambush on turn one but manged to get the two MkIVh's and the TigerI. I split one squad for scouts and used them and one of the M4-76w's to scout ahead. I loaded up the rest of the troops on the remaining Shermans. This served well as one of the split squads tripped the 88 ambush. It fired on the troops and then my lead Sherman moved up and took it out. In the mean time, the Rangers were holding their own with the judicious use of the 105 arty. After cleaning out the 88, I cleared the town and knocked out the re-inforcing STU42 but lost another Sherman to the Tiger. This turn I made my biggest mistake in that I sent a squad of Rangers and two bazooka teams to guard the flank the Tiger and STU appeared on in case there was more armor. They, of course, ran into the re-inforcing Volksgrenadiers accompaning the armor and were captured. The dug in Rangers and the 105's had pretty much stabilized the Rangers left flank so I moved most of the Rangers on the left flank over to the right to counter the new threat of the new Volksgreanadiers. My 3 remaining Shermans moved out of the town with the infantry just as the German Infantry was entering it from the rear. After some supressing fire, I was able to race 2 of the Shermans the road to help the Rangers. The other Sherman and the infantry moved in to pincer the Volksgrenadiers. The last salvo on 105's I dropped on the town as I left and if slowed up the German infantry that had been following my armor. This is pretty much how it ended with me incontrol of the crossroads 125 casualties on my side and 250 on the Germans. Can the US realistically expect to do better? Trading 3 Shermans for 2 MkIVh's, 2 Tigers and a STU42 seems pretty good to me. Granted, I lost some troops with my Bazooka patrol but they DID expose the Volksgrenadier flanking movement on the Rangers right.

    Thanks again for a GREAT fight!

    Kevin

    [This message has been edited by kverdon (edited 08-10-2000).]

    0

    Bag Pipes?!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Ok, I wasn't imaging it, I found a reference to the piper that lead Lord Lovat's Troops to the relief of Pegasus Bridge. I thought the folling quote would be of interest to the thread here. The following quote is from Piper Bill Millin, No1 Special Service Bge. as quoted in "Pegasus Bridge/Merville Battery" ISBN:0850526426

    'I stopped piping immediately across the road from the cafe. There was a battle going on. There were huge columns of black smoke and even from where I was standing I could hear shrapnel and bullets or whatever hitting off the metal side of the bridge. Wounded were being carried up from the canal banks and then to the cafe. It was a real hot spot. Lovat went forward to speak with Major Howard and he said "John, today we are making history". Lovat came to me and said "Right, we'll cross over. Now, don't play until I tell you". So we walked over ducking because of the snipers. We almost go to the ohter side and he said, "Right play now and keep playing all the way along this road until you come to another bridge and keep playing right across - no matter what just keep playing."'

    0

    Tigers? No spank you!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    What I think people have to remember is that the fantastic feat of Michael Whittman is just that, a fantastic feat. Alot of things went his way. If one of the Firefly tanks had been a bit quicker or if one of a hundred other variable had gone against him (I read that one tanks gunner was taking a leak when Whittmans tank drove right past its muzzle..)thing could have been different. There is just no way to re-create what happened at that battle. A human opponent and even the TAC-AI has much better control and co-ordination of his forces that the Brits did that day.

    Kevin

    0

    Indirect Fire

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Got search working at home (still locks up the PC at work and found this about the mortars from an earlier thread about mortars. Thanks to MadMatt for the following:

    Kevin

    ***************************************************************

    Ok ok ok,

    Perhaps it is time to explain how this works ONCE AND FOR ALL...

    Turn on your thinking caps children as its schooling time.

    Think of this as a mini FAQ on Onboard Indirect Mortar Procedure and TRP Useage!!!

    This process is called Onboard Indirect Fire, or OIF for short, and it works slightly different from the FULL VERSION and the DEMO. Since the full version will very likely be shipping soon that is what I am going to focus on although I will mention the difference between the two as there is only one...

    First off, what do you need to have to make this work? A mortar team IN COMMAND from a HQ unit, any HQ unit! If multiple HQ's are in the vicinity and within command radius the HIGHEST RANKING unit will take command. Once the mortar is within command if may fire at ANY AREA AND UNIT(in the demo he may ONLY fire at areas and NOT units, that is the difference!) within Line of Sight (LOS) of the HQ unit.

    Can the mortar team MOVE and still perform OIF? Yes as long as he stays within valid command radius of the HQ and the HQ's maintains its LOS to the target area or unit.

    Can the HQ unit Move and still provide spotting and command to the mortar team performing OIF? Yes, again as long as he can see the target and maintains command of the mortar team.

    What happens if command and control (C&C) is broken between the HQ AND/OR LOS to the target is broken (due to smoke, the HQ moving etc...)while the mortar team is firing OIF? The mortar team will cease fire immediately. It will resume firing within the same turn if C&C to the HQ unit, LOS to the target or both (depending on what caused the unit to cease firing) is re-established.

    Can a HQ provide spotting and command for multiple mortar teams? Yes, again so long as he has a LOS to the target and the teams are within his command radius he may command as many mortar teams as can fit into this command radius.

    Can multiple mortar teams that are under C&C of a single HQ unit fire on multiple targets? Yes, the targeting is actually done (drawn out from) the individual team.

    So, how DO I target OIF? Man, you ask allot of dumb questions don't you?

    Ok, Here is how you do it: First tuck your mortar team(s) somewhere nice and safe and preferably on a reverse slope or behind a building. Then get a HQ unit close enough to provide C&C and also with a good LOS to expected enemy axis of advance or strongpoint. During the orders turn you can use the LOS tool FROM THE HQ, to view what he can see. Anything that is within his Valid LOS (a blue line in the LOS tool) is a valid target for the mortar teams. To target, select the mortar team, select the Target option (T KEY) and then drag the targeting line out to the area (demo only: see below) or unit you wish to target. Since the target is out of LOS the tool will say SIGHT BLOCKED. However when you 'select' the target or area (left click) the target bar will STICK and show a targeted area fire line. When you see that the team will fire.

    In the demo, why can't a mortar OIF target a UNIT? In the demo, when you target a specific unit you are in essence telling the mortar team to wait until the targeted unit comes into LOS of the team regardless of if the HQ can see them or not. This was changed in the Full Version and now when you target a unit out of LOS using OIF the method of firing will actually SWITCH to area fire for you. Basically it will target the ground UNDER the unit and not the unit itself but ONLY when firing with OIF(see below)!

    Won't this effect the ability to target moving targets that are within the Mortars teams LOS? No, since the game can now differentiate between a target out of LOS from the team, but within LOS of the HQ, and targets that can be seen BY the team. If a mortar team can SEE a target they will adjust fire on it automatically if the target moves. Adjusted fire in not preformed if they are firing OIF. But remember, we are only talking about 60 seconds here and if a targeted unit has passed beyond the barrage zone you can simply retarget the units new position and resume firing ,assuming the enemy is still within LOS of the HQ.

    What happens if my mortar team is in C&C to a HQ but the target is within the teams LOS? The mortar team will fire on the target using it's normal DIRECT FIRE which will obviously be more accurate and will not require the HQ unit for C&C or spotting.

    What are TRP's? These are Target Reference Points and basically are areas PRE-SIGHTED for fire from offboard and onboard mortars.

    What are the advantages of a TRP? Faster reaction time (for offboard arty) and MUCH GREATER accuracy for both onboard mortars and offboard arty.

    How do I use a TRP? For offboard artillery you would target the TRP with the assigned spotter. For onboard mortars, you would target the TRP from the team itself.

    Do I need to have LOS to the TRP? No, this is NOT required since the target area has been pre-plotted prior to the battle.

    How do I place a TRP? This is done in the setup phase and it is moved and placed just like any normal unit. One thing make note of is that TRP's can be placed OUTSIDE of the normal colored setup area. This effectively means you can pre-sight ANY spot on the map for your mortars and offboard artillery.

    Do I need a HQ unit to fire on a TRP? No, the mortar team does not need a HQ to fire on a TRP since they already have the co-ordinates for this area setup.

    Can a mortar team Move and still target a TRP? No, once you move, all those fancy trajectory calculations and ballistics formulas your team had to that TRP are screwed up.

    You said above that if I moved my mortar team they couldn't fire on a TRP but I tried this and they DID fire on it!! Does this mean you are wrong? Why you little punk! I outa pull out my whipping stick and whack you one! The reason the team was able to fire was due to one of two things occurring: 1). The TRP was in fact within LOS of the team itself and what they were doing was firing normal direct Area Fire or 2). The TRP was within a HQ's LOS which had C&C to the mortar team and they were actually firing OIF at that area. This type of fire will not be as accurate as normal TRP targeted fire. Don't EVER doubt me again PUNK!

    Can a spotter move and still target a TRP? Yes...

    Can dual purpose and direct fire infantry guns, onboard (88's, 105's, sIG', quad 20mm's etc..) target the TRP and more importantly gain the accuracy benefit? If they can see it they can target it (DOH!) but they do not IIRC gain any special accuracy benefit from it. TRP's are meant for offboard artillery assets and mortars.

    WHY??? Cause I said so!

    Can spotter for offboard artillery target a area outside of their valid LOS? Yes, but expect the pattern to be fairly scattered and there may (again, I need to verify this) be an added delay on the firing time.

    Can a spotter that is under C&C from an HQ unit spot 'through' the HQ like the mortar teams above? Umm, NO!

    Now, is that CLEAR???

    Madmatt

    p.s. DAMN, I spent all that time spellchecking this and I go and spell 'Procedure' wrong in the Thread title!! DOH!!!

    ------------------

    If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

    CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission

    Combat Mission HQ

    0

    Indirect Fire

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Ok, I know this has been hashed over before. I have searched before (I can't seem to do a search now, if I do the browser locks up, IE 5.5 problem????). I've got a few questions/clarifications on Indirect fire, both Onboard Mortars and Offboard Arty. I've read the manual and previous searchs and am still a bit confused. Please bear with me and see if I'm getting this correct.

    On Board Mortar Indirct Fire:

    If I'm getting this right, if you have mortar units on the map they may fire at units out of thier LOS IF they are in command range of Leader that has a LOS to the Target. Is this correct? The manual makes a reference to on board mortars not being able to fire indirectly if they have moved from their initial positions? Can mortars move and still indirect fire at a unit in the LOS of a Leader that they are in command range to?

    OFF Board ARTY/Spotters:

    It is mentioned in the manual that a Company Commander can call for off board arty if the Spotter for that Arty is eliminated. Is this correct? If so, then how do you do it? Also, Lets say you are assigned both a 81mm Spotter and a 155mm spotter in a scenario and the both get eliminated. If the Company Co, can call for off/board arty, then which battery would he get?

    Thanks for clearing this up. A friend of mine and I have been scratching our heads over this and thanks for bearing with the question.

    Kevin

    0

    Gamey Recon?

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Scott,

    In your scenario about putting the tank survivors in line with the infantry I'd have to say that it would depend on the situation. There WERE times when crew survivors picked up M-1's and temporarily joined the infantry. This was undoubtably not the norm but it did happen. I don't think that you'd get too much chewing out at battalion for making use of available manpower in a crunch.

    Having said that, I'd like to say I'd like to see them under the full control of the Tac AI and have the AI try to retreat them or get them to cover. Most of the time they would simply hunker down or retreat off the map and then sometimes they'd take a hand in the fight. This would be more realistic with them not in the players control.

    Kevin

    0

    OK PATCH UPDATE PLEASE!!!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Yes, I agree, BTS has done an amazing job with CM. One of the cleanest releases in a long time. This having been said, I guess the thing that rankles me the most is the complete silence that has followed the anouncement of the patch. There are features anounced in the patch (targeting, for example, that many people would like to see). The only official word we got was that it should have been available last week and then that since Charlie was on vacation that it would not be available over the weekend. What I don't get is that the same scenario is repeated over and over again with computer software:

    Game is released

    Patch is anoucned

    Patch release date is anounced/estimated

    Users eagerly anticipate patch.

    Patch release date comes and goes

    Silence on patch status follows from game company.

    Users get restless

    Users get angry.

    What's wrong with a little comunication?. What about a simple status update?

    A simple, "Its in testing, will not be out this week, will update you next Monday" would go along way in keeping people happy. Its a simple thing really but hardly any company follows thru with it. Comunication evens expectations and defuses the restless natives.

    Kevin

    [This message has been edited by kverdon (edited 07-26-2000).]

    0

    OK PATCH UPDATE PLEASE!!!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    BTS made a small Fubar from the support arena when they released the second shipment of CD's with 1.02. This was compounded when they then made the statement they would not be making a 1.02 patch but including the 1.02 patch in the 1.03 patch. This is then followed by a lack of information on 1.03. I can see their reason for doing this, it had mostly to do with the overwhelming demand for the game causing a hasty second printing. The release code at the time of the second printing was 1.02 so that is what they had to ship. It probably would have been better if the second batch had gone out as 1.01 and 1.03 had been kept secret. The marketing problem with this is that there is a perceived, if not real, deisre for the owners of 1.01 to have the latest and greatest. (ie, if 1.01 is perfect, why is there a 1.03?) If also causes some confusion for example I was under the impression that 1.01 and 1.02 were not email compatible. This situation has been compounded by the fact the either Steve or Charles has been on a well deserved vacation and thus information upon the features and status of 1.03 have been non-existent. A little more information from BTS on what is going on with 1.03 in regards as to what is being worked on and when they think it might be out would, IMHO, help keep people chomping at the bit somewhat happier.

    thats it,

    Kevin

    0

    Speaking of Grognards...

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Boy this brings back memories.

    My first were Bismark and Midway. Moved onto Panzer Leader and Arab-Israeli Wars. Since then have played many of them out there, Squad Leader (Basic and Advanced), Gettysburg, Tobruk,Tactics II, Blitzkreig, WS&IM, Panzergrupe Guderian, Rommel in the Desert, Devil's Den,Luftwaffe,Fortress Europa, Up Front, .... Oh there have been too many to remember. Enjoyed them all. CM combines the essense of all the tactical small unit games, better than anything I've ever seen and Tiller's new Campaign series embodies the essense of the opperational games. Simulations have taken the place of the Air Games, Ahhhhh, life is good <G>.

    Kevin

    [This message has been edited by kverdon (edited 07-24-2000).]

    0

    Random Oppsosition Forces.

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    If would be a neat feature in CM if you could set your Opposition Forces to a Random variable of your own value. As it is, if I generate a quick mission, I have a good Idea of what I'm likely to see from the AI based upon how may points he has to spend. It would be neat to pick a random % that could be +/- what you have for the AI to chose forces from. Just a thought.

    Kevin

    0

    OK PATCH UPDATE PLEASE!!!

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the biggest problem I see over the delay in the patch is that v1.01 and v1.02 are not compatible for PBEM. This for me is kinda a drag as a good friend bought CM after seeing my copy and received v1.02 and, as we understand it we can't PBEM right now. The other problem lies in that I understand is that saved games will not be compat so If you start an Opperation under v1.01 you won't be able to complete it under v1.03, you'd have to start over. If I am mistaken in the version compatiblity, I'd love to be proved wrong. Otherwise I'll just have to wait for the patch.

    Kevin

    0
×
×
  • Create New...