xerxes

I can't stand playing CMBO anymore. It's just not fun. Watching an infantry squad waltz through mg fire is downright annoying now. Make no mistake, CMBO was a great innovation for it's time. With CMBB all the weaknesses of CMBO are now glaringly obvious.

The only issue I have with infantry moving under fire in the open is that from reports I've read, the most likely behavior of a unit starting to panic is to "freeze". Moving towards the enemy, even if it's the "right" thing to do in the circumstances appears to be an unusual reaction. But, this doesn't have anything to do with the original question. I think control should be taken away whenever it makes sense to. Crews that have bailed from tanks that aren't in C&C should have control and spotting info taken away. Apart from that situation I'm not sure what other situations it would make sense and be playable.

Using the same equipment is a little artificial for my tastes. The other issue is that a T34 and a captured T34 are not actually the same. The better German shells make the "german" T34 more effective. That's true for all the captured tanks I believe. When I want balanced armor platoons I setup a quick platoon on platoon shootout and run it a bunch of times at the likely engagement range for the scenario. It's not perfect and doesn't take all factors into account, but it gives at least a reasonable determination of parity for armor on armor dueling. That's what I did for my Recon! tournament scenarios (light tanks only) and it certainly helped me avoid some very unbalanced armor matchups. Even among light tanks there are "uber" light tanks that can absolutely rule the recon battlefield.

well yes, operations are great either as single player or if you have a dedicated (high turn rate) opponent.

My best piece of advice is forget all the "not so realistic" tactics in CMBO. Approach CMBB thinking that things will work how they actually did. CMBB rewards solid combined arms tactics. One more thing, learn how to use ALL of the support weapons, they all "work" in CMBB and are critical to success on the battlefield.

Great first post, you're introduced.

I've been working on a Recon(light armor) 2-player Operation/ME and I'm having problems getting it balanced. One issue, that isn't going away is that bad weather tilts towards the Soviets and clear weather gives the Axis the advantage. I don't see a way around this and since weather is random it can't be controlled. I'm using the division, regiment and battalion reserves to add in forces if one side is getting hammered. Question, how does the commitment of reserves affect the final victory level (or does it even effect the victory level)? [ May 05, 2003, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: xerxes ]

I thought that was just in the movies! Learn something every day.

It appears (judging from fire effectiveness) that Squad integral LMGs can fire on the move. This doesn't seem right to me (even though I saw it done by Rambo). I'd think the lmg would have to stop to fire. Anybody know?

I've found the best trench positions are reverse slope. Ouch, those are really nasty. Protected from arty, HE and mg fire. Enemy infantry has to come at your trenchmen well within kill range. Almost impossible to assault.

There is. Give the FT a move command, make sure the delay is over 10 secs but under 20. When he starts moving he'll stop firing.

I think there is a lot of merit to out of CC units behaving under AI control and in particular, not giving the player information. But, a couple of sticking points (maybe). 1. How can you have a unit be ordered to go over there (out of C&C) take a look and report back? Seems like this should be possible. I guess you could plot the entire movement for the unit and when he returns to C&C the "stars"/"crosses" indicators could appear on the map of what he had seen in his travels. 2. Crews should only be under AI control ONLY if they are out of C&C. Overall I think it's a quite workable idea and it would not turn CM into a "command" game at all in my mind.

I counted at least 10 (probably closer to 20) 75mm HE shells hitting the bunker. My wood bunkers never perform like this!

Hmm, I've been sitting 20m from this wooden bunker with a full platoon for 3 minutes. That was after wasting 80 {yes, 80 rounds} 75mm HE rounds on the stupid shack. It's holding up my entire attack because I can't move my support weapons up. Next time I bring demo charges and a flamer. p.s. on the similar won't close assault a stug problem I brought up a pioneer and immobilized the stug with a satchel and then finished it off with a manpak FT. [ April 23, 2003, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: xerxes ]

Does anyone happen to know how close you have to have a friendly to the target to disrupt fire on the target?

Higher quality crews will recognize a dead tank quicker (and switch to something more dangerous). Of course, if the target catches fire and smokes, pretty much any crew figures out that it isn't a threat anymore. Death clock is a great innovation.

Spanish civil war! It's in the bag now! :0

I've got two games going, in one my full platoon of infantry 20m from a wooden bunker don't seem to be able to hurt it. They don't appear to be throwing grenades. I don't have any friendlies closer. Anyone have an idea what might be going on? I've assaulting many bunkers with infantry and this one just seems unkillable. In another, my HQ simply won't close assault an afv. I'm playing with the 1.02 patch. I'm baffled since I've done both of these many times before and never had there problems.

V ickers vs. BT5 Romanian R2 vs. BT7

They automatically ride tanks too, lazy hitch-hiking bums.

If there is room they mount up automatically. I believe support weapons get seating "preference."

In a scenario, I would say not gamey at all. In a QB with known setup zones, maybe. It's a rather risky gamble though, expending all your defensive arty points based on where you THINK the attacker is can very easily lose you the game. If you're lucky and catch the bulk of the attacker and cause massive casualties, you'll probably win. Either way, win or lose, it would seem to make the game less fun.

I always brings guns on the attack. Phase 1: Overwatch from setup zone. Phase 2: clear areas that are in LOS of the setup zone Phase 3: Once initial LOS reachable area is cleared, move the guns to a covered area Phase 4: Push the guns through cover until they get LOS

Using them as "bait" for the enemy armor is a good idea. Defensively they are very good assets. Keep them out of sight and move them so they just have LOS to a platoon of enemy infantry. Reverse and get out of LOS immediately the next turn. That way the enemy armor can't deploy to hit you. If you have a good covered "redeployment zone" you can do this quite a bit defensively. The key is to not let the Wespe sit in the same spot. The other is to make sure LOS to the Wespe is restricted. On the attack a similar approach can be used but you have to risk ATRs and AT guns. You have to keep LOS to the Wespe as limited as possible while still being able to target.

Or just agree no KTs.