Peterk
-
Posts
915 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Peterk
-
-
You know, Peng used to be a really funny fellow - the cabbage post, his revolt against smilies - are some of the funniest posts ever written on here. I think he was even reponsible for the Church Of Combat Mission sermons???
Anyways, then he got his cesspool - slinked in, hasn't been seen outside since (...and I'm definitely not going in there to say hi - too perilous).
-
No.. you can't use a target-wide with smoke. I wish. Actually what I would like for smoke is a straight-line pattern, but in absence of that I use my little trick to expand the size of the screen and it works well.
-
This is an obvious one but with the number of new players and with the increased vulnerability of infantry to MGs and the more common occurence of open ground, I thought maybe this tip would come in handy to some newer players.
If you use off-board artillery to toss up a smoke screen to protect and advance, you may be disappointed by i) how little area actually gets covered (especially with mortars) ii) how quickly that observer ammo gets depleted. Here's a little tip to get a nice big smoke screen that you can keep up for almost as long as you require.
Most smoke rounds tend to be redundant (ie. there is already a round on the board that is already providing almost the exact same cover), so with this in mind simply retarget the smoke screen slightly EVERY turn (you want the green Adjust Fire target line) away from the places where you already have smoke. The spotter delay kicks in so the guy won't be firing throughout the entire next turn, you'll get just a few good rounds at the end. By moving the target around constantly, you'll have a bigger screen that will stay up longer because your spotter isn't using so much ammo on each turn.
-
> If you want a sense of why the Germans hated T-> 34s fight three battles.
But on the flip side, you will pretty much never have one of us treating our little russian toy soldiers and tanks the way they were treated historically.
If we send 5 tanks over a ridge and they all get blasted, I believe that all of us would decide "Ok that's no good" and look for another way. The real russians would have sent another 50 up the same ridge before calling it quits.
-
Sharphooters are also trained not to attack "unimportant" targets - they will go after HQs, MGs, exposed crews in tanks. They should not blow their cover just to nail one soldier in an ordinary run of the mill squad.
-
> First: Operations.
No it should always be clear to you what you are trying to do. Advance and Assault you're trying to get to the end of the map (but most times the designer doesn't tell you how big the map is - ARGH!). Destroy - only points for destroying enemy units. In CMBB, you can also get points for flags in operations.
> Second: Battles. Does anybody know the formula > the game uses to determine victory points?
> Casualties, VL's, exit (?) all generate points, > but according to which formula?
The victory flags are 300 points for a big one, 100 points for a small one. I think casualty points are equal to the purchase point for the unit killed - so a big flag is roughly worth a company of casualties.
-
Hey, he only wrote it 99 times!
-
Looks like I'm the only one who did this a little differently??? I set-up my two platoons from the left side all the way over to the right side (that's right - the open part of the map).
Reasons?
1. With only 2 platoons, one succesful Russian ambush in the heavy woods on the left and my day is ruined. And if I were the Russians, you can bet I'd have at least a platoon hiding in those woods as far forward as possible and they would cause damage.
2. I noticed that the scenario designer had extended the set-up zone on the right about 50m farther forward than on the left. Hmmm....a little less space to cover to get to the top of the hill, and since it's open I _might_ be able to move faster than in the woods. ALmost like a little bonus to tempt me to try it. OK...I accept.
The big question is. Was there enough cover over on the right to get 2 platoons through in time??? I thought I'd take the chance - there were scattered trees and little patches of forest and one house beside the road that I thought would do just the trick.
Turns 1-15:
FOr the first 5 turns I had all HMGs and all mortars except one fire into suspected (really obvious) locations at the top of the hill firing blind. I let the MGs go with area fire 'til ammo was at ~50 and then I started being more selective and turned some off to preserve ammo for the end game. The only enemy popped was the wooden bunker on the right. Good news. Looks like there's not much up there! This turned out to be the only enemy of consequence for the 1st 15 turns. It was slow going, almost single file along the road, one or two units at a time in short bursts of advance or run from cover to cover until we were out of the arc of that bunker. It took forever, but was very suspenseful. Only mistake was when I gave a HQ a 20m run and he got nailed early in his move and broke along with 1 squadwho decided to go with him even though he was safe in some scattered trees and wasn't asked to move (bastards!). Luckily, the other 3 squads carried on admirably on their own.
I got lucky and early on knocked out an MG in the trench on top with long-range HMG fire from the buildings in back. I was dreading taking on the guys in trenches, but it looks like they will break fairly easy in spite of the trench. <???>
I learned my lesson - never run in front of a pillbox. The advance command was a tiny bit slower and tired the guys a bit but not one casualty was inflicted on the guys who advanced despite coming under fire several times. I had to rest them after the advance a few times, but the column of advance was so narrow due to lack of cover, it was very rare to be able to move the same unit twice in a row anyways.
Turns 15-22
One platoon is in the last cover on the slope behind the pillbox on the right in good order (albeit out of command). The 2nd platoon is following close behind. I decided not to advance the flamethrower against the pillbox and he didn't move once in the battle. Platoon hit a minefield on the right by accident coming in just a little bit too close to the fortified area as they were sneaking to the rear of the bunker. Damn! should have thought about that possibility.
The reinforcements coming in on the left were an absolute godsend!!! Simulataneous attacks on both the right and left of the enemy position!!! If I had started on the left, I would have had to have rolled accross the defenses on the top of the hill from left to right and maybe not take out the pillbox on the far right due to time. But now I have a pincer with great crossfire possibilities as long as things don't fall apart.
Turn 23 - 25
OK. Here goes. Platoon on right and 1 platoon on the left taking on the wooden bunkers. Both attacks succeed. Platoon on right starts to come under mortar fire, but the HMGs in the back use up the last of their ammo to take care of it as well as a bunch of other units which are beginning to rout out of the trench.
Turn 26-30
The reinforcement platoon on the left occupies defensive positions since it seems some squads are coming out of the forest which I bypassed (Hah! I knew it) to counter-attack.
The platoon on the right encounters little resistance after the mortar attacks ended and advance down the trench towards the center pillbox. (Lesson learned - advnacing in a trench tires your guys out _really_ quickly - should've just moved). I expected the center pillbox to be a tough nut to crack but in turned out only needing one hit before the crew abandonned.
Russians in total rout. Game ends in 31 turns. Score 94/6. Good fight. Nice puzzle.
-
Hi again Tlasila,
I spent an evening on hill 312 to see what exactly you were having trouble with (and whether I had what it takes to even give advice on here).
This scenario can be very easily beaten but you have to be _very_ careful on the early turns.
=========== POSSIBLE SPOILERS
One thing to keep in mind. The very small scenarios with less than a company of infantry are often more "puzzles" than anything else and can be more frustrating to play than the more typical scenarios where you can make a mistake or two and recover rather easily. In Hill 321, if you goof big-time with one of your 2 platoons, you're just not going to win. You must absolutely get practically every squad you own to the top of the hill in good order to have a chance.
If you want to read my AAR, it's on the thread which SIlvio added a link to.
-
The experts might disagree with me here...
> Should I use "Arc" when covering my advance?
The arc command is more useful for the defender to set up kill-zones. I wouldn't go haywire with the arc command on attack unless you find your guys are firing at things you rather they ignore (like broken units to the rear). Then throw up an arc to focus their attention where _you_ want want.
> Should the advancing troops
> use "Assault",
No, only if you're 10-20 meters away from a dug in enemy and you want to take over the position in close-combat. Otherwise don't assault.
> "Advance"
If there isn't much cover and you absolutely have to go through open ground and spend a considerable amount of time exposed, then yes, advance is the way to go. Don't try to advance too far at one go (> 50-60 m.) or your guys will get exhausted. If you have to go farther than that, then do it in spurts (advance half of platoon (yes, stopping in the open), provide cover for other half, and then advance to cover on the next turn).
If you are in a forest and you suspect the defender is also in the same forest waiting for you, then consider using Engage/Move To Contact. They will advance 'til they are shot at and will then drop. If you're in good cover for the entire path, then you don't have to worry about your guys stopping in bad cover. Never use Move To Contact in the open with infantry.
> or "Run"?
If you're in cover and you see other nearby cover that you want to occupy, then "yes" you can try a run. The farther the distance between cover, the worse decision it is to run (because you get tired and you'll probably get shot up very badly).
> Is it a good idea to use area fire instead of
> direct fire?
Depends on the situation. If you're covering an infantry advance and you just want to keep the defender from shooting; if you don't want your shooter to abandon the area if the defender goes hidden, then area fire is the way to go - even with tank fire. If you want to kill/rout the defender then you can try direct, but the area of effect is less for direct fire.
> How can I limit my losses against enemy MGs
Supress them before exposing your men to them. Play the movie, selecting the enemy MG and watch it from his point of view (on views 1-3). Check out how long he spends on his stomach and how many spurts of fire he gets off. If he never goes down, pretty much don't even think of advancing into the open against him. Do this with all known enemy units which you consider dangerous. Looking at the enemy from the larger views (6-8) doesn't really give you a good idea for how suppressed the defender is - you have to get close. You may have to really gang up on an enemy MG to finally make him decide to hit the dirt.
> and still capture the targets in time?
I can't answer this one! There are hard decisions to be made during a battle where you may have to be less cautious and throw caution to the wind to meet the deadline. Work out a schedule of objectives before starting the scenario (example: by turn 10 you want to be halfway to the target - by turn 20, all attacking units should be in position for the final assault - by turn 28 the target should be in your hands) so that you can tell when you're in time trouble as quickly as possible. This lets you react quickly to the things that are holding you up and hopefully gets you back on track before it's too late.
-
At least two???? You guys are awesome! Very cool.
-
Yeah, I noticed that too. There will be a +/- 1 level variavtion that you have no control over. I'm trying to retrofit Wreck's solo campaign rules over to the East Front and it throws a minor wrench into the system a bit. I was planning on living with the variation and seeing how it goes (+1 means the group is feeling particularly inspired on the day of the battle, -1 means they got up on the wrong side of the bedroll and are not going to be having a great day)
-
Really looking forward to this.
Will there be any operations in there in the mix?
-
I believe it is possible but I haven't really heard on anyone doing it. I have heard of team-play hot-seat games though.
-
> Does anyone know of a full scale Ardennes
> operation? I have been looking to no avail, it > may be under my nose and I'm just missing it.
Check out an operation called Stoumont - there are 2 of tem by 2 different designers and they are both excellent. Extremely long and big operations set during the Bulge. Played it by e-mail with someone over a 9 month period and it was a blast.
-
I think part of the problem with scenarios is the designer set up for both sides. When you load up a scanario and the pieces are all set-up already and it "looks" OK, a lot of times you won't bother seeing if you can do something better.
Contrast this with playing a scenario in ASL where the counters are dumped onto the table and players are forced to do their own set-ups. An ASL'er I used to play with once told me that the set up was often 50-80% of the game.
I often wish there was a way to load up a scenario in such a way that my pieces were not placed in the defualt locations and rather in a blob at the bottom of the screen - like they do in a quick battle.
-
> In most circumstances (but not all), I feel
> that the better of the scouting alternatives to > find the enemy is half squads.
Have you had many half-squads vaporised 9this also pretty much never happened in CMBO) before you got any useful info? It's happened to me a few times and I've gone back to full-squads for scouting.
-
Alternate area fire and direct fire on AT guns until they are gone. You definitely don't want to take the chance of having one ignored, unless you know it is harmless. I usually try to double up on them - one tank fires directly and I know he might leave the target if the AT hides, but I try to have another tank pumping area fire right at it at the same time - and he's not going to stop unless something drastic appears - often the area fire tank knocks the gun out. It seems to work very well - but I know having 2 tanks to do this is a luxury I won't always have.
-
Hey Count Zero,
Thanks for sharing that technique. I'm going to fool around with it tonight. My method (actually Wreck's system) involves quite a bit of book-keeping but it looks like in yours, the computer will track most of the boring stuff.
Looks like we better come up with something fast...the cesspoolers are starting to venture in.
-
Hi Winterhawk,
I also am following this thread with interest. I have noticed that almost all of your criticisms about the infantry modeling are coming from the attackers' point of view. Now look at it from the other side. In CMBO, it was extremely difficult to set up a valid defense against all of those heroic half-squads that you miss so much. Perfect placement of machine guns and setting up of kill-zones really did not reward the defendder as they should have because the infantry was able to shrug much of it off via their incessant almost invulnerable runs towards the enemy.
Now at least the defender has a chance and perhaps even people will start playing things other than meeting engagements for ladder games.
I think your comment about "he who has the most firepower" wins was right on target...and it's arguably the way it should be. CMBB is more a game of suppression than a game of quick advances close assaults (anyone who has ever played Squad Leader also knows that suppression is the key to that game as well). Is it more fun? For me it is, but it's a personal impression. It definitely matches more closely, for the most part, descriptions of the real east front that you read in the history books than the CMBO engine would have been able to do.
-
Not really what people are looking for but...
I hope to have a set of rules up in about 2 weeks or so that will allow people to carry a company of infantry from the opening of Barabarossa through to the Russian counter-offensives at the gates of Moscow in winter in December of '41. I've started playtesting and it's going pretty well so far. It's based on generating quick battles. Players will have to track their boys' progress manually however (using provided charts) and roll a few dice before each battle to generate the parameters.
A subsequent set of rules (hopefully) will send your company to the south towards Stalingrad in '42.
-
Also by your description of the action (I sent a squad running - they were cut down at 40 meters) I think you are making a basic tactical mistake.
DO NOT approach a tank which can still fire accross open ground long distances by running (without smoke at least). Use advance - any command other than run which makes you too obvious and easy to spot - and take your time, with distances like that it can take 4-5 turns to get close enough to a tank to do a succesful assault.
Personally, if the tank is out in the open, this isn't even really a job for infantry - if the tank were 10 meters away from the edge of a forest or a building it might be. Use a vehicle of your own to finish it off if possible with a shot from behind.
Also, since it's night, just bypass the tank if possible. LOS probably extends 100-140 meters? Just don't give him any targets and stay away from the area. You might be surprised and the crew might abandon all by themselves - crews don't like being in immobilised vehicles for any period of time.
-
Vils. Are you familiar with the Wreck's Solo Campaign Rules for CMBO? _All_ you have to do is come up with an update of those rules for the east front.
I kind of don't mind that the CM games don't have built in campaigns. I see CM more as a battle toolkit and I understand why the designers would be loath to pollute their simulator with something that's purely fantasy. Doesn't mean that we can't come up with something.
What I'd really love is a Mega Camapign like the ones that have been done for Steel Panthers (by Wild Bill?)
-
> Well lets just say the wwb has some strange
> fetishes, and Rune and his scenarios figure
> prominently in them.
Anyone notice that the sizes of those scenarios of his are all large and huge???
Boohoo!I got it....but it's in french!Please help
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
Heck, I have the English version of the game but I find that most of what's going on is in Russian or German or Finnish so you're not the only one who is being linguistically challenged by the game.
I'm thinking about taking a vacation to Germany and Russia next year where I will attempt to survive only by using native phrases I've learned through CM.