Phoenix
-
Posts
676 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Phoenix
-
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zaffod:
Ok... does everyone here (at least the ones who crave the ultimate realism) leave the detailed armor hits on or off?? From what im getting here it seems like a gamey feature. I always thought that a tank crew would be able to tell if they achieved a gun hit.. There were some good optics in many tanks of that time... Im also assuming a 'gun hit' is a shot that penetrates/detereorates the mantlet or barrel only! The detailed text just mirrors the crew's interperetation of what kind of hits they take and make. What all of you guys's take on this??
Zaf'<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But were they (in real life) always 100% right? That's my only beef in the game.
I just can't believe that 100% of the time someone could tell if the gun was rendered useless.
I would love to see a "Gun Hit?" or even just no information *sometimes*.
This is strictly for PBEM, as I play solo with detailed hits *off*.
In PBEM I want every advantage I can get, so I turn detailed hits *on*
My .02
-
>I like some feedback from the game engine.
So do I. But I want feedback that would be realistic. I doubt that on the field of battle I would always know a gun was damaged.
>For those that don't like it, switch the >option to OFF.
I do in single player.
>For PBEM, just agree before what options to >use and what not.
Yeah right.
I can't see what's wrong with adding a toggle switch for PBEM that turned detailed hits on or off for *both* sides. Certainly if you want detailed hits you should see them. But if two PBEMers want it off it would be nice to have that as an option. A gentlemans agreement ain't gonna cut it here Im afraid. Too easy to toggle that detailed hits button by "accident".
[This message has been edited by Phoenix (edited 09-06-2000).]
-
I prefer this shot from my last PBEM.
One rifle squad, $2,567
One rifle grenade,$125
One dead Panther - Priceless!!
The squad was hidden, anticipating the arrival. As luck would have it, the Panther stopped 9 meters from the squad.
-
I think SOME detailed gun hits should be allowed to be "seen". I mean lets face it, there are likely to be *obvious* hits to a main gun that could be observed.
What I don't like is the instant message that a gun was damaged. Seems I automatically know this no matter what the range.
Can BTS clarify?
As to Madmatt's idea, well, that doesn't address the problem for PBEM.
-
Glad I wasn't the only one who *thought* I saw this happen once.
I jumped around the map and used some different views and then the area target lines disappeared and I never saw em again in that game.
Very odd.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by iggi:
A thought for CM2. I wanted to ignore an enemy tank that had it's gun knocked out. I wanted my tank to support my infantry against enemy infantry.
Would be nice to be able to select a vehicle and then press an ignore key. Thus only the vehicle selected will be ignored. That would be perfect for ignoring gun damaged tanks that your tanks keep trying to hit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I don't want this. Why? I don't think I should always know when an enemy's gun has been damaged. More FOW please, not less.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jäger:
If the game had been in real-time, with the ability to pause and issue orders, I would have loved the game,
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's funny. You want a "real time game" but you want to be able to pause it.
Yeah, that's realistic alright. Good grief.
Constant micromangement of each squads actions.
Hey, it's simple. The game is not your cup of tea. Save your $45.
-
Oddly enough,that information is on the ordering screen -
"Our Shipping & Handling charges are as follows for the first product:"
Within the United States - $8
Canada & Mexico - $8
All other countries - $10
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Basebal351:
I don't know how the rest of you fared, but I must admit that I was a little bit dissapointed when I recieved my copy of the game and found it in a paper slip.
-Jimbo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The whining never ceases does it?
-
Geee Steve. You don't have to be so RUDE when you answer our DEMANDS!
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gunslinger:
>
I did ask for permission.
I am just waiting to see the answer.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You already know the answer. It's no. Nada. Ain't gonna happen.
BTS would be fools to let people hack the .exe so they could release their own free versions.
My .02
And yeah, they've been very clear on this in the past.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KingMikeH:
Pham
I can't speak for everyone, but my personal interest in it is for the LAN play. My main opponent (and business partner) and I have access to a network in the office all day and we've played all the demo battles hotseat but found it to be a little disjointed by the pauses between turns when you have to go do something else while the other guy goes. (like work :])
Mike<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Just save the file to a directory on the lan. What's the big deal?
As to the TCP/IP patch, hell, if I can ever find someone who could actaully sit down and play non stop maybe I could use it. As it is now, I have a hard time finding someone who can play email more than a turn a day.
-
As far as what rounds, the Sherman should be using HE against a pill box.
Ah, I just re-read this and get it now.
As to why it's got 0% chance to kill I'd say that's because you aren't facing the firing slit. Unless you can get a round INTO the bunker I don't think a Sherman (75mm?)is going to have a chance.
[This message has been edited by Phoenix (edited 09-01-2000).]
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf:
Hey, BTS.
I was wondering if you are eventually going to work on making the tracks and tires of vehicles move. With that said the textures are great but when I zoom in and watch my tanks move out it would be really gripping if I could actually see the tracks move.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Gripping?????????? To watch tires move?
Gripping is seeing a King Tiger crest a hill that you were SURE was clear of the enemy.
THAT is gripping.
BTW - tracks already move. Not that I ever watch them.
-
=========================
But don't we all prescout locations, using whatever methods are available - e.g. different views, etc. You don't just move your units at random, you select locations to respond to threats, advance toward objectives, and so on.
=========================
Actually, I rarely do a lot of pre-scouting before I move units. Yeah, I "take a look" at a slope for hull down moves etc. But not too often for infantry. I prefer to play the game in a "fluid" fashion. Not spending large amounts of time figuring out possible LOS issues before moving. It must be working too, I haven't lost to the AI in at least 20 battles.
==========================
One of the limitations is that what you appear to see looking across a map does not correspond to what you actually should see.
==========================
And I think that's part of the key to the fun of the game. You don't know exactly what position is "perfect" and exactly what the terrain is. I think it *adds* to the realism. Adding the feature you suggest would detract from it, and from the fun IMHO.
=========================
The feature I am asking for allows the player to "see" what the true terrain respresents. This is actually quite realistic; eyes which deceive are replaced with "eyes" that see in a manner better suited to CM's current world.
======================
I don't see how it's more realistic. To be able to prescout a position with 100% perfection (using the LOS tool) does not sound realistic to me.
============================
I like this game a lot. I'm merely trying to find a way to deal with an issue which limits that enjoyment, much as the tank targeting problem drove many of us to the edge . Maybe somebody can suggest an alternative.
=============================
You need to rephase that to read:
"which limits MY enjoyment."
Remember, you're not speaking for the majority of the people playing the game. If this was an issue that people were really hot about you'd see constant posts on it. Like the targeting issue was. The fact is that most people do like how LOS works right now.
A key point here -
The tank targeting issue was a *problem*. This LOS issue is a deliberate game design decision from BTS. Just as the WEGO system is a game design decision. Some people may not
like it, but it's the way it is because it's how BTS wanted it. The tank/crew targeting issue was not something BTS designed into the game.
Anyway, enough of my rambling. The bottom line is yerrr just gonna have to get used to it Im afraid.
-
Not gonna happen. You say you already searched this so you have seen BTS's explanation as to why it's not in, and won't be added.
It's completely unrealistic to be able to go and prescout a LOS before you move the unit there. I for one would not want it added. For setting up a scenerio yes, it makes sense. But once the battle is going no. It would also make multiplayer games take even longer than they already do. Some guys would spend forever scouting for perfect locations to move their guys. Come on, this is chaos, battle, MOVE OUT men. Get over to those trees! No way in hell a commander knows exactly what the LOS is from a site they haven't been to yet.
As to the AI being able to find "perfect spots". I find I get the PC in cross fires all the time so it's obviously not that good at it.
Anyway, it's not going to be added, and I for one am happy with that.
-
As usual the answer is just a quick search away. Took me 1 minute to find -
(From BTS, Steve)
Counterbattery fire is well beyond the scope of CM so we don't simulate it. (After all, most artillery in the game is already "off map" and therefore somewhat abstracted).
-
Good lord, how thin skinned are you?
Steve's comments are rude? Please.
And at the same time you would find nothing rude about saying "CM sucks".
Uh huh.
And as you state in your profile
"Grognards are dorks".
That's not rude either right? Even though there are a LOT of Grogs on this board and several of whom made this game happen.
You're perception of what is rude and what isn't is bizarre to say the least.
m sick of this whining by people about BTS being rude.
Shut the hell up and play the $!@@# game.
Yeah, that part WAS rude, and it was intended to be.
Jeezus.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by infohawk:
I don't even know how look at my profile. Can somebody tell me? It would really surprise me if I put something that made you
react that way.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well this is in your profile listed as your web page.
http://grognards.are.dorks.com
Real mature stuff.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TeAcH:
Tiger, thanks for your opinion. I disagree. No amount of tweaking to this game WILL EVER make it a RTS clone in any regard. Dont look at a FOLLOW command like that. Sure you can drag a box around units, but I suggest you try that. Try to get a column of units down a road single file making turns all the way. Cant do it. Besides, just because something works in one genre (RTS games) doesn't mean it is wretched and evil for this one. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Have not tried this.....are you saying they will all start and stop at the same time without crashing into each other or driving off the road? If so, problem solved.
-
I've had *very* effective use of them against tank commanders as have others.
There's another thread open right now that discusses this.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson:
There is already one order that works; MOVE.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You're dreaming. Try moving 10 or so vehicles down a road togheter. The crash and bash into each other the whole way. It's impossible to coordinate.
A "follow" command would be a HUGE help in those scenarios where the weather is "Mud" and vehicles have to stick to roads.
As it is now, I skip those scenarios if there are a lot of vehicles. It's nothing more than an exercise in frustration.
[This message has been edited by Phoenix (edited 08-30-2000).]
-
Why is everyone renaming files and using old .exe files????
If you have a 1.04 PBEM going, you CAN upgrade to 1.05 and keep playing. Been there, done that. Charles even mentioned it was doable.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dman225:
I am not sure about the historical acuracy but wouldnt it be great if they had K9 units in the game. They could find hidding troops and bark a warning to the rest of the troops even detect mines. But anyway i am getting ahead of myself so tell me what you think. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ain't gonna happen.
Now obviously hamsters will be in CM2.
Maybe gerbils.
But dogs? No. They just weren't used that much.
I hope they use Hamsters since they have more dark meat on em.
Tanks don´t engage small guns with main gun
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)
Posted
Have not had that happen to me. My tanks engage any kind of "gun" with the main gun.
[This message has been edited by Phoenix (edited 09-06-2000).]