Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Mikeydz

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    375

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Mikeydz

    ***ROW III Finals***

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    I tend to disagree with Frunze on how much of a doddle Koltov was as the attacker. The main disadvantage the attacker has from my POV is the lack of infantry to properly scout out potential ambush spots. You may get lucky by risking a large proportion of your force in rushing through a gap in some woods or a section of town but then again you could also loose big time to ambushing German infantry that were well armed with anti-tank weaponry. I played the safer option and although my forces never came within a bulls roar of the centre of the main town that was never my objective.

    The issue I had with the Soviet setup in Koltov in that the Soviets are able to set up behind Ahapeebka (village on Axis right, betweer the "river" and the long diagonal road. I had a platoon of men in that town. He started with 6-8 tanks on "my" side of the river/treeline. From that point he had instant side shots on my StugIIIs set up watching the roads to my front and right. Both those guys were dead quick. I also had one of my AT guns set up there, along with a Schreck. Both those guys bit it also, but they managed to take out 1 tank each. So basically, after turn 3, my at defenses consisted of 1 AT gun on the complete oppisite side of the map (which never got a good clean shot oppertunity on anyone) and a smattering of schrecks. He was easily able to surrond and pound the village defenders to bits, and raced into my empty rear.

    My main point is this. If the Allied player sets, it pretty much rules out and chance for the Axis if he sets up in town. He'll get pounded from the front and right sides if he holds position in the buildings, and if he attempts a retreat through the open area to the rear, he'll get cut to shreds by the "flanking force that now has clear lines of fire to the Axis rear areas.

    If I were to change anything, I would not allow the Soviets to have a setup zone behind the treeline/river village on the Axis right. Maybe as for forward as the middle of the wheatfield with the trees in the middle, but not much more forward than that. It's one thing for a player to have to take a flank, but to be given that flank almost outright by the designer is a bit much considering the considerable force imbalance already present in the scenario.

    0

    ROW III - The Boots and Tracks CMBB tourney (Part 4)

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by redwolf:

    Seems like me and at least some of my opponents will use it anyway.

    There is just no point in conserving bugs.

    If anyone uses 1.03 for a battle that contributes to the scoring of the tourney, then that can negatively affect the outcome of the tournement. Everyone who plays in the tourney has to play by the exact same set of rules. It sucks that the finals started right before the 1.03 came out, but that's life. It's not hard to set up multiple versions on a system at once, so it's not life someones asking for an arm or a leg for everyone to play these final scenarios with 1.02.
    0

    ROW III - The Boots and Tracks CMBB tourney (Part 4)

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    For the version issue, I see no choice but to stick with 102. Once the games start, it should be locked in, since the playing field has to be level for all players. A bug like the AT Gun one can signifigantly affect the outcome of a scenario. The only fair way is for everyone to play at the same version.

    As for the statement wondering about tourney players using the AT bug to thier advantage. If you play this game right, you HAVE to use this bug. The ideal placement for any gun is behind a ridgeline, with as little of the barrel peeking over the top as possible. In order to not utilize this bug, you would have to intentionally place your units in less than optional positions. There is a difference between bugs that make you a cheater if you choose to exploit them, vs bugs like this one where you don't have a real choice in using it or not.

    0

    ROW III - The Boots and Tracks CMBB tourney (Part 4)

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by Kingfish:

    Guys,

    AFAIK, the scenarios were all designed and tested on v1.02. I'll leave it up to you and your opponent to choose which patch to use, but you both must use the same patch. Otherwise you'll end up with two different scores.

    Wouldn't it be important that everyone use the same patch. Changes from patch to patch in AI reactions, bug fixes, ect... could have drastic effects on the possible outcomes. Take King of Deb for example. Hitting the Allied AT guns placed on the far side of the rail line was a real pain, but at least it would have been a real pain for everyone. If someone went back and played that scenario in 1.01, then that player could have had a signifigantly easier time with it as the Axis, skewing the scoring. Eveyone should play under the same patch version so everyone has to deal with the same rules, AI code, bugs, ect...

    I would say that everyone should use 1.02, since that is the lates official patch that is available for both US and non US versions.

    0

    ROW III - The Boots & Tracks CMBB Tourney (Part 3)

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Just a brief updat for my games in my section

    Tourney II, Section 3

    Hosszupalyi --- Completed

    Christmas Battle --- A little slow but almost halfway now.

    Debrecen --- About 95% Done

    Rear Guard --- 2/3rd's Finished

    Beast --- Also 2/3rd's Complete

    The only one I might worry about would be Xmas. AT the rate that turns have been exchanged the last couple of weeks, I'd say a few days for Debrecen is left, and maybe between a week or two for Rear Guard and Beast. Hard to judge Xmas since it's been moving in fits and spurts, but I have confidence we should still be good to go.

    0

    KV2 first shot accuracy test result

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Originally posted by M Hofbauer:

    maybe the problem becomes more apparent with something more solid...IIRC there are targets that only the Kv-2 has any chance of killing, and the KV-1 cant, even if he hit better.

    Since I can't recall alot of in-game encounters, I've having to look at the raw numbers I have for the 2 tanks, and I don't see where the KV1 can't take out something but the KV2 can. Even out to 2km the 1's APBC rounds out penetrate the 2's HE rounds. the only real advantage is the massive blast rating on those HE's. And they both look like that have a shot against the german armor until you get to the later model PzIVs.

    The only thing I'm wondering about is the aquisition time Al reports for the KV1 vs the KV2. The both show the same rated turret speed, and neither have any special optics, so there shouldn't be any obvious or appreciable difference the the time to initially get a shot off between the 2.

    0

    ROW III - The Boots & Tracks CMBB Tourney (Part 2)

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Knowing the scenario as it is, I'd vote to carry on. The two tourney players who recieved the file are vets of ROW, and I feel ok taking them at thier word that they have not breached FOW concerning those scenarios. Since Rune didn't mention who the other two who got scenario discs were, I can't comment on if I could vouch for thier integrety, but as long as they agree to not release any info on those files, then I think the damage is pretty minimal at the moment. If on the other hand, the others that got the file post any type of spoiler info on the board or other site, then I would have a problem continuing, since the info would be wide out in the open. But since that doesn't appear to be the case, at the moment, I would say carry on.

    0

    Is there an "undo" ?

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Nope, no such beast as an undo function for ALMOST anything. The only thing you can undo is artillery targeting. Let's say you have some artillery fire plotted, and you adjust fire or otherwise change the spotters target, a new order shows up on his order menu to restet the target to what it was at the beginning of that turn.

    So in other words, your SOL.

    smile.gif

    0
×
×
  • Create New...