mikeadams

I also find them more satisfying in many ways. Plus I believe the best way to learn good tactics is to start with small infantry actions and slowly move to more complex engagements

Combining two wishlists into one.... It is frustrating to have all those beautiful Mods available, but only be able to use one of them. It is also just a shade disconcerting to see all of your Shermans (or whatever you are using) look exactly the same. Is it possible (worthwhile?) in CM2 to allow many Mods for vehicles etc to be present and for the computer to randomly assign them to each vehicle. That way four Shermans could each use a different Mod: eventuallY I am sure some of the Mod-makers would start giving us individualized vehicles

I would just like to thank all the people who have put together such an amazing number of MODS and a special thanks to the Mac translation programs...they have worked flawlessly for me. Is there any chace of a MOD site where a user preference poll and at least thumbnails of all the MODs could be viewed. The sheer number is getting to the point where downloading them all and then looking to see which ones to keep is a very time-consuming process

Its probably due to hamsters eating through the insulation on the electrical wiring; te King Tiger was coincidental

I use a built-in function of the game. Simply place your most valuable unit in the open and wait to see if it gets blown away: if it doesn't then your opponent is out of ammo. Slight modifications will work for minefields, bazookas etc.

Is it possible to overlay an actual photograph of the machine? Obviously the photo would have to be taken at the correct angle.

Maybe beavers: I always thought hamsters didn't sound tough enough. A sure way to check for beavers is to use the Canadians, they will recognize them for sure.

I know that BTS does not wish to provide specific numbers, and I have no problem (only they and the IRS really need to know). Nonetheless, I was wondering if the sales of CM have at least met your expectations, enough to keep you happy investing time in CM2?

Most fords across the size of river seen in CM should be crossable by most vehicles. In the mid-20th century they were still a fairly common man-made/modified feature that was a cheap alternative to building a bridge, usually with a smooth gravel bed that was quite capable of handling cars and commercial traffic. Quite a lot of country roads would cross small rivers via a ford so it would seem reasonable to allow at least lighter vehicles to cross; heavy or tracked might cross but would tend to destroy the gravel bed in the process.

Let me add my thanks: you guys make the big companies look soooooo bad.

Let me add my thanks: you guys make the big companies look soooooo bad.

I know that if you give the AI a +1 etc it makes it a tougher opponent, but does it have specific effect (better spotting, more accurate fire, better morale, all of these, etc). The reason I am interested is that I might modify my tactics if I knew just how the AI was improved.

Ah MadMatt, lets analyze the statement "Fionn, Steve, Charles please give me an answer, if this would be fixed or changed, or if you have an other opinion about this." This means they are only to reply IF this would be fixed or changed OR if they have another opinion. Since they have not replied apparently neither condition has nbeen met: in either case WE are free to reply, so here goes... My experience is often the opposite, namely the AI sends individuals on heroic but doomed attacks. This seems to be particularly true for commanders and AT groups.

I have no problems at 1660x1200 on a G3

I have searched for this, with no luck. Do minefields get used up? Observation suggests that after 2-3 groups have gone through a minefield it seems to have very little effect. Is this because most of the mines have exploded, or that everyone knows about them and are more careful, or am I simply imagining it? I know that troops will avoid a known minefield, so the later groups are broken/panicked etc. and I would think they would be too observant.

The 'gameyness' in many situations is because we know WHEN the score will be determined. If they was no fixed length, or no ending point at all, then this would change the strategies. With no ending point built in, the players or the AI could decide when continued fighting was pointless and agree to call it a day.

I agree that quick games are a great way to go. By alternating attack and defense in matching scenarios you learn how to handle all possible combinations. The key point is that you are always playing the game for the first time, so you can't use past experience (other than of a general variety). My favorite is small all-infantry actions: IMHO that is where you learn the most about tactics (duck for flames!)

While it is true that some members are discourteous on occasion, I have found this forum to be far more tolerant than most. I agree a FAQ would be a great addition (any volunteers?) though there will always be those who don't read the FAQ either. Still, I would like to commend the patience and good manners of the vast majority of users, especially those who take time out to answer, what may appear to some, to be trivial questions.

While I am often amazed at how good the AI is (I still cringe when I think of some other games by comparison), I do have one small niggle. In general, the AI does not co-ordinate its infantry attacks as well as I would expect in real life, but I accept that as being linited by CPU power. However, I find that the AI will often send individuals, AT teams, HQ groups etc in apparent suicide attacks with no support from other surviving members. This tends to happen later in the game when there is no realistic hope of any success. These nearly always throw themselves away for no purpose: maybe we should make small groups more cowardly/pragmatic.

This may not be Gamey at all. If the commander has a half-decent map of the area, he may do just that. I spent countless hours with a topomap deciding whether point A could be seen from point B, and from that figuring out good spots for FO and safe spots for me!

I would like a 'converge on' option. There are many times I want a scattered group to all end up in a single location.

Is it possible to alter the point allocation process a bit? I understand that in a mixed force you shouldn't be able to buy all artillery, or something equally unlikely, but it is equally unrealistic to find yourself unable to buy a particular unit because you are one point shy of what is needed in that category. For example: if I have 103 Infantry points left I cannot get a German Infantry platoon worth 105. How about a scheme where you can go beyond the limit at double the cost, i.e. the two extra points would cost four being taken from one of the other categories. Or maybe the platoon shows up slightly understrength? Or, maybe it just isn't worth the effort

But you need to pick the right Arty for the job. In a QB I chose German rockets: they were cheap and I found out why. They scattered all over the map, inflicting as much damage on my guys as the enemy. In future I will pick more expensive but accurate

I have also found some very bizarre computer purchases. The two that spring to mind are my infamous 'Night of the Living Volkssturm' in which almost the entire German force consisted on Panzerfausts and one in which my Combined Arms British force had two MGs as its only infantry component.

If anyone is still reading this thread for single malt ideas... I have over 30 different types and have found that the one I truly admire is Glenfarclas 105. It evaporates in your mouth and seems to coat evry part of your tongue, a realy extraordiary experience. t