Juardis

I have encountered several situations where I want to give the withdrawal order to an HMG team or a mortar team. The current order supposedly has them run away immediately. Unfortunately, the heavy weps teams also take their weapons and, since there is no such thing as a running HMG team, they s-l-o-w-l-y p-l-o-d away from the battle, usually dying lots in the process. So, if the heavy weapons guys are not going to be allowed to run away, then I suggest that they be allowed to intentionally abandon their weapons and run away. Maybe in CMBB?

Just an observation and not based on any tests or anything, but I've noticed that... If infantry is doing the shooting, all else being equal (i.e., same distance away, same amount of exposure) they shoot at 1. Tanks to button them up 2. Guns 3. FOs 4. HQ units 5. Mortar teams/flamers 6. Infantry squads 7. AT teams 4 and 5 may be switched. If armor is doing the firing 1. Other armor 2. Guns 3. AT teams 4. Mortars 5. FOs 6. HQ units 7. Infantry squads HQ units are ALWAYS preferentially targetted over their squadies, even when not positively ID'd. AT teams are ALWAYS preferentially targetted by armor over any other infantry unit, even when not positively ID'd.

And run, don't crawl. Crawling is a recipe for disaster.

In case you truly are clueless... Madmatt is one of the 4 BTS employees that bring you the game Combat Mission. He is also the main moderator of this, BTS's forum. As such, he can and will do what he thinks is in the best interest of BTS. This is not a public forum where anyone can say anything they want. This is a forum provided by BTS for their customers to gather together and share in CM. In case you were being funny.... I think you need to restrict all future postings to the MBT (otherwise known as the cesspool). You are their kind of people.

oompah loompah? No. Pernicious kinnits for not making CMBO perfect (vs. near perfect).

Was talking with havermeyer speculating about how they're going to implement "build your own factory". It would make sense to me that the new factory tiles will be like heavy building tiles with the movement associated with rubble tiles. In CMBO, you can't move directly from heavy building to heavy building, but you can move directly from rubble tile to rubble tile, so the logic won't have to change if the rubble tile logic is copied. The change over the current rubble tile will be that factory tiles will be one or two (or 3 even?) story structures. And like heavy buildings now, there could be multiple bitmaps for each factory tile showing different levels of destruction perhaps. Just a thought but most exciting to think about. Great work PL and thanks to Matt for answering. Love the part about wind speed and direction. Fionn told me last year that I was nuts for asking for it. In the context of CMBO, I guess he was right.

I wish to request that Shaw start every MBT. All else is but a cheap imitation. [ 11-20-2001: Message edited by: Juardis ]</p>

I've had the same question myself. I offer up 2 examples and possible explanations. 1. I had a company of men in the woods around the VL. My gamey bastard opponent waited until the last turn before moving a couple squads into the same wooded area. I had firm control of the flag, my company would've routed his squads, yet it was gray at the end of the game. He did that to both flags in the game and won because of it. 2. I had a HT sitting on top of a VL. It was shocked. My oppenent had a crew about 50m away. A crew mind you. At the end of the game, his crew controlled the flag. Bull****e!!! Possible explanations: Units unable to shoot cannot hold a flag (e.g., FOs and mortar teams without ammo). The flaw here is that if a mortar team were to lose their weapon, they would then turn into "crews" and have pistols. I think this is what happened with my shocked HT. He couldn't shoot so he couldn't control the flag. Now, if he'd had been KO'd, then the crew could've held the flag. Lose a 40 point HT to hold a 150 point? Sound's stupid, I know, but I've contemplated intentionally getting my shocked HTs KO'd just so I can use the crews (won't do it of course, but I've thought about it). Another explanation is that who controls the VL is not so much numerical superiority, but maybe command radius of any units in the area. Squads not in C&C would have maybe a 50m radius. In C&C of a +2 command radius HQ might increase the 50m radius to 100m. You can easily test this during a setup. Put a mortar team or AT team a certain distance away from a flag and see what color it is. If it's gray, you're not close enough. Move it closer until it changes (you won't see it change unless you save the setup and open it again). Now put a HQ unit the same distance away and see what happens. I haven't tested this myself, but the hypothesis fits my observation.

jabbott1@carolina.rr.com thanks

jabbott1@carolina.rr.com thanks

Good idea JasonC. I hadn't considered the rate of fire using up ammo faster or slower, depending on the rate. I was just frustrated that I could not take advantage of longer range shooting for the rifle squads without running out of ammo.

Was thinking on the best way to beat SMG teams given that SMG teams are murderous at 100m or less. Ideally, my rifle squads would engage at 200m or so where I have the firepower advantage and not my opponent. The problem of course, is that I would run out of ammo way before killing one of his squads let alone a plt. Anyway, that got me to thinking that not all weapons in a squad can fire at all ranges. Yet when one guy fires his LMG from 400m away, the ammo count for the entire squad just decreased by one. Now I know the ammo count is an abstraction, but theoretically, you could fire 40 rounds from 400m and have a squad left with no ammo. And this when only one weapon in that squad was fired. Needless to say, I disagree with this. So here's a solution. Since the data is already included and tracked internally in the code (firepower ratings), perhaps the ammo count should also be tracked internally so that if only 1 weapon out of a 10 man squad is fired, the total ammo count is reduced by 1/10th. If 5 weapons are fired, then the remaining ammo should be reduced by 5/10ths. If a 13 man squad, then firing 5 weapons reduces ammo count by 5/13. You get the idea. You may not necessarily see the ammo counter for that squad decrease since the counter is integer format only, but internally fractional ammo counts would be kept. Furthermore, this explains one of the mysteries where sometimes I'll order a squad to fire at a target and they won't even though a target line is drawn. Well, the reason is the long range rifles/LMGs have been lost already and all that's left are the shorter range SMGs. Of course, if this solution is implemented, it'll likely help the SMG squads more than a rifle squad thereby making SMG squads that much more powerful, but nevertheless, if it's broke it needs fixing.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MikeyD: Sigh, the prospect of having to buy $300 worth of equipment (again) to run a $45 game gives me the shivers. <hr></blockquote> Hehehe, well, considering that I haven't bought a game since CMBO came out, I figure I've saved at least $300. At least that's what I'll tell the wife As for coding around a driver bug, well, maybe than can be creative or something. Here's hoping anyway.

BTS, just wondering about system compatability testing. I know there are a bazillion combinations of PCs/Macs/OS's that you have to test CMBB with and I appreciate the pain and frustration that must be associated with this. But speaking for a minority of users out here, will the Voodoo5 card be used in the testing? I realize it's a 2 year old card and no longer made, but it's still a great card for CMBO (4x FSAA is simply awesome). As you know, there are some minor irritating glitches with it though that I was wondering if they were going to be addressed. Mainly, the garbled 2d text when escaping to the desktop then getting back into the game and the occasional screen white out when the video memory gets swamped. 1. Will these be fixed in CMBB? 2. Are you even going to test a V5 card for CMBB? 3. If not, I need to budget for a new card (prolly a GeForce 3), but that's expensive so I have to save now.

guachi - why the heck haven't you updated the spreadsheet for v 1.12 !?!? Huh! Why?!?!? Just kidding, your spreadsheet is/was/continues to be the best database I've seen.

Absolute spotting!!! Unfortunately, it won't be fixed in CMBB, but damn is it frustrating. A tank on the other side of a map should not all of a sudden see a hidden unit just because an infantry squad of his happened to stumble upon that hidden unit. The TAC AI preferentially targetting AT teams even when the AT team is identified as "infantry?". Next preferential target is HQ units. Did several tests on this with buttoned up hetzers rotated 90 degrees. Then ran a plt of guys, including a zook, across open ground right at a spot behind the hetzer. 4 out of 5 times the hetzer spotted the running guys and all 4 times it targetted the zook team.

I had this greyhound see, and it was buttoned up see, and this arty barrage began falling see, and then my crew became shocked when it's TC died after a near miss. There was no message that said internal flaking or that the tank just got hit someplace. No immobilization, no nothing. Just one crew casualty (presumed dead?) where there was a healthy crew the second before. Now, what in the world just happened? Concussion? Shrapnel penetrate the armor? Mutiny?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan: And it only runs on Windows XXXP. <hr></blockquote> ...and only with a Voodoo 5 card

happy happy joy joy. You gonna get your wife/girlfriend/significant other to administer the spanking?

I've had a RPG kill a Panther G frontally, a Panther G in the flank, a JadgPanther in the flank, and a StugIII from behind. I do count on them in defense. Because, as someone said, you cannot discount them on the attack. So most people know to get their precious AFV when infantry gets close by (some people have yet to learn that yet). Sometimes getting them to move is all it takes to setup a flank shot from a tank that previously did not have LOS. The trick to using them effectively is that the squad that has them cannot be under fire, preferrably unspotted, and of course within range. I have yet to figure out the range but I see someone here tested it at 60m. I've been trying to get under 50m. Obviously, the closer the better. If the squad is taking fire, it invariably will not fire it's RPG.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Scipio: Placing a vehicel in open terraine at the beginning...I guess you have a 50:50 chance to be killed first. For me it's more important to stay covered until I figured out where the enemy is. Then I have enough time to kill him.<hr></blockquote> In my case, that's a 100% guarantee that my tank will die first . My experience is that a tank hiding in open terrain will be spotted by anything within LOS (1000m with overcast sky during the day is the most I've seen). And since your tank is hiding, it won't get off a shot until it knows it's being shot at. If the first enemy round hits your tank or close by, then he'll respond. But if the first enemy round lands long, he may not even notice that he's being shot at and remain hidden. The best rule of thumb is to NEVER hide your tank in open ground UNLESS you're in a reverse slope with no LOS to anywhere the enemy might be. [ 10-25-2001: Message edited by: Juardis ]</p>

Jeff, note the smilies...refer back to one of your fellow cesspoolers (Aitken) threads on this topic...then you will see the true way. Which is that I am indeed making fun of the ridiculousness (word?) of the gamey argument while acknowledging that there are those that will no doubt argue is gamey. And therefore I preemptively laugh at them as well

Well, if we wish to open the Aitken gamey dismounted AT guns during beginning of meeting engagement Pandora's box, then hiding your tanks in scattered trees at the beginning of a ME is gamey . Let's face it, if you want to talk real life, if you're advancing and expecting to meet the enemy, I doubt seriously a tanker would drive his tank into scattered trees and idle his engine. No, he would be ready to move and fire at a moments notice. Furthermore, how could he have gotten into the scattered trees without being spotted from any units in LOS. Gamey gamey gamey!!!! That is...if one believes Aitken . Me? I hide them in scattered trees and unmask them at an opportune time . Works fairly well so long as you don't get burnt by absolute spotting (e.g., their grunts spotting your hidden tank for his hidden tanks).

Well, if we're talking about CMBB, then contrasting US System vs. Commonwealth System is irrelevant isn't it? Unless the soviets used one or the other that is. But...since we seem to be talking about the US System, what I'd like to see is a command for ToT (Time on Target) wherein ALL rounds of ALL calibers land at the SAME time. This was common practice by the US and I'd like to see it. However, if it wasn't common practice for the Soviets, then it's another great idea (IMHO ) for the engine rewrite and not necessarily for CMBB.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by redwolf: I tested the combat 1+ and 2+ values for mortars. A mortar under control of an extra-combat HQ gets better accuracy. A 1+ HQ with a regular mortar gets the same accuracy as a veteran mortar without HQ. I had to dig up details, but I made sufficient testing to be statistically convinced. In special I found that two accuracy boosters for a regular 3" mortar (either vetran and 1+ HQ or regular and 2+ HQ) give them a very decent chance to kill a Pz IV - class tank :-] The experience of the HQ did not matter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I thought this was the case with infantry units as well. IIRC, the lower the quality, the more rounds are used quicker and the more inaccurate those rounds fired are. So a green inf squad would waste 40 rounds of ammo while killing 3 people in about 3 minutes (as an example), while a crack inf squad would go through 40 rounds in 6 minutes and kill 6 people. By analogy, I thought the combat bonuses increased the accuracy of the units in C&C and selectivity of the targets fired at. Could be wrong though.