Juardis

The 0.50 cal most definitely. A greyhound or 4. Arty (they get lots more than the Germans, especially the Americans). Bofors - you're only AA defense plus a good infantry killer w/ high rof. The M4 105, GREAT infantry buster-upper. A M36B Jackson - big gun or the M18 Hellcat if playing the rule of 76. Did I mention arty yet? Zooks/piats - must have Any allied tank with a 76mm gun instead of the 75mm gun. I like to couple a 76mm with the 105. Glider squads - they have lots of inherent AT capability. Arty, have I mentioned that yet? ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Never ever buy green. I usually buy vets but have come to appreciate the numerical superiority that regulars seem to offer. I just need to practice keeping them together in tight C&C, otherwise they break like dry twigs. (In other words, buy regulars). Definitely get vet or higher for your support units though (AT teams, sharpshooters, mortar teams, etc). All IMHO of course. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

OK Capt, riddle me this. If I'm defending, and decide to let you have the flag by pulling my forces away from it, and then take those forces and move them through a gap you left during your attack, then attack you from behind (in a place you least expect), have I just not practiced maneuver warfare? I care not one whit about the terrain. I care about killing your force. By using your attack and my maneuver, I have successfully put myself in a position to best kill your force. I attacked from an unexpected direction by unexpectedly letting you have the terrain you were trying to get. Did I miss something here? I happen to think that CM is both. Sometimes, he with the mostest locally wins. Sometimes, he who manuevers to ensure he has the mostest locally wins. All IMHO of course. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Excellent read, thanks for posting.

when in a TCP/IP game, hitting GO within the first 2 sec of each turn for 5 consecutive turns will make all your units invincible for the next 5 turns. Can only be used once per game. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

OK, good to know I'm not being cowardly with my tanks . Thanks for the insigtful responses.

I understand Terence. We all seem to do that. But as for Tanks trailing infantry in real life, I'm not so sure. You may be right, but hell, all of France seemed to fall with armor leading the charge. Same with the initial attack into Russia. It seemed armor rolled over and through the defenses without any infantry support. I can't seem to duplicate that in CM1. Look at it this way. When we played M1TP2, we (or I did anyways) always led with tank platoons. Infantry seemed only good at springing ambushes. I know we're talking two different periods, but the idea is the same. Get your tanks into hull down positions, take out enemy, repeat advance using bounding overwatch whenever possible. Move infantry up behind. Whenever we led with the Bradleys, they were as good as toast. ------------------ Jeff Abbott [This message has been edited by Juardis (edited 01-30-2001).]

I wonder if they're going to release a demo?

Every book I've read (not too many), every movie I've seen (many), every story I've heard from vets (very few) all say that the infantry followed the tanks into battle. When I first got CM1, that is how I attacked. That is also how I lost. My armor would fall victim to AT guns, or AT teams, or even other armor just waiting. Leaving me with infantry to attack armor. Not a good situation. It seems in CM that if I lead with my infantry that I stand a much better chance of winning. But I also believe that this is historically wrong (I'm a gamer, not a historical grog, but I still believe it to be historically wrong). So, were the doctrines of WW2 flawed? Or is it possible that you should always lead with your tanks to protect your people since tanks can be replaced, people cannot? Even at the detriment of the battle at hand, perhaps putting the armor out front was more important for the war than it was for the battle? I'm trying to figure out why real life tactics seem to suck in CM as far as this is concerned. Because, as it is now, I usually hide my armor in the rear for fear of losing it because once I lose it, it's very difficult to win. That is not historically accurate either, but it works in CM. Any thoughts on this? ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I could see a huge problem in the bitter cold when plastic becomes brittle. I can see it now. One AK-47 burst and it splits right down the middle exposing the crew to the elements. Very bad for morale if that happens ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Like some, I consider myself a gamer with a huge interest in war and strategy. Most of the games I've bought in the past 10 years had one or both in common. However, I appreciate the realism and historical accuracy and, as has already been stated, CM is as good as it is today because it has all 3. I want more eye candy in the most realistic, historically accurate game I can find. But if BTS did not care one whit about graphics, then they would have sold a lot fewer CDs and we possibly would not have CM2 coming. Graphics is what propelled this game from a good seller in a niche market to a great seller that transcends the niche. If any of you noticed, following each positive review or ranking in the national gaming magazines, we got a slew of new people posting here. These new people read gaming magazines and hence can be defined as gamers with an interest in war (like me). Having said all that (if you're still with me that is), BTS should concentrate on the coding aspects and let the modders worry more about the graphics. As long as BTS puts in the skeleton for burned out buildings, large factories, 3d trees, lighting effects, etc, the modders can improve on the graphics much like they are doing now. And finally, CM1 was delayed 4 months or so to redo the artwork (IIRC). That alone should tell you what BTS thinks of graphics. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

more important than what it is, why isn't it in CM1?!?! I demand to see a patch with this in CM1, and if not for that, then I demand we see it in CM2!!! How in God's name are the Germans expected to win without this in the game?!

Ever go inside one? You get all kinds of neat details. Don't know how realistic it is though. What I'd like to know is from you modders, how realistic do you get in the inside? Basically, I was looking at the Jpz IV for vision slits and did not find any. Don't know if that's because the mod I'm using doesn't include them or if they're aren't any. Would be cool if I could get inside the tank and look out through the slits. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Well, I started a similar thread on c.s.i.p.g.war-historical. I think BTS should incorporate unit experience in the rarity equation. That is to say, an elite Volksturm is very rare, but perhaps an elite SS platoon not so rare. So the cost of infantry type, as well as vehicles, should be based on rarity (rifle 41s more common than Pioneers). Furthermore, you're more likely to see a crack SS troop so the cost in going from vet to crack within the SS infantry type should not be as great in going from vet to crack in a rifle 41 platoon say. Yet, since the SS was more rare, a crack SS platoon will still cost more than a rifle 41 platoon. All this for when you BYO troops. Computer purchased troops would probably work better with the probability that someone posted on c.s.i.p.g.w-h (and I think alluded to above). All IMHO of course. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Harpoon It was one of the first real time games but, since it dealt with ships and planes, the pace was manageable. Not sure what the latest incarnation is, but Harpoon IV is supposed to be done this summer according to the SSI website. I was supposed to be done last fall, then last winter, then this spring....Hope that means they're perfecting it. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I think it's safe to assume that it will only be offered online. But I don't work for BTS, so take it for what it's worth.

Sold out again? Woohoo!!! What is that, the 3rd sell out? Outstanding BTS. Sorry Canuck, I don't envy your position. But what I would do is play the hell out of the demo. Hey, it's better than not playing CM. BTW, you might have better luck in the usenet (comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical) than here. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Man, I feel for ya. I get more done with email nowadays than anything else. I mean, look at the time and know that I can get a lot communicated on my schedule with email let alone have 6 PBEM games going at one time . Hang in there dude. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Tom, I was under the impression that relative spotting was that you, the human behind the keyboard, knew what your units without radios saw. That is to say, you, the human behind the keyboard, are the Division commander and you are directing the battle from behind the front. The fact that you, the human, can see what only one unit without a radio (e.g., a sharpshooter that is out of c&c) can see is what I considered relative spotting. You're telling me that ALL of my units now know the same thing I, the human, do? That's new to me. That would also explain how buttoned up JadgPanzers can spot units behind them. Still doesn't explain why AT teams are preferentially targetted though (no, I will never let this rest until I get an answer )

Not here in Charlotte

What are you guys talking about? What other games are there? Last I checked, there was only one on my hard drive.

The mortar team was just there to record the incident for posterity. They took no part in the ambush (unless mortar teams can fight hand to hand, which I'm not sure they can do). So really, it was just one Rifle squad.

Let me see if I understand what you just wrote. The TAC AI will allow a buttoned up JadgPanzer IV to spot an AT team in its rear if some other unit has spotted it? And if NO enemy unit knows that it is an AT team then the fact that AT teams are preferentially targetted first is purely coincidence? And if no other unit has said AT team in it's LOS then there is no way said JP IV could see it? All of this without human intervention. I'm talking strictly TAC AI here. Is that what you just said? As for Tiger's Tiger continuing to move when shooting while in Hunt mode, that ain't supposed to happen. Under what conditions could that happen?

I have no doubt that BTS knows how much we like CM . But I guess it never hurts to praise. My list is long but in the interest of space I will only say this. The TAC AI is pretty damned good. I'm constantly amazed at how well it responds. Is it perfect? NO. Will it ever be? No. But by gosh it's effective. Tanks and mortar teams firing smoke to protect your infantry under attack is but one example. Overmatched AFVs reversing to cover and popping smoke is another. The list goes on. ------------------ Jeff Abbott