Juardis

In the game, do you typically keep tanks stationary in a standoff position or do you fire and move, fire and move? I like to keep them in standoff, but find that a well placed arty strike will show up in a matter of minutes. However, when I go to move them they are most vulnerable to direct fire and I typically lose many tanks that way. In real battles, what was the preference? I always thought it was standoff battles (ala, North Africa). ------------------ Jeff Abbott

This is the first I heard of special vehicles for FOs. Do you have any links to pictures or a description of such? ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I participate on a board like that as well. You do tend to wonder if it's your body odor, nerdy clothes, or your username when you consistently end a thread ------------------ Jeff Abbott

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chrisl: I use them on anything. They can cause the tank to button, and a permanently buttoned tank is much easier to kill. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> what he said. And who knows, it might get lucky and kill a tank. Having said that, if there are better targets out there (e.g., a MG nest or two, or a FO), I'll target them preferentially over a tank. The reason being is that a 60 mm mortar has, at most, 2 60 sec turns worth of ammo. I do not want to waste most of my rounds just to button up a tank and pray that I get a kill. I'd rather try to kill a MG nest or FO in one turn and try to save my last 5-8 rounds to button a tank up and pray for a kill on the next turn (or sometime thereafter). ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I won't be around for round 2. My opponent went all infantry. Doh! I can maybe still win the field, but it's a little harder at this point. If I do it'll be my superior skill that wins the day NOT! But if I were to hang around, I would vote custom. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Randy Mauldin: If I download the 1.1 patch won't it overwrite the 1.05 patch? I won't be able to save a file in the 1.05 version since it won't be there anymore, right? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Here's what you do. We had to do this with a previous patch. You open your PBEM game in 1.05. You save it. Don't hit GO, but alt-s and give it a file name. It will henceforth be saved at that point and will be called whatever filename you give it. You then download and install 1.1. Then you fire up CMBO with 1.1 and click on Play Scenario. Then choose the file that you previously saved in 1.05. This will open it and allow you to continue your previous PBEM game only now you're using 1.1. Got it? ------------------ Jeff Abbott

http://www.combatmissions.com Hmmmm...in todays (Tuesday 11/21) USA Today there is an article about this new TV show. 8 teams of 4 men/women to duke it out on an abandoned military base. Don't know any other details other than a June timeframe on the USA network. I would guess paintball, but maybe something more high tech. Sounds...blasphemous ------------------ Jeff Abbott

You want an update? We've played one turn and already I know I'm going to get my ass kicked by Kunzler. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Both sides can ask for a PAUSE, which gets rid of the timer for that particular turn. Usefull for beer runs and the follow up potty breaks Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Youse guyz be jammin! With a wife and 2 kids, that was my biggest concern ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I vaguely remember something about that (the HQ taking over for the FO part that is). Is this true? How do we do that? ------------------ Jeff Abbott

IMO, Tigers and KTs are overrated.

I recently figured out the same thing as you. I do not know the way around this. If you do what you suggested, what's to stop you from setting up a PBEM game with yourself? Answer: nothing. You're just going to have to rely on the honor system when doing something like this, or...let both players peruse each other's force alignment. Knowing what the other person has and knowing how that person is going to use what he has is entirely different. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir: I would also allow the Nashhorn. Great gun, but the armor is so thin anything that hits it will kill it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Just to back this statement up, I killed two Nashorns with a 0.50 team. Unfortunately, those same 2 Nash's took out 5-6 of my tanks from 1000m before my 0.50 could get close enough. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

The customary question Steve . Once I convert my 1.05 PBEMs to 1.1, can I then switch to TCP/IP, or will I have to start it in 1.1 to have the ability to switch between PBEM and TCP/IP? ------------------ Jeff Abbott

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TBlaster: So I vote for...leave as is. Tom<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ditto ------------------ Jeff Abbott

Since the Borg seems to be AWOL, I will temporarily fill in (I know, a poor substitute but hey, you get what you pay for) You have been assimilated. There, now that that's out of the way. Using search is an excellent way to endear you to the masses here. Well done and welcome back (sort of). ------------------ Jeff Abbott

sounds good.

Well, it is at this point that I must step in. As an allied player, I thought I was scrogged initially after looking at the map (and I still may be). But I have taken out his Panther already (just so you know there was no spoiler there). I'm on turn 11 of 18 turns right now and I have control of the center VL. Near as I can tell, he was setup to defend that VL come hell or high water given everything I've killed there. I'm not really sure I know what could've stopped me from taking that VL given what I did to take it. Sure, I took losses (my armor is almost gone), but I have enough forces left to push on to the other VL, which is exactly what I'm doing right now. So I guess it's all in how you play it as the allies as to whether you view it as balanced or not. Personally, I felt the allies had the advantage since I could pick and choose where and when to attack. Don, great little battle (but then again, I'm winning right now ) ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I think you'll find most people will choose the equal point combo (unless they're the Allies of course ). I vote no. Oh, and I was just trying to save you time by not having to send the maps out. I think you'll find that that will get old very very quickly. Think about it, by the time you open your 10th map you'll be sick of it. Just open one map, populate it with both sides, save it, then delete everything and start again with the next pair. Just trying to save you time brother. ------------------ Jeff Abbott [This message has been edited by Juardis (edited 11-16-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: Bocage in CM is generally not good cover. The enemy can see your men for maybe 10 or 20 yards behind it, and it does not offer much protection. The exception is if you are defending and your men are dug in behind – benefiting from the cover of their foxhole and the concealment of the bocage. David <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You sure about that? I setup a hotseat QB with a flat map and bocage only. I was specifically trying to determine what you can and cannot see with bocage. My observations are: 1) If you're hiding in bocage, you will not be spotted unless you fire or move. 2) Even if you do fire or move, you will not be spotted easily. A unit must have a LOS to your spot. And having a LOS into a spot of bocage is not a given. Sound contacts appear and disappear a lot in bocage. 3) If you're at an angle of greater than 30-45 degrees, you will not be spotted or be able to target anything beyond that arc, regardless of what you are doing in the bocage. 4) YOU CANNOT SEE THROUGH BOCAGE 5) It takes a long time (one turn) to run through bocage and you tire very rapidly when doing so. If you move through, you can double or triple the amount of time and if you sneak....well, hope it's a long battle. So IMHO, bocage is excellent cover for concealment, not so great for protection. The problem arises when you are indeed spotted and taking fire. Getting out of the bocage takes a while and you may die before doing so. And if the nearest cover takes you into enemy fire, then the TAC-AI will send you there. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I'm in. But I have some suggestions. First, forget about sending out maps until after each side purchases his/her forces. Just let us know the parameters (map size, type of battle, weather conditions, time of day, time of year, tree coverage, hill size, and countryside (e.g., rural, farm, village, town)). Tell us how many points we have and how many turns (20-25 is a good number for the reasons you gave). Tell us which side we're playing (probably won't know that until you get a bracket together). Then let us email you our force alignments so that you can purchase. Once you buy the forces for each side, email the scenario back to us and let her rip. You have to put a time limitation otherwise there will be no incentive to complete in a timely manner. That leaves the rest of us hanging around waiting for one or two slack asses to finish . Furthermore, you'll have to figure out what do you do in the case of a draw. I'm in a tournament right now at theblitz.org (called Road to St. Lo). It is run similarly except there are 4 custom made scenarios for each round and points awarded to the victor. If you lose, you're out. If a draw, both continue on (not sure how that works yet). The two players with the highest point total after 4 rounds then duke it out for the tournament champ. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I'm like gramps in that if I play too many at one time I get lost and don't learn anything. I was playing 8 at one time plus a hot seat game against myself and a scenario. I want to get that to 5 or so. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

I've had quite a few occasions lately to make liberal use of withdrawals. Here's what I've learned (this is one of the many lessons you've taught me so far Ron A. ). If you withdraw one or two troops, then they'll be OK mentally. If you start withdrawing more, then the whole platoon (WHETHER THEY WITHDRAW OR NOT) is rattled. So when Ron starts advancing his squads into my squads, if I issue a withdraw order to 2 or more units (squads, HQ, sniper, whatever), then they will bug out immediately unless they're broken, routed, or panicked. IN ADDITION, if I were to leave a flamethrower behind as a little surprise for his advancing infantry, my flamer will also go to a reduced state (e.g., from green to yellow). If more withdrawals are ordered, then it can feed on itself to the point that my flamer also breaks and runs on his own accord. So use it sparingly as those assets nearby seem to be affected, not just the ones withdrawing. Also, global morale plays a role in how fast a withdrawing unit breaks and becomes routed. This is an observation on my part and in no way based on knowledge of the actual AI coding. So it could just as easily be that withdrawing lowers global morale which reduces the morale of non-withdrawing units to the point that they can break and run as well. Or it could be that I'm getting my butt kicked anyway and it was the enemy causing my troops to act like groundhogs. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jpinard: Juardis - sorry to hear you lost money on them. It's going to be a very long time before they release anything new...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Thanks. It was actually my fault for not selling when it was above 30$. I got greedy. Anyway, it sounds like they're going back to making the chips like they were when they were making Voodoo2's. They then sell the chips to vid card makers (Creative, Guillemot, Elsa, Asus, etc) so that THEY make the cards. This is the way it was, this is the way nVidia does things, and this is the way 3dfx will go back to doing business. Unfortunately, there aren't as many card makers as there used to be. Diamond is gone, Canopus is gone, STB is gone. But as I said above, this is a good move for 3dfx. They obviously sucked at making cards but they are very good at making chips. ------------------ Jeff Abbott

OK, it is known that the trajectory of on board mortars is not modeled. So you can hide your 81mm mortar team directly behind a 2 story building and hit a target directly behind another 2 story building >100m away. Fine, this is an abstraction I can live with. What I want to know is, since trajectories are not modeled, does it matter if I fire my 81mm mortar from within trees? Will I set off an airburst directly above me? I've been assuming that I must be in open ground to fire my mortars but I'm in a heavily wooded battle right now and my mortars are useless in some areas of the map unless they can fire from within the trees. (yes, I did a search and Lewis (:USERNAME alluded to setting off an airburst above your mortar team, but did not say that it would). ------------------ Jeff Abbott