Holman

This issue brings up a question I've had about CM. How are tank riders penalized in the game? I know that they can't fire, and that they are prone to panic when they come under fire, but does the game also model an extra degree of exposure and vulnerability for squads riding tanks? I assume that they take more casualties up there than they would lying on the ground. Also, I notice that the TacAI is able to target a vehicle passenger, but that the player cannot target passengers specifically in the orders phase. Occasionally I'll start a new turn and find a targetting line that looks like it's going to a tank, but is actually labelled as leading to the squad on the back. Martyr

I use bicolor on the 251s and monocolor on the 250s. The effect, for me, is to make the 250s look slightly older, as they should.

Franko, that sounds great! For a while I've been thinking about trying to do a scenario from MacDonald's COMPANY COMMANDER, but I've never had the time. I'm glad you beat me to it! Please email the scenario to proberts@umich.edu when you have a chance. Thanks! Martyr

Jason, I find your posts very well thought-out and informative. They almost always add to my CM experience by filling in knowledge gaps and detailing the bigger picture. (Have you written a book, by any chance?) Balance of forces is one of CM's concessions to entertainment (as opposed to history). But I wonder if, with more complex victory conditions and creative scenario design, we might actually be able to have fun with some of the situations you describe. Martyr

Very interesting thread! One minor point I'd like to add is that scenario briefings can do some of the pre-battle recon for you. That is, a well-written briefing can give the player exactly the kind of limited information that a real battlefield commander would have. I'd like to see more attention paid to the text that we see even before the set-up phase. Of course this won't apply to QBs, but there you go.

Niles, please learn some lessons about posting etiquette. While the rest of the internet may be like the Wild West in this respect, on this board there are standards that must be upheld. And where the standards break down, there are moderators with padlocks. The lesson for today is this: posting attacks, threats, or calls for harm to individuals (or large groups of them) is a definite no-no. If it's a joke, it's not funny. If it's serious, it's sick and wrong. Martyr

"It Never Snows in September" was written by Robert J. Kershaw, and was published by Ian Allan Publishing (UK). It's a great account of the whole course of Market-Garden, with particular emphasis on German responses to the landings. I believe I just saw in a catalog that the book is being brought back into print. Apparently, Kershaw also has a book about Barbarossa (also from Ian Allan), but I can't recall the title right now. Has anyone read this?

One thing I noticed (hunting around some more) is that this bmp represents "Sicherung (security)" squads, but only late in the war. When I do a September 44 set-up, the security squad is the regular Heer soldier with helmet. In March 45, however, the security squad is the rough fellow in 1116.bmp. I wonder why?

Hi all, For some reason I can't figure out the unit associated with file 1116 in the bmp folder. (It's an unshaven, rather cynical looking German in a cap, not a helmet.) Can someone identify it for me? I've set up QBs with all the German elements I can think of, but none of them match. Also, can anyone tell me the level of the rank marking on this face's collar? I'd like to know if he is an officer or enlisted. Finally, does the type of cap he's wearing signify anything? I ask all this because (if the image is for some reason not already used) I might set it as the standard Heer infantry squad. Something about the fellow's expression just says it all for me. Thanks.

I think the main issue is whether AT guns have any use at all on the offensive. Since they are limited in mobility and are easily killed when revealed, I would think that they are not much good as part of your main effort. No good defender will allow them to last long if they are set up to cover a main route of advance. However, they can still be deployed "defensively" in order to limit enemy counterattacks. If the map permits it, you might also place them so that they can cover enemy reinforcement routes or escape routes. Another use I can think of is to hold them in reserve until you're pretty certain you know the disposition of enemy forces, and then move them to where they can fire on infantry or light armor with impunity. Suffice to say that AT guns are *not* useful in the reconnaissance role... Martyr P.S. And I hear what you're saying about empathy for one's forces. I hate to make an intentionally sacrificial move, even if it will preserve more forces in the long run. I just keep thinking about all those letters I have to write to all those pixel families... [This message has been edited by Martyr (edited 03-03-2001).]

Count me in, Jagdcarcajou! I'll send you a set-up when I get home from work tonight. I'm not on the Tournament House ladder, but I am on the Rugged Defense list. Look for me near the bottom... Martyr

32. Back in the 1980's, when I was a teenager, I used to do the math and think, "Wow, I'll be 32 in the year 2001!" At the time it seemed like science fiction.

Nay. For all the right reasons. "Ask not what your forum can do for you. Ask whether your post is worth reading." Martyr

In general, I think the computer forces need a slight experience boost so that they have a better chance of carrying out the broad plans that the Strategic AI gives them. On the other hand, I don't want to face Elites all the time, so I limit the boost to +1. If a scenario designer has included a lot of Conscripts for a reason, they will still fight as (merely computer-controlled) Greens, so the overall flavour of the situation is preserved. The force percentage bonus then determines whether I play a "balanced" game or fight against a much stronger enemy force. I like the fact that there are so many options here. This can make a single scenario replay very differently. Martyr

I tend to think of games in terms of scale. Sometimes I want to push a Panzer Army towards the Meuse at 10km a hex, and sometimes I want to get down a dirty with a bayonet in my hand and veins in my teeth and etc. etc... CM handles my tactical, squad-level needs better than anything ever has. I feel like I've been waiting for this game all my life. But when it comes to individual man-level combat, I'm most looking forward to Shrapnel's ALL AMERICAN: 82nd AIRBORNE IN NORMANDY. On the science-fiction side, I hope that Interplay's FALLOUT TACTICS lives up to its potential. The flight simulation I'm most waiting for is Blue Byte's IL-2 STURMOVIK. For the operational level, I've recently rediscovered THE ARDENNES OFFENSIVE (which is *free!*). I also have a copy of Shrapnel's COMBAT COMMAND 2 on the way, and it looks good from the reviews. Martyr

OK, I have two questions. One of them is technical, and the other pertains to CM etiquette. The embarrassing technical one first: 1) How do I include those fancified, clearly-marked, nicely indented quotes in my posts on this board? Whenever I post, I have to cut and paste from others' wisdom, and it never looks right. In fact, it always looks like I made it up myself, and this usually leads to costly and vindictive libel litigation. And now, Dear Miss Manners: 2) What's the best way to tell an opponent that you think he's being gamey? Any anecdotes (with the names changed, of course) are very welcome, especially if they involve snippy counter-accusations. Thank you and good night, Martyr

*** quote *** The only "problem" I have ist that the company HQ is able to command troops from another company than his own... *** unquote *** I always take this to mean that enlisted men with follow a Captain even if he's not *their* Captain. "You men follow me!" *** quote *** Oh, and you will also find that the company HQ take command of any infantry unit that's close to it but further from their organic platoon HQ. *** unquote *** Just a (probably unnecessary) clarification here: a company HQ can command infantry squads that are OUT OF RANGE of their own organic platoon HQ. However, any MG team, mortar, spotter, or other independent team will take command from whatever HQ (of any level) is closest.

We probably shouldn't jump to any conclusions yet, since there has been no final statement either way on this board. There are lots of us posting here, but Charles and Steve--ultimately the only two people who can make the decision--probably have things to do other than checking this thread every fifteen minutes. And it *is* the weekend, after all... Martyr

Perhaps burning buildings are treated as rubble already. Of course, no unit will enter a burning building, but a unit fleeing one might no longer be considered inside a building at all. Thus, the ability to enter the adjacent building as if from "outside."

May I ask if the HTs in everyone's tests have been firing back with their machineguns? Seems to me that there should be a difference between closing with a buttoned halftrack and closing with a halftrack that is firing back at you with a MG or two. Wouldn't the MG's suppression fire slow the assault somewhat? And remember that most HT MG's have some sort of protection for the gunner, while the assaulters are probably in the open and slightly below the attacker. Just wondering if this variable is part of the observations. Martyr

I'm always looking for the best "all-purpose" mods, usually without any sort of unit-specific insignia, so I haven't had to use any mod manager (yet). I just overwrite the .bmp's with the new mods I want, but I pay carefult attention. I also keep a list of what mods are in use and the order in which I installed them, so that I can easily back out if I have to. If a very dependable, easy-to-use mod manager came along, however, I would probably start using it. I haven't looked into it yet. Martyr

BTS has already remarked (in the original thread) that they are testing and looking into this problem. They probably don't have time to respond to every instance of "I saw it too!"

I'm not certain, but I'd guess that the HT was relocating in order to *escape* the barrage, but unfortunately moved into it instead. True woods would be impassable to the HT of course, and even scattered trees would slow it down, so perhaps forward (and through) the barrage seemed the only means of escape. In any case, did you notice a round landing very close to the vehicle before it moved? Perhaps that would trigger a flight response. I assume that you've watched the morale state of the crew, and that total panic was not a factor... Martyr [edited to make sense] [This message has been edited by Martyr (edited 02-15-2001).]

The "Any Port after a Storm" series is an exception to the general rule. Unless I'm crazy, I distinctly remember seeing a note at the download site indicating that the player should select "free set-up" when playing these scenarios against the computer. This is because the default setup has all the german units lined up against the back of the map, just as in a QB before you take your initial positions. Go back and look. There may be a readme note in the zip file for the whole "Any port" group. Or the note may be only at Manx's Combat Missions site. I'd like to ask developers in the future to remind us of any special instructions in the general briefing accessible from within CM.

My nickname fits me for several reasons: 1) In grad school, I was studying religion in England in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Martyrdom was a side interest. 2) I get killed in CM a lot. 3) I get kind of whiny when I have to take out the garbage or cook dinner. Martyr