R-Man

I've been playing spring/summer 1944 and can't get an 85 mm with HE. I tested June through October with no luck. Come November and the AP was back in the load. This does not appear to be a supply issue, as one would think the summer months of 1944 were good to the Russians. I think it's a code problem, but have no way of knowing. By the way, I played a quick battle against the computer last night with the 85 mm AP. The AA gun took out a Tiger at 600 m with a side shot. One shot one kill. Had I missed, and that Tiger squared-up, I fear the consequences for my entire force. It was 1943 and all I had were T-34s.

Gentlemen, we may have a bug. I tested December 1941 and 1943. Both had a load of AP. I went back to June 1944 and it was all HE. I know I have tried using the 85 mm AA gun another time and it was also all HE, so I stopped going to it. I could probably spend the next hour testing every combination of month and year to narrow down the problem, but I won't. Do somefink. I need a decent gun to fend off the Tigers and Panthers. I'm stuck with the over-priced 57 mm Zis 2. That is the only gun that stands a chance, and after the Tungston is gone, all hope is lost against the Tigers.

Why does this gun not have any AP? Is it a historical thing? One would think that if the 85 mm tank gun has AP, the AA gun would also.

I’m a happy camper. The new features sound great. I’ve pre-ordered and I’m ready to go. The demo will be downloaded tomorrow. It’s been so long…

I'm in Milwaukee until December, so I can drive down from there. CM and beer sound like a good combination haha. I have a laptop, but I'm not sure about setting it up in a bar. It might be better to just drink pints at Hooters and talk about Fions' tactics. Otherwise, the girls might think we're board-gamers. Or worse; Role Playing gamers!!! How does Saturday the 20th or Sunday the 21st sound? I prefer Saturdays because I can sleep in on Sunday. Hooters of Schaumburg 1705 East Golf Road Schaumburg, IL 60173 847-619-4668 Hooters of Downers Grove 1303 Butterfield Road Downers Grove, IL 60515 630-960-4008 Hooters of O'Hare O'Hare Airport-Chicago Chicago, IL 60630 773-714-0193 Pick one...

I can just see Col. Trotter at the PC Gamer staff meeting after finding out that Combat Mission got left off the top 50 list: One eye buldging towards the ceiling, red-faced, pounding his fists on the table, "You insufferable twits!!! How can you leave the most revolutionary war game ever made off the top 50 list?! I want some ass, and I want it NOW!!!" The click-festers relent and give him 50th place, beating out 10,000 other games on their "short list." As others have stated, 50th is not a slap in the face, it is a great accomplishment. Congrats again, BTS.

The 90 mm is definitely under-rated. I love this weapon, and purchase at least two or three in any defensive QB. I can’t believe that this gun has less armor piercing ability than the 76. It knocks out King Tigers! Just make sure that the guns have over-lapping fields of fire, and hide the crew until you get a few big juicy targets, then let ‘em rip! BTW, Wilhammer is correct, the 90’s and 88’s do not add to air defense in the game.

Regardless of its minor shortcomings, Forgotten Soldier is the best first-person account of the war that I’ve read. It is a book that you just don’t want to finish, yet can’t put down. Savor those last chapters. When CM2 comes out I will pull out the book and read it again. Another good first person account is Company Commander. It’s not nearly as chilling, but it has its moments.

I’m afraid that this discussion has gotten a little off track from Wilhammer’s original premise; that there are inconsistencies in the point system related to infantry, oftentimes resulting in the German infantry platoons having more bang for the buck. For example, in a November 1944 Quick Battle, the Americans have the ubiquitous Rifle Platoon available for 120 points. It has total firepower ratings (abstractions?) of 674, 338 and 144 at ranges of 40 m, 100 m and 250 m, respectively. Compare this to the Panzer Grenadier Platoon at the similar cost of 129 points. It has firepower ratings of 794, 472 and 232 at the same ranges. Based on firepower/points, the American’s are at a 91.3%, 77.0% and 66.7% disadvantage at the three ranges, respectively. This discrepancy is not limited to just the Americans. When comparing Engineer Platoons to Pioneers, the Germans are on the short end of the stick, having 73.2%, 96.6% and 119.5% at 40 m, 100 m, and 250 m. The German flamethrowers are at a disadvantage in range as well. The point I’m trying to make is simple; all things being equal (supply, rarity, cost of equipment, etc.), the cost of infantry should be based on relative firepower to a greater degree than it seems to be now.

My addiction to CM has not yet even scratched the surface of my addiction to Close Combat. But it’s coming close . The Real Red and Real Infantry mods to CC3 made it as good a game as there was available at the time. I do not agree that it was a twitch game. Spot the tank, hit 1+V, 2+V, 3+V, etc...Boom! Hotkeys compensated for the twitch factor to some extent. BTS would do well to include a campaign game with men and units that increased in experience levels as they went from battle to battle, and could upgrade their equipment. I see a combination of CC3's unit development, and TalonSoft's dynamic campaign system. The defensive AI in CM is definately up to the task. BTW, IGotMilk was the funniest poster I ever read on those forums! I went there during the first CC-CM war, and was pleased to see that the real vile characters stayed out of it.

Well, I guess you’re still reading this thread, so I’ll throw in my two cents. The jeep price is fine. I seldom buy jeeps, for the simple fact that I would rather have a bazooka team. But if my support points are low, and I’ve got room for a vehicle, I’ll pick up a 19 pt. MG Jeep. I’m not sure if I’ve ever seen one survive a battle(?) It would be funny to send one on some kind of gamey recon patrol, but I’ve never tried it. That would be a waste. Reasons to leave it as it is: The jeep can only carry two guys, the 50 cal. has already been toned down, and compared to a half-track, it ain’t much. Rarity notwithstanding, your point system is pretty good. Although, I think the increased price of a fast turret MAY be overstated in the game. A veteran Panther seems to swing plenty fast, and he fires almost twice as fast as a regular U.S. tank destroyer. A fast turret doesn’t seem to be worth all that much under such circumstances. Hey, you guys got your props in the November Computer Gaming World magazine. There was a very favorable letter to the editor, and it was the TOP scorer in this month’s game roundup. But of course, you already knew that. Three months plus, and this game still rocks.

You poor fool. Deep down, didn’t you know this was going to happen? Aren’t you just kidding yourself when thinking that you can escape the web that is Combat Mission? Forget it. The more you struggle, the harder it will be to get free. Soon you’ll be trying new strategies and force mixes, reading AARs, making Amazon.com profitable with your wild purchases of 40 year-old book titles... It’s not too late to reformat your hard drive!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w: I would like to counter R-Man, and yes I prefer to play the Allies as well, and yes usually we are out gunned, by better tanks. I think all these things you mention are inline with the reality of the situation at the time. The Allies had more equipment and it may not have been as good. The Germans had 4 years of war making experience and better equipment and very good tanks ( with GREAT optics ) So I'm not sure were the problem is. Is the problem in the point system that does not make the Allied units cheap enough? -tom w <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Tom, Thank you for the calm, rational and flame-free response to my rant. I am in favor of any modification to the game that increases realism and FOW. However, there are some play-balance issues that can only be addressed through the points system. In the interest of play balance, Shermans should be cheaper (or Tigers/Panthers more expensive), German infantry more expensive, and the potency of the 50 cal. (while not a points issue) should be restored to its original lethality, or at least bumped up a notch. The liberation of France and Belgium after D-Day (August through November 1944), while not a cakewalk, was certainly far less costly than the Allies had ever imagined. (The phrase “wildest dreams” comes to mind.) I do not have access to my books at the moment, but in “Defeat in the West,” the author cites incredible German prisoner and casualty counts in excess of 1 mil. men per month on the Western Front alone. The Germans could not replenish these losses. Thus, in an argument akin to armor rarity, I suggest that the cost of German infantry be increased. The points system now, as I understand it, is devoid of any factors related to rarity, manufacturing, supply, etc., and is only concerned with quality ranking factors. It is fair in its own way, but also unrealistic. The Puma is a perfect example of this imperfection. This thread was started with light vehicles and AFV point costs in mind, but hey, while we’re tinkering, let’s look at the bigger picture. Rick

I don’t like the idea. As a player of the Americans, my 50 cal. MGs are now impotent, my crappy tanks cost too much, my bazookas have half the range of shrecks, my infantry come in only one (expensive) flavor, and my light vehicles are going to get slowed down and have reduced spotting. Now, we Americans are good sports, and we don’t whine like the German players do, but come on guys. We’re dyin’ here. All the Americans have going for them are slightly better artillery, fast vehicles (or, at least, they were fast), decent half-tracks (except for the 50 cal. adjustment), and low cost (lightly armored) tank destroyers. The Germans, on the other hand, have improved Tigers, heavy firepower in light tanks and half-tracks, and more varieties of cheap infantry than you can shake a stick at. I’m all for realism, but the only way to play-balance this game is through the point system. The Germans were losing over 1,000,000 men a month on the Western front after the D-Day landings, had virtually no source of new manpower, and had to create the “home guard” to deal with it. Why is their infantry so cheap then? Sorry for the rant, but the American players have sat quietly by while the German juggernaut has been continuously strengthened in this game. I seriously think that the point system needs to be overhauled, and that the German Army of 1944-45 should be brought into line with the very real manufacturing and manpower deficiencies that they experienced IRL. (BTW, when I say "American" and "German," I mean player sides, not actual nationalities.)

I don't know. An on-line game of Age of Empires took an hour, an on-line game of Panzer General II took two hours. A similarly sized game of CM will take FOUR HOURS. That may be a bit too much time to spend in a game room.