Redleg

Close Combat forum on ClubSSI by some fanatical freak that was named 'Anonymous'

Acually the poundage of the british guns refers to the weight of a lead sphere that would fit into a particular barrel. So the 17lb gun would fit a 17lb lead ball in the tube. The round itself was probably heavier than 17lb. Still a confusing system, darned brits.

This was an issue I read about awile ago. I belive that originally the bunkers were too easy too kill and they upped thier survieability against artillery. I think that the way it is is better, as bunkers, especialay concrete desingns, should be very resistant to artillery fire against all but dead on hits. Smoke the bunker, then get a platoon arround behind it and assault it. This is probably the most realistic method to kill a bunker. At least in my opinion.

specifically, http://www.clubssi.com/cgi-bin/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=Combat+Mission:+Beyond+Overlord&number=27&DaysPrune=20&LastLogin= it is listed in the forum list, but not on thier front page.

This is an interesting development. Take a look at www.clubssi.com. SSI is the group that publishes Close Combat after Microsoft dropped it.

The TNT2 works well for me and others on the board have stated success with this card. If you are looking for a replacement....

Geez, when I brought this up I was accused of being 'not a real wargamer'. The forum population has been gracious to you . The 3 soldier representation is annoying, but the good gameplay makes up for it, at least for Ver1. In future versions, this should at least be an option.

FM 7-8 The Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad and FM 7-10 The Infantry Rifle Company. The basics are the same even if the weapons have changed. There is a .MIL web site with FM's from WWI to Vietnam(?). In any case it has WWII FM's in it, including 'Know your enemy' type books about the German Army. Good site, and I will post a link when I get back to work, unless anyone else is aware of the site and can give a link. I will be back to work 5 Jul.

You respond to any statement with "okay sarge" or "yes sir"

My mortar teams are always the first to get killed if I ever get them in a position to see anything to shoot at. As soon as they pop up to fire, any enemy in LOS fires on the poor guy. I still have to figure out how to use them right.

I love the FOW system in this game, it sure does make for a more intense and uncertain game. Perhaps the two tanks shot each other? The two projos crossed each other in flight?

oops, DP - sorry. [This message has been edited by Redleg (edited 06-30-2000).]

Just dont do to them what someone did to the CC forums. That was a mess, and although I found out about CM through that mess, I was really put off by some CMers rudeness. Of course the CC guys were rude too, but it IS the CC forum anyway.

or the TC and driver were unbuttoned. Inf fires on unbuttoned tank crews.

Looking for missionarries?

http://www.rzm.com/videos/waffenss.cfm is the mg42 vid spot

National Gaurd Bureau blocks the pictures, HEHE . I cant see them til I get home. They probably have a problem with the name of the picture (14in) . Stupid Server Filters.

I guess I was looking for all that legwork to be done for me by asking for an orientation of the platoon after the last waypoint is places. On completion of movement, the PLT would arrange itself on line in the direction given.

It would be nice to be able to move an entire platoon by giving an movement order to the PL, as opposed to boxing all the guys and moving them that way. The advantage being that the Platoon will configure themselves in a way that makes sense. For instance, when blocking a PLT and moving them that way, the unit gets all messed up at the destination, such as the 60MM Mort in front and the squads oriented the wrong way. Also, the squads tend to bypass enemy units that they pass allong the way instead of engaging them, even in just a 'move' as opposed to a 'move fast' order. Can this be done? Give the PL a move order 'Move Platoon' and then have the game ask for a direction for the PLT to face when they reach the destination. This will decreace micromanagement alot. En route, they will engage enemy forces as a platoon if any are found. The PL could also be directed to 'Move Platoon Fast', the difference will be the PLT will bypass any enemy forces allong the way. Is this a good idea? Is it possibe for CM2?

I always liked the M203 for very personal artillery.

That would be really handy. Good Idea! I sometimes spin arround and arround trying to get behind a unit to see what they see, and slow sideways movement would be a nice addition.

In VoT I always use the leftmost platoon to assault bunkers after I smoke the route. I position the entire platoon outside of the bunkers fireing arc and then move them right next to the bunker. They toss grenades in and cause the crew to bail. The three times I have done this successfully no freindly fire casualties have resulted. Always the squads are right next to the bunker.

That would be really nice, right and left flank freindlies not under your control. That would be a nice addition.

After playing for awhile I will withdraw my TBS complaint. After figuring out what the heck I was supposed to be up to and how to orchestrate maneuvers, it isn’t so bad. RTS would destroy the feeling of higher level command so I will capitulate on this RTS vs TBS point. I still wish each guy was represented in CM though, BUT I do understand it is not possible with modern computer hardware. I hope that full representation will be implemented in future versions. My idea concerning crew served weapon-targeting (giving key weapons icons on the screen to give quick access to a targeting line) may save a little time, but would clutter the screen and probably be annoying. I am much happier with the game after fully familiarizing myself with it and will be purchasing soon. I am sure there will be much to learn and will give me many hours of good game play. It is quite a switch from CC and requires a massive rethink of tactics. Things that work in CC get your men killed here and vice versa. I am surprised by the common response to complaints by many members of this group. Many valid objections are needlessly belittled and the poor saps to raise objections are raked across the coals. Of course not all ideas will work, but perhaps someone will have a nifty idea that is actually good. Critique is a good thing for goodness sake. Not everyone who wishes something was a little different in CM is a ‘troll’ or ‘not a serious wargamer’

of course I did not consider multiplayer. But CC works MP, Why not this? I guess that would make it fully RT then tho. Im not totaly converted to TB, but MP pauses would be annoying granted. BTW, I will probably buy it anyway, even if I dont consider it 'the perfect game' because I love being on the ground that is being hit by arty BOOM! Boom! BOOM!