Jump to content

Bertram

Members
  • Posts

    475
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bertram

  1. I have kind of the same trouble in the Farm tournament.... a German squad with a HQ close, laying in wait on a US squad, will be outgunned by just 2 or 3 US soldiers. Right now I have a squad covering an opening in a bocage wall, 2 US soldiers pop up - 20 seconds later half the German squad is gone, with no us casualties. Earlier I had a squad in the second store of the Cafe, firing down on two US teams. Took about 20 seconds to reduce the squad to 3 wounded riflemen, I think I only got one US soldier.... The only time I could get enmy casualties was when they crossed the road running, so they could not fire back, or when my men used grenades. What I noticed was that each time (well, it was only a few squads), the LMG gunner will be hit the first, after which there are only 7 Mausers against 2-3 garants - and then the Germans just havent enough firepower to compete...
  2. Found this looking up H2HH in Google - found it in my dropbox, but didnt know what it was... 4 opponents, this is the first time I found this file in the dropbox directory.
  3. There are in my opinion some bugs, some oddities and some frustrating issues with the spotting. The bugs are (in my opinion) mostly tank related. I have had a M8, opened up, looking to a road corner where I expected a Panther to arrive (I wanted them to reverse out of sight the moment they spotted the enemy tank). The Panther managed to sneak around the corner (which was about 50 meters away), line up a shot, and kill the M8, before one of the crew managed to spot them. I also have had tanks sittng 50 meters, in the middle of a straight road, head on where one side could spot the other for a full turn, before thye were spot in turn (the spotting tank was an M3, and it decided to enage the Panther with their 37 mm. They got off 4 or 5 shots before the Panther spotted them and replied). I have had infantry unable to spot a tank that was firing on them, even though thye had clear los to the spot the enemy was sitting, and there were 2 squads and a HQ unit theoretically looking for it. I expect that the testers and programmers are looking into this, and improve it when possible. Then there are the oddities. Not necesairely wrong, but sometimes a bit surprising. One of those is the easy of spotting enemy infantry in buildings. I have had a FO in a bulding calling in an artillery strike on some infantry a few hunderd meters away, only to have all infantry in los responding by immediatly spotting him and firing on him. This seems odd, as the FO certrainly does not have to expose himself to spot. Same goes for infantry not hidden in woods. If I give them a hide command, they are difficult to spot. If I unhide them, but keep them in place, they are often spotted immediatly, even from considerable distance. I just mean them to lift their head a bit, not to have them jump up and down, waving their arms.... Mostly this seems to me due to the game having just one "state" for infantry at rest (that is, not hiding, not moving). In real life there is a big difference in the behaviour of a FO trying to spot an enemy while sitting in cover, a squad sitting in ambush or a sentry, versus a bunch of troops just having a cup of tea or resting before getting orders. In CMBN these are all "not moving" , and are spotted the same way. This is also why scenario's like those where you have to recon, and sneak up a bunch of enemies don't work really well. This might be possible in real life, when you avoid the sentries, because not all troops can be alert at all times. In CMBN in contrast, all troops are at the same alert level all time, and are spotting with the same intensity (unless moving). Thereore the recon troops, which are moving, hardy ever spot the stationary troops before they spot them. For most battles this does not matter - once the bullets start to fly you would expect all troops to be alert. For ambushes and sneak attacks you would need some alertness level implemented to make those scenario's really realistic. I can live with these effects. CMBN isnt made for commando raids, the occasional suprise when my concealed troops are spotted I can blame it on bad luck, and I expect some tweaking to be done in the coming releases. Finally there are some frustrating effects from the current implentation of spotting. One of those is the difficulty of having a sqad positioned so that they can look out of a wooded area, without leaving the woods. Setting them up that way is doable - it is just placing them, using the "target' tool to see if they can look out of the woods, and repeat till you get it right. Once in the game it is very difficult though. Especially in WGO mode, you have to give a move command a few feet ahead, wait till the next run, see if your men can already look out of the woods, give a new command, wait a minute, and repeat. It take sso long, that I often just give a hunt command - which only works if the enemy is sogood to start shooting when my men are spotted, otherwise you end up in front of the woods. Same goes for corners of buildings, hedges and bacage, etc. Often I wind up just short of the place where I have the los I want, other times my men go well past this point. This is frustratng of course, because in real life, it is a pretty easy command (advance till you can see xxx), which needs lots of micromanagement in game, and even then has results that vary wildly. In some sense these effects of the engine are worse then the previous category - the frustration that some simmple (in real life) things are difficult to do breaks the immersion. It makes it certainly less enjoyable for me. On the othe hand, this goes for both sides, so as a game against an human opponent, it isnt a deal breaker.
  4. Dropbox directory made, Sluggo mailed, first turn posted...
  5. If you can get another 16, I am game. BORedmeijer <at> home <dot> nl
  6. Dropbox is a program that lets you integrate online storage space with your directory, and lets you share that online space with other users. Subdirectories can be shared with different users (you have to invite them, or be invited). It just looks like a directory on your computer, you can drag and drop "outgoing" email files for one opponent in one subdirectory, for another opponent in another subdirectory. They will see that there are new files, and can drag and drop them into their own "incoming" directory. Maximum file size for the free version is 25 MB, which is enough for medium sized battles. Upload and download speeds are very good (depending on your own internet connection of course). I like it, not only for pbem, but also for sharing files with friend. Would not use it for work, or confidential files. Only disadvantage is that the popup that notifies you of new files disappears after a bit - you might forget to do a file this way (while with plain email you always have the mail itself sitting there).
  7. Do you want to play it real time, or pbem? I think I have time to try PBEM one again... Not a fan o real time.
  8. Winzip also works. Just make sure you uncheck the boxes that install another toolbar, that send info to winzip, that install Kaspersy virus checker and other goodies. You will have to live with them claiming all zip, rar and other compressed files as "Winzip files". They may also change the way Windows Explorer displays files. Be carefull which buttons you click when Winzip is opened, otherwise it will install the previously mentioned programs, "accelerate" your computer, and try to sel you programs to "make your computing experience better".
  9. I have to disagree here. As commander it is indeed more realistic not to know what is going on. But I am not only the commander of this force, I am also the brains of the squad, and the mother of the individual soldiers. All to often their digital brains are not up to reacting realistic to the events around them. As long as I have to direct them as much as I have to, I need to be aware of the things they are aware of. I personally think it LESS realistic that units don't react to evolving events, because the compagny commander is looking through the eyes of a squad on the other side of the battlefield (and having an unrealistic close up knowledge of what happens there). I think it LESS realisitc that a force only reacts when the compagny commander is around, making it necesairy for him to race around the battlefield and sacrifice his overall view in order to tell individual AT teams to targetthis tank or that verhicle. As long as our input is needed at squad/team/verhicle level we should have time to give that input, and have the information that that unit has at that level to make decisions in a ralistic manner. That has the drawback that we, at the same time, have a better overall view of the events than the unit in question would have, but that problem isn't solved by going the other way, and giving less information then the unit would have, or not enough time to make the units act realsitic. I think this is substituting the fog and information overload of the battlefield (due to limited intelligence and speed of events around you) with the information overload of a computer game (due to complete other factors, like being on the left flank of the battlefield while somethig happens on the right flank, or having to actually having to tell ten tanks individually how to drive along a straight road, and baby sit them while they do that, because they otherwise get tangled up, turned around and stuck in the trees). If you like that, it is ok with me, but I don't view it as more realistic. And I certainly don't think people who want to take as much time as their digital counterparts would have for each decision are beginners, and people who like the twitch and run around as more experience. Except maybe that they have learned to move the camera faster and use the commands faster. Which would make you an experienced player in some sense I guess.
  10. I am enjoying it. There are things I like better in CMBB. Some of those are because this is another engine, and I need to adapt. Some of those are because I feel the game has taken a step back, due to the choices made. I can understand those choices, and the game as a whole might get bettrer from them, but at individual points they are sometimes annoying. Details: I enjoyed QB against humans in pbem. (Against the AI it wasn't worth my time - buched up charges along single paths....) Random maps were good enough, as long as you did not go for towns. I am not convinced the current maps are better. My experience is so-so thus far (I am now plaing an engagement QB, which has a river in the middle, with the objectives on a bridge across the river. Equal forces, both need to cross the river to win... Not a realistic starting point). The AI on the other hand is much improved (if the designer made a good plan, and didn't forget to link it the right way). Love the individual soldiers and the smaller "squares" on the map. But I liked the larger maps and the bigger units in CMBB. You had a longer time to manouvre to contact, and the odd occurances evened out a bit. No way you can do that now, even a 2x2 map with a medium force brings my (fairly up to date) computer down, and the files top 25 MB. I am a bit disgruntled about some of the changes in lethality and cover, compared to CMBB. Someone said that you should approach this as a new game - and that is ok. But it is also supposed to be a simulation "as-good-as-possible". And having houses being good cover against arty (for exampla) in CMBB, and not so good in CMBN grates a bit. If both are supposed to simulate reality, one of them has to be off...... Love the relative spotting. Hate the way your units seem to forget what they spotted a moment ago. In Hussar your tank sees a destroyed german tank - till he looks the other way, and the contact turns immediatly back into a ? Come on, it was a burning Panther at 30 feet, 3 seconds ago, sure you can remember that, and not turn it in an unknown enemy contact? Love the wysiwyg cover system, but there are some oddities. Same scenario, got a scout car looking down the road (covered arc) at a corner 40 meters away. A Panther sneaks around that corner, and shoots the scout car before he notices the 50 ton, 3 meter high clunking monster. Really? Have two Stuarts watching a road. A Panther is coming down that road. It is not seen by the Stuarts. Panther shoots the first Stuart. A few turns go by. Panther is seen by the second Stuart. Second Stuart opens up, Panther sees it only after the fifth hit (with predictable results). Plain, straight road, about 100 meters distance.... Same goes for the individual lethalety. I had 9 (German) squads in ambushes in another game. Pulled of the ambushes ok (a very nice improvement, in CMBB you might as well not fall back - standing to the last man gave usually a better result). My casualties were 10 men - unfortunatly 7 of them were Schreck toting individuals (taking out 7/9 of my AT capability, and they had not fired a shot yet). Love the new C2, though it takes a bit of micromanaging. Way better than enything in CMBB. Cant wait to fight on the east front - without radio's. Not complaining about the snipers buddy that opens up with his MG at 200 meters, or the loader of the Schreck that starts pinging the enemy tank with his rifle at 300 meters - I expect those to be fixed in this patch. Do I enjoy the game - yes, but there are a few annoying caveats. Do I enjoy it more than CMBB - mostly, though I miss some things you could do with CMBB. Do I go back to CMBB - no way. Will I be playing CMBN - absoluut, with all modules, till the east front game appears.
  11. I could not find a patch comment thread, so I am loggin my problems here. Sorry if they are covered elsewhere. I am playing a pbem game, scenario Hussar. Updated the game, received a file, ran the file. Went ok till I came to the end of the replay and wanted to re-view it. Hitting the back to start button (<|) caused a CTD. Tried the << button, after restarting the turn. Did the same. Don't knowif my opponent updated, but as I do the computing, this file should run ok, as per patch notes. Bertram
  12. In a quick battle my men didnt surrender when just 10 of the 150 were left (all broken, 8 of 10 wounded). This might have been because 7 of them had hidden themselves on a second floor of a house in one of the two victory zones (this zone was at the end claimed by none of the sides, the other zone was occupied by the enemy).
  13. Another option for the artillery is not to use it as prep fire, but to start plotting artillery at suspected targets in the first turn. It will take a few turns to arrive, but when it does you will have an idea where the enemy actually is, and can adjust accordingly. Which is best depends on the amount of artillery you have, and the number of possible targets... (and the time you can take to to have the infantry waiting for it).
  14. I have to advice against depending on infantry AT weapons on the defence. In a recent battle I tried a German defender with just infantry and (an extra helping of) panzerschrecks, as the map was advertised as bocage. The cover was less then expected, and the infantry insisted on opening up at the tanks at 250 meters (ignoring the enemy infantry). The enemy armor on the other hand was very good at picking of the panzerschrecks - even if the MG was the one opening up at the tank. Of my first 10 casualties 7 were panzerschrecks (of the 10 I had). At the end of the batle, not a single panzerschreck had fired. Nb: I see I did not formulate exact enough. I had my infantry (with Schreck) set a target arc at 150 meters. The enemy advanced with infantry in front, tanks behind. When the enemy infantry came in the covered arc my infantry started firing - only to switch to the tank immediatly afterwards. The enemy tanks were to far away for the Schrecks, the enemy infantry was ignored, while the MG's plinked the enemy tanks. The enemy infantry then suppressed my infantry, and the enemy tanks killed them - the Schrecks first. The ambush went ok, in so far that I could disengage most of the troops, but most of the Schrecks were killed - even though they did never engage. With hindsight I should have bought some AT guns, a Stug or a tank....
  15. I am currently fighting two pbem battles in which I have US Armored Infantry as troops. And I am running into difficulties with the C2. First I have got to say that I understnad the C2 system. With "plain" infantry troops I have no problems keeiping everybody in command (well, not more then efverybody has - at times it is pretty difficult to keep the troops close enough together to have the squads within range). With the armored infantry I keep running in trouble though. An US platoon of Armored Infantry consists of 4 halftracks, in which there are 3 squads, a mortar crew and ammo bearers, and two mg crews. Usually I try to park the halftracks somewhere just out of sight from the enemy, set up the MG's as firebase, the mortar near the trucks and let the infantry advance. I immediatly run into trouble. The Leader losses radio contact with higher up when he dismounts (or maybe when he is more then a few meters from his halftrack). If I want to keep my dismounted troops in CC I have to keep the leader close - advancing in his halftrack? Meanwhile the mortar crew has no radio either, can not use the radio in their halftack (or the halftrack hasn't one either) and has to walk behind the halftrack of the platoon leader to keep in command. Indirect fire is only possible when the leader dismounts within voice range, as spotting in a halftrack is a bit conspicious. And then the leader losses contact with higher up. As it is I am usually better of using a plain infantry platoon, which is more flexible. I loose the speed and the mobile MG platforms - but the first usually isnt an issue and the second is of dubious value - viewing the terrain and the vulnerability of the halftracks. Am I missing something in the C2? Or is an armored infantry platoon really so prone to C2 problems?
  16. Large map with large troops gets up to 55 MB at turn 2. We then abandoned the game... Medium goes between 19 and 25 MB, depending on map and force composition.
  17. Of course both the time frame and the kind of crops grown have changed a bit since 1944. Maize wasn't really grown that much in Europe, except in the mediteirranian, till after WW2. In fact cold adapted variants only cropped up here (in the Netherlands) in the sixties and in northen Netherlands from the eighties. I think you would not see any in Normandy in the timeframe of CMBN. (Also because of the maize in Northern Europe is mostly used for fodder, animals then were still hay fed). Wheat was mostly grown in northern France, which was one of the main grain producing area's fo western Europe till WW2 (the harder American grain then took over for food producing purposes). All grain then was much higher - not as high as in the middle ages (when a men on a horse could hide in it - like the high maize variants now), but almost shoulder high (I remember grain being waist high in the early eighties, I am still surprised each time that the new variants are only knee high). Due to the height the grain was much more prone to be blown down by storms or rain (and then rot), so the coastal region wasn't very good for larger grain fields. Mainly grass lands for hay making seems correct for the timeframe. Don't forget this was the time they were just switching from horse drawn to motorized. Farmers were still mainly using horses, especially in regions like Normandy. I have seen figures putting 50-70% of the fields in Europe to haylands in the late 19th, early 20th century, just to provide hay for the horses needed to provide transport for the ever growing commerce.
  18. Havent seen routed units yet (the red exclamation mark version, seen lots of units with the "routed" text in thier description). In fact I was going to start a thread about rout and autosurrender, and the absence in QB's.. In my last QB I was (German) defender. Troops set to regular. At the end of the game I had 10 men left of about 150 at start. One squad of 7, unhurt, routed, 3 single men units two routed one paniced. The enmy was all around me, only reason my men were not killed were that they were hiding in attics and basements. Of the 10 men 4 were wounded. The enemy had one victory location, one wasn't controlled (the squad of 7 men was hidden in a house in that location). Obviously nobody had any communication - all leaders were killed, and the units could not see other units. This was the situation for the last 5 turns (well, actually I startedthose 5 turns with a few more single men squads, which got killed one by one....and even in the open and surrounded they either ran or fought till the last). I would have expected routs (the red exclamation mark kind), surrenders and an auto defeat... did not happen. We actually kept going the last 5-10 minutes to see if a surrender would occur. Not.
  19. First I think retreating is much easier in CMBN then it was in CM1x. If you are early enough, a squad that has a retreat path (even if it is only "straight back from a hedge) has a good chance of survival. You have to be quick though - one turn of fire, or two at most when you kill all point men of your opponent in the first turn, and you have to move. Otherwise you will be pinned, and tanks, artillery or other nasties will finish you off. I have got the feeling that in CMBN this means that you often will get killed anyway. For even if you can fall back in good order, you wil need some space to do it. Generally the maps in a QB are to small for the number of forces. On most maps you only have the room to fall back once, or at most twice. Then your position is known, and the artillery will finish you of..... I have played several QB's now, and in each the defender either ended up (in pretty good order) at the edge of the map, at whih point he was easy pickings for the artillery, or he stood his ground, and was killed by artillery at his initial line of defence. In fact the most QB's seem to be a duel between the two sides artillery, the infantry is just used to find the positions of the enemy (if that is needed, if the attacker takes a bit more artillery, he can just plaster the suspected positions with half his allotment, and kill most defenders). For this reason I have the feeling the artillery is a bit on the deadly side. In history there are plenty of examples of troops holding out even when battred by artillery (take the para's at Arnhem for example. In CMBN they would have been down to less then 50% strenght after 5 minutes of shelling).. Anyway, that is ow it seems to me.... maybe others can confirm or deny? Bertram
  20. Had the same in Huzzar. Two of the objectives were "touched" at once, the thirth (actually POI1) just didn't want to trigger. Sent an Armored Car over several times, but no joy. I finally gave up, and ordered it to reverse back - then it triggered.... Seems that location is partly hidden under the hedge, and you need to drive real close to the edge of the road to trigger it (I would suggest a bit bigger trigger area's for the designers, if possible......)
  21. Small arms firing at tanks: I have a problem with this too. In a recent QB a MG opened up on a tank at 450 mtrs. It kept firing at the tank the next 3 minutes, while the infantry squads that walked besides the tank were ignored. (After the 3 minutes the last of the MG crew was killed by HE from the tank. The enmey had no casualties). This seems to be typical behaviour. Bridges: In Hussars! I noticed that sometimes the vehicles did a little zig-zag just before and just after crossing the bridge. This while there was just one waypoint, and they were traveling along the centre of the road. (The bridge is also a bit lower then the road, this might influence the path?). Infantry in houses: In a current battle my infantry in (stone) buildings on the ground floor are subjected to air burst artillery. Each air burst killed 2-3 men from the squad, destroying 3 squads in 3 or 4 minutes. Viewing how ong the airborne in Arnhem (for example) survived being shelled in the houses they covered in, this seems a bit excessive.
  22. My personal preferences: I like to play a scenario not more then once - the surprise and uncertainty is part of the fun. For email purposes it is not perse necessairy that both players play the scenario for the first time though. It depends on the scenario, some are depending on surprises or puzzles, other have multiple options. I think you should mention if you played it before during the choosing of the scenario. For turns I consider one turn/day minimum, with breaks for weekends or holidays. You should mention those in advance (more or less), and mention them again when you are sending your last turn for a few days. Slower can be ok for really large scenario's, but you run the risk of loosing continuity and forgetting plans, or plain loosing interest in the game.
  23. I am (partly) with the original poster here. I was pretty disaoppointed by the box. I had expected a solid tin, and got a plastic box with very thin layers of metal on it. I expected it to be stronger than the regular plastic covers, instead it is not as strong. My box was crumpled as well. An edge must have dropped on something - and clearly this steel thingy cant handle anything like that. Due to pevious experiences with Battlefront, I expected the box to be shipped from Europe. My bad for not reading the small print. And I did not cancel because I was jut to lazy. But with hindsight, and now knowing what I get, I would not have payed $ 65,- for just this thin cover and a manual (Yes, customs added another 17,-, and the carrier added another 20,- for paying that for me). As to the number that arrived damaged: I received mine five days ago, and would not have reacted if Steve had not stated that almost none were damaged in transit. I think this goes for most people that receive damaged tins. I mean, it isnt that great to begin with, so what is the use of complaining? To get another one to throw away? As it is I just will do digital download only in the future. No big problem, not really a collector (though I do have all the combat mission games in physical form, as far as that was possible). Just a bit disappointed.
  24. Mark, I just set up a QB with someone else - same result: setup zones switched!! I remember that the first QB was set up by Simmox, and he had the QB already setup for a game with someone else, and then send it to me instead. So he might have swapped sides then... Could this have flipped a variable on my side, which makes me always assign the wrong setup zones? I'll try a few QB setups this morning, just "sending" them to myself, to see if it is consistent....
×
×
  • Create New...