IntelWeenie

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson: But as someone else noted; the pillboxes in CM are not "typical Atlantic wall bunkers", but inland pillboxes designed to take some less than infinite pounding from 20cm guns or less.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Then why are we debating the 14" guns' effectiveness? (sigh) If we consider pillboxes to only be 'lesser' Westwall-type or other fortifications, then we should only concern ourselves with the weapons the allies used on those structures. Most accounts I have read stated that bombardment by 105-203mm arty was typically ineffective against the Westwall's concrete emplacements. Why? Because they were designed to withstand such bombardment. So, they had to be taken out the old-fashioned way: by the PBI (Poor Bloody Infantry). ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

I think a full-length movie might actually be easier to implement since much of it is already built into CM. (I'm thinking of PBEM turns/movies). Only thing lacking is a way to tie all the turns together into a single playback. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 09-07-2000).]

IIRC, halftracks and armored cars cannot cross walls/hedges, only full-tracked vehicles. I would imagine driving a tank over a wall would create the possibility of bogging, but it's not an "all or nothing" deal. (I cross walls with tanks all the time.) I would guess the environmental conditions were something other than "dry" when your AC bogged since the TacAI would have plotted movement around the wall if you gave it a move order across the wall. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

Pretzels and soda. (or whatever I can find) <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GriffinCheng+: Personally I hate to touch controls (including TV remote and mouse) when I feel my hands are salty. If I have to choose, a glass iced of Cola or Cream Soda is fine. Of couse I cannot have those when I am playing flight-sims. Both hands and feet are bz. Enjoy. Griffin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So have your wife/girlfriend/significant other/child/maid/manservant feed you while you game! That or use one of those beer can hats with the straws.... ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

OK, let's take this from another angle. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rommel22: I just want damage modeling on vehcle collision so it's more believeble.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What would you have the damage be? I reread all of your posts to make sure I wasn't overlooking anything, but nowhere do you mention what the effect of a vehicular collision should be. A Tiger could certainly crush a jeep, but what would it do if it managed to hit a Sherman? Mobility kill? Gun Hit? Nothing? Relative velocity, mass, size and a great many other factors would have to be considered for something that, when considered against 5+ years of armored combat, was really extremely rare. Sure, it sometimes happened, and so did air-to-air ramming. How many flight sims model THAT (Without your a/c being destroyed, too)? In conclusion, it would be too much work to produce a credible/authentic effect to be worth it for something that was not commonplace anyway. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson: As I've understood it, the map size you set is a relative value. Small: Fairly crowded with troops. Medium: Not that crowded. Large: Almost impossible to cover the front line. So a "medium" map with plenty of units will be huge in size. What you want is a "small" map. Cheers Olle<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yup, same here. The dimension that seems to be affected most by this is the width. I think it might also determine the number of victory flags. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson: * Multiple direct hits on a pillbox would degrade it's armour. How much is up to what weapon is used, how the fuse is set, where the hits are relative to each other, and so on. If using 14" guns with the purpose of taking out pillboxes, the fuses will be set at a slight delay to allow the round to penetrate the surface before detonating. This would create a crater in the roof. If another round hits that crater, that crater will be deeper. Repeat until pillbox is knocked out... If it takes 3, 5 or 7 hits I don't know, but each hit has some effect. This can be within the scope of CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But it currently isn't. Yes, buildings in CM are modeled something along these lines, but they aren't armored. You do have a point about cumulative effect, but IMHO it would take more than a dozen or so (point detonating HE) shells fired to do destroy a typical Atlantic Wall bunker by "chipping". <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A comment to Claymore about the issue of bunkers not destroyed with prep fire: This was what in CM is referred to as a "Target wide" map fire. So there can't have been that many direct hits on any specific pillbox. Try in CM to place a wooden bunker in each corner of a square, about 100m a side, and then call for a "target wide" 105mm mission to the centre of the square and watch how many bunkers get blasted... I can't recall any photographs from D-day showing the bunkers surrounded with craters from near misses, as would have been the result of directly aimed fire. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Again, prep fires such as you're talking about are well beyond the scope of CM. Guns this size are almost never used in such close proximity to one's own troops because of the extreme danger of 'shorts'. Remember, the battlewagons usually were firing at distances of 10-25 miles (16-40 Km)! ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

Anyone know what background .wav gets played during rain? Make a new one with thunder sounds. Lightning I could do without. (Hurts my eyes ) ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

I just wish my tanks wouldn't fire their MGs at infantry halfway across the map.... ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

Does fog affect infantry exposure? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

In one game a while back (v 1.03, I think) I shelled a very large (12x12 tiles) patch of woods that I saw enemy infantry entering. When calling the arty, I only could see their roundels near the edge of the forest wher I had lost sight of them. After the barrage came, I could see one or two dead infantry pop into being in the middle of the woods! My closest unit to any of these 'corpses' was about 200m away and it's LOS fell about 30m short. I understand there may be programming issues involved, but I don't see why this couldn't be addressed in the same way it is for 'live' units. They remain a roundel until the unit can be sighted by someone. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

Check out: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/009864.html ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

You, well, er, um...can't. To get around this, place your waypoints all the way to your destination. You can always delete them later if you change your mind. Also, be aware that orders all given on the same turn will have no execution delay between them. If you add a waypoint to a path on a later turn, there will be a pause (just like if you started from a stop) before the unit will continue its movement. That's the difference between white and red waypoint markers. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

* Another vote for Detailed Info of own forces only * ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Olle Petersson: Seems like HMGs were pretty crappy against aircraft then. (Especially if considering that the claimed kills are overrated...) Just my observation Olle<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ah, but they were designed more to dissuade attack than to actually shoot down enemy a/c (fighter pilots have to have something to do!) My Grandfather was a bombardier in a B-17F in '43 (shot down by flak in October, spent the rest of the war in a POW camp, but that's another story). I recall him telling me that once they tried putting extra tracers in the nose guns to dissuade frontal attacks (which were a real problem for the -17Fs to handle). In 14 missions the entire crew of his plane only claimed 2 a/c downed and another 2 damaged, but they got the bombs through, which was the whole point. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

X-acto knives rule. End of story. All hail Plano!! ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

I wasn't going to post anything, but it's turned in to a trollfest, I will reply to Jager's original post. Jager, sorry to hear you find CM to be something of a disappointment. It seems that a lot of this stems not from a realism standpoint or that you think the game is inherently flawed, but from the WEGO system it uses and some of the programming choices made (# of troops shown, blood, etc.) I think you made your points well and with good manners. I (and many others here, I'm sure) think you are missing out on a good game and a really fun time. The game can get quite intense, especially in some larger scenarios where there's a lot going on. This is where the WEGO system is a bonus, I think. With RTS, smaller parts of a large action can be forgotten or lost in the shuffle. In CM, you can replay the last 60 seconds from several viewpoints (try 'locking' onto a tank going cross country with view 1) from any point on the battlefield. Relive the moment you finally killed that last StuG! Pick the perfect moment, take a screenshot and make it your wallpaper (I do). I was a bit hesitant when I first downloaded the demo and saw it was not RTS, since that seemed the way of the future for computer games. I quickly came to like the WEGO system, though, and don't think this game would be nearly as good if it were RTS. Hope to convince you, but understand if I/we don't. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: AAAArgh. When I say "model" snipers like AT teams I don't mean to model each "bullet" fired. I am talking about the params of that unit, i.e. Ammo, Ammo load, ROF, etc. Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK, Jeff, you're saying you don't want to model each bullet, but list ammo as one of the parameters to be changed? Changed to what? To me, it still boils down to every form of fire vs. infantry is calculated as a FP rating. When shooting (any small arms/HE) at unbuttoned tanks, I have never seen 2 crewmen casualties. I suspect that it's because CM takes any casualty result vs. crew as "1 casualty" to keep it simple, since individual crewmen are not modeled (within the vehicle). I don't think it weird at all that a well-trained and proficient sniper could cause two casualties with only a few rounds. Or, in CM terms, one 'shot'. You seem to be considering snipers as different from other infantry when, in fact, they are not different in CM. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Therefore the tracer round that is emmitted from that unit IS the unit firing, as far as the games engine is concerned.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> AFAIK, true, but it is an abstraction meant to represent several seconds worth of firing. (Are we splitting hairs, or what? ) ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 09-05-2000).]

I'll most likely play all nationalities; it's what I do now in CM1 (though I've only played as the Free French once). ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

The dullness may just be dirt. I think most of the uniform textures are a bit too clean looking. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

jshandorf, what you seem to be proposing is really nothing less than a revamp of the entire infantry fire model. Yes, once in a while it will produce what seems to be odd results (1 'shot'=2 casualties), but how rare is such an occurence? Besides, casualtes themselves are abstracted in CM. One casualty. Hmm, is he dead, wounded, or "shell shocked"? Might a "2 casualty" result be interpreted as one killed and the other soldier freaked out because his buddy's brains are slattered all over his face? Such a result as this is perfect for a WWII sniper/sharpshooter. Terror and uncertainty are as much their craft as taking out individuals. WRT the comparisons to AT teams, etc., I think you are not following Jeff's point about "infantry units". Yes, they are all infantry units. But they differ in their type of weapon. AT teams have AT weapons. FOs have OBA. Sniper/sharpshooters, though, have a rifle, which falls into the 'infantry weapon' category and therefore calculated as a FP rating. The FP rating applies to all HE projectiles, too. It's just the way CM is set up to resolve fire vs. infantry. Your fix would require sniper/sharpshooter weapons to be in a class by their own to track the ammo, but would still be resolved as a FP rating. I do see your point, BTW. I just think it would be one of those great cost for little gain issues. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Some of these are very interesting. The one about Russian planes ramming Germans I have heard before. I have even heard that a couple pilots actually managed to get good at it, and are credited with a few kills a piece using the tactic! Jeff Heidman <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> IIRC, the Germans produced some specialized FW190s that had armored wing leading edges and were supposed to ram US bombers. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Depends on what you mean by "sunk". I believe everything but her mastheads was underwater. Most people would call that sunk. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> From the photos that I've seen the Graf Spee sank to only about the level of it's deck. The depth of water in the Plate estuary was one of Langsdorf's (Capt. of the G.S.) concerns when contemplating what to do after he was bottled up in Montivideo. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 09-05-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jshandorf: Okay... I am currently playing and PBEM game where my opponents sniper shot at a half squad of mine and killed 2 men. Now I am all for the remote possibility of a sniper lining up two guys with one shot and popping them, but come on..... Thanks, Jeff<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Was he using an Italian Carcano carbine from a book depository? Have you checked for other (hidden) snipers on nearby grassy knolls? ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Claymore: HOWEVER, CMBO clearly states that it deals with actions AWAY from the beachead and I do not find anything worth patching/fixing in this case. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes; it is, after all, "Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord". For those who really want to try a D-day, scenario, why is no one instead pointing out the lack of beach terrain? This, IMHO, is more important than if a 14" rifle can take out a bunker. The large guns were not used on beach defenses once the troops were on the beach, anyway. True, light cruisers and destroyers did provide some direct fire support, but that's another story. Ditto to Claymore. ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right

Try this thread for starters: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum7/HTML/000146.html Or, do a search in the Tips and Techniques forum; I know this has come up a few times there. Also, there is a pretty good article by Fionn on Madmatt's site (http://combathq.thegamers.net/) under the Article section. It's called "Movement To Contact: A Tank Platoon Tactics Primer". ------------------ Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses. -Dudley Do-right