IntelWeenie

May we assume the Fireflies were not given target orders in any of the 6 tries? BTW, what was the reason for choosing Fireflies & Nashorns? (just curious) ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Compared to ASL, CM seems to me to be pretty deterministic in its penetration formulas. Whether or not that is good or bad is debatable, but I would like to know what BTS used to decide how to model the fickle finger of fate in armor penetration, since it seems like the studies do not really address the issue. Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't know what they used, but the 'fickle finger of fate' (I like that! ) is definitely there. Don't know how else Tigers can bounce rounds off of the turret of an M8 Greyhound. (happened to me once or twice) ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

I like the concept of unmanned bunkers, but after some thought, I think it might be hard to fit into the CM1 game engine. Did some thinking on how they could be implemented and shot all my thoughts full of holes: Unmanned pillboxes as terrain type: can't move/orient them in game setup (maybe a good thing?), but then you have 2 totally different implementations of pillboxes (manned -like vehicles- & unmanned) causing different problems (LOS issues come to mind) Unmanned pillboxes as immobile vehicle type: crew/passengers can't embark on abandoned(unmanned) vehicles. Passengers not allowed to fire. Hmpf. Either way requires major exceptions/modifications to the game engine. Anyone else have better ideas? ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

2) Members get to tell junior members to do a search first. Oh, wait, that's not it.... ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

6. Pop smoke and back out of the line of fire. I think a lot of it would depend on crew quality, type of friendly tank, type of enemy tank. As Seahawk said, the fuzzy logic makes it impossible to predict behavior correctly EVERY time, but run a test for this enough times and you might get an average result. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Los: Hey you wise asses I ain't no amatuer and never claimed to be one, as it is I do this stuff for real. In fact I just got back from NTC yesterday. Nice to see green again... Cheers... Los [This message has been edited by Los (edited 08-24-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Didya kill any tortises while you were there? (Ugh, the dustbowl...still sends shivers down my spine!) ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by grunto: It seems as though the 20mm gun 'trails' the jeep as it runs around. Andy<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> They both have 'slow' turrets. Similar to Tigers 'trailing' M5 Stuarts. FWIW, there have been issues brought up in the past on the apparent reluctance of these vehicles to engage infantry. Maybe a similar problem here? ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

Sometimes forces caught behind the lines are left there in their own isolated setup area. Usually, they will just be forced back to the normal setup area with the rest of their buddies. I think the reason there can be no exit flags is due to the fact that the operations maps are not a series of separate maps (like CC), but rather a large map where you only see a portion of it in each battle. Kind of like the way you see only a portion of a large web page in your browser, but can use the slider bar to see the rest. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 08-24-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: Well you're supposed to push the enemy back as fast as possible. In practice sneaking past them does the trick also. But you'd better kill them while you can. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This is how it works in all advance operations. There have been lots of suggestions about how to improve the lack of feedback on operational progress, but for now, you just wanna keep rolling as best you can! Rob/1, he did post this question in the Scenario Forum on the 13th, but never got a reply. Cases like this I have no problem with cross-posting. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

I'd look the threads up for you, but I'm lazy that way. I had this same question back when I first got the game and searched to see what had been discussed about it. In a nutshell, BTS stated that they would NOT support any electronic format manual, mainly to combat software piracy. They were emphatic enough in their posts that I don't see much chance of changing their minds. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 08-24-2000).]

KwazyDog, you tease! Has anyone else noticed how he says this is in the next pact, but doesn't say much about HOW it's done?? Oh, the anticipation! ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

I know BTS is taking a firm stand on this, but I have a thought that I don't know has been tried yet about this. Could the AT teams be given sidearms as primary weapons and Baz/Shrek/Piat as a secondary like PFs/demo charges/gammon bombs/rifle grenades. Only tweaks needed that I see are increasing the likelyhood of using the AT weapon and losing the ambush command. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

I could understand it from the viewpoint of units entering the map (either start of scenario or reinforcements). ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DrD: Exactly. I said the same thing about the second time I had sex <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You didn't say it OUT LOUD, did you? ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: And here goes: Allow both players to choose units from the same side. I'd just love to play out the US vs Canada war. Or british vs French. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Instead, Canadian vs. Canadian (or French). Now you have "The battle of Montreal"! ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DaveT: If it is not planed for a patch could someone tell us why? My point comes from being in SP mortors for 6 years. And the the first thing they told us is that we were not suposed to ever see the bad guys. And it is hard to do this when you have to see them to fire them. Dave <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If it is not done in a patch, I would hazard to guess that it has to do with the fact that C&C does not apply to vehicles, only infantry. Might be more of a programming task than one might think to change the basic behaviour of these units. Of course, if it could be done... ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 08-24-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: I love a good debate, especially on company time <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hee, hee! Me, too! Worth mentioning about the references to the CPU hit involved in showing dead bodies. CM does not use sprites; all units (incl. each soldat) are 3D models. Therefore, each "dead body" is rendered just like each live one. This is also one reason why squads are represented by 3 men instead of 8-12. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>One question for everyone who has the full version: Can that unit screen be displayed in playback mode so you can monitor when a soldier gets killed in real time or can the screen only be pulled up after the fighting is over?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually, the reference was to the unit info shown at the bottom of the screen when you click on a unit, I think. Yes, it is shown during playback. The unit detail screen (showing firepower/armor/penetration/kills) can be shown during playback, too. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 08-23-2000).]

HQs can act as "spotters" for on-board infantry mortars (but not any other guns or HT-mounted mortars). If more than one HQ is in command range of the mortar, check the C&C lines to see which one it's connected to. The big advantages of spotting like this is timeliness and accuracy. There is no time lag like with OBA. IIRC, there is no limit to the number of mortars a HQ can spot for and the HQ can HIDE while spotting! Forward Observers cannot observe for on-board units. There will be a time lag until the rounds come in and accuracy is somewhat reduced (compared to on-board fire). FOs do NOT need line of sight to their targets, but the time lag will be about twice as long and accuracy REALLY suffers. Bonus Tip: TRPs (Target Reference Points) increase the accuracy and timeliness of off-board artillery, even if the FO does not have LOS to the TRP. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

Using horses is fine, as long as you don't fight mounted. This was the mistake the Poles made. IIRC, the Russians used their cavalry as highly mobile infantry and generally fought dismounted. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

There was lots of discussion on this in the past before the game was released. In a nutshell, BTS says they won't do it, for lots of reasons. The only corpses that will show are a single soldier laying face up when his unit (squad, team, crew, etc.) are totally destroyed. If you want more info, try a search on "dead Bodies". Hope this helps some. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

The ex-Soviet Union was comprised of literally HUNDREDS of different nationalites; some small, some large. Even modern Russia is not all "russian". Most communist leaders sought to supress feelings of nationalism as the felt (probably correctly) that such feelings would undermine their force of rule "from the center". Many feel that one of Hitler's biggest mistakes was to quash nationalism in occupied Soviet territories instead of encouraging it, thus helping secure his rear areas. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

Some might say that, but I expect them to be the same ones that poh-pohed the expansions for Advanced Squad Leader when most folks couldn't wait for the next theater to be released. I remember for the longest time ASLers clamoring for the release of AoO (Armies of Oblivion), the expansion that added a lot of the minor allies, but no real rule updates/changes. I'd expect the same thing happening with CM2. Also, I expect there to be significant updates to the graphics modelling, since that has been the biggest mainstream niggle. Charles has stated that CM1 graphics were based on the assumption that people would have 4MB video cards. Now, he can plan on a 16-32MB baseline! ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

Other than smoke, you seem to already be using them OK - suppressing the enemy troops. I worry more about initial positioning rather than re-positioning since they will run out of ammo in 2-3 turns with a good crew anyway. If you have to move them to get to their initial firing positions, load them up on tanks/trucks/HTs. If those aren't available, have your infantry hang back so the MTRs keep pace. In most scenarios (and nearly all QBs I've played), there is more than ample time to get them in position before attacking. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb [This message has been edited by IntelWeenie (edited 08-23-2000).]

I would like to see horses (or at least hose-drawn wagons) in CM1, at least if the rumblings about an expansion pack with additional vehicles are true. I would think the coding would not be real hard, they would work similar to any truck, but with a different 3d model. Of course, then some folks would want them to stampede when shot at. (which would be hard to do, I think) ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb

The bazookas used in WWII all used the same 2.36" rocket, so performance was similar over all these models. There were some minor improvements made during the war, but nothing earth (or tank) shattering. The M20 "Super Bazooka" increased the diameter of the rocket with correspondingly better penetration, but it did not see service until the '50s. I never understood why ASL had different models of bazooka. ------------------ "Belly to belly and everything's better" - Russian proverb