Slappy

1. I don't know either. I hate to say it but read the manual. 2. It's very useful. Let's say you have some infantry crossing open ground at a move when they come under long range fire. You can immediately switch the move order to advance. The troops will move faster and be more resistent to the fire. I often switch fast and hunt orders on vehicles. There are many more uses for this, but you'll see them fast enough if you know that this exists.

Long prior to WWII, shock was close or hand to hand combat. Shock troops are just those intended to close with the enemy and destroy them in the last 50m, in very close combat if necessary. The Sturmcompanie(?) is probably the closest thing in the game and these formations tended to be ad hoc combinatios of SMGs, FTs, tasers, whatever was at hand to give overwhelming local superiority of firepower so that the attacker could shock and overcome the defender.

I'm not sure, but here are some suggestions: I've had limited success with setting guns up 'hull down'. I don't think the engine really affords them the advantages that they would really get. I prefer to have the gun in some sort of cover. Again, I think that the engine dosen't give full credit for intervening trees in comparison to occupying trees, particularly for morale effects. The only exception here is on board mortars, which a human would eat you alive with. I know that keyholing is the correct answer, but with an 88, I just can't stand the possibility that nothing might come through that hole. I tend to go with a wider field the larger the gun.

Captured units work a little like a victory flag. If their side gets a significant local superiority in their area, they'll become free to go. CMBO originally did not consider them disarmed, which made for some sticky situations when they were freed.

What may be misleading is the 'different directions' bit. I split my squad often, but tend to keep them fairly close to their mates and the HQ. Scouts and outposts are the primary uses, but that can be done within 50m of the rest of the platoon. I don't like the idea that I'm sacrificing units. I want to have a plan to get that team back to its unit (and ultimately its collective families). That said, it still limits exposure for scouting. Try using each half of a split 40m out in front of a platoon as you move through deep woods. They'll run into trouble first, trip most ambushes, and the rest of the boys can follow up within a turn. Worst case, you lose both halves to a well lain ambush. It's far better than losing two squads and the HQ. Someone else will likely be along to explain why some consider sending split squads 300m from their HQ is gamey.

Some older timer comments on these comments: 0. You seem to be catching on rather well. 1. Very true, learning to use the small dips is one of the the biggest adjustments between CM and other games. 2. True, but I woulden't count on it in snow, or with less than fit troops. 3. True, but vets run out of ammo just as fast a greens, and elite armor is just as easy to penetrate. 4. Very true, but sensitive to calibre. You can probably ride out 76mm, but you better run from 150mm. 5. Absolutely. Units also spot better with a covered arc than when hiding (in all diretions). Even when you want units to hide, give them a 20m covered arc instead. 6. You're right. More than enough discussion of that around here.

The parameters section lets you choose the number of small and large VLs. Edit the number and type there. As for placing, just go into the preview mode, click on them and place like any other unit (p and click on the map). There you are.

If that doesn't answer your question about customer service, nothing will.

I may have missed it, but I am shocked that no one has mentioned Fionn's AAR of The Sunken Lane at Combat Mission HQ. I can only assume that he is being modest. This is one of the first AARs I ever read, and it is still, without question, my favorite. It's for CMBO, but is well worth a read for those starting out, as are many of the others in that batch.

Every other US person on this board bought their game through the website. None of us got screwed.

Actually, I have two. 1. Start Small If you can't win a 500pt battle, you're not going to win a 2000pt battle. Spend some time learning the mechanics, the orders and the interactions, preferably in a particular terrain and time set, then move on. 2. Test Things The scenario editor is your best friend. Set up small situations and see what happens. Either run agains the AI, or hotseat them out. Test firings will show you how armor stacks up. You can put units in different terrain situations and see exposure ratings. Want to know how to take out a bunker? Put 20 on a map with different units behind them and see what happens. These, taken together, will give you a very solid edge in game mechanics over most players. They won't overcome superior tactics, but the only way s to get those are military training and extensive human v. human gaming. Given equal tactical facility, knowing the game is a distinct advantage.

Correct. The AI can never play the side with boats. It is entirely unable to handle them for coding reasons. You are free to paddle to your heart's content.

I've only played this against the AI, but here's my experience: 1st Try: I got my ass handed to me. StuGs smoked me from my starting positions. Smoking T-34s everywhere. It was ugly. 2nd Try: Same. 3rd Try: I ignored the infantry entirely; never moved them. I split the T-34s into roughly equal groups and sent one to the right and one to the left under cover. Some well timed sniping from hull down from both sides bagged me the german armor with side shots. I then drove my tanks up to the flag and mowed down the german infantry that ran up out of the valley at me. I lost about half of the tank force and think I got a tactical victory out of it. [ January 20, 2003, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: Slappy ]

It is a point that has been 'registered' by your guns. They have all done test firings and can hit that point by memory. Offboard Artillery gets a MUCH smaller delay to fire within ~20m. Onboard Artillery can fire without LOS or a spotter if it hasn't moved (which would make the settings necessary to hit that point different). Guns get greater accuracy in the area of the target (not sure about movement on this one, I don't generally move my ATGs much).

Nothing to be done. Mortars, like all teams, will latch on to the closest HQ. There is no way to choose. This is something that nearly everyone has learned to their inconvenience the first time. On another note, there is probably a better use for your ammo than sniping at armor, unless it is very light. Only a direct top hit will damage most tanks. Halftracks and such can be taken out by a near miss, but this is very dicey if they're on the move.

Actually, I'd like to be able to give a stand and fight order. Particularly in the classic 8 PzIII v. i KV situation. The panzers tend to run because the AI for each has no idea that they have 7 friends around.

Fantastic. Spectacular. Funny.

Additional testing (in the editor) shows that even in the pregame phase, they don't show any benifit over normal building exposure.

Apparently I was incorrect. I've gone back and rerun Pavlov's House. It turns out that the trenches in buildings do in fact disappear. It also seems that they weren't padlocked. I've also done some limited testing and seen that they do disapper in general, even if padlocked in a building. I now have no idea why they're there. I stand corrected, and mystified.

Odd. SPOILER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In Pavlov's house, I almost certainly remember trenches that were placed inside a heavy building and remained there for the whole battle. I am almost certain that they were padlocked into place. In fact, I remember wanting to move them and being unable to. Perhaps that was the difference?

They're a gamble, and a fairly expensive one. If I get them in a scenario, I use them with glee. I generally don't buy them myself. I'd rather have the 2.5 81mm spotters or 1.5 120mm I could get for the points. That way I know what I'm killing.

The question you have to ask, and that leads to the variation of answers that you'll likely get, is 'What do you want your scouts to do?'. The answer is obviously, at one level, 'To scout damnit!', but you have to be more specific. There is a continum from cheap but very unsurvivable scouts (green half squads out of command) to expensive but likely to survive initial contact and maybe deal out some damage (veteran full SMG squad in command). When you scout, you put the scouting unit at risk. There is a tradeoff between the robustness of the scout and the value of the units you put at risk. All types have their uses in the game. I tend to pick based on several factors including: - Likely separation between myself and the enemy (pretty easy to predict in a QB ME) - Likely enemy opposition - Terrain - Many more Example 1: I probably have 400m or more between the forces. It's an open map with only moderate cover. Here, a sharpshooter can move up initially. They're hard to see, and will probably not come into direct contact with anyone. For the first 100-200m, they spot really well. I'll move them up into positions with good LOS to narrow down where the enemy will be. Example 2: I'm in a fairly dense forest (some open, some scattered trees) and I expect to make contact in the next 100m. I will probably do my scouting at the platoon level with a full squad 30-50m in front of the rest of the platoon with the HQ cheated up to provide command to the scout. In this situation, a small scout like a sharpshooter or a half squad of low quality could easily disappear in the first volley and provide no information about the enemy at all! I want my scout to find the enemy, survive the first volley and hold until I can bring the rest of the platoon (and possibly artillery, heavy weapons, etc.) up to the party. In reality, I tend to break off and reabsord all sorts of scouts from and into the rest of my force as the game goes on. It all depends on the situation. Remember 'What do you want your scouts to do?'

You're welcome. Unfortunately, I have no input whatsoever on any of the other questions except for 8. I played BO on the mac and never saw that. I play BB on the PC, so I cannot comment.

I'm with YankeeDog. I would love to place dummy minefields for half the cost. Disturbed and marked out ground is cheap. Visable minefields are not uncommon and would make another great addition. Sometimes, the mines are a lot more effective (for funneling purposes) if everyone knows where they are. One more request is to make minefield spotting less accurate. You've just hit one mine. Even if you assume that everyone in your universe knows that all minefields are 20mX20m, why should you know where the exact center is? Somthing along the lines of a sound contact in the 5m vicinity of the real minefield center would make things much more interesting.

I will start by saying that I have no clear opinion on the cumulative bonus issue. I can see both sides of this (too many cooks in the kitchen v. increased morale and cohesion). On a slightly different note, it does occur to me that most players use HQs in a reasonably ahistoric fashion all the time. The classic CM 'diamond' formation with the HQ in the rear is a generally cowardly way for a platoon HQ to perform, to say nothing about Company COs. I doubt that most infantrymen would take too kindly to fighting the entire war with their sargent 30m to the rear directing traffic. I can imagine responses like 'Why don't you get your own ass within a mile of the point for once and maybe you won't find a grendade in your bedroll tonight jackass' being rather common for this situation. Perhaps conveying some benefit to using HQs in a more forward role might help this.