Specterx
-
Posts
66 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Specterx
-
-
That's really weird, it's like the squad just vanished... I've never seen it before.
-
I won Yelnia as Germans the first time around. I kept all of my infantry hidden in forests or in reverse slope positions. If you keep your HMG's near the rear they will remain invisible for the entire game. Deploy the ATG's in a similar way, near the back of the map, in positions so they have limited fields of fire at the T-34's. The Pak36 is actually more effective vs. the T-34's front armor so try and get frontal aspect shots at < 400 meters.
-
AFAIK means As Far As I Know, AFAIK...
-
Try a human wave in Yelnia, it worked for me, and I killed twice as many as I lost
-
In Yelnia the key for the Germans is to keep the Soviet infantry at arm's length for most of the scenario with your HMG's while keeping your infantry hidden (the HMG's should remain invisible for the entire game because of camo bonus). Looking at the map from above and from the German side, I placed an ATG near the rear of the leftmost woods so it could cover the field between the left and center woods patches. I put the second one in the brush behind the center woods although placing it in the woods itself would likely work as well. I co-located an HMG with each AT gun and placed the others in similar locations (near the rear of the German positions).
Be sure to keep your ATG's hidden and give them a restrictive "cover arc" command. I have found that frontal and rear shots are the only ones that seem to work. If you can, take out the platoon leader (Regular experience, the others are green). If possible open fire on isolated vehicles and HIDE the guns the next turn, then repeat the process.
Playing this way and using reverse slope positions I got a Total Victory with 214 soviets casualties (48 by one infantry squad in a small pit) and 102 Germans lost.
-
Yeah, AAR's would be nice... The few on the CMHQ site are great but that section hasn't been updated in months (years?). Maybe the Der Kessel guys would create an AAR section for us :cool: .
-
-
I'm sure BFC can't comment on it but I'd imagine that "converting" your european copy of CMBB to the American version would be as simple as replacing the EXE and perhaps some data files.
-
This would actually be a nice feature... sort of like the command lines.
-
LOL - just for laughs I tried the human wave tactic and advanced all my units out of their start locations and just kept throwing my men back at the german lines when they panicked etc.
When the battle ended I had caused 204 german casualties and captured all the flags while loosing only 169 of my own, and 1 tank.
Hmm....
-
The specific problem of "gamey" invasions could be solved very easily. Right now, SC assumes that the capture of a country's capital somehow triggers the surrender of the entire country, which alone was <b>never</b> enough. Requiring the capture of, say, 2/3 of a country's territory in addition to occupying the capital will fix this nicely.
-
I've got four major issues with SC that I'd like to get comments on:
1. Maybe just my own ignorance, but is it possible to conduct real amphibious assaults? i.e. assault an enemy unit directly from a transport? If this isn't allowed for I can see major opportunities for exploitation (line the coast with a wall of corps). Specifically I've found that Malta is nearly impossible to capture because of the strength of the defending air unit and the fact that you can't land any ground troops. Admittedly, allowing for real amphibious assaults is difficult since there's no automatic retreat in the game, which brings me to point 2:
2. Allow for units to automatically retreat when too much damage is done to them (say if they suffer >30% casualties from the start of the turn while on defense they retreat). Without retreat built in we can't have amphibious assaults and it creates some unrealistic situations in general.
3. Stacking. I can understand no stacking for Armies, but you should be able to stack multiple planes/ships, maybe even multiple Corps, as well as ground units and planes in the same hex.
4. Sub spotting range and sub ops. Right now subs can be seen from 1000 miles away (literally) and attacked by anything, even battleships which would realistically have no anti-submarine weapons. IMHO reduce sub spotting range to 1 hex (can only be seen from an adjacent hex) and introduce the Destroyer as the only ship type that can attack subs, along with Carriers.
-
Agree, having like 5 players in a game would be awesome!
-
I've actually found the opposite to be true. In one scenario (can't remember the name...) I had 4 PzIV versus about a dozen shermans/fireflies. The range was pretty extreme, at least 1000m, I remember it was long enough that about half the 75mm shots fired from both sides bounced off :eek: . Accuracy was pretty poor but I managed to get a 5 or 6 to one exchange rate, topped off when my last MkIV took out the last two Brit tanks with its last two shells, each at 1000m+ :cool: .
-
I think it was said in another thread that one person controls all the countries for a given side... be nice to have the option for different leaders for each country though.
[ April 21, 2002, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Specterx ]
-
So one player controls all the countries of a given side?
-
You guys should all check out CMMC (there's a link on the CMHQ menu). in CMMC we're simulating a Corps-level engagement between the British and Germans, and so far it's run smoothly. So far every player I've talked to (including me) is going to play in the sequel for CMBB, so they're obviously doing something right.
-
Once I had my veteran SS Panzergrenadiers ignore a platoon of Cromwell tanks that motored on by them and fire their faust at a CARRIER. They missed.
The AI for faust/riflegrenade needs to be improved IMHO, I would think that a squad with any kind of AT weapon would fire it immediately if an enemy tank came down on them...
-
I think this has something to do with the tendency of the TacAI to choose less useful rounds for targeting purposes (e.g. AP instead of T) so as not to waste ammunition. This seems sort of pointless when applied to HE vs. infantry since most of the shots will "miss" anyway... especially if smoke is used.
I'd say that it's just an AI quirk.
-
Where did this pic come from? Can't be CMBB since its Germans vs. British...
Maybe BTS has an upgrade planned for CMBO that incorporates CMBB features.. that'd be nice.
-
I've got a PC, and I've tried using Camtasia and SnagIt, both produced very choppy pictures with lots of flickering and loss of texture.
This question is CMMC-related, btw, for those wondering why.
-
Does anybody know of reliable software (or a reliable method in general) for capturing in-game CM movies? The sort of quality found in the opening movie would be nice, but I'm sure that requires thousand-dollar recording software :/.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Captain Wacky:
If I can live without a firewall, why can't they?<hr></blockquote>
Have fun when the 13-year-old l33t H4x0r d00dz strike.
At a minimum everyone on the 'net should get ZoneAlarm or another free firewall, there's just no reason not to, and they're fairly easy to configure to allow specific programs/ports through.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Captitalistdoginchina:
Guys,
I may not be so popular for starting a second thread.
My appologies in advance.<hr></blockquote>
Burn him!
Personally I don't care how much FT's cost, I never buy them in QB's and wouldn't think of using them unless it was a set-piece battle (i.e. CMMC or a scenario). Interestingly enough, the whole cost vs usefullness debate is pointless when you're dealing with scenarios, since simply buying something else is not an option.
My disdain for FT's shouldn't be misinterpreted as a lack of respect for their usefulness. In CMMC I can recall at least one battle where FT teams attached to a German pioneer battalion flamed a row of houses, allowing other German units to withdraw and eventually denying a bridge to the British (There's something about it in the allied paper I believe, look for an article about the battle for Elbeuf). Like any other unit they need to be employed correctly. If I try to knife fight with my Tiger I deserve to loose it, just like I deserve to get my flamethrowers shot up if I try to charge a platoon of heavy infantry.
Finally I can't understand why so many people are spending so much time on such a trivial issue. How many people would actually USE flamethrowers if they got a 10 point cost reduction?
Weird resolution bug in CMBB, not displaying the res I choose
in Combat Mission - Tech Support
Posted
edit: I feel like a fool, the very next thing I did after posting fixed my problem, but there's no delete button - mods, feel free to delete this.