Peter S

Have you gone mad? RANDOM MAPS ARE WHERE IT'S AT!!! Is it just me or am I the only one who detests playing wargames that force you to fight on the same battlefield over and over and over and over again? Am I one the only one who drooled over the vast expanse of unused ground in Prelude to Waterloo's massive Twin Battles map? Am I the only one who cried when Napoleon 1813, with its unlimited replay value embodied in a strategic/tactical gameplay wrapper, was an incomplete bugfest? Is the same thrill there when you've planned your entire troop movements before the battle of Gettysburg even starts? Oh look, it's Little Round Top and it's worth 30 Victory Points! I'll just march a crack division to take it, just like I've done 'x' number of times before this one. I just hope my opponent doesn't put any troops up there... Yeah, real fun the first few times but the minor variations one experiences in countless replays wears really thin. Sometimes I wonder whether these hardcore 'I only play historical scenarios and/or maps' wargamers have some sort of unhealthy ladder competition obsession, or, even worse, an inferiority complex when it comes to facing the 'great unknown'. Take that statement however you like it but variety is the spice of life. As far as CM goes, I would sooner have some poor fanatical psychopath recreate the entire map of Europe and compress it into one file that the game can access for random map selection than have to only deal with premade and/or user created maps. Quite frankly, had CM NOT included a random map generator I would not be so enthusiastic about it, and certainly it would not have held my attention for as long as it has. Random map generators, dynamic campaigns, mission progression 'trees' are the things I look for in wargames and sims. ANYTHING to increase longevity and maintain 'freshness' is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Terrain generating algorithms can be improved, and CM's generator is not so bad when you take into account the precious few computer wargames that have one at all. Oh yeah, I almost forgot... Long live Watney's Cream Stout!!! If none is on hand then gimme Murphy's Irish Stout or Guiness...

That superheavy German tank design, the 'Ratte', if authentic, is perhaps one of the dumbest ideas I have ever seen in the history of military vehicle design. Maybe one day when ultra-durable suspensions, small scale nuclear power plants and lightweight rail guns become commonplace on the battlefield can such a beast be considered feasible, but 1945/46?!? Forget it. While it's firepower is impressive, it's rate of fire was probably pathetic. And given the state of gasoline and diesel engines in the 1940s, the Supertank's cross country and road speed would have been equivalent to a snail's pace, meaning it would be limited to operating on more developed roads and highways, further lessening its overall impact on the battlefield. Most importantly, the Ratte is extremely large, meaning even medium bombers would have a chance of nailing it with low altitude carpet bombing using armor piercing ship-killing bombs. Also keep in mind that given the Ratte's obscene cost and high maintenance requirements, it would have been an infrequent sight on the battlefield, attracting unwanted attention wherever it went. Essentially every single tank and artillery shell and air dropped bomb within miles would be directed against such a freakish monstrosity. Heavy armor or not, it would have been knocked out of action before it even reached the front lines... I'd take a couple platoons of Panthers or Tigers over that rolling bomb magnet any day... Lastly, the Maus, Germany's less 'impressive' 100 ton supertank, was another stupid and wasteful project. I would consider the King Tiger to be at the borderline where good sense blurs with folly as far as WWII German tank designs go. A 70 ton tank with an exceptional 88L71 gun was more than enough for the WWII battlefield.

I have news for you GriffenCheng+, if you want to clear BG2 within the next three to six months then you will have to put all other gaming interests aside. Many Bioware employees have stated that there are about 250 hours of worth of gaming if all the subquests are completed!!! So if you want to get your money's worth then stock up on supplies, it's going to be a loooonnngg winter. Talk about a lifestyle altering experience...

From what I understand CM's sales are so impressive that Steve and Charles have decided to abandon computer game development and fulfill a lifelong dream of becoming champion hamster breeders... HAH! Anyway, this question has been asked many, many times (myself included in the ranks). You may ask, but BTS won't tell...

Regarding No. 1: Great, I have no problems with these fixes. No 2.: This 'Vehicle Rarity' feature in CM2 is great as long as you fellows keep it an OPTION! I would sooner have this Vehicle Rarity feature serve as a point of discussion (and/or argument) for prospective PBEM opponents trying to agree on battle parameters than have it permanently limit our purchasing freedom in all Quick Battles. Considering the larger scope of the Eastern Front you fellows might also want to consider adding an option (I stress the word 'option') that would limit a side's vehicle selection to sections and/or platoon sized formations (pertinent to the type of force selected, of course), to further prevent massive gamey 'mixed bag' vehicle purchases in large scale battles. Basically Jeeps should be cheap because they were! Whether or not a Jeep mounts a powerful .50 cal machine gun is irrelevant. Simply put, a .50 cal squad is rightfully more expensive than a .50cal Jeep because it requires 6 soldiers to operate it in the field. Those 6 soldiers need to be trained, paid, fed, clothed, cared for and transported. This is in addition to the bullet belts, spare parts, sidearms AND the .50 cal MG. In comparison, a .50cal Jeep (with the same armament, ammo and spares parts) only requires support for its two man crew and the gasoline and spare parts to keep the vehicle operational. In terms of the 'big picture' a .50cal Jeep was probably cheaper and certainly more cost effective to field than a .50cal squad (especially given the Jeep's extraordinary ruggedness and reliability). The offset to the cheap cost? Jeeps are also much easier to spot and more difficult to hide than a 6 man squad. And while quick, Jeeps are also unarmored, with the exposed crew being extremely vulnerable to literally everything under the battlefield's sun! Allow me to further champion the .50cal Jeep's low cost by using examples of non-combat hazards: potholes, blown tires, high speed fishtailing, hydroplaning, small quadruped mammals that bolt across the road at the last second and spook the driver, and lest we not forget the harmful effects of 'road rattle' on the crew after high speed dashes over crummy roads... Lastly, penalizing a player simply because the side (i.e. USA) he/she chooses to play with had a knack for making reliable and cost effective weapon platforms (i.e. the .50cal Jeep) is wrong. Using this same logic should not the T-34, an extremely successful and relatively inexpensive and effective weapon platform, be much more expensive in CM2 than it was in reality? NO!!! I have said this before on the forum but I urge the BigTime team to not penalize the majority for the gamey sins of the minority.

I think Steve's suggestion is the wiser one: 1) Reduced top speed and acceleration for vehicles who venture off road (as long as the reductions are based on historical performance figures instead of a quick-fix solution to offset 'gamey' tactics). 2) Reduce spotting success for fast moving vehicles. (I thought this was already implemented?!?).

This is going to get me flamed big time. What the hell, call it a rant if you will, here it goes... Why hasn't the Korea War gotten the attention it deserves? Because a more stoic generation of Americans fought that war. Volunteer or conscript, when their country called them to fight in Korea few of that generation (essentially the same that fought WWII) protested the action, and those that did were paltry in number compared to the millions who protested the Vietnam War. And while the Korean War was not broadcast on national TV and radio the newspapers and magazines were still publishing photos and reporting casualties. And media coverage or not, those body bags were making their way back to the States. Many Americans at the time believed the Korean War was a noble cause, if not a necessary sacrifice. Otherwise why else would there have been so little protest to the war during and after the fact? The gov't sponsored propaganda machine was not in full swing as it was in WWII. I find it ironic that after WWII, when the dust settled, people had (and still do) the nerve to call it a 'crusade'. And if this was the case then why was the war against the fascists more nobler than the wars fought against the communists? Why has communism escaped the incendiary criticism that fascism still (and rightfully) endures today? Better yet, if a crusade against 'evil' is a noble cause then why has our nation's past travails against communism suffered from this same sort of incendiary criticism? Stalin's reign of terror alone killed over 20 million innocents and/or 'enemies of the state'. Add in the numbers for Mao, Ho Chih Min, Pol Pot, and Castro and their murder totals positively dwarf all the fascists combined! For what it's worth, I have a Japanese friend who is actually thankful WWII ended the way it did (A-bombs and all) for Japan. He shudders to think what would have happened if the Soviet Union invaded Japan and either took it over completely or split the country in the same brutal fashion it did in Germany and Korea. I guess if you're going to save the world from itself then you'd better be prepared to take on all forms of nastiness, fascist or not... Anyway to return to my 'stoic' argument, simply attend a Veteran's Day or Memorial Day parade and take a look at the WWII and Korean vets; whether in their old dress uniforms or wearing their VFW/American Legion duds those guys still walk tall and act proud. Then watch for the Vietnam vets; casual dress bordering on disheveled, makeshift uniforms made of tattered fatigues, peace symbols and various other buttons and pins decorating their person, in my neighborhood some even ride their Harley motorcycles along the route!?! Why was their struggle any more dramatic or difficult than their fathers' in Korea? It took nearly 10 years for ~60,000 Americans to die in Vietnam, and yet in two and half years of fighting in Korea we lost close to 40,000! Was Vietnam different because it was an 'unconventional' war? Bull. US soldiers in the Pacific fought Japanese soldiers who used guerrilla tactics similar to those utilized by the VC and NVA. Was it a question of difficulty? We killed far more North Vietnamese than N. Koreans/Chinese so it is not a question of the N. Vietnamese being the more formidable opponent. I get a big kick out of the fact that the surviving participants in the so-called 'Forgotten Conflict' to this day haven't made such a big deal about America's lack of recognition of their sacrifices in Korea. And yet many baby boomers, many of whom are still patting themselves on the back for protesting the Vietnam war (is there no end to the overly dramatized anti-Vietnam War movies?) and who consider themselves supporters of human rights, are still declaring the Vietnam War a tragic mistake. Call me cold or insensitive but I think I am dead on the mark with my generation based stoic assessment. Just as the English have lost their stiff upper lip, so have Americans lost their 'take it on the chin' attitude (the baby boomers being the first to display this lack of self restraint). Grandpa wasn't perfect and his certainly wasn't the 'greatest generation' of Americans (I save that for the generation that fought the Civil War, Federal and Confederate alike) but he never took prozoac, read a self-help book or penciled in a visit to the therapist... Perhaps the Korean War is referred to as the 'Forgotten Conflict' because the generation who fought it doesn't feel they need the special attention the Vietnam generation feels they deserve for their war. After all, if you're not complaining, who's going to pay attention to you? In case anyone is wondering, I am a 29 year old Gen X-er, 3rd generation American of Greek & Italian descent.

LEAVE IT ALONE! NO POINT ADJUSTMENTS! Is this gamey 'disposable recon' tactic a widespread problem or has it been limited to a handful of friendly and/or tournament PBEM games? Something tells me that the select few who have encountered this tactic are making a too much fuss over too little smoke. The usage of cheap vehicles for suicidal reconnaisance may have been a rare and unorthodox practice on the Western Front but it did happen (albeit in a less spectacular fashion). But aren't cheap recon units inherently disposable anyway? As to the usage of non-combat vehicles for this gamey tactic; if the fellow wants to waste points on a fast moving target instead more support units then let him, a capable opponent should be able to compensate for this with sound tactics. By the same notion, aren't those gamers who send a SINGLE Hellcat at top speed deep behind into enemy lines to outflank a wily Panther (or two) also stepping outside the realm of reality? Would an allied tank commander be so bold and/or stupid as to do this SOLO, and WITHOUT other armor or infantry support? A lone, open-topped tank braving the unkown (i.e. hidden, Panzerfaust and grenade equipped infantry) in the hopes that it MAY succeed in nailing a German tank or two? A few brave and/or stupid souls might try it, not most. Sounds suicidal and equally gamey, doesn't it? While there will ALWAYS be those who exploit the rules to win at all costs (esp. those in ladder and tournament competitions), these people are clearly in the minority. Please do not punish the majority for the sins of the minority. Finally, allow me to echo the sentiment of others here that American units ought to be a tad cheaper than they are, to reflect America's 'embarassment of material riches'.

YEAH! I do request! Please send those 'Dusty' textures to me as soon as you can! I can't wait to try them out. Thanks John

Hey Matt and the CMHQ/CMHQ Annex gang.... Where are Tiger's fantastic vehicle textures mods? You guys said they would be available today!

What's so bad about Riverdance? As far as plebeian entertainment goes it could be ALOT worse. Come to New York City and see the tripe they call modern Broadway musicals. You can actually hear Gilbert and Sullivan rolling in their respective graves... Besides, where else but in Riverdance can you see a large collection of attractive Irish girls bouncing about a stage? It's that fruity queen in the leather trousers I could do without...

The 75L70 probably made the difference in countless battles where just being 'good enough' wasn't enough! By 1944 Germany's tanks were routinely outnumbered by their Allied counterparts on any given battlefield. Every little bit counts when you're trying to keep the hordes at arm's length... 100/500/1000/2000m 75L48 AP 141/130/112/91 HE 50/46/42/34 75L70 AP 173/160/145/114 HE 69/63/56/45 88L56 AP 145/143/130/103 HE 105/97/88/73 88L71 AP 220/205/188/157 HE 93/86/78/65 This comparison really puts the Nashorn's AP & HE ability into perspective. And do you think Allied tankers would have feared the Panther as much as they did if it didn't have that 75L70? With the scarcity of special AP rounds, improved and/or bigger and better cannons like the 75L70 (within reason of course, unlike that impractical 128mm monstrosity on the Jagdtiger) became a necessity. And the very fact that those Shermans bounced several 75mm AP shells off the hull of that Hetzer says alot about that TD! A Stug with its vertical armor would probably not have withstood that sort of punishment. And a Marder would have been so much scrap metal with the first hit! However, I can certainly appreciate your fondness for the less glamorous equipment. It's definitely nice to play with different toys every now and again...

I've played Quick Battles where my tanks started out with less than optimal ammo loadouts. Other than lowering the numbers of HVAP/APDS and other special AP rounds available in any given tank, I would prefer that BTS leave the ammo levels alone. Perhaps BTS should add an option to the Quick Battle generator that allows you to adjust either side's starting ammunition levels (i.e. Low, Average, Fully Supplied and Random).

Ahh yes, the Hetzer, I forgot about that one. Good call. Its sloped armor really does the trick, whereas the StugIIIG's armor is about as vertical as the Tiger's. And best of all it's a steal at 75 points. Haven't seen or played with the Hetzer too much though. I just got CM and have been playing mostly Quick Battles in Summer 44. I think the Hetzer is available by Fall 44, correct?

Why buy Nashorns? Because YOU CAN! Seriously though, Marders may be more cost effective (almost two can be had for the price of one Nashorn) but the Nashorn's 88L71 cannon is guaranteed to punch through virtually all Allied armor at all ranges. The Marder's 75L48 cannon is good, but not THAT good. On the other hand, if you're going to use 'shoot and scoot' tactics at very close ranges then the Marder is ideal, it's a cheap tank for taking cheap shots. Personally, if I'm going to spend upwards of 90 points for a TD then I'd go for the Stug IIIG; it's got a low profile, it's not an open topped vehicle, it's hide is much thicker than the Marder's and Nashorn's (therefore allowing for the chance of a glancing blow or non-penetrative hit), and unlike the Marder and Nashorn the Stug has a MG (two MGs on the Late model) for pasting soft skinned targets. The Marder and Nashorn having nothing to offer beyond their main gun and can barely withstand a dose of small arms fire and harsh language, let alone a 50mm-75mm AP or HE round.

Hey Mr. Johnson, Louis Nicholas Davout was NOT at Waterloo! At Napoleon's request, his best Marshal was something on the order of 'Minister of Armaments' (or War, something like that). Napoleon felt he needed a capable and trusted ally (a) in Paris, and ( in charge of France's military industry, in both cases to prevent political sabotage by Bourbon Loyalists. This clever political move is probably what cost the Emperor his brief campaign because had Davout been in command of the same troops Ney commanded at the battles of Quater Bras and Waterloo, the outcomes would have been quite different. And I agree with Disaster's statements about the Gettysburg/Antietam engine. Despite the engine's obvious strengths (some of the best tactical AI in any wargame to date), I don't believe Breakaway Games is going to inject the AI with a major dose of 'Napoleonic smarts'.

Some of this may be asking too much of the next patch but here it goes... 1) Improved Tactical AI- (a) I've seen the AI make too many desperate suicide charges (as the Attacker) in light of the fact that I've already massacred or broken the majority of its troops (which were not fanatical quality)! The AI should know when to quit and offer a cease fire! Perhaps it is my lack of experience with CM (I just got it) so can anyone counter this as being a faulty observation? ( The AI needs to better plot its artillery smoke rounds. I've seen it drop the smokescreen behind my lines more often than in front! 2) True Fog of War should not allow either side to know the Skill Level of the opposition's troops! The same goes for their Status (Rested, Ready, Pinned, Panic, etc...). The exception to the latter might be if opposing units are in extremely CLOSE proximity to each other, and even then only certain states should be detectable (in the heat of battle could anyone honestly tell the difference between an enemy unit that is being Pinned and one that is Hiding?). 3) Allow more types of heavy/special weapons teams to 'Run', except adjust their speed so that it falls somewhere in between 'Run' and 'Move' (let's call it an anxious 'Trot'). I simply fail to see how men already selected for their physical ability to carry such equipment should be limited to a normal walking speed in battlefield conditions. If anything, inflict a 'Tired' state on these units much sooner than if they were running with lighter equipment. 4) Mortar teams (especially the 60mm) should take a little longer to set up and fire. 5) Full OOB display of friendly troops during and after the battle. After the battle you could include the casualties and kills for each unit as well. Full disclosure of the enemy's OOB and casualties should also be available after a battle. This is one aspect of the Close Combat series that needs to be brought over to CM. 6) A special 'Assault' option for Infantry units. It would be nice to tell infantry to get up and go after a nearby tank/pillbox only and have them automatically run like hell for cover afterwards. 7) Gun Camera for Fighter Bombers and Artillery shells! HAH!

Statistically speaking, nearly ANYTHING is possible on the battlefield. And statistically speaking, it sounds like you got the short end of the stick this time around! Did you save the game prior to hitting the 'GO' button for that turn where the Germans initiated the charge? Reload it several times and see if the outcome is the same every time. If you're really curious then use the editor and try to faithfully recreate that particular setup. Rest assured, I doubt those German squads will prevail as often as you think. These troops you used to secure the VP area, did they experience combat and/or sustain any casualties prior to manning these defensive positions? They may have had low morale at this point when the Germans rushed them. Also keep in mind that those six German squads (60+ men) running like mad towards your position can have a considerable effect on your troops' Tactical AI! Finally, keep in mind that it came down to six versus three (mortars aren't too useful against fast moving target(s)), so even if each of your units had a different target, that leaves three German squads free to keep running like hell.

I never said Battlefront or BTS had an obligation to tell us how many copies they sold!!! And I certainly did not imply that these guys were withholding sales figures for fear of public recrimination in light of CM's success! I am merely curious about many units of CM have been or are projected to be sold and I think that public knowledge of these sales figures would be great for business. People love a winner, and when a game's success is made public (especially an underdog like CM) people sit up and pay attention. You see I NEED wargame publishers to make more games like Combat Mission because I simply cannot bear another heartbreak like Napoleon 1813 or Impression's cancellation of Civil War Generals 3. I may enjoy playing sims and rpgs but I NEED good 'wego' type of wargames. Did I emphasize the word NEED enough? For your information I am fully employed by those little green men that visit the Earth every now and again. If you're intereseted we have a very comprehensive abduction package. Can I interest you in a midnight abduction? Guaranteed to spook the hell out of the wife and kids and the family dog wil never hump your leg the same way again. How about a tracking crystal inserted in your temple? Maybe a 105mm HE rectal probe for that get up and go? You should see my 401K, it's out of this world... LOL! WAYYY too much free time at work today! Peter S

Road blocks? No problem. First make sure to maneuver your recon units so that they are in a favorable position to... Oh, forget it, here's a better idea: Purchase the 1969 Dodge Charger, the 'southern US stock car' variant with syndicated 70's TV series camoflage (an attractive red-orange with a black '01' on both doors and a Confederate battleflag on the roof). Now 'Fast Move' this mighty steel beast towards the enemy roadblock whilst the crew whoops and hollers at the top of their lungs (psychological warfare tactic influenced by pre-20th century Native American warrior culture). Unfortunately, since there are no 'whoop and holler' crew sounds in CM you'll have to make them yourself (make sure you open all your windows beforehand and warn the neighbors, it helps to alleviate any pressure imbalance that may occur in your inner ear and avoids any interruptions by local law enforcement). If the enemy does not route before this purest expression of maniacal machismo then have one of the two man crewmembers (typically the blonde one) unbutton (roll down his window) and use his compound bow to shoot dynamite tipped arrowheads at the enemy units defending the roadblock. This high explosive onslaught should inflict major casualties on the remaining defenders unaffected by the previous psychological warfare attack and has been known to send even the toughest of SS units running to the rear! However, should the explosive arrowheads prove ineffective then you will quickly find yourself running out of road! Quickly initiate a suspension of disbelief 'miracle jump' over the roadblock, followed with a discharge of the vehicle's musical horn (yet another psychological warfare device) as the it flies over the heads of the cowering enemy. This will ensure that your crew and the vehicle will live to fight another day! This vehicle, AKA the "General Lee", is devoid of any actual armament, offensive firepower is typically supplied by the crew in the form of the aforementioned compound bows and dynamite arrows (which can penetrate over 100mm of face hardened steel at ranges up to 500m). However, what the General Lee lacks in offensive punch it makes up for with speed and protection! Under the hood is a fearsome gas guzzling beast of an engine, a 375 hp 440 Magnum V8 which can push the General Lee over a quarter mile of road in less than 12 seconds! The General Lee is also a turretless design, giving it an extremely low silhouette, low enough to give frustrated 88 gunners a sissy girl fit! However, should those enemy gunner's find their target the General Lee is protected by the finest American 18-20 gauge steel, known to stop even the most sizeable Japanese import dead in its tracks! The General Lee also has excellent cross-country capability and with adequate speed has been known to 'miracle jump' 40-50 foot gorge(s) and/or roadblock(s), and with only minor structural damage upon landing! Let's see a Tiger top that!!! LOL! http://hazzard.simplenet.com/images/hazzard/bw/buddies.jpg I knew there was something going on between those two! LOL!! I HAVE WAY TOO MUCH FREE TIME AT WORK TODAY... HAH! LOL!!!

I still want to know why BTS and Battlefront will not release the exact sales figures for CM. Battlefront and BTS are not publicly owned entities nor are they competing with huge publishers for retail shelf space, so where is the external pressure (if any) to be silent being exerted? If this game sells more than 20,000 copies then it will certainly garner more free press in the relevant trade and gaming magazines. Why 20,000? I remember back when Firaxis sold Antietam solely through the internet the magic sales number for it to be considered a success was 20,000 copies sold, in that 20,000 copies sold direct via the internet was equivalent to 100,000 copies sold using more conventional retail methods (100,000 being an industry-wide watermark for moderate success?). If the figures for CM are (or will be) as impressive as many of us believe it will then why keep quiet about it? In this instance making as much noise as possible only attracts more attention to the product from the press and more importantly, from PROSPECTIVE BUYERS! Just shooting my 88mm mouth off, Peter S

To whom it may concern, Congratulations on your success with Combat Mission! I can say without hesitation that this one of the best, if not THE best wargame ever made! I have not enjoyed playing a WWII tactical wargame this much since G. Grigsby's Typhoon of Steel or its much ballyhooed progeny, Steel Panthers. Combat Mission is exactly the sort of boost computer wargaming needs in this era where big money publishers only have eyes for more 'plebeian pastures'. But what I really want to know is... just how many copies of CM have you actually sold so far? 5,000? 10,000? 20,000? At the current rate at which copies are flying out the door, how many do you expect to sell over the next six months? Is CM shaping up to be the word of mouth, sleeper hit of the year or simply a moderately successful title (no small feat nowadays)? I have asked this same 'numbers sold' question to developers of more mainstream titles and each time their mouths are seemingly welded shut by the suits standing behind them! Can a curious fan get a straight answer? And last but not least, is CM2 going to cover the ENTIRE Eastern front (Leningrad-Moscow-Stalingrad-Berlin, 1941-45) or just a few select campaigns and/or years? Thanks again for giving me more than my money's worth, Peter S

I'll second that 'Standardization' argument. It is fair to say that the armament industries of the entire Axis was plagued by this lack of focus, especially when it came to weapon platforms. The combined manpower and economic might of the Allies gave them much more room for industrial 'errors' as their sheer weight of numbers could (and would) offset any qualitative inferiority their equipment suffered when compared to the Axis'. From tanks to planes to ships, the logic of settling on a few effective designs versus many was lost to all but a few wise high ranking officials in the respective Axis powers. The glaring exception to this was Germany's submarine fleet, which saw the smart and effective use of two extremely successful combat designs (types VII & IX) before the nearly omnipresent allied naval and air units demanded a more revolutionary design (type XXI) be built. OK, I jumped off the subject a little, So sue me... Peter S