Louie the Toad

I agree, not gamey at all. Silvio, there is nothing in Franko's True Combat Rules or Iron Man I know of that says this type of recon is cheating. What would be cheating according to FTCR would be to fly ahead of your scouts with the mouse to inspect terrain you could not see from the scout's position. Observant Toad

A partial solution would be to: 1. Turn off 'Detailed Armor Hits' 2. Only observe the target from your most forward position or the firing tank. (no flying over there with the mouse to check things out) 3. Rely only on zoom X2 or X4 to observe. "Slowly we come to appreciate the realism of Franko's True Combat Rules" -- Louie the Toad

Hence my earlier topics on having an operational or strategic overlay. A game which would generate the reasons, the objectives, the terrain and the units for engaging in the CM tactical battles. Can it be done vs the AI ? We know that multi player grand scale games exist but that is not what is needed here. I want to play a strategic game vs the AI or another player and fight out the clashes using CM. Big Picture Toad

Does anyone know if there is a bonus to the squad that is engaging the enemy if its commander can actually see the same enemy? My initial reaction to this question is that there is no extra bonus. A 'blind' command unit gives the same bonus with regard to star, lightening bolt, heart and question mark, as one that can see the same enemy itself. But then is there ANY effect gained for a squad whose command unit can see the same enemy? Wondering Toad

Guerilla Tactics, shouldnt they be against enemy supply lines, communications, ammo dumps, HQ areas and the like? None of these in CM. I rest my case. Rested Toad.

I dont like the way I asked my question on my last post. I will try again: Does a leader actually influence (in the game AI) the target selection of its squads? Would a unit with a gold box lightening bolt be better at selecting and directing fire at targets than a leader with no lightening bolt at all? What does the bonus actually do? Directing Toad

Congratulations on the birth of your son. Is this a number 1 son? The new last rule should provide for some interesting play. It might make the game go faster too since selecting units with + - has slowed things down a bit. It brings some questions to mind about leaders. Assuming a squad is in command control and los and its leader spots an enemy unit, will the leader direct the squad to shoot at the enemy unit, or does the squad have to see the unit on its own ? Level 1 Toad

Maybe it was 'motor'cycles with side 'cars'. Motoring Toad.

c3K, This is precisely the question. Is there a game that one could play on a strategic level and transfer units, results, terrain etc. back and forth from a tactical game (CM). It could probably be done from a (dare I say it) board game with two pbem players each having the game and being completely trustworthy. But I really dont want to retro to a board game. Maybe all that is needed are three maps, some grease pencils, a telephone and a referee. Strategic Move / Tactical Battle Toad

PVT Ryan, Please explain: "An off board arty fo 'stands up' to observe his target". I have yet to see that. Questioning Toad.

Band of Brothers

Elvis and everyone else: Thanks for the info. This looks exciting! And I will follow up with you. I would like to be the supreme commander though, as well as the lieutenant. Does anyone know of a computer game that would work with regard to the questions of my first post. Commander Toad

What! Where! When ! Who ! How do I make contact? This is wonderful, I cant wait!! What does MC mean? Can I help? Tell me more !! Pleeeese !! Hopping Toad.

I agree with the option for level 1 play. As Franko would say "Everything else is Cheating". Level 1 Toad

I have asked this before without satisfactory results. Wouldn't it be great if there were computer games available where at an operational or strategic level players could maneuver their forces to contact.... Then the units and terrain could become the components of a constructed CM operation or tactical battle. The results of this contact (the CM battle) could then be translated back to the strategic game in terms of losses and ground gained. Then another strategic turn would be made, etc. This type of game would solve all kinds of gamey purchasing, would give meaning to victory locations and would give a player a reason to retreat and save his forces. Yes there may be some very unbalanced encounters but that would be the "fault" of one of the players, not of a scenario designer or the AI. Big Picture Toad

Tananka, Maybe you have uncovered a new combined arms configuration. Tanks with sharpshooter scouts. The last scenario I played using sharpshooters had 1 within 70 meters of the enemy only with a brush concealment. He had crawled thru brush and briefly over open ground and gave me very good information on enemy activities. He never was discovered, even after taking out an enemy field gun. I still think it would be good to hear from some veteran tankers, regardless of age, to hear from them what they think or did about crews scouting forward. What is in the manual and what actually happens are not always the same as you know. And you probably forgot that Cavalry, no matter when in history, at times had to fight as infantry. The truth is better than speculation. Curious Toad.

Redwolf and Tananka, Are you guys tankers? As I said, lets hear from some vets. By the way, my scouts actually sneak and crawl in order to scout. They seldom get shot at. Sneaky Toad.

When it comes to points I would rather loose a couple of crew members scouting forward than have my following tank get kayoed in an ambush that they could have uncovered. Ok, don't you suppose there could, would be an esprit' de corps (spelling?) of the tank platoon or squadron? They are part of a larger group, not an isolated unit. If a crew is on foot and in somewhat good morale might they not be willing and be ordered to sneak forward so their buddies dont run into a problem. Somehow I can't picture the crew of a knocked out tank under Rommel's command running to the rear, past the rest of the squadron, ignoring the tank leader and not telling their comrades what was up ahead and leaving the rest of the tank commanders to figure it out for themselves. Tell me, would you do that? Would you want your comrades to do that to you? Questioning Toad I would like to hear from some tankers first hand.

Dear Sightreader, I understood what you meant. It is just that I usually construct battles using QB. If I want to avoid the edge thing, I pick a huge map, 5000 pts and then use the tools to reduce the size of the forces by half or even more. Gives a lot of space to move around in but there are some LOS oddities if the map is too big. Optional Toad

Shadow, Just a few ideas to tide you over. Have you tried variants like night time and fog or huge maps with smaller numbers of points so you can maneuver out of sight. And of course: Have you tried playing with Franko's True Combat Rules. (I suggest a very small point scenario at first) Happily, Toad

Looking for a " Keeper of Critical Information" Someone should keep the above info, especially Jason's. I am sure it will be needed to ward off all kinds of bickering when CMBB comes out. Not volunteering... Toad

I always thought the maps were too small for the forces engaged Causes edge hugging like you said and eliminates at least half the effectiveness of tanks. Was it Guiderian who said something like " tanks have two weapons, guns and engines". Lets not start the attritionists vs the maneuverists though. Motoring Toad.

FFE, I think your definition is right on target. (here comes the but) BUT it assumes that all players have a fairly good knowlege of WWII ground and even some air operations, tactics and equipment. It is obvious from posts that they don't. So an unknowlegeable player may innocently do something that is terribly gamey that might drastically effect a game. There can be a real dilemma here because I think that most players would want to be able to develop creative tactical solutions to the problems that the enemy and the terrain pose. A commander, probably British, once said "they came at us in the same old way, and we beat them back in the same old way". Sounds boring doesn't it. Don't we all want to discover that tactic that mystifies and confuses and defeats the enemy? (my apologies to Stonewall) As you said, and I wholeheartedly agree, Intention and the Spirit of the game should be our guides. However those virtues come from within the heart of the player and there is not much that can be done by other players about a person who is a poor sport except to avoid them. I think it would be beneficial for those who are not very knowledgeable about WWII weapons and equipment to do some reading and selective video watching. This would end a lot of the innocent gamey playing. There was a posting on the forum some time ago that asked what a mortar was. It made me wonder if that person was playing the game. Part of the learning curve for this game should include knowledge about WWII ground combat. Researched Toad

I am not talking about the unrealistic massed use of jeeps here but the two or three you get in a finely crafted realistic scenario. What has worked in your experience? Motoring Toad.

Maximus, Its you again! Anyway in this one the weather is very poor, snow and visibility less that 200 yds, so the going is slow. Would like to add more turns just to get into the fighting. Snow Blind Toad