Harold

The hopeful purpose of this thread is to get CM'ers to discuss the "real" details of the game. By this I mean what have you discovered in the game engine that others can use to form better attack or defense tactics. Here are some that I have found. 1) Infantry right behind walls can get 0% exposure from fire if it is coming from the same level or lower. Fire from higher levels does increase exposure. Infantry also hide quite well behind walls. 2) The Churchill is one tough tank to take out at roughtly 45% from the front. Even at 40m a Panzerscreck may not be able to do anything and a Jadgtiger rates only good on the kill %. 3) If you draw vehicular movement directly through non-moving infantry, the infantry WILL move, presumably a self preservation act to avoid being crushed by friendly treads. Now I am wondering if this also occurs when moving through enemy troops? Hmmm......... Some may dislike having their so-called secrets exposed but I believe that the game engine is really a set of real world rules that everyone can benefit from. Any others? Harold

Tom, I don't know if you are correct or incorrect in your observation but it is something I am taking into account into the ASL conversions I am doing and have done. At this point I am assuming Allied armor will more likely use available Tungsten and have dropped the typical average load of what seems to be three down to one tungsten round max. Can't do much about QB's or other scenario designers but it is something that ought to be considered by those who create custom battles/operations. Harold

Hardened veterans Waffen SS want a fight No match for Airborne Tiger on the Hunt Lil' Stuart pops out of woods Whoops! Forgot the flanks Troops take a beating Surrender to the Victors Must be the AI

ASL or Advanced Squad Leader has a website dedicated to rating the win/loss percentage of a scenario. Of course it requires a webmaster to put the scenario info in but simply requires the user to fill out the fields. Here is the website for anyone interested in attempting something for CM. http://www.netreach.net/~jrv/web/roar/Record.html

Here's another one http://w1.312.telia.com/~u31213280/index.htm

Play hotseat versus yourself. Best way I have found to solo test scenario balance. Harold

The units need to be placed in their respective zones in the scenario editor first. Once that is done they can be setup as part of the scenario. Their base color indicates what zone they can setup in unless you have padlocked the setup in which case it will be orange and the unit(s) cannot be moved at all during setup. Harold

Try this website http://WWW.COMBATMISSIONS.CO.UK/ I am sure they would be happy to post. I bet others would too. Anyone who spends three months researching and playtesting one scenario deserves to see it posted somewhere. Looking forward to it. Harold

Well since you are snowed in, here is one that involves snow................ http://www.mm.com/user/jpk/men589th.htm

I think the best way to deal with possible deadbeats is to resend your last move with a message indicating you were not sure whose turn it was to send. If you get a reply, great. If not then it at least lets you know where the game stands and you can move on. There are plenty of willing players out there especially if you join a ladder. Personally I don't worry about my ranking and want to simply play others that have a bit of a commitment to seeing the game through. A deadbeat list however is a terrible idea. It is great for finding out who _might_ be a deadbeat. It is lousy if your name pops up on one justified or not and in this day and age you need to be very careful who you label. Harold

It is my understanding from reading the manual that the player doesn't have control over fausts. The TAC AI makes that decision whether to use them or not and being under any type of fire greatly reduces the chances of them being used. Unless something has changed concerning this I don't even bother targetting vehicles or armor to fire a faust. Harold

Try Merzenhausen Zoo at Col. Klotz' website. http://w1.312.telia.com/~u31213280/index.htm

One thing to be careful of is make sure you don't develop a pattern with placement of your Platoon HQ's. If all are "in the back" yet visible to fire a good opponent should pick out and pick on HQ's. Mix them up and fog of war seriously cuts down on the chances that your all your HQ's will be targets. If possible try to keep your HQ's out of direct fire. If not do not develop a pattern.

Crank and others, Good to hear that you are trying your hand at converting ASL scenarios. It really is fun and it forces you to explore the units capabilities, limitations, etc. when converting. This is of great benefit when playing all scenarios as well. A couple of things th consider: 1) Read ASL Veterans How To list. I differ on some points but we all do on this forum. It is an excellent primer on converting scenarios. 2) Before you fire up the scenario editor check the victory conditions and special rules carefully. Some can really throw a wrench in your plans and make it tough to convert. No need wasting a weekend only to find out that it won't work. 3) It helps but is not a requirement if you have played the ASL version. It gives you a feel for what occurs and can assist in conversion. For example I converted Tiger Route. The reinforcing 6 squads of Germans really need the flexibility of three 2 squad platoons with HQ rather than 2 squads of three. Hope this helps and good luck. Harold

I wasn't aware of files being corrupted by overwriting. What actually corrupts them and how often does this occur because of overwriting?

When playing by PBeM which one do you prefer and why. I have a number of PBeM opponents going simultaneously using both methods and I can't figure out why people like them numbered. I find overwriting is much easier to keep track of, it's cleaner, and if I really want to go back and look at a turn I can simply regrab the attachment from the email and rename it then. So what is the purpose of numbering other than draining the HD and confusing your opponent . Please enlighten me. Harold

In a recent PBEM my opponent had a mob of Churchills and Crocs. I had a German Panzerschreck Team that had already taken out one Churchill and later targetted another. I was very surprised when I got a "Good" on the To Hit and "None" on the To Kill. I didn't believe it so I shot at it. It hit and it didn't kill just like it said. Very weird so I started thinking about it. Was the angle of deflection too shallow causing the HEAT round to bounce or detonate away from the Vehicle or was the armor just way too thick for anything to get through? So I set up a quick test on the firing range and it turns out that when a Churchill/Croc is approximately at a 45 degree angle to the firer it is damn near impossible to knock out. While I cannot recall the specifics of my test I believe even a King Tiger rated no better than Good at under 100 meters and it may have been only OK. The 128 was the only gun at UNDER 100 meters that had an excellent rating. It simply amazes me the amount of detail that has gone into this game to even consider that a tank might be tougher to actually kill when it is at an angle to the firer. Someone mentioned on another thread if there were any easter eggs in CM. To an amateur military historian like me this is an easter egg wrapped in a damn well though out and designed game. Harold

Bill, No way did I do all of those conversions. Not even some. Many others have contributed more such as Cory and Dan. It is a lot of work as you know and I am just converting, not creating from scratch. The order of battle and terrain is already in place. The hard work has been done by those who designed the scenario in the first place. Still it is quite satisfying to take a map and see it in 3D especially if it is a historical map. Harold

Tom, Maybe you are just playing the wrong opponents . One of my opponents had his 76w take out a King on the second shot from the front. It took a few minutes for me to figure out it was even ko'd. My only reaction was it damn well had better been Tung. Turns out it was. Come to think of it I have another opponent who thought planes were pretty useless until he just spotted a huge bomb crater with a Mark IV parked next to it and that is all he can see so far

Here's the ASL2CM website........... Harold http://w1.312.telia.com/~u31213280/index.htm

A variable game end option certainly has merit and it would be interesting to see it in CM2. Still, it's a damned if you do damned if you don't. You could be the attacker whose nicely grinding down the defense only to have it end three turns early or you could be the gritty defender holding out only to have it go three extra. Anyway you look at someone will feel cheated. Slightly changing the subject. Has anyone tried any PBeM scenarios with no flags or exit zones? Are victory points even awarded just for enemy casualties? If so then games could be played with casualty victory points only using the axis point bonus row in the battle parameters as a balancing mechanism. Harold

The last minute rush for the victory locations is nothing new. It has been an in wargames (the paper kind) for decades and it is not going to go away now. Same thing for the last minute rush to make it offboard exit zones or board edge creep. As a defender you must always prepare for these possibilities and setup or fight accordingly. At least now there is the possibility of a victory level anywhere from 1-100. Used to be either you won or lost. Harold

Teamski, I know your pain and I don't know of any way to change a current battle to an operation or vice versa and I don't think it is possible. Maybe (hopefully) someone can enlighten us. You will either have to work around it or start mapping all over again. You might look and see if you can cut the operations down to a single battle. Moral of the story is make sure to decide battle or operation before you lay down terrain. I had just completed a 1120 x 3100 map when it dawned on me it might be better as an operation. Harold

Hey guys, Before you laugh at the prospect of a Storch or PBY terrorizing troops from above you might want to know a little about my uncle. His name was Charles Carpenter and he was an aerial artillery spotter for the U.S. 4th Armored division in WW2. He flew an L-4 Piper Cub and his nickname was "Bazooka Charlie." He got the nickname in Normandy when he mounted bazookas underneath the wings and started tank hunting when he wasn't doing spotting duties. He was credited with knocking out six vehicles, four of which were tanks (for embellishment we will say they were King Tigers ). The entire article is in Sept 1987 issue of World War II magazine. I always thought my grandmother was pulling my leg until I read it. So if CM is really serious about historical accuracy I think it is about time "Rosie the Rocketer" is patched into the game . Harold

For those interested here is a link to an OT-34 that was recently pulled out of a lake outside Moscow. I wonder how it got there http://rkka.domainvalet.com/mow99.htm The rest of the site is located here http://www.dol.ru/users/hotdog/home.htm Harold