Jump to content

coralsaw

Members
  • Posts

    404
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by coralsaw

  1. Perhaps I should go buy a MAC. Gee, do you get both versions (PC & MAC) on the MAC disk? /coralsaw
  2. Howdy Germanboy. I've been lurking since ever, but only have had a laptop for a while so I couldn't play CMBO. Thus, no point in bitching on the forum. I'm gonna get me a big desktop in september though. /coralsaw
  3. Worst thing of all, IMO, would be that the CDV copy-protection gizmo may very well delay patches for a week or two after the US version comes out. I've seen it happen with Europa Universalis II and many other games. I'll also buy the US version. It sux having units named the wrong way... /coralsaw
  4. Hubert, What is the rationale, is it playbalance? I believe that the centralisation of most governments at the time was so strong, that losing the capital meant losing the country. Economic institutes, radios, government structures, transportation etc. Moving the government to a deeper territory (unlike the factories) would not have been possible in the few months the first phase of Barbarossa lasted. Moscow, AFAIK was no exception, which is why Hitler thought he could end the war in 8 weeks. /coralsaw
  5. <ed> I just saw I answered the wrong question... Heck. :cool: Anyway, I've used area HE fire against suspect woods, but I haven't observed any benefit. I don't think it's a good use of ammo, unless the overwatch approach for (sit back and wait for the enemy to popup) doesn't work. </ed> Local superiority while assaulting is a must, if casualties are to be kept at a minimum. I try to attack a squad with 3 squads. One squad provides covering fire by directly engaging the enemy. The other 2 squads rush the pinned/distracted enemy. Pinning fire is best delivered by HE, MG, squads in that order IMO. Mortar and Arty preparation is quite useful, especially if it lowers the morale of the enemy. If you cannot afford local superiority, a) you should not assault, or you should accept higher losses and risk of failure. One can use, e.g. 1 BAR equipped half squad to pin and assault with the other half squad against 1 full enemy squad, if one must have the terrain. /coralsaw [ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: coralsaw ]
  6. Enoch, Fire works well when you have the means to light the buildings up. Giving up the first row of buildings to protect yourself from DF does not work well though, since the enemy is offered good cover and time to bring their heavy equipment forward to establish a firebase. What one needs to benefit from in towns is the cover that buildings offer. An enemy entering a building, will not spot an ambush until it's too late. The best general tactic for defending in a city I have found, is setting successive kill zones, starting from the edge of the town. Infantry ambushes from hidden positions, moving inwards to the next kill zone after 30-60 sec, under suppressive longer range MG fire, if possible. Ideally, the next kill zone should be already in place, when your troops withdraw to reinforce the third zone. FOs and ATGs are dispersed at the edge of the town, or in woods nearby to pound the enemy before he enters the town. If your outermost kill zones get pounded by DF, then "withdraw" immediately. Casualties will have to be taken, and as somebody rightly said, every HE round that is spent on buildings is not spent on directly firing at your soldiers. This attrition tactic works wonders, as it will demoralise, slow down and cause casualties to the enemy. You do not have to destroy the enemy to win, sometimes it's enough to throw him off balance or delay him. Scooter, This doesn't work well, IMO, as you can get a maximum of 1-2 free shots before you are spotted, and that's assuming par in AFV numbers, which is not always the case. The best results are, both psychologically and physically, if you show your armour late in the battle, all things being equal. All these are general tactics, so a pinch of salt and a lot of situation awareness is your best guide. /coralsaw [ 08-01-2001: Message edited by: coralsaw ]
  7. Used to have a Compaq Armada with an ATI 8MB chip, and CM worked well for small battles (no smoke though). Now I have a Dell Lattitude 400, ATI AGP2X with 4MB chip and CM is absolutely unplayable. The perils of portability... /coralsaw
  8. Hmmm, that's a good trick to save time Walker, but Engineers are expensive specialised units that you'd in general want to keep a bit further than 20-30m back from the scouts I'd rather take a turn or two to breach properly while establishing covering fire for the Engineers and bringing them from a safe place, than to effectively risk them getting into an ambush. /coralsaw
  9. Mostly interesting ciks. I never noticed that, guess I should be payin closer attention. /coralsaw
  10. IME, on offense, they are only useful if hidden to guard VLs. Otherwise they cost too many points as casualties to keep on the map. The TacAI has a cunning nose for backpacked fuel tanks, FSs are a real bullet magnet. /coralsaw
  11. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Will we ever take the time to do this? Probably. Will we do it prior to the release of CMBB? No. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sob. How can one say no to logical arguments? I still want my fire-engine though... /coralsaw
  12. I originally missed that SenorBeef, seems very close to what I had in mind. Let's hope that the BTS guys will give it a 5 mins thought now (I'm sure they will). coralsaw
  13. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: To recap... Grand Campaigns were not included in CMBO because they are inherently unrealistic. Grand Campaigns are not going to be included in CMBO partly because of that, but most practically because we don't have the time to code and test such a massive feature.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Steve, This is clear as spring water. May I propose a low-maintenance exercise that will allow the community to create a Grand Campaign by themselves. Would you guys consider creating an API that exposes all the functionality of the editor, as well as a post-battle situation (casualties etc) so that people can automate the creation of battles through an external shell? If you could do this, which from where I stand does not look a huge amount of effort, then the community would be able to create a good Campaign management tool that would export battles and import results. Note that this proposal doesn't mean exposing the format of the scenario file at all, which for good reasons you guys do not want to do. coralsaw
  14. Jarmo, I can feel your pain mate... The tactic can be beaten though, considering a reasonable map. What has worked for me is using a platoon of (good quality) infantry in good cover as a skirmishing line infront of the MLR. The purpose of the skirmishers are to: - deny intel info to your opponent - throw your opponent's attack timing off Infantry would have done wonders with the Humbies, let them come close and kill them. And if your opponent wants to waste his arty on a single dispersed platoon, so much the better. It's good to protect the flanks with the Guns, but they should be kept way back and hidden, in case an AFV (impervious to small arms) tries to flank. Otherwise they're dead meat against arty. One last thing. Don't forget that the cars crews are worth victory points, especially if captured, so don't let them get away with it. Hope this helps. coralsaw
  15. Proof enough? http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=009908 coralsaw
  16. PeterNZ, Well, well, well. You're taking part too... If we're on opposite sides, pray I don't find you in front of me. coralsaw
  17. Acesid, Here's what I do. I always keep my mortars out of sight, and have them all fire using a Leader as spotter. If there is a dedicated leader for the support platoon or a Company leader, so much the better, otherwise, I use the platoon leader. When advancing, I keep the mortars behind the advancing infantry, but in C&C range. When enemy MG nests or infantry guns are encountered, I sneak and hide the leader forward, and next round spot and fire the mortars for suppression/destruction of the enemy. Defence is easier, as you can setup your mortars out of sight, but use the same indirect spotting technique. Rule of thumb, keep them mortars out of LOS, until you feel comfortable. And make sure you use their few precious rounds when you really really need them, there will never be enough. Hope it helps. coralsaw [ 05-12-2001: Message edited by: coralsaw ]
  18. Yeap, I can sympathise! TacOps-style SOPs please, cm'on people, lobby!!! (not before CMII though, methinks...) coralsaw
  19. IIRC, BTS has stated in the past that it makes no difference what order you choose after bogging down. The AI is taking care of it. The chance of freeing the tank up is based on the quality of the tank crew and that thang called luck. coralsaw
  20. IMO, Veteran or better FOs are worth their money in gold: - Faster response. That's a biggie. - Harder to be spotted, aka as "the living fire magnet". - Better chance to withdraw without breaking when under fire. Rockets is a saturation weapon, that's a whole different ball game. Then it's cheapskate land... coralsaw
  21. Engy's post is the works.. . "Withdraw" is a real saver for point-squads. When strong contact is encountered, issuing a "withdraw" right away can make the difference between a dead squad and a living one. Also, very useful when the odd spotting round has fallen to get the heck out of there before it starts pouring down, or when that damn Stug has started blowing the house your MG is hiding in down. If used preemptively (just as the proverbial hits the fan, or even before), "withdraw" is a major lifesaver. coralsaw
  22. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Should ammo loads play such a large part in the strategy and tactics of our half hour battles? :confused:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> IMO they should. You simply wouldn't have enough ammo to keep firing for half an hour, IRL... Your point is valid though, squads (and the TacAI) should have had more discipline in firing away like mad. A "Hold your fire" command would be a bonus, but I'm afraid it would have repercussions in the TacAI code, as you'd surely want that pesky MG to start firing again if it gets assaulted by an unseen enemy squad, wouldn't you Blackthorne... A lot of folks and I have asked repeatedly for TacOps-style SOP functionality, but alas, it hasn't happened. TacOps is the dog's bollocks in this respect... Regards coralsaw
  23. Manx, Just to say that you are doing a damn good job. Your site is a gem. Thanks man! coralsaw
  24. I should point out, to avoid confusing people, that the QB in question was a random unit pick and setup for the AI...
×
×
  • Create New...