WWB

It might take seconds for you to download and install, but putting together a quality battle requires a good 20+ hours of work for something small. Not to mention testing time by others which is absolutely vital, especially for making tutorial type battles. I also should add that my Green Hell battle. avaliable from Boots & Tracks below, is a very good infantry training battle from what I hear. If anyone wants to write a tutorial based on it, be my guest. WWB

I suspect the thing was rather nasty. The US made good use of 37mm cannister, found to be very effective in hedgerow/jungle clearing ops. WWB

76mm is quite BN level, and you can also use the 120s to pop the smoke screen. I do agree there is somewhat of an issue, but you still have not checked the wind speed. From what I saw this was only an issue with light mortars with alot of wind where the smoke would not persist for more than a turn and a half in any case. So what pray tell is the wind speed in this situation? WWB

I saw the same thing happen with the beta, then I tested it. If you have a strong wind medium mortar smoke will not stick around, which is pretty realistic IMHO. Try 105mm, it will persist a bit longer. WWB

Check the wind speed. If you have a strong wind, the smoke disperses fast. WWB

You cant setup troops to show on the second map. They will get moved to the first. You can padlock fortifications that will show as the map advances though. And you could use a tied to map reinforcement to bring in troops at certain points. WWB

Maybe he can install the english CDV patch when it arrives. WWB

What I mean is that in operations the computer redraws the setup zones between fights. If the No Man's Land is set to 0 then troops can begin right next to each other. I think the briefings are adequate, and we were under orders to keep them short anyhow. If you make a scenario, you can write in the entirety of a Tale of Two Cities if you so choose. CMBB is a far different game at heart. Try those re-made The Last Defense and Reisberg battles floating about. They really show the diffrence nicely. WWB

1) They are a bit lighter than CMBO, but all necessary information is there. 2) That op slows any computer to a crawl. Get a cray. 3) What you saw is the setup zone behavior and a 0m No Man's Land. WWB

Getting a server is relatively cheap and easy. Most of the qualified techie types probably have an old machine with enough umph sitting about. It might need a some more RAM and more disk space, but no need to buy a box. The problem is bandwith. Residential service agreements either ban servers outright or severly limit monthly upload (my new one will let me serve pages, but upload is limited to 1gb a month). You need to go with business services, and since it is a fairly bandwith intensive task, you need a fat pipe. I did a cursory search, and it looks like the going rate for 1500/1500 is $300/month and up. Of course, one could get a T1 for $650 a month or so. If I was still living in Mom's basement, I would actually consider it, but I have rent to pay. WWB

The bottom line is that someone, somewhere is going to have to pony up some significant cash. I gather that serious mod hosting requires data transfer in the range of 300 GB/Month. I did a cursory search and hosting costs seem to be at least $200 a month, a figure far too high to ask any individual to support out of pocket. For that amount, one could also get a beefy partial pipe and host the thing themselves but that entials alot of work keeping the server up and secure. The question then becomes how to pay for such a service, and the more I think about it, subscription is the way to go. 200 modsluts paying $9.95 a year could easily cover the costs for such a service. WWB

1) His graphics were downsampled--he was using an intel 810c graphics adapter. Definitely not cutting edge. 2) It seems he only played for a few hours. I would not call the TacAI intelligent, unless he was playing certain CD scenarios which are stacked against the player. WWB

The more I think about it, zeroed out comment type reviews are appropriate for the battles done within your own group. That will keep scoring from getting skewed while getting comments out there. I did not really think about the lone wolf types, they have less collusion concerns than most of the parties to this discussion and should have a bit freeer reign. Actually, at this time, I think there are only three groups about: B&T, DK and The Scenario Design group. I would not mind seeing another few pop up myself. WWB PS: Atlas, saw your review of Katukov Strikes Back. The scenario is mis-labeled fictional, it is actually historical. I take no responsibility for the map, as it is transferred straight from a 1:50K topo. As for the padlocks, well, that was where the 10cm gun was and the briefings explains why the tanks were stuck where they were. [ October 19, 2002, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: wwb_99 ]

Keep in mind that if you blast a path of craters through wire, units move faster with more cover. WWB

Selection is random when unrestricted. You are better off forcing a template upon the auto selector. That option was added for human play. WWB

Since you asked andreas, I think, due to the vested intrest Der Kesselites/B&Ters/whomeverites have in seeing their groups scenarios well recieved, that group should not review the battles on general principle. Reviews are supposed to be from impartial third parties IMHO. Other members of your group, especially those who happened to have playtested a battle, are not quite impartial enough. I do realize that there is another way. If you want to comment on the battle, say it is great, etc, how about just giving a zeroed out review. So it does not effect ratings but will allow you to comment. The best policy really is to post a few AARs from the playtest. Lets one comment without screwing with things. WWB

I believe this is a high priority item on "the list." They tried to get it in for CMBB, but it was ultimately unworkable. WWB

Just in case anyone missed it. WWB

Consider the fact that a german infantry battalion holding 1500m or more of front had exactly two 37mm ATGs supporting it and no mobile AT assets backing it up and the fear of the T34 makes much more sense. Note the above figure presumes the infantry battalion was up to full TO&E, which few in the winter of 41 when the T34 earned its reputation. WWB

Cant be done. Best method is to print out the gridded battle map and transfer things tile by tile. WWB

I have never seen an AI which can be called good at attacking in any wargame ever. And, if you are a noob, CM's AI is actually a pretty harsh teacher. WWB

Sounds like you did from the descriptions. Those T34s came out where they were supposed to, the reason it is reccomended to play as the germans is that you need to pull of a fighting withdrawl to win. Standing and fighting will cost you those tanks easy. WWB

See the Hornet's Nest scenario on the CD for some Panzer Aces type action . . . WWB

Central Mod repository would be cool. There is already a scenario depot that serves that function for scenarios. You can check it out at the first link in my sig below. WWB

Because they did come in from several directions. I take it you hung around the top of the hill, which is not entirely intelligent. WWB