Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

Hensworth

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    671

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Hensworth

    How's everyone feeling about hull-down?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    What was the crew's experience ?

    I've never done it, but imagine sitting in the turret of a tank and having to judge whether or not some terrain feature actually covers the hull of your tank from a target - through binoculars. It can't be an easy thing to do.

    Being difficult to do translates to making a mess of it in CM terms. And that translates to tanks rolling blithely to their doom...

    Calling all grogs ! Any evidence of tank crews getting training on how to find hull-down positions ?

    0

    New game or expansion pack?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by benpark:

    A lot of what people seem to be asking for lately seems like that gem of a "realistic" game "Sudden Strike". Realism (in terms of WW2 armor penetration rates, infantry tactics and so on) is term that is not taken lightly by many people on this forum, nor by BTS. While there may be some legit arguments about gameplay vs. historical accuracy being bandied about, alot of what I seem to be hearing lately is a drone of complaints that seem more in keeping with advice for your average, badly researched, un-historical FPS. I think it is great that CMBB has obviously attracted so many new people to this great game that we all really love to play, mod and talk about. BUT, I am getting nervous about the loud chorus of voices with some rather misinformed views as to what this game is intended to be-a VERY well researched, VERY true to the nature of warfare of this time and place (1941-1945 Eastern Front, Second WW), and for my $45- aVERY playable, informative, and realistic as possible-game.

    As we all know, economic reality as they see it has forced BTS to start pandering to the retail masses. Gone is the proud 'only available online' boast.

    This means that any old punter can now walk into a store and pick up the game just because he's got *insert random other WWII game here* already and CMxx comes in a similar kind of box. Or whatever.

    Strangely, and luckily for the fans of the historical side of the game, they've managed to shoot themselves in the foot somewhat by putting out a game which will see many among their newly acquired audience (many of whom have a 9000+ member number, since the retail version came out around the time the counter hit that number) wrinkle their nose at it (much wrinkling already in evidence on this forum ?).

    It seems like their software development strategy and their marketing strategy are somewhat divergent. Obviously, something will have to give. Either they will have to make more playable games (bigger bangs, less effort ?) or they will lose the interest of the people who are looking for those things and will have to find a way of surviving with their small band of history addicts.

    DISCLAIMERS

    People who bought their game off the rack are NOT inferior to people who bought it online.

    People with 9000+ board member numbers are NOT inferior to people with lower member numbers.

    I am merely trying to illustrate.

    0

    Russian infantry attacking - realism or a joke?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    SPOILER ALERT

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    I just figured that out replaying the tutorial.

    I had the Maxims and the green squads raking the treeline in front of the flag while the regulars dodged from crater to crater until I had one squad either side of the (supposed) German position. By then, the German ATG had revealed itself and was easily taken out by the 50mm mortar. This allowed the T34s to rumble up and fire some canister into the trees and that was it.

    [ September 02, 2002, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: Sgt_Kelly ]

    0

    CMBB Yelina scenario from Russian side (spoiler)

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Don't worry. I was just about to enquire whether anybody found those scenarios dang hard from the Russian side.

    I had exactly the same problems as you. Invisible MG's, hard-to-kill AT guns (mostly because the T34's can't seem to hit the side of a barn).

    Then I came to the same conclusion as you : I moved the tanks out in front of the infantry. This went against all my CM instincts but sure enough the Germans were on the run pretty soon. Once they were out of their foxholes the Maxims kicked in and it became a little easier to advance.

    Looks like we'll have to be prepared to let go of some old CMBO doctrines.

    0

    CMBB Yelina scenario from Russian side (spoiler)

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Don't worry. I was just about to enquire whether anybody found those scenarios dang hard from the Russian side.

    I had exactly the same problems as you. Invisible MG's, hard-to-kill AT guns (mostly because the T34's can't seem to hit the side of a barn).

    Then I came to the same conclusion as you : I moved the tanks out in front of the infantry. This went against all my CM instincts but sure enough the Germans were on the run pretty soon. Once they were out of their foxholes the Maxims kicked in and it became a little easier to advance.

    Looks like we'll have to be prepared to let go of some old CMBO doctrines.

    0

    New Battle Type: Static

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Don't see the point of this.

    ME's excepted, you always have an attacker and a defender. The attacker has no interest in having foxholes since he's going to have to leave them anyway.

    Suppose I was in a type of battle where I know my opponent is in exactly the same situation as me : about the same strength, dug in and in control of an equal number of VL's. I can do 2 things : get up and attack him or stay put and let him come to me. Either way, the attacking force is doomed because they don't have the necessary advantage. The percentage play would be for both players to stay put and settle for a draw. Not very interesting.

    Now, say forces are still equal, but one side controls more VL's. Try and win this from the side starting out with less points... If you do manage to take a flag from the opposition, your casualties will more then likely offset the points you gained.

    If you start experimenting with unbalanced force sizes you automatically peg one player as the attacker and it becomes irrelevant whether he starts in foxholes or not. You're back to your standard attack / defense.

    From a reality point of view you're talking about a stable front where both sides are dug in either side of a no man's land. The kind of activity that takes place under such circumstances (patrols, setting up observation posts) can't be modeled in CM as it involves too much sub squad level tactics.

    0

    Ed Kinney's...

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    1. Make a copy of your CMBO BMP folder. Store it somewhere outside of your CMBO folders.

    2. If it's a zip file, open it up, highlight the files that have a .bmp extension and extract those to your BMP folder (the original one, not the copy). If the system asks you whether to overwrite existing files, say yes.

    3. Check out your new look CMBO. If it looks horrible, delete your BMP folder and replace it with the copy you made (be sure to name it nothing other than BMP !)

    4. Get CMMOS. In fact this should be 1...

    0

    Commandos raid at Vaagso, Norway

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    SPOILER ALERT

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    Played as Allies and surrendered on turn 25.

    My tin cans were being slaughtered by ubiquitous 20 and 75 mm HT's and 50 mm Pak whilst trying to deal with the hordes of German HE assets.

    When I surrendered it turned out I had 900 men left, the Germans 800 (200 casualties to both sides). About equal in numbers and massively outgunned, I think I made a wise decision not to press the issue...

    0
×
×
  • Create New...