Gpig

excellent! Thanks! Gpig

Do I hear more snickering?

sweet

thanks. Yeah, after reading your excellent story I was left with this impression of what those poor horses must have been thinking when they looked up at that Tiger. Like, "I wonder if it's too late to put in for a transfer . . .?" Gpig

Oops.

Ahhh . . . there we go.

Double post [ June 24, 2005, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: Gpig ]

You are correct, sir.

I think the issue is "if you want to put something into a house." Like, why would I put this ATG in a house, when in the garden over there, behind that wall would do perfectly fine. No one is saying it can't be done, it seems. Just that it wasn't done often. I think. Gpig

zmoney, check out the "STEVES RECENT BONES" thread in the CMAK forum. It's got plenty of tid-bits and steve-isms, all compliled nice and neat like by aka_tom_w. Happy reading. [smile] Gpig

Loaf, check out the "STEVES RECENT BONES" thread in the CMAK forum. It's got plenty of tid-bits and steve-isms, all compliled nice and neat like by aka_tom_w. Happy reading. Gpig

Hi Brent. Yeah, I played the LONG version (20 turns) as well. I tried to find this scenario at the Scenario Deopt so I could review it, but it was not there. Play the Axis side and let us know how you do. But I agree, some small tweaks could be made to this scenario to make it a tidge better. The reinforcements for one. Both sides have reinforcements appear in "open" areas. The Allies reinforcements appear almost halfway onto the map. Not very realistic. They are also exposed from the the get-go. (And in my battle, appeared amongst forces already fighting the good fight. Makes for a messy orders phase.) Maybe the map could be altered slightly, in order to give the Axis reinforcement road(s) some cover at the map eadge? In my game, the Axis reinforcements were caught with thier pants down. It's a great map, otherwise. Lots of nooks and crannies. Gpig

Agree to Disagree, why don't you? Ace Pilot wrote: 4. Some combination of #2 and #3. The AI would still control WIA, but the player would have some influence by issuing general orders at the start of the battle (move wounded to rear immediately, leave in place, move to a designated rally point, etc). The AI would do its best to fulfill these orders. The same idea could be applied to AI-controlled prisoners (take to rear, hold in place, or even take NO prisoners). I think this is a workable solution. When wounded happen, there is a SOP in place already that frees up the player/commander from further management. At the beginning of the battle, there would be a SOP checklist to go through, and one of the items would be for WIA. Gpig

Letting the A.I. drive would be another poor choice on the part of the germans. Gpig

Are you trying to compress the images somehow, AFTER you've taken the screenshot? I know that when I tried to compress my screenshots, they became scream-snots. Gpig

Excellent point, Ace Pilot. Tank gets brewed up (2 KIA in the tank), but 3 WIA men manage to crawl out. They are surrounded by an enemy platoon and promptly surrender. Or should they just vanish, once they are WIA? No possiblity of returning to friendly lines? Or taken captive? Or can crewmen never be WIA, only KIA? As it stands now, a crew is usually gunned down as soon as they emerge from a wreck. It might remain that way. But I've read a few accounts of WIA crewmen surrendering to enemy forces in the immediate vicinity. Anyways, interesting discussion. My position is that it would work fine as one level of WIA. 100% fine WIA KIA Then you could have combat ineffective units (WIA) that you *might* be able to give MOVE and EMBARK (and HIDE?) orders to. Not much more. (Almost like when you've captured enemy forces yourself.) I'd like to see the wounded depicted on the battlefield. In the minimum possible way. Gpig

I just finished a game where I was surprised to find my Jeep MG had shot down a plane! Didn't know they had it in 'em. I never heard nothing, either. Didn't even know it happened. A Stuka did fly over and drop a HUGE bomb (that did nothing), but then never showed up again. Crazy. Gpig

Like this? http://img160.echo.cx/img160/2541/wreckage7zc.jpg' alt='wreckage7zc.jpg'>

OOoh, that's gotta hurt . . .

testing a pic

Holy crap. That IS expensive. Didn't realize. :-\ This site should be useful for the idle rich, scenario designer. Gpig

*looks around, up at the ceiling* . . . where's that voice coming from? Hmmm . . . I have this sudden urge to look up member #4289? Thanks, Confucious! Gpig

Howdy. I've found some nice information on this attack (and it's one of the stories in the CMAK Companion - 78/ Let The Bloody Black Bastards Come). Maps, OOB's and pictures. I got all jazzed to do a scenario based on the battle, but then it fizzled. I realized the battle is really just a battalion (or two, depending on how big I want to make it) wandering through minefields, MG fire and artillery strikes in the middle of the night. "Would anyone really want to play this battle," I axed myself? Then I read more about the battle and it includes a nice little bit of action by no more than a platoon of men. This was the action that really turned the tide of the battle. So, build a platoon sized battle? Or a battalion sized "movement?" What do you all think? (I think I may have answered my own question.) Gpig [ June 20, 2005, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Gpig ]

Apologies if this has been posted before. Some cool pictures. May be helpful for scenario designers/map makers out there. web page Spotted a pic of Pegasus Bridge (check out all the gliders, nearby). Also, pics of Dieppe. Caen. Etc. Lots of Berlin. Check 'em out. Gpig [ June 20, 2005, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Gpig ]

Well, consider it LOWER hull down. I noticed the front LOWER hull of the Grant is weak. So at least THAT part of the tank is covered when hull down. Though I'm guessing I get a Hull Down Bonus even though most of my tank is showing above ground. There MUST have been a discussion when CMAK came out about how use of HULLDOWN Grants/Lee's is considered GAMEY. Right? I'll do a search. Gpig