Jump to content

Vergeltungswaffe

Members
  • Posts

    3,523
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Vergeltungswaffe

  1. Matt, Are Fernando's Panther G and Panther G(late) that you recently posted the fixed versions with the correct hull side, or still the original versions before he fixed them? Thanks for everything you do.
  2. I've had the same experience. Infantry ambushes work well, for the most part, but armor ambushes only seem useful when you can boresight an area that constitutes a bottleneck that enemy traffic must pass through while your units sit somewhere safe. The moral of the story is don't use 'em unless you can't be flanked.
  3. Yes, Hiram. I don't know what was up with that clock, probably a big debate over its time accuracy at 2000 meters while traversing the turret at low rpms, but I'm glad they fixed it.
  4. The best part of your AAR was your references to units either running out of ammo, or attacking with the ones that still had a decent amount left. Ammuntion is, of course, probably the biggest limitor on the battlefield. Many battles have been won or lost for want of ammo on one side. I just finished playing a scenario involving the Pegasus Bridge where my PanzerGrenadiers successfully pushed the Tommies out of the area surrounding the bridge only to run low on ammo while defending against a large, determined counterattack. Thus, we had to pull back, and give up our hard fought gains. I just had to grit my teeth and enjoy the realism of it. In a 20 turn game, I would have won a huge victory, but by the end of this much longer one, I had to suffer a narrow defeat. Enjoy your Italian Campaign!
  5. That's the great thing about this game. Anything possible in real life is possible in the game. I had good experiences with Scotland the Brave I and II. Terence, I still recommend you try them. Germanboy's opponent may have made some very bad or very unlucky choices to make their encounter so one-sided, you never know. I always give the AI a bump to make it better, so if you play them solo as the Germans, do that.
  6. Terence, Of the ones I've played so far, for tricky attacks Marechal's Mill and King's Castle. Also Wollersheim. That one is veeery hard. Infatuate II features some terrain you probably haven't seen elsewhere and No Better Spot To Die has some interesting equipment. I, personally, like larger scenarios/ops for the most part. If you do, the layered defenses you talked about can be put into practice in Scotland the Brave I/II, Beast at Bay, Bridge at Cheneux, and First Clash at Stoumont.
  7. Bobbaro, You have renewed my faith in mankind. I knew there had to be some folks out there that enjoy the whole process and the thought involved in it.
  8. I've downloaded almost all of them, being a long time ASL player. I've played several, so far, and have been very happy with them. They have typically been adjusted a bit for balance where they needed it, and it is wonderful to see the maps I knew so well in 3D. Play 'em, you'll like 'em. Col. Klotz' site is one of the best in the CM ring.
  9. Popper, is it possible that your Tiger was positioned such that it couldn't depress the gun barrel far enough down to target the Limey's? If you can set up the same situation again, try moving forward a bit and see if that makes a difference. Just a thought.
  10. Keep in mind that most Russian tanks came with a small sledgehammer to "persuade" the gear lever when it got difficult, especially the KV-1.
  11. While we're on the hypothetical, give me the E-75 with the 88mm L/100!
  12. From the looks of this thread, I guess I am an exception. I much prefer long scenarios. 60 turns or more is great. My reasoning is that I like the idea of having a large map, having to recon the area ahead, gauging enemy resistance, or trying to determine what path the attack will come from. To me, this makes playing against the AI much better, as well as human opponents. For any that have played Close Combat, the two things I hated most were hitting the start button only to have 11 units in clear LOS within 200m that weren't there a second ago, and scenarios that only lasted for about 10 minutes of real time. After two months of CM, and many outstanding Wild Bill scenarios, I now almost exclusively play operations. I still remember playing the Villers-Bocage Op as my first one and enjoying the first 10 minutes of the third battle as my troops and Tigers probed forward, but found no Brits for several hundred meters. The tension built to an incredible point as I waited for them to put up a stand. If this is boring to many, sorry, getting to the battle is half the fun. I also like that any thoughts of suicidal end game rushes are harshly rewarded in operations. Quick Battles are there for those times when you can't or won't take the time for something bigger. I say devote your considerable efforts toward long, large scenarios and ops Wild Bill. Thanks in advance for the many yet to come!
  13. Gentlemen, Halloween was a great day. I received the November issue of Computer Gaming World and it contains a good sized article on how Combat Mission has killed computer wargaming. Now, before you think is was a slam, it was the ultimate praise for the finest computer game ever created. To summarize, they said that every other wargame out there sucks in comparison to our beloved CM. The bar has been raised a great deal. I'm 38 and I've played wargames all my life. I have practically everything ever printed dealing with ASL. I played Steel Panthers and Close Combat. They were both entertaining, but not particularly satisfying. However, I can truly say, the last two months of eating, sleeping, and breathing CM has been the best gaming experience of my life. Congratulations, BTS, I hope you will know ever increasing success and prosperity. I want to be playing CM and its successors years from now, not watching my children play childish games on their console while I lament the death of great adult gaming.
×
×
  • Create New...