markshot

I didn't really have a point or criticism. I was just impressed with how much shooting it took to take down one close target. Also, the German soldier impressed me. Although he died, he never even broke into a sweat.

That scenario would not have been helped by time only something heavy like the main gun of a tank. Also, luck was a serious element. Perhaps, 1 of 10 runs massed Brens on the 2nd floor might have achieved the needed kills. Here is something that drives me crazy!!! You cannot tell you per man so human behaving squad with the action squares: DON'T GO THERE; THEY WILL SEE YOU; SHOOT YOU; AND KILL YOU!!! Invariably, these guys just love to scurry about and cover all angles; especially those where someone is waiting to put a bullet through them. Now, you say, the omniscient I (player) knows that. Well, if you are an AI simulation and you see a body bleeding out in a certain spot that was in good health the previous turn, what does that tell you about that spot? Yes, I like the new game, and all the human like behavior, but it is not very human like go stroll over to you buddy who is spurting blood like it cannot happen to you.

Well, "new" more as in new to me. I had got my last my PC in 2007 and continued on and off with CMBB/CMAK until last year when I replaced that computer. I now own CMBN/CMFI/CMRT (+DLCs). I am playing on IRON and I am still learning. Also, somethings are just the usual result of engine upgrades without retesting/balancing all scenarios. Like I have been banging my head on CMFI - Kiwi Soldiers only to search and find out that it is one of the hardest and that engine upgrades may have made it even harder.

Howdy, Bil, I must say that the new CMx2 makes me feel stupid. I find myself frequently replaying missions. I didn't use to with CMBB/CMAK and mostly won. I hope one day I shall be able to do that with CMx2. The one thing I always wonder about with these games is ABC is the most realistic engine ever produced. There I go; doing okay. But then XYZ is released and is the most realistic ever produced, and I am an idiot again. At what point does realism = real? (and if not my body, but my intellect is up for this) Good hunting!

Too bad. I miss fire. It was such a useful tool. Even more absolute in CMBB/CMAK than blasting a structure to rubble, since they often took up positions in the rubble. But a structure burned, no none stuck around. Oh, well!

Why do I ask? Well, I would like to set a building on fire with the WP rounds. Is that possible? Thanks!

Playing CM v3 at Iron Level It seems to me there is a qualitative difference between "visual close" and "voice" in terms of the resilience of my troops. Is that true or is it just my imagination? Thanks.

Dead of Night Well, I have tried not splitting into recon teams for this one. Keeping my squads close and in command with one hunting. A recon team stumbles onto a fortified enemy team and it is a fair firefight; deaths are fairly balanced. A squad stumbles onto an enemy team backed up by two other squads in support and it is not a fair fight at all. No one dies and the enemy team is eliminated. Also, I am covering ground faster; as it is very slow (lots of waypoints and pauses with more teams) versus longer waypoints and squads.

Bil, I haven't read this thread, but I thought to post here just the same. CMRT: Dead of Night. A great game of cat and mouse, but with guns! DIFFICULTY=IRON So, I have my two man recon teams out front. Hunt, zig-zag, pause, even crawl to the next crater and stay there and listen. I don't get sound contacts or spot anything. Men die. It seems in the darkness; sitting still is a great advantage. I can be practically on top of them. Things seem pretty much binary. Either it is peaceful or you are dead (and then it is peaceful). Also, interesting ... is light from weapon flashes modeled? Why do I ask? Well, if only the flash was modeled, then you would have a contact, but once they start shooting, then I pickup trenches and sandbags. I can only imagine the reason that I failed to see them before was due to a lack of ambient light ... which resolved with gunfire. Thanks.

I forgot to mention that I am playing at the IRON level. I will pay attention to dust in the future when I am in such a scenario. Thanks.

Interesting. I was unaware that. That would be just perfect. Is this documented somewhere or has it just been confirmed via hot seat testing? Thanks.

I remember when dust was introduced in CMAK. I tended to prefer CMBB, because the AI was not aware of dust. Thus, the human had a huge advantage in dry terrain knowing what was going on out of sight. (Yes, you could turn off dust rendering, but it was tied to smoke which you needed to be able to see.) So, is the AI now aware that movement of vehicles creates dust? Thanks!

I have been playing GTOS. It is very nicely done. I am in systems. The quality of the programming is solid and the performance is impressive. The only short coming is documentation. To truly get up to speed will require: * Limited manual. * Community reading. * Community Youtube videos * Reading a few Steam Forum threads (I got mine from GamersGate, but for $5 USD you can posting rights on Steam as that is where the English speaking community hangs out) It is worth the effort. (It has often been discussed/compared to CM, but they are different games and not direct competitors for the same niche.)

Yes. But I stayed away from large and huge scenarios. Partly for performance reasons and partly because when they get so large (especially if the points are infantry), they become tedious with such long turn planning. Actually, the perfect game series for that is RDOA/HTTR/COTA/BFTB. I bought RDOA when it was here and was a member of the team for many years. The engine is incredibly scalable. So, you can command at any level and avoid being mired in micro-management. The balance is purely up to you. A very elegant system. * After that we moved to Matrix and Panther Games has subsequently moved to LnL. But it was right after I figured CMBO out that I bought RDOA. PS: I have only played one PBEM in my life against a tank veteran I made friends with among the original Steel Beasts game crowd. I beat him in the final turns. He rushed an unprotected Sherman into a town. I got a Schreck team setup just before he came down the road ... and well you know. A tanker should know better than that! I thought I would never have a better PBEM and quit while I was ahead!

I have always appreciated the level of help this forum provides!

Thanks!

In the prior games, fords were very obvious graphically. How do I recognized them in this series? Thank you.

I am relatively new to this v2 engine. What I am enjoying most is that the scenarios are quite a bit more replayable than v1. With v1, I had 6,000 scenarios and every three years I would cycle through them again. At my age, it take about three years to forget the mostly everything.

In CMBB/CMAK, you might position a squad or HMG in a building on the far wall, but firing out across the room. Why? Well, although narrowing the LOS of the HMG is made the HMG less noticeable to other units. Also, if you wanted a squad to mainly ambush those who approached the building closely, you set them further back. (also used a covered arc) However, in CMv2, units gravitate to windows of whatever direction they want to shoot out of. Any way to achieve the above? Any reason to achieve the above? Thanks.

Well, I don't want to get in the middle of someone else's p*ss*ng match. Yes, I apologize to use words imprecisely. But otherwise, I want to say that I am grateful for his posts (and many other experts) through the years as I have found them thought provoking and helpful to my game play and enjoyment. Of course, your mileage may vary.

I remember in the last generation that hiding units helped them to recover I believe suppression and possible fatigue too faster (along with being in command). It hiding still the thing to do for shaky units? Thanks. PS: Bil H, I am not a gamey person! I am a systems designer/developer. If someone puts something in a UI, then there must be a reason and I WANT TO KNOW WHY! For example, I want to know what that big red button does that says [SCRAM THE REACTOR]. {All said in good fun, Bil. BTW, I am still not using NATO symbols. In fact, I am playing GTOS using standard Soviet symbology. Oh, how terrible! I have gone over to the Reds!}

I played since 2000 starting with CMBO and only recently got a new PC + CMBN/CMFI/CMRT. I don't really understand the soft factors. You have leadership, experience, condition, and morale. I have read the manual, searched it, searched the forums, and played around in the scenario editor (my online lab for CM games). So, the two former are constants within a scenario, but the later two vary by situation? All have text labels and the manual sort of describes what each of the four parameters impact. However, except for leadership, I don't really get the modifiers. Where do they come into play? How are they set? (you cannot set them in the scenario editor) How do they interact with the current state of one of the three soft factors? (Are they just simply coefficients applied as a factor to the current state?) Do the modifiers vary dynamically like the states for condition and morale? Now, I am even more confused. I played more in the scenario editor. It looks like the modifiers are the long-term state (applies for an entire fire fight). I am so confused. Years ago when I was trying to learn the other games, there was a member "JasonC" (who I see is still here) who would write doctoral stuff on history, military realities, and in game modeling. Does anyone know some informative threads that demystify "soft factors", because the more I stare at them the "softer" my understanding is becoming. Thank you!

I think it is a great training scenario for players coming from CMBO/CMBB/CMAK in terms of Bocage fighting and breaking up into teams and the spotting model. In fact, I consider the practice I got with it to be invaluable.

Now, it is back to Russia playing GTOS where I am definitely going to lose to the USSR this operation!