The_Capt

Oh what the hell, let's stir up some sh@t!! I find it very strange that for an enlightened, hardcore gaming community, the thought of "real time" should have everyone running for pitchforks and torches. Got a newsflash for you guys, "real combat" is in "real time". I think the problem here is that everyone doesn't want to see CM become another C&C clone and lose it's "je ne sais quoi" edge. And become a twitchfest, complete with rushing hordes, resource management and German Strumgruppe factories. Well I think blind fear of change is counter-productive, kinda like the Republican Party (whoops who wrote that!?). I think a CM built on reality of combat would be a lot of fun. One could make a plan on a map or even in the game and then let it go. Your influence as a comander would be much less and you would lose a lot of control. Virtual sighting has been discussed which could be built upon here to include "out of touch" units acting on their own, without the commander even knowing where they are. I think it would be very challenging to make a plan and then have very limited control. The only thing you would have direct control over is Arty and your Reserve. If I have one complaint about the game (well ok one of two) it is that CM is a little to controlled and more like chess than the real thing. Real combat is chaotic and confusing because FOW not only applies to the enemy but your own people too. Now roll in multiplayer potential. You could command a platoon within a Bn. Be given orders and then go out and do your job. You may be out of contact with Bn HQ or even Coy at times and you would have no idea of what is happening on the other side of the battlefield. Except for gunfire and sounds of action. Now we are talking. A truly enlightened designer would have both options available. And I might add that if BTS doesn't do it someone else eventually will. Computers may not be ready yet but in an industry which measures Eras in 5yrs or less, we can expect the hardware will be ready soon. Now as to the "zealots" who are right now on their knees with CM manual in hand muttering " The way of CM is "we go"...we do not appeal to the twitch crowd..Our Charles who art in (where are these guys anyway?) bless thy fingers to encoding and keep corporate suits far from us". Just settle, it is a free board and we are allowed to speak our minds so long as it stays within the guidelines laid out by Admin. The day that BTS or anybody else stifles this board is the day the "ideas stop" and the countdown to someone else doing it better begins. So let's dare to dream and put the pitchforks down.

dalem, Again too simplistic. Every soldier in existance is going to duck when fired upon, regardless of the weapon used. The question is how long is he going to stay "Ducked". Or suppressed. It is a gross simplification to say all soldiers fired upon by any weapon are going to hide behind a wall and not move until firing stops. Once the initial "duck" is done if no bullets are punching thru your cover, you begin to plan on how to actually get out of the situation via killing the other guy (ie shooting back, getting a gernade, calling arty). If bullets are tearing thru the cover you have selected, these coherent thoughts have a much harder time in forming because you are too worried about having large holes blown in your soft person. We call it "Combat Shock" which has differing degrees of severity depending on exposure and level of experience of the troops. For example: Green troops are actually less likely to go into shock because the experience is "unreal", after they get bloodied their reaction becomes more sane. So my question still stands: how deeply into the supression/cover/experience question did BTS go and could this not warrant a re-vist as to the effectivness of the all powerful SMG.

No argument there but in the scope of CM a quick and hasty command arrangement can be done. Which though not perfect is better than isolated squads moving around without direction. This cna happen at the platoon level and not just coy and Bn.

How about the question of Cover. If I am in a gun fight with an SMG squad and bullets are not penetrating the tree/wall I am behind, I would think to be under far less surpression than if .303 rounds are flying thru either. Again this is tied to troop quality and experience. Was this all tied in as well? I think there is more to the Firepower question than meets the eye (as I am sure the developers have figured out, so exuce me for being slow). Do SMGs suffer a greater penalty for cover and experienced troops on the receiving end than weapons of larger calibre? If the answer is "Yes" than not only am I really impressed but it would negate the SMG issue to a great extent. If it is "No", I would ask why not and wouldn't that balance out the uberSMG issue?

I think that it might be better to tone down the "firepower" of the current SMGs. The term "firepower" is deceptive. Yes the SMG can put out a hell of a lot of BBs but there is more to it than that. Penetration, stopping power and accuracy to name a few. The SMG was and is a sloppy weapon. The 9mm round is a low powered slug which won't punch thru a car door or a tree, let alone a brick wall. A .303 rifle will do much more but a lower rate of fire. Correct me if I am wrong but I can't remember if BTS actually went this far in modeling small arms. Either way I think a lessing of SMGs value may be in order rather than escalate the SMG race.

Gentlemen, As a good officer I must agree with a fine Snr NCO. Troops (quality depending) are trained to respond to rank...all rank, not just the ones in their chain. I've seen re-grouping done in a trench dog-fight. If two remnant sections (or as Yanks call em squads) happen onto a Platoon Sgt or Platoon Commander from the same Bn they will: 1) Recognize him and 2) Do what he says as long as it isn't suicidal. They can be coordinated in short order (a few minutes) and will perform much better than when left alone. Platoons know each other and even if all else fails, when the sh@t hits the fan they will be drawn to someone who is suppose to be in charge. Hell the Chaplin could get a grip on guys who are rattled without a mission. I'll take it one step further. Sections which are at 50% strength or less should be able to be rolled into another section. A section commander will grab these guys anyway if they are leaderless and wandering. Command and Leadership are much more complex and robust than what is portrayed in the game.

Well now that we are all in one place, let do what we all really want to do...Bad Mouth Americans!!!

I thought the addition was quite nice. I would have still bought the game with or without us in it but it is good to see. Often we get lumped in with the Brits and forgotten. They even got the flag right. To be honest, I didn't even know our troops were modeled when I ordered. I do admit to liking using them from time to time. But they do have shortcomings much like the Brits. An intersting aside, I have played the Worthington Force Scenario which is based on a British Columbia Regt action in Normandy. Vicious fight but what is really interesting is that my Grandfather actually fought in the action. He was a Sherman crewman and was in one of the eight tanks which actually got out alive.

Try "Sneak" if you can, if you are under fire or suspect arty..Run it will hurt less.

Popular misconception, What you call "Combat Engineer" is in fact reality. A prepared defensive postion is something to behold and a terror to assault. The question was posed how to improve a defenders chances. In a defence there are five critical factors. Armoured/AT firepower, Infantry Firepower, Arty firepower, Obstacles and Counter moves. The coordination of these factors are needed to defeat an assault. You cannot remove one just because it isn't fun and expect to be able to accomplish the same thing. The reason QBs don't work for the defender is simple..frontage. A Bn may get 2000m to defend, which equates to 630m per Coy with three up! If you want depth the two lead Coy will have to cover in the are of 800m. A modern inf Coy with all the bells and whistles can only cover off 700m. So you either stretch way out or suck in and leave openings. Now you are outnumbered and can be flanked/enveloped. No sane defender would go looking for this. Don't get me wrong it did happen and a lot of people died when it did. Even non-grogs can use engineers, it isn't hyper-realistic. Well anymore than armour I guess. There are other options but the QB seriously screws the defender. It can be done but you are not getting a good deal, as opposed to the attacker. I am not sure what you mean by "my version". I am not suggesting taking anything away from the game just playing it differently. You can choose to or not.

AHHHH!! THE NIGHT BEFORE!!! Ok deep breath. Silent breaches can happen on the furthest obstacle belts say 2000-3000 m out but the close in ones are not going to be touched and will be attacked in the face of the enemy. Sorry but the ignorance of engineer operations in this and wargames in general is enough to drive me mad. Obstacles are a real problem in CM, they have been artificially inflated in price so that their use will be limited in the interest in "gameplay". Again generally because few no how to conduct a "assault breach" and it might not be "fun". I definitely disagree to the last point, it can be a real challenge especially when done in the context of an operation. For example have a Breaching force and then an assault force. A much more realistic approach to a prepared defence. What QB defence battles really do is portray a Hasty Defence in which all has gone for sh@t. You didn't have resources to emplace obstacles and your frontage is twice the size your force and reasonably defend and you have no units left or right to tie into. BTS found this out and tailored forces to match as best they could, hence an attack with only 1.5 to 1 odds, when 3 to 1 is what is needed in RL. Even at 1.5, as has been noted it is damn hard. On the topic of the post I have a few suggestions: A. Don't QB, generate a scenario map, which both sides can see before playing. Have the attacker, attack down a reasonable frontage, no more than 1200m for a Bn sized force (say 3000 point game). B. "Obstacles are free". Yup you heard me, come to an greement as to engineer works in the game and give em to the defender. The attacker will require some more engineer resources (also free) but it allows the defender an obstacle plan. Oh ya this should include TRPs. C. "Pillboxes". Allow them, makes life a lot harder for a defender. D. Number of turns is a good idea but if you give the advantages above, you need to give an attacker a lot more time. Turn balance is critical. There are a few ideas. I think the QB defensive battles don't work. MEs and of course attacks (heh heh) but on the defence the balance is just too lop-sided.

For those sharks out there, I am sure you will find 3 spelling errors in my last post. I will state now that they were intentional and designed for emphasis only...(hey Fritzy do you think they bought it??...)

Panzerman, OK a couple of points and then I let it go cause I am getting the "I am kicking a puppy" itch in that dark black closet I call a conscience. First of all you seem like a decent enough lad and I am always heartened to see a young man taking an interest in war. May I suggest you join the Reserves, there are quite a few good units in Vancouver and they are taking 16 yr olds now...try 6 Field Engineer Squadron and make an ols Sapper happy. I would caution you to be a little more careful in the tone of your posts. This is an imperfect medium and sometimes things are lost and picked up in transmission. As I said a newbie would feel pretty small right now, like he really screwed up and may be pushed into a state of permanent "Lurkerdom". Second, my sweet Lord! Just what in the hell are my taxes paying for?!! I mean I am an old grunt with Science degree and no perfect speler but son just what in the hell was that last post? I will give you a small peice of advice, which you will ignore, but someday you may throw at your kids (and judging by the way things are going they will be grunting and whistling) someday. Get a dictionary and a thesaurus, people will take you much more seriously if you can express thoughts clearly. And here is another hot tip, women love a man who can write like a hot-damn, makes em wonder what else you can do really well Har har har! Lastly for Terence; You diplomatic sweet talking son-of-a-gun. You keep talkin like that and I am going to get a serious crush on you!!

Excuse me Commisar but if yu had only used the Search Injin you would have seen that yu are not telling the truth...dumby stinky head....

OK, I think I am starting to get this..Panzerman I think the last three letters of your handle are stretching reality. Judging by your listed occupation, I think I am conversing with a young person here. And being a youth of the modern age, Schools, society and life in general has left you without the gift of common courtesy. So for your benifit I offer the following: The_Capt: "Hey guys when is BTS going to offer stocks publicly so I can get rich and start a serious alcohol slide into an early but fun grave?" Panzerman answer #1: " Hey doood, I am wit you on dat one but I think they have said that that is a big no-go-show. I think I saw dat on a thread somewhere..why don;t you try the search engine." or if we really want to impress.. Pazerman answer #2: "Rightious!!! But the downer is that BTS has said NO WAY!! Here are the threads where they said it xxxxxxx". or even Panzerman thinks "Man what a dumb question..been asked a thousand times. Well not worth typing a response to...moving on..oh look the Bi-Monthly Lurker is out again..Down in a minute Mom...no one understands me....etc" Thus endeth the lesson

Hey Panzerman, My that was a heartfelt apology..I am shedding tears here. First of all 192 posts and playing since last Oct does not equal "new people". I am well aware of the search engine and as I pointed out there is little on this. If you are so "in the know" maybe you could post the link to your "inner crowd" information so that all us unwashed heathens can stop wasting your time..which I am sure you will spend in a contructive and wonderfully human justifying manner. In short don't even try and back peddle here, if I was a newbie I would be seriously intimidated and made to feel small...that is bullying where I come from, unfortunately for you, you beaked off to someone who has been here for a while and now is calling you up on it. Now I think I have my pound of flesh..although it was under done and gamey (pun intended) as hell. I guess the answer is no...to bad good way to raise money for the warchest when Microsoft makes 20 clones and ups the bar. Oh well if they change their mind I am in.

You know, nothing really ticks me off, like somebody who yips off like that. It intimidates newbies and just pisses off old-dogs like myself. A) Time for search engine to locate stock options topic...4 mins 16 secs # of hits = 3 C) Hits, two previous thread dating back to last year one not helpful the other 6 pages long and after a 45 sec search gave up and of course my thread. D) Time to type my thread question approx 30 secs. E) Time to read, well even though I could open up with a few insults here I won't so say 5 secs. F) Time to type snarky response (again avoiding easy insults and reference to typos) 30 secs. G) Grand total of my time wasted 30 secs H) Grand total of Panzermans precious, sands thru the hourglass wasted 35 sec, 30 of that his own doing. So in short, I apologize for wasting 35 secs of your life my friend because it is obviously worth more than 5 mins of mine...oh just a thought...PERHAPS BTS HAS HAD A CHANGE OF PLANS IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS!!! DO YOU MIND IF I ASK?!!! Or have I somehow missed you appointment as Supreme Watchdog of the CM forum?! Now Admin can answer my question and lock this thing up.

I want a piece of the pie before CM2 comes out!!!! When are you guys going public?!!

Damn near immposible in RL. I mean you could but the ground would be so banged up that it would probably slow down your own troops more than the minefield was suppose to. Plus the resources required, arty-wise would be much better applied to the acutal enemy locations. And then while they are trying to avoid the rain of steel the Engineers can come in and clear a lane.

Damn near immposible in RL. I mean you could but the ground would be so banged up that it would probably slow down your own troops more than the minefield was suppose to. Plus the resources required, arty-wise would be much better applied to the acutal enemy locations. And then while they are trying to avoid the rain of steel the Engineers can come in and clear a lane.

And how about the Close Combatesk list of active weapons!!!! It is a rip-off but a very good one. I am not sure what the thing with the vehicle with the bars around it is though. Dear God I hope those aren't "Energy Shields"!!!

Thank you Michael, The Grog elite have begun... tero, that practice is a lot older than the Red Army and as recent as Bosnia.

Take a good look at the new info bar/interface on the bottom..very interesting. Oh ya the tank thingy looks ok too.

If want to make Engineers more relevant to the game the answer is simple...lower the cost of the current obstacles or make them bigger. The mine fields are too small for what they cost when compared to other units in the game. This would allow more use of mines and AT obstacles which would force the attacker to use his engineers as engineers and not infantry. Another key addition would be to include armoured engineers such that existed during WWII. Sig your idea has merit but the "realist Grog elite" will lay eggs at the suggestion. "Ford tiles and corduroy road!!! Just how in the Hell did they do that in front of my position?!" will be the cry. But again as with most things in CM you can always mutually agree to use or not to use.

CM2 HAD BETTER HAVE EXPLODING BANGALORE CHICKENS OR I AM GOING TO HOLD MY BREATH UNTIL I TURN BLUE....DONT THINK I WONT!