hobbes

I also noticed this and posted on the topic under Cowardly Russians? a few days ago. The point should also be made on the numbers of tanks visible to each side. 100 T34's should not retreat from 1 Tiger!

I'm looking for a game - wendynchris@ntlworld.com you can pick the scenario or a QB Cheers, Chris

It seems if I button them up and do a fast move they do close the distance - but with hunt they all retreat.

This is my first post for a couple of years so I hope that highlights the seriousness of the situation. I did make a search on retreating armour but knowing the unusual way our friends across the Atlantic spell certain words I may have missed something. My question is why do 15 of my T34's retreat on contact with a lone Tiger 500 meters away? Surely if anyone would lose their lunch through a rear door it would be the Tiger crew? The game seems not to have any concept of the number of friendlies in the vicinity V the number of hostiles. Agreed a couple of T34 (76's) finding a Tiger 500 meters away may well retreat - but 15? I think they would realise that their best option would be to move with all haste to close the distance. Also you end up getting the silly yo-yo effect of the tanks having orders to move forward - retreating - moving forward again after fresh orders - retreating etc. The odd tactic of putting a smoke screen in front of the Tiger just to shield your tanks from the horrible sight starts to become a silly viable option. A little different to the reality of Russian tankers actually ramming German armour as reminisced by a Soviet tanker on a history channel program I watched a few hours ago. Any threads on this?

After 1 game defeated as allies 2 changes seem to scream out :- 1. A far stronger US is needed with points going to the Brits or Soviets as lend lease if required. 2. Amphibious assaults allowing units to move to the costal hex (but not to move inland) the same turn they arrive offshore. This to prevent opposing units blocking the invasion by moving units along the coast. There are plenty of other tweaks that could be made but these two would make for a far better game and more balanced game.

I find with 1.03 that I cannot load saved games without an immediate crash. I have the same problem with the non-patched version. 1.02 was OK but I can't find this patch anywhere now. Why today? For the first time I had 8 hours free to play this game - now it's Noon in the UK and I only have 6 left

The port of Gillingham next to London? This should be Dover I assume?

O wow! from discussions I remember on this from the distant past I got the feeling that the only advantage of flank or rear attacks was that you were just in a more advantagous position to put more fire down onto the target. This is good news. After playing for over a year I will revise my strategy! Thanks for the info

Ever thought about doing such a thing? Of course not - I'm English!

Hi, since my last post about Lurking about 6 months ago I have only skimmed this board. I'm still mad about CM - and play it constanly. Can anyone tell me what the highlights have been since I last looked? Any major discussions going on? The last bone of contention I remember was about SMG's. One reason I'm posting this now is that I feel flank attacks have too little significance. - But I'm assuming this has been discussed - (at least a moral drop I feel should be in order) Please update us occasional Lurkers - I know there are quite a few of us - waiting for CM2.

Hemel Hempstead, England

Just posted a similar thread on the matrix http://www.matrixgames.com/whatsnew.asp board - I have seen numourous threads on here about fav games over the years - but has anyone else ever felt p**d off about not finding a great game until years later when the graphics are just too naff to cope with? My bug bears are War in russia, Civ1 and worst of all X-com - I was a mad keen laser squad fan but somehow I never saw x-com until a year or so ago - and then - even though I had to buy it - I found it difficult to get into because of the dated graphics. I AM A GROGNARD - ALL I CARE ABOUT IS THE AI I AM A GROGNARD - ALL I CARE ABOUT IS THE AI I AM A GROGNARD - ALL I CARE ABOUT IS THE AI I AM A GROGNARD - ALL I CARE ABOUT IS THE AI

Me too - and I thought I had just been unlucky

bump The reason I'm bumping this is to make the point that you seem to get replies easily to fairly frivolous threads about lurkers - but next to nothing about stuff like this - are me and Olle the only ones that care about TRP's? [This message has been edited by hobbes (edited 02-11-2001).]

Bye the way Lurker - you have 122 posts!!!! [This message has been edited by hobbes (edited 02-10-2001).]

This might be a little scary - but the thing that the lurker wants most - is the scalp of a talkie - anyone with over 100+ posts fancy a QB? Send me a mail at wendynchris@btinternet.com PUT YOUR PANZERS WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS!

2 junior members outed! Any more first timers out there? Come on - make my day - make your first new post - you know that thing that has been bugging you for 6 months that nobody has mentioned yet - you thought sombody would have by now! The time you plotted your M10 to move under the bridge and it ended up on top of it? The 300mm rockets that couldn't have landed further away from the TRP if you had a speeding soccer star heading for a spice girls punachie? And don't tell me you are still waiting for the anti-tank morter thread to reserect before you make your first post - come on guys - this is your chance - post now!!!!

I remember reading a post a few months ago about lurkers - people like me who have been reading this board for months without ever taking part. Well if you do a search on hobbes you will see I have made an attempt - but have had little response to my first ever post so far. So I think I will continue to lurk - the surprising thing to me was the amount of lurkers that came out of the closet last time this was mentioned. I'm going back to my swamp now - I would just like to say - if I may - that there are probably a lot more CM players out there then you think. (And as we have been playing for 8 months - we kick) Any other lurkers want to come out of the bocage? [This message has been edited by hobbes (edited 02-10-2001).]

Does anyone think it's odd that you can't 'walk' artillery fire more then 20 metres or so from a target reference point without incuring a full time delay - when you can walk it 100 meteres or so from a regular target. Sometimes it seems you are better of without the ref point. Also it would be good to have some indication when walking a regular unsighted plot whether you are in the permissable 100m radius or not - as you do with the green line when the target is sighted. I did a search for this but was surprised I found nothing - did I miss a thread? [This message has been edited by hobbes (edited 01-30-2001).]

I set up a 1.05 QB with 8 regular PzIV's targeting houses with infantry visible at 800m - they took out the houses before turning their attention to the infantry. Same test in 1.1 6 tanks immediatly switched from the buildings to the infantry with 4 of those tanks retreating behind smoke by end of the turn when there was no threat. It seems the firing smoke problem in a previous thread is just a symtom of tanks regarding infantry as a high threat in 1.1 Anyone else notice this - I know my QB setup is a very small test

I have noticed this in 1.1 tanks seem to treat infantry as a high threat target firing smoke/discharging smoke and retreating - also ignoring my commands to target buildings etc if an infantry unit appears 500 metres away!