BlackVoid

Random weather without fog. Streams and bridges. Ditches. Full replay. Better balance, so the attacker does not have the advantage. Bigger maps.

Very good post by Jason. And by most of the others too. Saying that the heavies are unhistoric is bull****. I like to play by special rules because its less about luck. And a piece of advise to everyone: no matter if the enemy has a heavy, don't give up. Actually I am more worried when i face a normal tank if my AT assets are gun. A good example is my game against armornut. He had a Churchill, a howitzer, and an Archer. I had two 75mm inf guns, a puppchen and a hetzer. My Hetzer got killed by the archer (very unlucky but this is war), my inf guns were knocked out. Luckily my puppchen killed the Churchill from 500 m(very lucky). His Archer and howitzer survived until the end, but I won because I had more infantry and I used them better too. The queen of the battlefield is infantry. Especially if equipped with SMGs. But heavies indeed can have an unbalancing effect, especially if the attacker has them. For more see my post: Fed up with Ubertank battles

Oh and one more thing for attackers: you can use guns too! Just buy sg to tow them if needed.

Germanboy I just recently was looking for a post regarding the point balance and decided to post here instead of opening a new topic. I play mostly TCP/IP ladder games and I noticed the fact that even after 1.1 I win almost every time on the attack, while on the defense I only win occasionally when the terrain favours me very much or when my opponent makes big mistakes. We talked about the issue with some friends on TH chat and they all agreed that the attacker has the advantage in most cases. It would be nice to get some stats from tourneys and ladder games as to the ratio of wins on defense and on the attack. Excellent long post by Jason and I will definetely try out some of his ideas. I find it very tough to use arty effectively on the defense. Most people use a recon force on the attack to scout out the line of enemy resistance then follow up quickly with an attack. Pounding the recon force with arty is a waste. The main attack usually proceeds too quickly or too dispersed to use arty against it. I usually use another approach with my attacks: I proceed with all my force dispersed, so no matter where the enemy arty hits I suffer only moderate casualties. I only concentrate my force just after I found the main line of the enemy resistance. At this point the enemy cannot call down his remaining arty without endangering his own troops. For those of you who have trouble attacking, just one advice: use just one flank and attack there with everything you have. Choose not the best approach, but the most unlikely approach. Just a few examples: 1. I recently played against the AI. I underestimated "him" greatly and lost 80% of my armor in the first few turns. Then he pounded my concentrated infantry with mortar fire. Still, I pushed and won the game. 2. In a recent game against a human opponent I lost 2 hetzers early on. I lost a whole platoon trying to kill the lone enemy Firefly, so I can bring up my support armored cars and one Wespe. I won this game too without problems. I think the attacker can afford to loose a lot and still win, and this is not right. In any case I would love to hear more opinions about the point balance. I think it still favours the attacker.

Well the 1.1 patch is here and nothing really has changed. The attacker still has a large advantage on most terrain. BTS?

What is not modelled in Cm now is the effect of hits on morale. Hearing constant, very loud impacts on your tank is very frightening for the crew. This was modelled in Steel Panthers, hopefully it will make into CM2. German 20mm guns are very good in CM. I often see them damage or immobilize tanks.

Very annoying when this kind of stuff happens. Really, gunnery in the game is sometimes suspect in the game. Weird stuff: 1. Tank hitting corner of house he is hiding behind instead of the enemy. 2. Gun missing a two-storey building from 200 meters. 3. Moving Sherman FF hitting Tiger on first shot from 400 meters while the stationary Tiger with gun pointing in the Sherman's direction missing. 4. PZ IV not engaging under hunt command when a Sexton is firing at him. Sexton kills with the first shot! This kind of stuff happens way too often to my liking.

Haven't seen any topics on the snow stuff although I searched for it. Thx for the info Juardis. These could be quite easy enhancements, it is really sad if they don't make it into CM. The Steel Panthers series had this feature. What's going on with SP4?

There are a few shortcomings in the game that could be easily fixed and would enhance it greatly. 1. Snowy terrain without snowfall. In scenarios it is possible, but in QBs it's not. In winter QBs, there should be a high chance of snowy terrain even if the snow is not falling. 2. Dynamic turn limit Especially in meeting engagements the turn limit often results in gamey tactics. As the game is now I prefer not to play MEs at all. The dynamic turn limit would also allow the defender to play counter-attack. In the game the attacker often makes his final assault in the last few turns. Counterattacking so late is too late. Suggestion: if both forces have still high morale the turn limit should be extended by an additional 5 turns. Please reply to this post if you support these ideas.

4 I like playing the underdog. Besides the allies really screwed up my country by giving it away to the communists.

Mantaray look what happened to Atomic. Their later games (from CC3) were not well received by the hardcore gaming community. They have gone out of business. I think BTS have gone the right way by publishing on the Internet only. Big publishers and their infinite stupidity cannot interfere with their design and development. The result is CM which is the best wargame ever. Big companies produce for the masses. Look at console games, they sell a lot more than PC games. Most people are dumb and stupid, they watch idiotic Hollywood movies, soap operas and play brainless **** on consoles. Mass market entertainment sucks and I do not care about it.

Why the west front again? I am sick of the west front, it is booooooriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing! 4 out of the CC games take place on the west front. CM takes place on the west front. All recent WW2 flight sims take place on the west front. Thankfully CM2 will deal with the east front. I would love to see more games set in Africa, the Pacific in the Vietnam or Korean war. Or anywhere else, but plz, let the western front rest in peace. Is it just me who is fed up with the west front? As for GI combat it looks crap. Hopefully it will play better, but I really do not think that it will challenge CM in any way.

Thanks for the link. Please guys, post more!

I am a game designer and just started working on the design of Vietnam War small-scale tactical wargame. In the game the player controls a platoon and attachments. I need ONLINE resources that deal with tactics and equipment on this scale. Real AARs would be best. If all goes well you may see the game in about 2 years. Book suggestions are not that useful but are also welcome. Info I need: typical composition of a US/VC/NVA platoon platoon equipment with ammo loadout tactics support arms typical engagement ranges casualty rates I apologize for posting off-topic but this forum seems to be full of military experts and I had trouble finding any site that deals with anything else than the global history of the war.

At the current state of the game bunkers are really useless. Especially in quick battles against a human opponent. In one game I had a 40mm Bofors inf front of a bunker. The AA gun took it out in less than a minute. Not only are bunkers too highly priced, but they are way too vulnerable as well.

Buy her a computer and a couple of games. I can tell you it works, because my wife is playing a lot too. I got her hooked with Diablo I in cooperative multiplayer. Best games for wives: Sims Monkey Island series Grim Fandango Road to Eldorado Everquest - this you can play with her Diablo I-II Twinsen's Odyssey Abe Rollercoaster Tycoon Best to start with something simple.

One more thing: it's one thing to take out the slow turreted Tiger or the turretless Stug with infantry. Taking out a fast turreted Churchill is an entirely different matter. I tried it once and I lost a whole platoon. And the Churchill was only protected by a lone machinegun!

Thanks for the grognard link. I'll try it out. I planned to include a detailed vehicle listing with the final version. I only posted these rules here for comments and opinions. I may be playing the wrong people, but I prefer ladder games as it adds a lot of tension. Good point on the 76 rules, although I think that the Panther is really way too expensive in smaller battles. And I don't think a Panther can survive a flank attack by Hellcats, so there is a great counter tactics in the hand of the allied player. I banned AA guns, because they are lethal against light armor. I see now that aircraft also should be banned in these types of games. I was also thinking about banning aircraft all together as it is a luck affair too. What do you think about heavy arty?

In CM in attack/defense situations the good defender orders his troops to hide. In this state they are impossible to spot from farther than about 50 meters. How realistic is it for a company of men to remain undetected with the enemy watching from a few hundred meters? I think it would be realistic that hiding troops sometimes are detected at longer ranges. A loud word, a lighting of a cigarette in real life would give away the position of the defender easily. What's your opinion? As a former tanker myself I have to agree on the buttoned spotting abilities of tanks. What you can see from a tank is close to nothing. Hidden infantry is almost impossible to detect. I think it is modelled quite well in the game.

I don't know much about it. It would be good to run some tests though. It would be nice to see how many games have balanced forces out of 20 for example.

Balanced quick battle rules Beta version These rules were inspired by Fionn’s rules, but they are NOT a copy of them. It is based on the experience I had in more than 50 games playing against human opponents. The goal of this ruleset is to provide a balanced game for both sides in quick battles fought with 1500 pts or less, while keeping the rules easy to use and remember. All rules and rulesets can be changed if both players agree to it. Why the need for special rules? First of all, in the smaller battles both players can only buy a very limited number of tanks. In these battles luck can be a decisive factor. Let’s say you are defending as allies and you bought one 17pdr AT gun to take out the expected german heavy. Unfortunatley the german player’s arty takes out your gun in th 4th turn, then his King Tiger appears. He is clever enough to keep it protected by infantry at all times and the KT is able to dominate the battle. This situation happens all too often in small battles. By limiting the armor purchase to lesser tanks the game becomes more balanced for BOTH sides. Let tactics decide the battle instead of luck. Let’s replace the KT in the previous example with a regular Panzer IV. With clever tactics the allied player can get rid of it by using smaller At guns, Shemans or even armored cars. Differences to Fionn’s rules I really like Fionn’s short 75 mm rules, they make for a good and balanced battle. The Panther-76 rule however is flawed, there are two points where I have to strongly disagree with them. First is the Churchill, which has no place in the ruleset as it can be taken out only by a very limited number of expensive german equipment. The second is the Tiger which is excluded on the basis of it’s gun. I’m puzzled, because the Tiger’s gun and front armor is actually weaker than the Panther’s. The greatest difference is that these rules are based on much simpler criteria (with the exception of the advances Sherman – Panzer IV rule). This makes the use of the rules easier, as the player can decide without difficulty whether a piece of equipment is allowed or not, he does not have to keep a list of the rules nearby. General rules These rules should be valid in all situations regardless of the ruleset choosen. 1. Map veto Each player has a choice to reject the generated map. If someone insists to play on a map that favours him, simply do not play that person. After 2 tries if the map is still not good, different terrain should be chosen. 2. If the players met on a forum or chat on a ladder website, the game is automatically a ladder game unless agreed otherwise by both. 3. Time limit is disabled for setup. The rulesets These allow balanced games, the rules are intentionally kept very simple. Sherman – Panzer IV rule This is very simple. Under these rules only Panzer IV and normal Sherman tanks are allowed as armor. Shermans that have more than 90 mm armor or bigger than 75 mm gun, are not allowed. Advanced Sherman – Panzer IV rule This rule gives more choice than the Sherman – Panzer IV rule, but it is also more complicated. Excluded stuff: Vehicles that have greater than 90 mm armor, except open top vehicles Vehicles that have greater than 30 degrees armor slope Vehicles that have greater than 75mm guns, except infantry support vehicles which only have a few hollow charge rounds (Sherman 105, Wespe, Hummel, etc…) Excluded heavies rule This rule excludes only a few heavies for more balanced play. All vehicles that have more than 140mm armor are excluded. Excluded armor: Sherman Jumbo Churchill VII-VIII King Tiger Jagdpanther Jagdtiger This rule is my personal favourite as it allows for a wide-range of selection and it is also very simple. Recon rule This game should be played as a mechanized infantry game. Excluded stuff: AA guns and vehicles 75mm or larger vehicle mounted guns Larger than 100mm arty Infantry rule This game should be played as a mechanized infantry game. It makes for a fun halftrack battle. Excluded: AA guns and vehicles All armored cars German 20mm halftrack, german assault HT Larger than 100mm arty Comments welcome. I am working on putting these rules on a website, especially if they are well received here.

Steve, Please give me a tip how to take out two infantry and daimler AC supported Churchills moving between the edge of the map and a forest or other impassable obstacle in a 1250 pts QB. Brit player is attacking of course and your AT guns have fallen to enemy arty. I would really appreciate it. I would also love to play you as a Brit and see your tactics in action. My ICQ: 100082586

I am really amazed at the level of support BTS is providing. I love CM and I will continue to play it even if you do not change anything. All I can say is Thank you! But I won't give up on my topic. A question to BTS: Is the survivability modelled in your equations? My post was not based on any scientific or historical data, it was based on the many quick battles I played. And I am not bad either, just check me out on Tournamenthouse: www.tournamenthouse.com In quick battles Hetzer's and Churchills are a very common sight while Tiger's, Stugs and M4 Shermans are vanishingly rare. This tells me that something is not right with the point allocation. Let's look at the Stug. It has a higher rate of fire than a Hetzer, it has a good ammo loadout and has more machineguns. Still, noone I know buys them in QBs. And I know the reason: the survivability of a Stug is VERY LOW. Any allied armor or AT gun can take it out. Now let's have a look at the Churchill. Yes it is slow and has a weak gun. The 75 mm version at least . The 95mm on the other hand is the best infantry support tank in the game. Someone mentioned that infantry can take it out. It cannot. It does not take a genius to figure out that the Churchill has to be protected by infantry. And even if it is not protected it can easily defend itself on open terrain with it's fast turret. Of all the things that can take out the Churchill, most are luxury items for the german player. 88mm AT guns are very expensive and very vulnerable to mortar fire. The list of mobile assets that can take it out is very short: Jagdpanther Jagdtiger Kingtiger Panther Of course with flank or short range attacks the list is longer, but a good player will not give you this opportunity. This leaves the german player with only two choices: Puppchen or AT mines. The latter are only good on restricted terrain though. The lack of mobility for the Churchill means that it is only good on the offense, where the attacking player can decide where he is going to attack. On defense, where they have to react to the enemies movements they are no good at all. Until the cost of the Churchill is increased I have no other choice as defending with axis but: 1. Play by special rules where the Churchill is not allowed (I even play Fionn's Panther 76 rule with no Churchills allowed) 2. Buy a ridiculous amount of Puppchens 3. Play on gentle slopes or flat terrain where I can place AT mines. 4. Play in rain or snow, so that the Churchill is likely to bog down. I know that many feel the same way: the CHURCHILL is an undestructible bargain for the allied player.

Try ro set your virtual memory to minimum: 512MB maximum: 512MB you can find a line in one of the ini files: [vcache] below it add the following lines, so it looks like this [vcache] minfilecahe=32768 maxfilecache=32768 I haven't read all the posts, so sorry if I did not write anything new. One more thing: use win98, 2000 is very slow

Panzer General. Got me hooked on wargames and WWII as well. My next favourite was Steel Panthers. Playing through the whole war was great!