Atlas

I think those of you who play CMBO as if it were just a mere game should go elsewhere with your "gamey" tactics. CMBO is REAL - more real than anything I have ever experienced. I look at the world around me and I know that it is just a fantasy compared to CMBO. I wait for the day when the CM Mother Ship comes to take me and all the CM faithful back to Planet BF. (BF?) Come one, come all! Until that day, you should boycott Yobobo's unholy web site. I curse TH with all my being. -Atlas p.s. I have felt this way ever since Swamp beat me in the TH Tournament.

Source:Encyclopedia of World War II Figures are for entire war. Pz I : @ 3,000 Pz II : @ 3,580 Pz III: 5,644 Pz IV : 9,000 Pz V : 4,814 (Panther) Pz VI : 1,350 (Tiger) KT : 484 Other Assault Guns: 12,000 --------------------------- Total: @27,872 Note: Pz IV = Pz IVC - Pz IVJ

Jason said: "If artillery starts landing around you, and its caliber isn't small (little brown holes not big black ones, small pops from 81mm, etc) then clear out. Don't waste time - use the "withdraw-run" command to eliminate the delay, and get well clear of the area. When the artillery stops falling, run back." Running around when indirect heavy ART starts to drop in force is one way to die quickly. I think what Jason means to say is that when the "first" spotting round of heavy ART drops, use the short time between then and when the rest of the rounds start to fall to get away.

Jason, Since you have so much time to write, I'll assume that you are a student. Anyway, you should relax when somebody makes an inane comment about the effects sniper fire had on the battle of Stalingrad. Just say something like: "No. The actions of one sniper did not decide the fate of Stalingrad. Read "(Good Book)" if you'd like more information." Hope this lets you get to sleep at night. -Atlas

Do reviews really matter? We are all going to the movie. The question is: today or tomorrow. Please post your own review as soon as you are able.

Swamp is a "gamey" vulture. I stayed true to history,purchasing the most "appropriate" units and implementing honorable tactics! If Swamp had any decency he would have met me in a fair fight; instead, he stabbed me in the back!

Abbott, LOL. I understand exactly what you are talking about. The types of games one plays on a ladder are not necessarily the most interesting. The ideal setting would be a newly created historical scenario. The ideal players: ? -Atlas

Actually, there is a solution. Not a great solution, but a solution. 1. Use the computer select for unit purchase. I know, I know, sometimes you get 10 half-tracks going against a 5 PzIVs. If you play enough - as you are likely to on a ladder such as TH - the odds will even out. 2. When you sign up at TH, use the "-X" after you nick name (e.g. Atlas-X) to let people know that you will only play computer selection. [There are a few of us already over at TH waiting for more "X-ers" to join.] 3. GET OTHER PEOPLE TO JOIN THE X LADDER. We can complain all we want, but until we organize...

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/000145.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015323.html

O.K. I am probably not the only one who has had his CM privileges revoked, but the experience got me thinking. I think the thing we CM addicts need to reduce our longing for the game is the ability to lurk in on other peoples TCP/IP games. Instead of watching "Platoon" or "The Battle of the Bulge" for the umpteenth time, I'd love to see two of the best ladder players battle it out (e.g. Swamp and VS at TH.) Heck, I'd watch Rotten and Yobobo play! Yes, yes, yes, the idea is not new, but my desire to see this implemented in CMII certainly is! Cheers.

My initial rant brewed from a ladder game I had a few hours before I wrote when somebody - after watching his entire force get smacked by a pair of Churchill VIIIs -cried "gamey." Many months ago, the tilt on this board was definitely "anti-gamey". Now it seems that the majority are of the opinion that all is fair as long as both parties agree, which IMHO is the correct position. The only argument remains: What if NOTHING is said? I think we should all agree that when no ground rules are specified, then anything goes (including using "historically improbable" mixes of troops.) The onus is on the person who is insulted when encountering troop mixes and tactics he believes to be "unfair" to stipulate the grounds rules. Cheers and peace to all those my initial post pissed off.

Very interesting. I would like more verification before I submit completely to this story. However, I always found it strange that none of Miller's band-mates were on that plane that crashed into the channel. (Miller's song, "Little Brown Jug," - the one he dedicated to his wife - will never sound the same to me.)

Way too gamey! You have no consideration for those precious virtual HT that will die needlessly for your evil pleasure. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/016638.html

jasoncawley@ameritech.net, Wow! Well said and researched. The better players have long understood the advantages of the VG Sub Machine Gun Squads (SMGS). When placed in capable hands and on any map, save one with near zero cover, the SMGS rule. They give the best bang for the buck for the vast majority of map parameters available. (Try anything in the dark, fog, heavy, moderate woods...etc.. Forgetaboutit.) Without question, they should be more expensive. I would not worry too much, however. It would be virtually impossible to perfectly quantify the military value of every unit in the game. Such values depend too much on the size and parameters of each map. I prefer that the cost of CM units depend entirely on the actual cost to manufacture (build, train and supply) each unit, but this would not doubt make certain units way to expensive to purchase in a QB (e.g. KT.)

0! Once had a dozen PBEM going at once. The first time I played a network game and realized that TCP/IP is the best way to play CM, I did not begin another PBEM.

Congrats! Well done.

SUBVET! Please come to the TH Chat room tonight (or the next) for our battle. I will be waiting. Contact me at nepcolake@home.com if you have any question. Thanks. -Atlas

Subvet! When do you want to rumble!? We must finish that tournament game. Let me know what times are good for you. Thanks. -Atlas

http://www.shadowsfolly.com/WWII/Russia/KV.htm

Michael Dorosh is half-right. I agree strongly that the Canadiens, like the rest of the Allies, relied heavily on artillery. However, please ignore Michael when he write's "get in close; go at it like hockey players." (I played hockey and I am sure it is nothing like war.) Most German infantry units (had) have higher fire power at all ranges, so the key is to mass what little firepower the Canadien's have at the German point of attack. (If you apply Michael's theory against German Sub Machinegun squads you will surely get crushed.) Good luck.

Yobobo rules!

Goodwood, You make a very good point, but I think you are placing too much emphasis on the flags. Do not think of them as operational or strategic objectives (e.g. Bastone, Utah Beach, etc.) Think of them as one of thousands of local, tactical objectives that confronted the German/Allied armies during the war. (e.g. "Major, take that line of low hills and hold it!") As such, value of the land was not usually as important as the value of the soldiers and material that was needed for the next local, tactical objective. Of course, scenario designers may stack a bunch of 300 point flags together on a hill to create the type of scenario you desire; but I have rarely seen such scenarios in a QB. Good luck.

Bump