Hurricane
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Hurricane
-
-
I guess many are designed with the AI supposed to be defending. As well all know, the AI isn't too smart, so the scenario designer might beef it up to make single-player a challenge. Of course, this means human-human play suffers.
-
Am I missing something, or is the only reason to camp your guys on the lower floor that they can withdraw faster?
I.e. if I want my squad to hide until enemy infantry assaults my house, should I place them on the upper floor? Until now I always placed them on the lower floor.
-
Very good observation, Pud! And a good explanation by Dschugaschwili. I wouldn't call this a bug, but I can see two big problems with this "feature".
First the fact that a reversing tank only can fire at targets at 0 degrees angle to its hull front. I get the feeling that the reverse command is more like a withdraw command for tanks than a "move backwards". I think a "reverse hunt" would make much sense. The shoot and scoot command would of course use the reverse hunt command after scooting.
My main gripe, however, is that this is an undocumented "feature". If no firing while rotating while reversing is the desired behaviour, I think the manual should say so clearly. I only read this forum sporadically, and I don't think you should be forced to do so just to get to understand how the main commands in the game work. If a tank will stop to fire while doing a "rotate" command I expect it to do the same while rotating as a part of any other command. UNLESS it is documented otherwise, which it is not. Pud could have solved his situation by using a 'fast move'-'rotate'-'reverse' combo to kill the marder, but by using the more simple 'fast move'-'reverse' he killed himself. Since the manual at several places encourages you not to micromanage your moves this is a problem.
[ February 28, 2003, 09:08 AM: Message edited by: Hurricane ]
-
I have managed to complete one game of FITE+SE. It took about one year (played against my brother) and ended with me as the axis winning!
I still love those games, but nowadays I neither have the time nor space to play them. The map is HUGE and fills an entire room.
Does anybody know what GR/D is up to now? Do they even exist anymore?
-
View 5 is also a normal view level in CMBB. I think it also could be mentioned that view 6 is good for micromanaging units inside buildings.4. Command View: If you are ever confused by what the camera is doing, hit 4, center the cursor, and rotate until you see a friendly unit or particular landmark. This view lets you examine the entire battlefield in 3D, and is thus the most important one in the game.Views 5-8 are top down maps of various zoom levels. Not particularly useful compared to View 4, but they do have their moments.
-
I think the real problem will be with the patches. How is some American guy supposed to understand to download the european patches from a german website instead of the US patch? Expect lots of "patch doesn't work goddammit!!!" threads.
-
Here is a link to a ranking by the respected Finnish magazine Tekniikan maailma: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=004533.
-
The very widely read Finnish magazine Tekniikan maailma (http://www.tekniikanmaailma.fi), which mostly reviews cars and home electronics has in its latest issue ranked the best computer games for 2002. Of the 3 categories Console games, PC games and Children's games, CMBB gets the first place in the PC category, and is the only game with 5 stars out of five!
As this is a ranking article more than a full-scale review, the text is short and consise. This is my very quick translation:
"CMBB is a turn-based, WW2 east-font era strategy wargame, which also can be played by email. You can for example send your next turn's orders from your desk to a collegue at the other side of the office. This way your working days go swiftly by while thinking of tactics, and your boss won't have a clue. "Gosh, it will take me the whole day to reply to all these emails."
However, PBEM is nothing particularly new or revolutionary. CM2 instead draws interest through its realism and error-free depiction of tactical combat. The field units work like their real counterparts, and the shouting of the individual soldiers is like something taken straight from "Tuntematon sotilas". (the by far most famous Finnish war movie, my comment) Even the computer is a worthy opponent, and in order to beat it you need to use the terrain and resources at your disposal in their best ways.
Good:
- Profound strategy
- Needs dedication
- Longlivedness
Bad
- Roughish graphics
No 2 was Battlefield 1945 and No 3 Mafia, No 4 Elder Scrolls 3:Morrowind and No 5 Unreal Tournament 2003.
-
Having played against some real newbies (and what I first stubled upon), here are some examples of what you could cover:
* Which movement command to use at which moment.
* How to embark/disemark vehicles effectively (where to put waypoints).
* How to use HQ:s as spotters for mortars (how you know if they will fire or not, and how to avoid getting command from the wrong HQ).
* How to use artillery (like not to try to take out IS-2:s with mortars)
* When to open fire (especially for defenders, and how to make an ambush)
* Understand the difference between a PzII, a Tiger and a ISU-122.
-
Well, I think the lesson is "don't assault up slopes". That's all I have to say about this matter.
-
Same as Boo_Radley, modem at home, so I download all stuff at work and burn on CD. A 56K modem works perfectly ok for TCP/IP and PBEM:s. I am still waiting for the energy company to come and install broadband through the electricity net so I finally can get rid of my line phone.
-
I would also really like to know a bit more about the guide. Will it be of any use to other people than novice players? I have no trouble beating the AI in almost any scenario, but I am well aware that there are lots of better human players out there. But will this strategy guide give me any tips on how to improve my gameplay from "good" to "excellent"? By the impression of the TOC and introduction, it won't. Quotes like
We cover the basics, even way more than the basics, but there are things that the grognards know that you’ll only learn the hard way… by playing them. Let me put it this way, they have taught me everything I know, but not everything that they know.it’s not the last word in Combat Mission tactics, but it’s a darn good start.
So this guy is a total outsider, with no "inside" information whatsoever.Mark was given full access to beta testers, scenario designers and even those of us that created the game in order to provide you, the reader (and gameplayer), with new insight and knowledge about the award winning Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin.I am especially disappointed that there seems to be next to no information about artillery and air tactics.
So, all in all, I think I will try to live without this book. At least until you guys here at the forum who bought it can say if it's worth the money or not.
-
And I thought 64Kb should be enough for everyone.
-
At least according to Antony Beevor, most of the Russians in penal units were perfectly ordinary soldiers who had just been unlucky. If a Russian soldier retreated, escaped/was freed from captivity, talked negatively about bolshevism/positively about capitalism, picked up nazi propaganda leaflets etc. ect., he could expect to be put into a penal battalion. Real criminals were just a small minority.
-
I have read almost all the posts in this thread, and it has included lots of interesting things (and lots of not-so-interesting things, too).
After having played the "Breaking the Egg" scenario and having my ass handed to me I learned the hard way how to use the slow ROF ISU-122:s and 155:s. With that in mind, the behaviour of these heavy tanks is certainly justified and everything works more or less like it should.
Now, the point of my post is just to highlight the fact that the seemingly strange behaviour of the Soviet heavy tanks is not very well explained anywhere, either in the game or the manual. I certainly can understand that the casual gamer will be more than confused that the über-tanks he bought for expensive points just run away instead of fighting. While BFC, justifiedly, says the reversing tanks ars a game-selling feature, they only look at part of the truth, and that is that the feature will be considered a bug by many if not explained in a easy-to-understand fashion.
Now, my suggestion is that info entries should be added to the detailes info screens of each unit, for example to the "kill" page which is empty most of the time and only part-full at best. Is this possible within the existing engine?
The info wouldn't have to be very long, just a short description of the unit's role, a few lines long. This way people wouldn't bang their heads against the wall about their über-tank-destroyer which in reality is something entirely different.
-
I might remember wrong, but wasn't the risk of bogging smaller in scattered trees than clear in CMBO? I think this was explained by the fact that roots and stuff would prevent the ground from getting muddy. These results, OTOH, clearly seems to show that you in CMBB should stay out of scattered trees.
-
IMHO, air power is by far the weakeast element simulated in CMBB (and CMBO). It is extremely abstracted and you have little or no control over it. I think it would be more than fair to even get basic information like "enemy aircraft spotted" "friendly aircraft spotted" and also information about successful AAA fire. But now you have to carefully listen to sounds and look for shadows, which is totally different from the rest of the game. This gets especially confusing in a battle where both sides have aircraft. I get this feeling that my tanks or the enemy's tanks are getting killed entirely randomly, and that is not very fun.
[ December 02, 2002, 07:25 AM: Message edited by: Hurricane ]
-
My (limited) experience is that rockets never hit. So try to buy planes without rockets.
-
Area target is only so good.
First, it is not as effective as firing directly on the enemy unit.
Second, the unit will keep firing the entire round, when often just a shell or two would have been enough. This is especially important for tanks with a small amount of ammo.
Third, if the gun reappears, the tank might not cancel the area target and fire at the actual enemy.
I would suggest as solution that you should be able to target the generic markers (the red stars or german crosses). If the marker is spotted and the enemy again is seen the tank would automatically retarget on the actual enemy. Or, if the area is spotted and the enemy has disappeared/died, the tank would cancel its fire order.
-
I think I read on another thread that you don't need to adjust the fire at all, ie. the barrage should self-adjust.
-
Surprise, surprise, but the European version does indeed install into the right directory. CDV's marketing name for CMBB is Combat Mission 2, and that is the default directory when installing the game, too. So everything works just like it should.
-
Thanks guys! Looks like a great patch.
One question, though. Has the issue about units with covered arcs that automatically will unhide if there are dead units or units outside of LOS inside the arc been fixed? This is, IMHO, a serious problem because defenders otherwise so easily run out of ammo.
-
Nazis on the moon? :eek: You've got to be joking.Originally posted by Suicides-by-Steve:The last time you got angry with me was because I had the "audacity" to ask for a more user-friendly editor- the ability to add different units or landscapes easily. Such as a Lunar surface or a Tropical jungle. What's the big deal with that? You could have the next big thing here... I'm not being an ass because I have an idea that I think MANY could appreciate.
-
This might shed some light on the issue (from http://www.wwiitech.net/main/germany/vehicles/pzkpfw6/)
That would make fuel consumption about 4 litres/km.For power, the Tiger was originally fitted with a Maybach HL 210 P45 V-12 petrol engine. But, as with the later Panther, this was soon found to be underpowered, and was replaced with the HL 230 P45, which produced 700hp, in May 1943. However, this was still the same as the HL 230 P30 fitted to the Panther, and the Tiger was around 12 tonnes heavier. This meant that the Tiger had a power to weight ration of 12.3hp/tonne, compared to the Panthers Ausf Ds 15.6hp/tonne. The later King Tiger, weighing almost 70 tonnes, was fitted with the same HL230 P30, lowering the power to weight ratio even further. Not only was the engine put under great strain through normal daily use, as the engine was intended to deal with the original weight of 45 tonnes, but other things affected the Tigers reliability. Among these was the fact that routine maintenance was often missed out due to the high demand for Tigers in the front line. Also, Tigers being used to recover other Tigers put a great strain on the already over worked engines. And this practice was common even though it was forbidden from the highest levels. This meant that engines had to be replaced often, which fortunately for the mechanics was a relatively easy task. All the extra weight and strain put on the engine also meant an increase in fuel consumption. And this at a time when Germany would soon need all the fuel it could get. However, even though the Tiger had an engine designed for a lighter tank, it was not as bad as some other, lighter, tanks. For example, the Tiger I’s power to weight ratio was only slightly lower than the American Sherman. Also, the Tiger, at around 38km/h when the engine was limited to 2,500rpm, was faster than the much lighter Sherman. The Tiger carried approx 540 litres of fuel, carried in four tanks, two either side of the engine, and this gave it a max range of 140kms.
Edit: found this page about the JagdPanther: http://www.wwiitech.net/main/germany/vehicles/pzkpfw5/index.html#Jagdpanther
According to the table, the tank was 700 litres, which gave a road range of 210 km. That's only 3.3 liters/1 km.
[ November 04, 2002, 06:07 AM: Message edited by: Hurricane ]
Objects still mising in CM
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
Ok, another thing:
What about a battle briefing including a small map of the area, with
*victory flags
*your setup area
*landmarks
*exit zones
*expected enemy setup area
*expected point where reinforcements will appear
The two last points are IMHO the important here (the others you can just as well look at during your setup phase).
First, in everything except meeting engagements, you usually have a rough idea of the enemy's expected position. Pre-battle scouting is supposedly taken care of, so why is there no mention of the enemy's position? This would also add a whole new aspect to the game, i.e. "how much should I trust this intelligence?". It is of course up to the scenario designer to decide how much he wants to reveal to either side, and how correct that information is.
Second, reinforcements (especially when defending) sometimes appear at the most unexpected places. I was just the other day playing a scenario, where I had left the main flag lighty defended, because it was furhest behind on one flank. Imagine my surprise when all reinforcements then appear on the other flank, just a short distance away from the enemy.
Again, this is also something a good scenario designer would have included in the briefing, but my experience is that writing briefings is not the scenario designer's favourite task, so why not make everyone's life easier by adding some nice maps to them?