Rake
-
Posts
346 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Rake
-
-
Well said. I guess by design the defenders do have an advantage laying in wait for my guys to expose themselves. Wherever I could,I will from now on hose down a ?? enemy in buildings and wooded area.
I don't even wait for the ???... If it looks suspicious, it gets hosed.
Another game breaker is the AI in some scenarios being too rigid. When defending, the perfectly rested units controlled by the computer tend to, unless provoked, stay in their assigned spot throughout the game. They don't really maneuver to counter attack or help their buddies who are in danger of being overrun by me. Knowing that they won't give me trouble and, I simply concentrate my force on my objective and bypass them altogether. I should try playing against a human.To my knowledge, AI units will not move without scripted AI orders unless they're routed by fire.
On the title subject - my sniper team's number two opening up with his side arm at inconvenient ranges, giving away the stealthier sniper's position. Related but less of a battle-breaker, the SMGs in teams and squads opening fire at ranges that are too far, and running themselves dry before they are really useful as a side effect.I don't want the micromanagement fiddle of separate covered arcs for different weapons within a team, that would be going too far. But some sort of SOP, maybe with a button command override, that tells the shorter ranged weapons to hold their fire - along the lines of target vs target light perhaps.
Personally I don't want any of my SMGs firing beyond about 80 meters unless specifically ordered to do so. That is far enough that it keeps grenade throwers away, and close enough that they will hit things in meaningful amounts before blowing through their ammo.
Spot on, with both points!
-
no one let any cat of any bag. they are outside the building. The wall section is one of those with an angle and the angle terminates up against the building. I'll see if I can't get the other shot posted from the angle of the shreck team that shows this more clearly.
Alright, dammit, I apologize
. But you've gotta admit, from the original angle, they sure looked like they were inside the building. And, given the ability of tanks to (theoretically) fire at ptruppen in adjacent buildings uo to eight stories above them, add me to those who would like to see this changed to allow bazookas, schrecks and fausts to fire from inside buildings... This is one of those few occasions where two wrongs do make a right...jmo. -
The Schreck is not in the building but before it at the wall. Unfortunately, I too had hoped they allowed AT weapons to be fired from indoors.
I saw the wall before I posted my question and it sure looks like the wall is up against the edge of the building. If the edge of the wall is up against the building, the schreck team has to be in the building. Unless, the wall isn't directly against the building... in which case I stand corrected.
These images are from CMBN, but it shows the relationship between the low wall and building... if those guys are behind the wall, they are most certainly inside the building.
Personally, I'm wondering if somebody didn't let the cat outta the bag :eek:
Get back, IMC!!!
-
Funny you should say that. I wish this were video rather than a screenshot. The team here smacked the Sherman. The Sherman crew bailed, the TC grabbing his Thompson. He emptied the entire clip at the Shreck gunner at darn near point blank range missing completely, whereupon the gunner calmly drew his pistol and dropped the TC. God I love this game.
What you also can't see real well is the assistant is tossing a hand grenade (or possibly an AT grenade, couldn't really tell).Yeah it might be better for the asst to have an MP 40, but in this instance the asst never even fired his weapon.
How come that schreck is firing from inside a building?
-
... I have never, in my entire experience playing CMx2, wanted to wait, stationary and undeployed, with a crew served weapon. I can hear others saying they do this, I can recognize it must be so for them, but I still see no tactical point in it, in practice. A hacky way of getting fire discipline for a low ammo mortar is as close as I've come to seeing such a reason that makes sense to me, and personally I either stay out of LOS entirely or just use an arc for that purpose.
Jason, I'll give you one reason why I intentionally do not deploy at the end of a movement order... Occasionally, I'll have an MG or mortar team trailing behind my recon. The recon is, besides looking for intel, searching for spots that have LOS to certain areas of the map. I know that I can plot a move order to an action spot and check LOS from there, but this just tells me what the line-of-sight is from ground level, not eye level. With the recon truppen sticking their heads up, I get a much better idea of what the support team might see once they're in place and deployed.
Meanwhile, the trailing support teams will be slightly behind, usually hiding, in woods, weeds, wherever... I don't want them wasting time to set up when I know they won't be staying there long. If I'm not sufficiently back in the woods, there's the chance the team could be spotted while moving around to deploy. Again, I can check LOS before I get there, but if the enemy has eyes on the area, they may see my guys with their heads up, while I'm only able to check LOS along the ground until I arrive at the spot. And, I certainly don't want them wasting time packing up if spotting rounds suddenly start dropping in the area.
I'd settle for just having a clearer indication of the orders state, sharply distinguished from its actual accomplishment. Even just changing the toggle display states to "deploy weapon", "pack up weapon", would be enough. I'd rather I didn't have to order it at all, but I'd settle for that cosmetic change.I absolutely agree that there should be greater differentiation between states in the UI. I've improved this somewhat by adjusting contrast and brightness on my monitor while playing the game. But it's a pain in the @$$ doing this all the time... especially using the same monitor that I use for making color corrections to my photography. It's even worse when running the game through my television... my tired, old eyes can't read what's on the screen from 10' away. I will not go through the contrast adjustment routine with the tv...
jm$0.02
-
What explosion and smoke mods are those?
All Aris'...
http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=2396
http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=2403
-
Market Garden
Eastern Front
Bulge
Gustav Line
Modern... which I may, or may not, purchase... depending on the scenario
-
Trying to get back home to Blacksburg, VA
-
That s pretty much the tactic that will lead to sucsess in most missions of the Troina campaign. Slowly recon until you find the german AT guns, hit em with arty, then kill defensless infantry with your tanks from stand-off range.
******SPOILER - Scenario Three******
Yes, it works well... unfortunately, IIRC, there are no tanks in the third scenario :eek:
This one looks like a slow slog up the hill and hoping the artillery can smash the defenders before I'm completely exposed... like most of the way up the hill
-
Hi all,
I can't get passed the first mission of the Troina campaign; my men always get hammered by direct and indirect HE fire and break very quickly. Has anyone got passed this mission yet with a half-decent score? I just can't seem to find a way to deal with the enemy spotters and guns. I've tried using mortars on the guns but I have no idea where the spotters are to target them. I've tried opening barrages on the hilltop positions but nothing seems to work.
Any suggestions much appreciated.
Just in case no one has noticed before...
******SPOILERS******
I got through the first with 16 KIA/11 wounded, 1 jeep knocked out. I kept most of my force back at the start, sending one platoon up to the VL on the left. They took most of the casualties as they were held up by the teams in the VL and got mortared pretty heavily before I could pull them back.
I sent another platoon, along with my sniper team and spotter, very slowly up the center... crawling, pause, hide, repeat... until they had LOS to the hilltop and the woods on the right. Soon enough, the AT gun in the woods revealed itself after the sniper team got involved in a shootout with the German sniper. The spotter got a sight and mortars quickly took care of that.
After "securing" (I use the term lightly due to the fire they were under) the VL on the crest to the left, I used a smoke barrage to cover my tanks moving over the crest and into the valley along the left side. Along with their accompanying infantry, they arrived at the top of the hill as the German counterattack was coming up out of the brush. The AC was quickly dispatched and the rest of the platoon was slaughtered with short range canister fire. The M5's continued under smoke cover to the dead ground about halfway across. The second AT gun revealed itself and knocked out my trailing jeep, through the dissipating smoke, as the jeep raced along the valley and before disappearing into the dead ground.
By that point, I was already on the gun's flank and was able to take it out from behind with a close range assault with tanks and infantry while the hilltop fortifications were under an extremely heavy barrage. From there on, it was just mopping up. By the time I got to the hilltop, artillery had killed or run off all the defenders. The AI soon surrendered after the tanks began pushing over with LOS into the woods.
I did okay, too, in the second. I just started the third around the time when CMBN 2.0 was released and have playing that ever since.
-
Wow Rake. That's what you get with a gtx 670? I was looking to move from my 275 to at least a 660, thinking the additional vram would give a good boost for cm. Guess I'll hold off on that... What is your cpu?
Reed
HARDWARE
OS: Win7
CPU: i7-2600K CPU @ 3.4GHz
Mainboard: ASUS Sabertooth P67
RAM: 8GB DDR3
Graphics card (overclocked?): GeForce GTX 670 - No
Graphics memory: 2GB
Hard Disk: Western Digital Caviar (7200 rpm)
Plinko:
I think it has more to do with CMBN's optimization. I haven't seen many people list framerates much higher when running at Best settings. Not saying that some don't, I just haven't seen much higher on the boards without dropping models or textures... and Hister's posts seem to indicate that maybe modeling is the key. I might explore a bit with dropping the model settings and see what that will do. Still, I experience very little noticeable lag, so I'm pretty happy with the way the game runs. Looking at your BM readings, you're doing fairly well with what you have.
-
I've run the test again using the scenario replay submitted by Steiner in the tech support thread that Hister linked above.
I played (slightly) with a few of the other card settings and tested the gamut of AA settings, from my card's max (32x CSAA) down to App-Controlled. Again, I ran these tests with all mods still in the game. I found the other night that mods only made for a small framerate hit on my system.
What I found today is that there is almost no difference with the settings for my GTX 670 (v314.07, latest driver that I'm aware of). Frames improved slightly by dropping from 32x to 16xQ CSAA. From there down to 2X, differences were within +/- one frame:
32x CSAA: 17 / 34 / 24.1
16xQ CSAA: 19 / 37 / 26.9
16x CSAA: 19 / 37 / 26.4
8x: 19 / 37 / 26.9
8x CSAA: 19 / 36 / 26.9
4x: 19 / 37 / 26.9
2x: 19 / 37 / 26.9
The biggest hit came when I used the App-Controlled setting, with rates falling to 18 / 28 / 23.0. I've only run the game a time or two with model and texture settings lower than Best, so I don't know what changing these settings would do to framerates.
-
... And the other was to try to move ALONG (parallel) to the hedge BUT fire the Blast perpendicular to to it alone the path. I tried to do the latter...i.e. I gave my engineers a move order along the hedge but when I tried to add a "blast" command, the colored blast line aligned itself to the same direction that my lads were walking along side the hedge....well that didn't look right to me so I cancelled those orders...
I nearly always give a blast command parallel with bocage. Not only does it prevent the blast team from moving through the bocage, but it almost always creates a tank-sized gap in the bocage. Occasionally, the gap will be smaller, and once or twice the pioneers didn't even set off the charge. Still, it's nice to have a vehicle-sized gap; you never know when they might come in handy.
-
Awesome.
One can really see why this was key terrain in the battle.
Yeah... you can look at a topo map all day, see the ridge lines and draws, but until you see it in 3D, you (or I) don't realize how dominating the view is from the top of the hill.
-
The horizons look particularly good with these map views -- whose horizon mod are you using?
Only Aris can do that kind of work
-
A few new shots:
St.-Barthélemy still needs some fleshing out, but the buildings are now more than just placeholders
Some long lines-of-sight from the top of the hill... some will get cut back as trees and bocage fill in, but there will still be some long, keyholed positions
Much of this area was farmland with a few isolated farm settlements. Most of the bocage on this map is of the low variety with some higher hedgerows placed where Google Earth (and the '47 aerial photos) seem to indicate. There will be plenty of gaps, large and small...
D33 looking back up the hill toward St.-Barthélemy... this section of the road sits in a 1-2 meter cut section; the topo of the roadway is not finished...
Same spot from higher up...
-
I had played the first few missions of the "Road" campaign in CMBN v.1.00 when most U.S. troops were "regulars". While testing 2.01, I played through the first 3 missions of the updated campaign where most U.S. troops were "Green". In 2.01, I won all 3 missions with light casualties.
It's not Road to Montebourg that concerns me so much... it's C&F
. I didn't play it the first time around after reading the horror stories some forumites were reporting.I just loaded up "Over Hill, Down Dale" for the first time this evening and started looking around. I know there's got to be an MG42 lined up down the road the on the U.S. right... I just hope there's not a Pak 40 backing him up! :eek: Guess I'll lead with my worst M5 and find out...
-
Third, with regards to Contacts and Confirmed units... I understand the difference between the two but did not expect that the Contacts would remain for as long as it did. In fact, on the final push to the crossroad, my troops could be 20m from a "contact" with clear line-of-sight to it and the "contact" would not disappear. It'll go only after half my squad runs past it, so at the end of the battle, the map was littered with contacts which made it confusing. Same issue for the guys who were on the other side of the road fighting along the hedgerows... they'd engage an enemy "contact," find out it's a Confirmed enemy, kill it...... but then I don't know if it's safe to advance my guys as the Confirmed/Contact icon is still there! Even when I bring a tank and an armored vehicle up the road so they can see BEHIND the hedgerow where the enemy was, the icon still doesn't disappear until some of my guys are actually right next to it.
Contacts have to filter down through C2. A lot of the contacts remain because units on one area of the map still don't know that a contact has been eliminated or moved out. Click on various units around the map and watch how the locations of the contacts move around depending upon the last known spotting by your highlighted unit.
Here's an example:
You won't know for sure if something is there, or not, until you get eyes on the area... It was very confusing getting started, but keep playing and it will start to make more sense.
-
It's usually necessary to re-do your hotkeys file after every patch.
Mine are identical for CMBN and CMFI. I just copied my CMFI hotkeys.txt into CMBN after patching, and everything is back to how I had it.
Yeah, I'd forgotten that I needed to do that when I patched over. I had been using the generic alternate file for some time, and just renamed the new alternate file... that's why I noticed all the differences.
-
I attached only the pop up, because the actual terrain seems unchanged.
I suppose that Battlefront, by mistake, included the Bulge pop up into the 2.01 patch...
Is it "Bulge", or could there be some patchy snow left over in Belorussia in June '44? I know I've still seen snow in June when I was in Idaho...
-
Sorry if this has been caught and mentioned before, but I noticed that the Hunt and Hide commands are both sharing the "H" key in the alternate hotkey file. It seems that the Hunt command is the default.
I've edited my file back to the the "U" key for Hide; anyone used to using this key may want to do the same before finding out a unit that you thought you gave a hide command isn't actually hiding. :eek:
I also noticed that the Vehicle Covered Arc now has "V" as the hotkey, while "C" is the new key for Covered Arc... I like this change... Wish I'd thought of making this sooner
This leaves the Wide Angle view without a hotkey... just go in and add a key that makes sense; I changed mine to "@" because it doesn't make any sense Edit: I just noticed that it seems that the Zoom In (previously Z) and Zoom Out (previously X) have switched places, too... I think!!!
I'm getting old and my memory's not what is used to be. Some of the dumb sh!+ I did in my younger days probably catching up with me -
By any chance, was this a "HQ" element with an "extra" (leader) team member? IME, MG teams are more likely to wrongly position the MG if there are "too many" bodies in the way. You might find that a face in a different direction will get the MG up to the berm: if it's setting up "back right" try Facing "oblique left" a bit to see if that helps. Because I'm not sure the patch is going to address the problem you're describing, only the "team members running away" one, which is a bug, rather than an unintended consequence of something WAD as I think your problem is.
As i recall, the mg was setting up to the back right, but my original order was to face obliquely to the left because that was the location of the main area of targets that I wanted to suppress. I don't recall whether there was an extra man in the team, or not. I'll look again next time I open the game.
Thanks for the suggestion
-
One "small" change I'd like is to either remove the "HE" (I believe that's what it says) from the demo charges box. As it is now, the number of charges are covered up leaving a hieroglyphic that is difficult to determine the number of charges remaining.
I said "small" above, because I realize that some things that seem like they wouldn't take much to change, in my non-programming viewpoint, might not be so easily accomplished. Still, if there were a way to move the number of charges to another area of the box, it sure would make it easier to read.
-
Are you issuing the face command at your last waypoint? For example, if I want my machingegun to set up near the opening in hedge, I issue movement order to that hedge opening. Then I select that last waypoint, issue the facing command and the click the deploy button. Next turn they will move to that waypoint, spin a bit and face the selected facing direction and begin to deploy the weapon. I never have problem with either the machinegun crew or mortars using this method.
I've had the same issues as Vinnart. More often than not, the mg will position itself correctly along the hedgerow if the deploy procedure you recommend is followed. But, I've had one team absolutely refuse to deploy the mg adjacent to the hedge... I moved it to consecutive AS's along the hedgerow, each time following the waypoint/face/deploy procedure and the mg itself always backed away from the hedge far enough so that it did not have LOS any farther than the other side of the hedge. Enough team members were close enough that I could get a gray LOS to a distant target, but never a blue line beyond that first action square.
Now, if it's of any consequence, this was in a campaign started under 1.10 (iirc, maybe earlier), so that may have had something to do with it. I've not noticed the issue in games started under 2.0 when I've followed the procedure.
Fortunately, it sounds as if the patch release is imminent
. But you've gotta admit, from the original angle, they sure looked like they were inside the building. And, given the ability of tanks to (theoretically) fire at ptruppen in adjacent buildings uo to eight stories above them, add me to those who would like to see this changed to allow bazookas, schrecks and fausts to fire from inside buildings... This is one of those few occasions where two wrongs do make a right...jmo.
I'm getting old and my memory's not what is used to be. Some of the dumb sh!+ I did in my younger days probably catching up with me
Burning AFVs
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Truth! This one ran me out of my home for four days back in '07. As the video shows, there were times when the smoke blacked out the sun.