Barticus

Those crazy russkies liked their PPSHs so much they even tried mounting them in their bombers; ...an experimental installation, but still.

I was sorting through some vacation photos from two years ago and stumbled across this pic which may be pertinent to this forum's interests. So....at the risk of resurrecting an old flame war i give you.......The Bren Gun Tripod!

Played a quick mission on a heavily treed village map, defending as the Americans. Half way through the scenario there were a number of audio contacts in the forest. Since I was busy dealing with Stugs on the other side of town, there weren't really enough men at that end to deal with them. The artillery spotter called up a nearby 60mm mortar team and had them fire into the forest to pin the enemy contacts down. When the scenario ended I was checking the troops to see who did what and that mortar team was credited with 36 casualties. This is the highest number for a single unit I can remember ever seeing, including CM1x

I had no idea this even existed, this old Mechwarrior thanks you. Now I won't get ANY sleep tonight

In CMSF I select the unit and run the cursor over the terrain path I want them to use. The pointer will change to a 'prohibited' icon if passage is blocked. At least, that's the best I have been able to find. B

So....you're equating this thread with watching a train wreck, horrified enough to know you shouldn't watch but too fascinated to look away?

Pawter, I understand the point you are trying to make. In my opinion, most scenarios have too many troops squeezed into too small an area, but that is a matter of both personal preference as well as scenario design. The chief problem I have with your argument is this; even if we assume that Battlefront wrote your perfect game, who else would buy it? In the end Battlefront is a company that is already supplying an admittedly tiny niche market. I would go so far as to say that without the Internet as a whole Battlefront might not be able to exist at all. For my money's worth, the current incarnation of the Shock Force series, of which CMBN is the next iteration, satisfies my tactical squad level gaming itch quite nicely. To make it any more complex would have an adverse effect on my inclination to play it. Again, that is a matter of personal preference. B

Oh, well done sir, well done *Golf clap* B

Is it possible to 'stitch' existing maps together to create new ones? I have a half-baked plan to recreate some of my favourite Squad Leader scenarios and a feature like this would be handy rather than having to rebuild each and every map. I'm not really expecting it to, but you never know until you ask. B

May I ask you how Rise of Flight is? It's been on my radar for quite some time, but I am fearful of making the plunge.

Just finished watching 'The Wire'. Building a 1/48 CF-18, playing CMAK, playing Panzer General II.

I run CMSF under Windows 7 with very few problems. If you have trouble with older applications there is also an option to run them in 'XP compatibility mode', which clears up most issues that I have run into.

I for one will hope for a few tweaks to the interface commands. I like to use keyboard shortcuts when giving orders and I am forever giving the wrong command due to the fact that I am in the wrong 'command mode'.

The entire forum needs to go to Grouper therapy.

Well this is all very nice but can any grog out there tell me whether the Lobster's armour plate is face-hardened homogenous plate, cast, or riveted? Just what AOI does a 76mm Tungsten AP round require at a range of 787 metres to penetrate? Assuming, of course, that the lobster is caught unawares and before it adopts a shell-down defensive position?

1. Better AI waypoint calculation. I hate seeing my vehicles advancing in reverse because two drivers had an argument. 2. Addition of convoy command would be a big help 3. Expanded Operations options like random reinforcements and/or random arrival. 4. Fully articulated track systems would be nice instead of the 1 pixel deep stencils we have now.

Hmmm, a map editor you say....... If you were an old board game grog-type being like myself, you might be inspired to create, or re-create as it were, some of the games of old. Like Tactics II, or Blitzkrieg! Vewwwy Intewestingk.

It always seems to me that the AI is a better shot than I am, regardless of skill levels. On the other hand, it can't seem to formulate decent defensive plans, so it seems to work out in the end.

My 0.02 pfarthings, for what it's worth; CMBO when it first appeared was a dream come true for me, ASL in 3-D. As far as I know, most of us here had little to no input with BFC up until the first Beta was released (June '99?). Steve, Charles and the rest of the gang managed to do a pretty bang up job when just about everyone else was screwing the pooch on what a tactical level WWII game SHOULD be. They had vision (and guts) to do the game right before any one of us whined about what the engine should/should not have. CMBB is, as far as I am concerned, more of the same with as many improvements as could logically be included given engine and time constraints. Hows about we back off a bit and trust them to do it correctly, like they've done TWICE BEFORE!. I understand we all want the perfect wargame, but we have to realize that NO-ONE would be able to produce (profitably) such a beast. BFC(and a precious few others) have gotten it just about as right as it could have been. Have a little faith, brothers, have a little faith. Whatever theatre the engine re-write encompasses, I will be there. B

How about this; 1) We break the mods down into categories. i.e. Russian AFV's '41 to '45, German guns, Terrain, Special effects. We try to work it that each category is roughly the same size for hosting purposes. 2) People then volunteer to host a specific category 3) We keep one website as a central repository that lists what each category contains, where it's hosted, and by whom. A link to the hosted download site will also be provided. Unfortunately, I do not have access to a hosted site, nor do I have privileges at work to host such a site. I will, however, look into alternatives. How's that? Bart

Just stumbled across this item in a recent QB. It never got used, so I don't really know how good it is, but the calibre threw me off a bit. Is this a captured Japanese gun, or did the Russians develop it themselves? B

Yes, I have come to the conclusion that this is what I will have to do. I tried it with the ISU-152's in that scneario, and the two of them KO'd the Tigers pretty quickly. Unfortunately, the Panthers had line of sight too, and were quicker on the draw. The Russians lost out....again.

Yes, yes, valid points all.....but; I prefer to play custom scenarios, and most scenario authours don't usually give you enough light artillery to lay down a really effective smoke screen. The 88L71 and 128mm gun on the Jagdtiger are both fearsome weapons, but their superiority is only really apparent at longer ranges, say over 1.5 km, and their rate of fire is much less than the 75L70. The 75L48 is a very nice gun too, and there certainly are alot of them, but with most of those vehicles, I can usually kill what's mounting them without too much difficulty. Both the Panther and the Jgdpnz IV/70 shed 76mm and 85mm shells like a duck sheds water. Time to start playing with the SU series of SPG's and see what I can do.

Minor spoilers inside; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . So, after a week of playing CMBB, I have come to TRULY appreciate(fear) any German vehicle mounting this gun. OK, so the number of AFV's is limited to the Panther and the Jagdpanzer IV/70, but lord have mercy, that's two vehicles too many. In CMBO, I viewed the Panther as a 'nice' tank to have on your side, but the weak side armour reduced it's effectiveness overall, and I preferred the Tiger. If you combine this gun with the new German optics rules, steppe terrain, and large maps, the Panther truly comes into it's own. I have played the Magnuszew (sp?) Bridgehead operation and the Jagdmeister scenario from both sides several times now, and the deciding factor in both are the Panther and it's gun, or at least it seems that way to me. NOTHING in the Russian arsenal has the front armour to deal with it! I except the JS III and SU-100 which I have not yet had the chance to test. In Jagdmeister, I lost 4 JS-2's in 15 seconds to a combined 6 hits from the 75L70 FROM THE FRONT, WHILE HULL DOWN! In the Bridgehead operation, there is a nice hill on the German left that commands a very large portion of the battlefield. As the Germans, by the fourth or fifth scenario when you get a platoon of Jagdpanzer IV/70's as reinforcement, I still had 3 Panthers operational and that hill is where I sited all seven vehicles. When the AI setup the Russians across the board, it took all of about 30 seconds to kill eight T-34's, leaving one that got to cover in time. Incredible. Anyway, I will have to develop tactics specifically to deal with the Panther, probably using T-34's and their speed for flanking maneuvers. Thanks for letting me vent. B

On a side note, I believe that the infantry version of the flamethrower to be less effective than in CMBO. I was playing a scenario as the Germans assaulting a Russian occupied village. I had lost all of my armour, and there was one SU-100 left that I needed to kill. Using two infantry flamethrowers, I hit the SU-100 a total of three times altogether, 2 from the flanks and one from the rear. No effect. The SP Gun was quite happy to drive away from them and turn to use it's main gun.