gredeker
-
Posts
437 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by gredeker
-
-
This doesn't have to do with armor protection, but I seem to recall reading/hearing somewhere that T-34's were issued with a large hammer as standard equipment to "encourage" the gearshift lever when needed. Can anyone confirm or deny this story? And does anyone else know of any other obvious manifestations of the shortcuts taken in the manufacturing process to speed production?
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Wild Bill Wilder:
And even a good player will make a blunder...one that could cost him the battle.<hr></blockquote>
...like putting his lone long-range AT asset in an incredibly poor position where it has no LOS to any enemy units for the first ten turns, then gets taken out before firing a single shot...or doing something so incredibly stupid (I hesitate to mention it) that led to the destruction of his most expensive armored unit on the map during turn 1, before it could fire a shot...
And yes, I'm talking about myself, and no, I can't give any more details because not all players have completed the scenarios in which these events occurred.
Edited because my grammar wasn't correct the first time around.
[ 01-25-2002: Message edited by: redeker ]</p>
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JPS:
Greg, check your inbox.<hr></blockquote>
I will as soon as I get home, which won't be for another 5 hours.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JPS:
Ranville *spoiler*
.
.
.
.
.
.
Both guns way behind the town. One for each flank. Additional "bonus" was that the right flank gun had LOS to the area the later enemy reinforcements happened to come from - my guys got one heavy armored car and two StuHs before they shot a single shot
<hr></blockquote>Yee-ouch! That would do it.
Could you send me your AAR and/or the ending game file so I can get a better idea of what happened?
I'd be happy to send you the same in exchange.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by CombinedArms:
My views on balance: (mild spoilers??)
*
*'
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Ranville: This looks pretty even. The Axis won 7-5, as I count it. Playing as Allies, I thought it was heavily balanced in favor of the Axis. The record suggests it was only slightly so. I didn't manage to kill the flamethrowing HT before I lost my Stuarts. That thingy went on to murder me. The Allies get just a few AT assets to support their superior infantry. If they use these effectively, they can win. But if they lose them too fast, thing can turn very grim very quickly. I think this one is tricky to play from either side, and a little event like the loss of a Stuart can have a big impact.
<hr></blockquote>
I'd definitely agree that how the Brit player handles his AT assets makes a huge impact on the game. My FT HT roasted many a building and the three StuH42's demo'd many a building. By the end there was no Brit AT capability left, and all the German armor still had ammo, so it was a case of driving the Tommies into an ever-shrinking pocket with the armor. Due to the rather open nature of the ground on the Brit side of the village, if the German player can manage to get some armor behind the town then it's all over.
If some PIAT or 6-pounder crews had managed to put some more hurt on the German armor, I think things would have gone much differently.
Question - where did Brit players put the two guns? Did you bring them into town, or place them in woods/trees outside the town?
-
Thanks for all the hard work, TreeBurst.
-
Don't forget the Puma.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Schrullenhaft:
Strangely the opposite has been true with manuals from other companies in the past. They concentrated on the historical setting for the game, but didn't provide enough details on the game mechanics.
A historical overview would be nice, but since the conflict is so huge it would generally be a waste of paper and time for BTS to try to summarize the conflict in the manual. And as already pointed out the number of units included would require a much larger manual to include summaries on - at an increased cost (and BTS already has enough people complaining about how much CMBO had cost without a 'pretty box'). Manual printing is one of the slowest and costliest parts of creating and distributing software. Perhaps a PDF for a unit overview, though I wonder if that would be worth BTS's time.<hr></blockquote>
I can just imagine the arguments that the grogs would have if BTS tried to even put a cursory summary of the eastern front in the manual.
Personally, I would like more detail about the game engine published in the manual. I feel like there's pretty good data out there regarding vehicles (although I wouldn't mind additional information on percentages of getting weak point or shot trap penetrations) but I feel like the basic infantry model is still largely a mystery. Obviously, more firepower is good, more cover for the target is bad, but there's plenty of room for more information to be provided. Maybe it's my ASL background, but I'd like to know more formulas and whatnot to aid decision making (exactly when to open up with that MG, odds of being spotted when performing various tasks, etc.)
-
Madmatt just posted this on another thread regarding non-vehicular crews' self-defense abilities.
---
Crews now have a (minimal) small-arms short-range self-defense capability!
The TACAI will take care of this for you, so you can't give them your own small arms targeting orders and as we say above it's a MINIMAL self defense ability but it's better than nothing.
This capability has been extended to ALL crewed units and teams. That's PaK crews, Mortar crews, FO's, Vlad and his Holy Avenger Flamethrower (although he would probably be more prone to zap the boogies with his FT), Dieter and his trusty 'Shreck, the works!
Bailed vehicles crews still have their pistols, as before, of course.
This self defense range is pretty limited (maximum of 100 meters or so) and the firepower rating is very small, probably less than the FP rating of single rifle per man and their ROF is much much slower than a dedicated rifleman.
It's a purely self defense mechanism, don't expect miracles, but it does give them a little bite.
Madmatt
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JPS:
I still have three turns of Ranville left with Pixelmaster. He took command at rather chaotic minute, and things did get worse
JPS<hr></blockquote>
Things can get pretty interesting in that scenario depending upon the presence/absence of certain units.
Soon we'll actually be able to talk about these things without beating around the bush!
-
Down on page 3???
Somebody who's still playing post something. Either that, or maybe Treeburst could determine if any scenarios are completed by all and could be released. Or will there be a WBW ROW scenario pack?
-
Don't forget that Wespes and Hummels can also fall to the .50 cal. That's the main reason that I take either SPW 234/3's or StuH42's for anti-infantry work - they can stand up to U.S. .50 caliber fire.
If you're playing Germans vs. Brits or Poles, then your worries change from .50 cal MGs to PIATS.
-
It's often better when starting out to play the smaller ones first. IIRC, the "size" column (Tiny, Small, Medium, Large etc.) actually refers to the number of units in play, not necessarily the size of the map. Stick with Tiny and Small first. Avoid Huge until you feel like you have a better handle on what's going on.
Some people also have interest in a particular area conflict (Normandy, West Wall, French Breakout) and play those scenarios first - others are interested in trying different climatic conditions (fog, night, snow) to see how that changes things.
-
Thanks - I thought I had remembered something along those lines.
I love this game!
-
Treeburst, that sounds awfully tempting! Still, I might not be able to play in the next one depending on timing. I'll let you know as more info becomes available. The reason why I might not be able to play can be located here:
http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=023129
Holien, check your mailbox.
-
This is slightly off topic, but it's funny.
My wife and I are in the process of having a new house built, and we had whittled the carpet shade down to two finalists. Both were beigey-neutral, but one had a hint more brownish-red highlights and the other had more gray/silver highlights.
Me: "What's the name of the brownish-reddish one?"
Spouse: "This one is Mincemeat."
Me: "What's the other one called?"
Spouse: "Let's see... it's called Puma."
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.
[ 01-18-2002: Message edited by: redeker ]</p>
-
Way kewl.
But this would really make my day -
Are you going to have the command delay from platoon leader tanks to early-war radioless AFV increase when buttoned up and decrease when unbuttoned, to reflect the relative ease or lack thereof in using hand signals (as I understand was done) to indicate directions to the platoon?
-
While I'm a big fan of the HE abilities of the U.S. 75 and 105, I have a special place in my heart for the little 37mm on the Greyhound. Not only can you buy one relatively cheaply with non-armor points and get a vehicle which is MG-proof (and therefore excellent for taking out isolated MG bunkers), but it can also take out any light vehicle and many of the larger vehicles with a lucky shot - I recently had one take out a Tiger with a side shot. It also has a very high muzzle velocity (and therefore accuracy) and rate of fire.
-
Learning the intracies of the "pause" order is one of those things that takes your play to the next level. Proper use will turn that traffic jam of vehicles into a well-oiled machine moving out at a frightening speed.
I've also found that it is possible to pause in the middle of a turn - the trick is plotting too many waypoints in previous turns, more than what a unit can do in 60 seconds. Then, during the next turn, you can drag the now-red waypoints to exactly where you want to go (changing the order type and/or deleting any extra waypoints if needed), then issuing new orders (white waypoints) in the current turn. The unit will complete the orders from the previous turn (red waypoints), then "pause" for however long the command delay for that unit, then follow the new (white waypoint) orders.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Big Time Software:
John,
I checked and the ROKS-2 was the standard backpack flamethrower. I wasn't aware that this was not a conventional backpack FT design<hr></blockquote>
From the Encyclopedia of Weapons of WWII, edited by Chris Bishop, p. 270:
"In design terms there was nothing really remarkable about the ROKS-2 apart from the attention paid to the appearance of the weapon. One of the tactical lessons learned during World War I regarding flamethrowers was that any solider noticed by the enemy to be carrying a flame weapon immediately became the target of every weapon in sight, so if the appearance of the flamethrower could be altered in some way the user had a better chance of survival. Accordingly the Soviet designers went out of their way to make the ROKS-2 appear to be an ordinary infantry weapon. The main fuel tank was configured like a soldier's ordinary backpack, and the flame projector was made to look like an ordinary rifle, and in fact the butt of the projector was taken from the standard Soviet Model 1891/30 rifle. The only noticeable flamethrower features were the small gas pressure bottle under the pack, the hose leading to the projector, and the rather prominent ignition device at the muzzle of the projector. On the battlefield these features would probably have merged into the general background."
-
Boo,
Check out this thread:
http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=022118
It should answer a lot of questions, including what the deal is with the hamsters and Peng. There's even a hamster mod out there, available from combatmission.com.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by dalem:
This was just a case of 'pro-Dale rolling badly' bias. Both I and my opponent (who played several other campaign games earlier that summer, i.e. Columbia Games' EuroFront package) agreed that I had teh worst summer of dice rolling anyone had ever seen. In the RB game I had one counterattack scenario set up pretty early in the campaign where I had 2 KVs and 3 T-26 tanks ready to pound the crap out of a German salient and bust a hole for my infantry to exploit.
On turn 2 I rolled 3 boxcars for main guns and on turn 3 I rolled boxcars for the other two. I put a billion purchase points and that entire scenario in the crapper myself - no enemy fire needed! I rolled like that for most of the campaign. It was a short campaign.
-dale<hr></blockquote>
Yikes! :eek: My only RB campaign game went the other way, once again due largely to dice. I was the Russians, and I kept rolling low on my RG leader dice rolls (getting lots of -1 and -2 leaders), while my opponent was rolling average or slighly worse. In addition, his leaders seemed to break early and often. After five CG days, he surrendered. My squad/leader ratio at game end was insane - I want to say somewhere around 4.5/1.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JonS:
Oh yeah - in CM terms. If you really want to use Shermans firing indirect, just give the Allies a couple of 75mm spotters and a TRP. And if you really want to get pedantic, suggest that they don't move the fire away from the TRP.
<hr></blockquote>
I'll second that, but I'd make it a green or conscript spotter to help enforce the "suggestion".
Heck, you could make the spotter padlocked in a corner of the map surrounded by unscalable cliffs so he couldn't get LOS, so he'd pretty much HAVE to use the TRP. Of course, he'd then be an artillery target himself...Hmmm, I'll need to work on this idea.
-
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155:
Redeker,
The spreadsheet is on the way. It is an MS Works file (.wks). I hope that works for you. I can change it to straight text fairly easily, but the columns get messed up making it much more difficult to read.
Treeburst155 out.<hr></blockquote>
Thanks Treeburst. MS Works is fine. Er, let me clarify - MS Works poses no compatibility problems.
Wild Bill's Rumblings of War [Part III]
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by wadepm:
I'll bet you had the Croc facing the wrong way in "High Cost"? I'll bet a lot of people did that, the setup was very confusing for the allied player. Mine died a few turns later from something just as dumb!<hr></blockquote>
Crocodile? One of these scenarios has a Crocodile?
Seriously, I think we should probably hang on a bit longer before discussing things in detail.
Kingfish, I'm going to hold off posting anything to the alternate thread until one of the official tourney dudes says that it's OK.