Mike D
-
Posts
485 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Mike D
-
-
I seem to recall that CM will track a squads ammo level in a somewhat abstract fashion (i.e. every round carried by every soldier is not being modeled as in Close Combat for example). This is fine. My question is will we as the players be able to issue orders to a squad, either directly, or indirectly, to conserve ammo if they start running low and the situation warrants it? I.e., a large firefight in the early part of the game depletes a number of my squads ammo levels, but I know the enemy is going to counterattack later on so in the mean time I want them to take it easy on the ammo, but at the same time I don't want them to not fire if a good target comes along, or they need to do so to defend themselves.
Mike D
aka Mikester
[This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 07-09-99).]
-
I'm also extremely interested in map data. Not even so much the company/battlion level maps showing where certain units were located / moved, but more importantly good topographical maps of the areas so that we can all build good CM 3d maps. Where does one go to get good topographical maps of France, Belgium, Western Germany, etc.??? Especially ones that go down to a map scale where we can actually transfer the data to a CM size map? I'm thinking of maps similar to the ones the US Geological Survey publishes for hikers, etc. here in the states. Do similar maps exist for European countries? I have to assume they do, just a matter of how does one get their hands on them. Even better would be maps from the 1930's / 40's that showed the actual roads, trails, etc., in the area to give us a more accurate picture of what the area really looked like in '44-'45. But I imagine good topographical maps from this period are going to be even harder to come by. Steve / Charles, where are you guys getting your map data from to build the CM scenarios included w/ the game?
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Lot's of great leads here for my future reading. Thanks to everyone. I've read a few of these books, but some of them I've never heard of. I will definately have to check some of them out.
Speaking of books I ran across a web site tonight (totally by accident by the way) that has dozens and dozens (literally) of WWII books of all different sorts and topics from German weapons, to battles, etc. Some of them are even auf Deutsch. Many of them appear to be by foreign authors and others that were actually involved in the conflict. Steve and Charles, sounds like you guys have tons of books already, but there might be something hidden here that you have not seen yet as well. Anyway, here is the web address for the book store:
http://www.sonic.net/~bstone/aberdeen/
Here are just a couple of examples of what they have in the German Armaments section (there are some 70 titles listed in this section alone):
35. HISTORY OF THE 653 HEAVY TANK HUNTER BATTALION, Karl Heinz, C, O, This book is an absolute marvel , a massive photo album with 500+ photos and 500 pages featuring two of the heaviest tank destroyers of WWII; the Elephant/Ferdinand and the Jagdtiger. Almost all of the photos have never been
published, if interested please don't delay as this book is expected to be extremely popular, a first of its kind! finally in stock! $102.00
37. MAUSER BOLT RIFLES, Ludwig Olson, 3rd edition, C, O, Definitely the most complete, detailed. authoritative and comprehensive work ever done on Mauser bolt rifles by one of the world's leading firearms experts, 390 pp. $55
17. TIGER TANKS Michael Green, S, O, Detailed filled text examines the facts, figures, and combat records of the tank while interviews with crews and adversaries recreate what it was really like to fight in and against the Tiger, color and black and white photographs, 128 pp. $20.00
The list goes on and on. Other sections include books on the Eastern Front, Luftwaffe, War in the Pacific, etc.
Definately worth checking out what they have here. Finding this site by accident was just my first surprise tonight. What really blew me away is that I have spent a good 15 years or so of my life growing up in Littleton as a kid, and then later living in the area as an adult, and this bookstore is right here and I never even knew! Maybe it has only been around for a little while and I just missed it??? If nothing else it will give me something to do this weekend. Of course if I'm allowed to browse through some of these books I might not ever find my way out of this store since some of the stuff they have sounds extremely interesting. In any event, hope everybody has a great 4th of July holiday here in the U.S.
Regards,
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Ken brings up a good point. I thought at least the Germans (and perhaps others as well) had quite a number of tank models fitted w/ smoke dischargers / smoke grenade launchers. How often they were used, how many smoke rounds they carried, etc. I do not know. I also thought several nations (not sure which ones) had smoke rounds for the main guns of the tanks, or was this post WWII??? Also, will the close in antipersonnel (grenade?) devices fitted on many of the later war / heavy Germans tanks be modeled in the game? Can't remember what those things are called, but I'm pretty sure they are on the at least the King Tiger in Close Combat 3. Seems like this came up before, but I can't remember, so if it has, my appologies.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Never played the original TacOps, but heard many, many, good things about it. Including first hand recommendations from friends that have played it. Have just been waiting for it (ver. 2) to come out for some time now, but if I remember correctly Maj. H got messed up w/ his publisher until he landed here at Battlefront. Anyway, very much looking forward to this game as well. Does anyone know the general time frame of release for TacOps2?
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Steve,
This brings something to mind that I've thought about asking you guys to do for awhile (or maybe I did and just don't remember). Would it be too much trouble (say every two weeks or so) to give us a status update on what has happened w/ the game since the last update. I'm thinking of "major accomplishments" here. Stuff like: tactical AI module is mostly complete, British infantry graphics and units in work, LOS model completed, etc., etc. Not anything too much, just a brief paragraph, or two, every couple of weeks to give us a better idea of what's currently going on with the game and what kind of progress is being made. I know I (and I expect many others) would certainly appreciate this. Thanks.
Regards,
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
I'm pretty sure the US did try to take out Khadaffi in Libya several years ago. Don't remember the exact year, but it was sometime in the mid 1980's I believe. Actually bombed his personal residence and killed one or two memebers of his family. Hey, why bother w/ snipers when the Navy or AF can do the job w/ laser guided bombs and missles, right? In any event I believe he was not there at the time of the attack, or otherwise escaped harm.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
This has been a great thread. Very informative for myself and I'm sure others as well. Here is my question. I hear counterbattery fire being mentioned here a couple of times now; so does CM allow counter battery fire? I've seen it in other games (can't think of which ones right off hand), but can't remember how it worked in those games. How prevalent was counter battery fire during CM's time period and if the game is going to include it how will it be implemented? Did the Americans and Brits have a huge counterbattery fire advantage w/ the piper cubs and all the other aircraft flying around being able to radio in German artillery positions? Just curious. Thanks.
Regards,
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
That makes sense I guess. My thought was how do you know there is a vehicle over there in the first place, but chances are there is something. Since you as the player have a fairly good idea that the enemy is over there "somewhere". Unless, of course, the scenario designer is simulating the 3rd armies dash across France and didn't program any German defenders in in the first place
. But then, what fun would that be????Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Steve,
I kinda figured that was the case, but wasn't sure. I guess my orginal thought was not having the pillbox (or other camoflauged enemy installation / vehicle) suddenly appear and be fully sighted once they opened fire on the advancing attackers. But you guys, as always, seem to have a fairly "elegant", well thought out solution for this; and it sounds plenty good enough to me. Thanks.
Mike
-
Doug,
My question to you is if this happened behind a hill where none of your units could physically see, how would you know you hit an enemy unit w/ your artillery vs. some trees or a house that caught fire instead? BTS, all things being equal, isn't it just as likely something that is a non-enemy unit is burning back there vs. a tank, halftrack, truck, etc.?
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Charles,
I figured you guys had the camoflauge thing covered somehow. If it's modeled and utilized in the spotting algorithms that's great. I guess I don't really need to "see" it I when it comes right down to it. Thanks.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Way cool. Thanks Charles. Sorry if you guys had already told us you were going to do this and I missed it.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
While I'm sure that I and my wargaming buddies will do the head to head thing w/ CM, I'm pretty sure for the most part we will go for the play by email as well. Hard to find that dedicated couple of hour block of time to devote to head to head play all that often. Which reminds me of a question I asked BTS sometime back and don't recall it ever being answered; If we start a game head to head can we at some point (say turn 3) switch to play by e-mail, and then back again to head to head (say turn 8)? Also, if we start via e-mail and play turns 1 and 2 can we then play turns 3-6 head to head one night and then switch back to via e-mail when we are ready to quit for the night and save the game? I would certainly like to see this since I would agree that H to H will probably be a more interesting gaming experience, but unfortunately will almost certainly end up playing much of the time via e-mail. I think this would give us as players a lot more flexibility in how we can play and complete the game in a timely fashion. Not sure what programming / time resources would be required to do this, but I know I and my friends would certainly use it if it were available. Anyone else out there think that they would use such a feature???
Regards,
Mike D.
aka Mikester
-
John M,
If I were a pilot I would have dropped those suckers ASAP as well. Not because I, or they, were evil, but because it is darned unsafe to land the plane back in merry old England w/ bombs still hanging in the racks. Dropping unused ordnance prior to landing was common practice to best of my knowledge. Still is today in some cases as well I believe, although modern aircraft might have a better way to ensure the ordnance won't come off during landing. In WWII in the Pacific this usually wasn't much of a problem because they usually got dropped over the water. While it might have been "nice" for the flyboys in Europe to wait until they got over the channel to do it, it is a long way from Germany and carrying that extra weight means burning oh so precious fuel. Fuel that might be needed to evade enemy fighters, etc., on the way home as opposed to running out on the way back. So I don't blame those "educated" flyboys one single bit for dropping unused bombs wherever they might fall over Germany. Much better than dropping them over France or somewhere else right? Plus it maximized the fuel and range of the aircraft heading home. Sounds like a pretty smart move if you ask me.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Pixman,
I asked a simple question. Why such a harsh response? Trivialities? I don't think having a post release place to meet, chat and play is any more of a "triviality" than this discussion site is -- which, by the way, pulls significant time away from the developers of CM1, much less CM2.
____________________________________________
I appoligize if my response seemed harsh. Trivialities, yes. But again as I said that is just my opinion. I tend to play my games against friends that I know locally, so having big internet gaming sites dedicated to a game, or games, finding opponents, etc., really doesn't mean much to me. I have all the head to head action I have the time to play already lined up. As far as this site goes as I have stated here before I think this site has been great. However, I have also said that I believe that at some point BTS is going to have to not concentrate as much effort as they have here, and really concentrate hard on getting the game done. I know Steve said something to this effect several months ago in that he would be spending less time answering questions, etc., here on the board, and more time on helping out with the game. But much to his credit he has found/made the time to continue making this discussion board what it has been, terrific.
_____________________________________
I'm also not sure why you went off on a rant about how most other wargames suck. I hope you are not referring to CWG2 because, though by no means perfect, it is an excellent game overall -- played by some excellent generals at an excellent (and free) gaming site. If you have never tried it, I would recommend it highly.
_____________________________________________
Uhhhhhhh, was I ranting? Probably was I guess. As far as ranting goes that is just something that I like to do every now and again
, but probably has more to do w/ dealing with the BS that goes on at work everyday. Again, sorry if you took it personally in any way. Many...., most..., oh well let's say many of them suck then. They are all fun to some extent, but very few, if any, of them offer what CM is going to offer. Great game play, wonderful and most needed realism and detail, and 3d graphics to boot. Many games such as Close Combat series, etc., fall way short in one or more of these areas, but again, that's just my opinion. Civil War General 2? I think that is the game you are referring to, right??? Never had the opportunity to play it. Unfortunately I don't have the time to check out and play as many games as I would like to. Might have to go take a look at this one though since I have heard some good things about it from others as well. Thanks for the tip._____________________________________________
Maybe I am missing something here. Is BTS not making CM playable over the internet? If they are, then how/where will the two players interface? These are straight questions. I would appreciate a straight answer from anyone willing to provide it.
_____________________________________________
I don't want to answer for BTS here, but I do believe the game is fully internet playable both via e-mail and head to head via TCP/IP I imagine. I believe if you look in the FAQ it states that they are doing this. As far as finding opponents to play I think BTS is leaving that up to the rest of us. I'm sure other boards dedicated to wargaming like www.wargamer.com will have areas dedicated to the game where you can find opponents. And if you still can't find anyone to play I will be more than happy to go a few rounds with you. This game is going to be so kick ass that I will probably end up eating my words and looking for anyone and everyone to play against on the internet
___________________________________________
My appolgies once again, I just quickly cruised through the FAQ and didn't see the part in there about head to head / internet play that I thought was there. Oh Steeevvvvveeeeee, looks like it might be time for an update, maybe?
_____________________________________________
By the way, I did scout back through to find some reference to internet play on this board. I did not see it. Sorry if I offended anyone bringing it up again.
_____________________________________________
Yes, I've tried to do this a couple of times myself when I was trying to think back to something that has been discussed. Usually kind of hard to find what you are looking for though. Probably I'm just to impatient to deal w/ it though.
In any event I wasn't offended by your post and I hope you were not offended by my reply.
Regards,
Mike D
aka Mikester
[This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 06-24-99).]
-
BTS,
After looking at the German pillbox line in the woods and some of the other new screen shots a question that has been in the back of my mind for awhile arises. I can't remember if this has been covered before, but will the scenario designer and/or the players be able to designate units as being camoflauged??? I'm thinking primarily of units in defenisve positions having camoflauge netting, tree branches covering AT gun emplacements and tanks, etc. I know that many pillbox pictures I've seen were not camoflauged, but then again I've seen at least some, and maybe more than I can remember, that were so. Same goes for tank, gun and infantry defensive emplacements. Looking at the screenshots the pillboxes sitting there along / in the edge of the tree line look kind of bare / easy to spot from the looks of things (definitely not easy to see by any means, but not very difficult either). Are they receiving some kind of negative spotting bonus being that they are in / near the woods? Would it be difficult to implement some type of camoflauge scheme in the game for those situations where the defense has had time to implement such things (as determined by the scenario designer)? It just seems like it would add a lot to the game if the attacker couldn't "see" and/or spot enemy defensive emplacements quite so easily, but maybe you have taken care of this in an abstract manner in the game in which case I'm just asking for the "eye candy" of actually seeing the camoflauge that goes along with the coding.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Pixman,
FYI. I believe the answer to your question is no. If I remember correctly it has been discussed at least once, if not 2 or 3 times, and BTS said they were not going to do this since they wanted to focus their attention on developing games. I certainly hope they do just exactly that. There are far too few really good computer wargames out there and still fewer programmers that really know how to develop one. Case in point, just look at what amounts to mostly crap on the store shelves when it comes to wargames. In my most humble opinion most of them suck. I would much rather see CM2 and the other great games that these guys will probably come up with being developed, rather than have them "wasting" their time with such trivialties. Someone else will probably do it for them anyway, so why waste their great talent on such matters????? BTS, if I've got this wrong please correct me. Sometimes my little pea brain just doesn't seem to remember as well as it used to
Anyways, just my opinion in any event.
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Chris,
Mmmmmmmm, BETA DAY.
Are you turning blue yet?
I've been holding my breath for a couple of months now and CM still doesn't seem to show up any quicker
Anyways, I too thought about the historical significance of today's date as I was opening my day planner at my desk this morning to see what boring meetings I would have to attend (there were 2 of them unfortunately). I often wonder if a few things had gone differently in Russia could the Germans have captured Moscow and effectively knocked Russia out of the war??? Even if they had, given the Russians propensity to fight as partisans would the thousands of them left after the government capitulated have fought on anyway? Would the government have even capitulated in the first place, or just moved further to the east and fought on. While losing Moscow would have been a crushing blow to morale, much of the industrial might around the city had already been moved to the east (if I am remembering the books correctly). My guess is they would have fought on anyways. The deeper the Germans penetrated the country the more overextended their supply lines became and this probably would have caught up with them. I think this was proven in part at Stalingrad and in the Causcus's in '42. Even if they didn't fully succeed in knocking Russia out of the war it would have been interesting to see the affects of the after war situation on the military might of Russia. Would they have been so drained that they couldn't even retake all of Mother Russia, let alone eastern Europe and Berlin before the Americans and British took Berlin? Would there never have been a Cold War? Of course if they had been that bad off the Germans probably would have shifted more divisions to France and may have made the Western Allies job there very difficult indeed. In any event, it is interesting to ponder what might have been and be thankful for the most part that things turned out the way they did as a result of the determination and sacrifice of many good men.
Regards,
Mike D
aka Mikester
[This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 06-22-99).]
[This message has been edited by Mike D (edited 06-22-99).]
-
BTS,
Now that I'm done drooling all over my keyboard after checking out the latest screenshots I can write this reply. Screen shots looking better all the time. Matter of fact, they look excellent.
Would agree that they do look kinda sterile/plain as some have pointed out, but as Steve has stated when you are watching this all in motion I can well imagine it will be alot less noticeable. Besides, I'm going to be looking at where enemy fire and movement is occurring, not at how pretty every thing looks.
Would also agree that your precious programming and development time would be better spent on AI and other aspects of the game that really matter as opposed to coding Bessy the Cow and Farmer Brown's tractor.
Charles and Steve, EXCELLENT WORK. You guys are really going to shine when this baby is born. This game will set a new standard in computer wargaming when it comes out. One I sincerely hope other publishers and game companies will follow.
Now back to my drooling, ahhhhhhhhh.
Best Regards,
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Green squad will most likely break and run for cover. Especially if it is caught in a cross fire from the 3 mg's. Otherwise, they will probably remain pinned right where they are and continue to become more demoralized until they break. Liklihood of the greenies returning fire is probably very low. Vets will probably hang tight where they are if they can't crawl to some nearby more favorable cover. They would also be more likely to start to try and return fire perhaps. In any event you more than answered my ? and then some, which is great. Thanks for spelling it all out and explaining it so well.
Mike.
-
Steve,
Thanks for the explanation. What you are doing makes much more sense now in terms of not having the armoured HQ/Leader units.
Mike
-
In addition to Harold's question. Will we be able to play a random scenario, but instead of having a random map, also have the ability to specify the map we want to play it on and perhaps which side will start on which side of the map?
Mike D
aka Mikester
-
Steve,
This is not necessarily a push on my part to see armoured HQ's included, more so a question. Don't armoured units suffer the same type of demoralizing factors that the infantry do, even though they are inside their almighty powerful tanks? Can't they panic, break, "run", just like infantry? If so, how are they rallied if they totally break and run and their is no armour HQ? This somehow doesn't seem to make much sense. In addition to providing the things that you stated above, didn't the HQ/Leader of a tank platoon also serve to rally / stabilize his troops? The type of situation I'm thinking of here is say we are playing a Bulge scenario (or perhaps more appropriately a campaign, where the next day/battle the US player would get some decent reinforcements and or be able to move them up from the rear at a later turn on day 1) and it is some very heavy German armour w/ seasoned vets and supporting infantry going up against a mixed US infantry force w/ some armour support only from a sherman 75 and a couple of stuarts. The germans outnumber the the US tankers by 3 or 4 to 1. The sherman is clocked by the first round from one of several of the King Tigers in the german force on turn 1. In addition, they have a couple of panthers, 2 PZ IV's and some other lighter stuff as well and they are not doing much to hide any of it from the Americans. They and their support infantry then proceed to run rough shod over the rest of the US force most of the rest of which are green troops. You mean to tell me that those remaining Stuarts are not going to turn tail and run? Or if they do, that there is not going to be an armour HQ back there somewhere (assuming this wasn't the lone sherman) to help rally them if they do panic and take flight? I guess I can live w/o the armour HQ units, just wondering if it is really realistic to do so from a morale/rallying perspective.
Mike D
aka Mikester
. But then, what fun would that be????
Question about the AI levels?
in Combat Mission Archive #1 (1999)
Posted
BTS,
Mr. Rourke posted the question above about having the AI do something crazy / odd every now and again to keep the game from growing stagnant as it is played over and over and we as players start to figure out how it thinks. While I don't believe it should necessarily do something crazy, or odd, I do think it should have some degree (small, but definitely there) of randomness to it (which is what I think Chris meant) to keep us players on our toes. I don't know much about fuzzy logic, but does it allow the AI to have some degree of randomness to it so that in a given situation the AI might react somewhat differently on a given occasion vs. if the same situation came along again at some later point (whether in that same game, or a totally different game)? To me this would add enormous depth to the game since it seems like many/most other game AI's seem to get to be too predictable after you have played the game for awhile.
Thanks,
Mike D
aka Mikester