James

I havent been overdoing the CMBN, much, look it's real.....on second thoughts maybe I have if I'm amazed at such things! planning.zip

I've just seen this for the 1st time: In the unit info, the part which lists soldier actions like "spotting" "aiming" ect, I've just seen a soldier "planning" - it happened during the squads 1st contact with the enemy. It seems there's even more things going on under the hood than I imagined!!

Excellent, the more reality that goes into this simulation the better!

Thanks for the heads up Lucky. My historical knoledge does'nt streach to this situation - I had no idea it was so compleacated!! I envisioned the calling up & spotting of a platoons light mortor situated right next to its HQ in the heat of battle would go sometihing like this: "Hey Miller, drop some rounds 200 yards that way!" (the CO points, Miller quickly aims-elevates in that direction & shoots one off)....."no left a bit 30 more"....

I've just played a battle on iron setting & found that it took 3/4 minutes for a US para platoon's Hq squad to call in support from its own mortor section which was 15m away & in visual-voice contact. Surely the minutes spent reciving could be cut & they should go straight into spotting & adusting their fire. I can understand the reciving delay taken in contacting a distant battery by radio but not your own mortor squad right next to you. Have I over looked something here? Is there a way to get quicker fire support in this situation?

How this done? What is a .divx movie? Please elaborate JC!

One feature I would love to be included is being able to record a whole battle & then play it back from any POV. At the moment i'm doing just wego because i'm utterly fasinated watching the brilliant action & happenstance packed into every minute - alas you just can't do this in real time without forgetting to give orders! Not only that you'd have a record, a newsreel of you most famous battles for posterity! So please, could we have this feature in? Plus - I've seen the video AAR's - how were these done?

Rember me, I started this thread asking when the new engine was coming out - little did I guess the longing it would unleash. So its not coming out for quite a while.......right see you in 3 or 4 months, I'll check then!

I havent been around for months and was wondering what the latest news is on the development of the next combat mission engine.

I'm about to undertake an attack on a posisition with a german motorised company mounted on half tracks, should I: A)Charge right into the posistion dismounting right on top of the enemy all guns blazing. or B)drive up to the nearest cover and advance on foot with covering fire from the HT's. What sort of tactics were used with real life motorised formations?

Steve thanks for clarifying my AA speculation. What your planning is execellent. id:Pak40 Pak 40, you can do this to some extent by useing dynamic flags in the editor.

There have been people saying that an AI good enough to challenge an experienced CM player is years away. But it may be possible now, take a look at the AI in Battlefronts Airbourne Assault. It works on the lines of real life command & control. Instead of trying to simulate a player it simulates real miltary proceedure. The higher level AI c/o's actually plan their manovers while the lower level AI c/o's execute them with the initative to adapt their orders to the actual situation. I could go on for ages about it but my dinners on the table soon - take a look at it on the Battlefront site and try the demo and you'll see A very realistic and challenging AI in action. Whats more its not script based and can adapt to different maps. In short if the AI of AA was scaled down to the company-platoon-squad level and put into CM the single player experience would be great. Such an AI is not years away, its out there now. Got to go dinners on the table, take a look at AA and you'll be pleasently suprised, then imagine it transplanted into the CM engine.

A few weeks ago I asked the same question for the samr reason. I was told the wav no which was 300 i think but not sure, check it out first. I simply deleted it, no more roaring fire sounds.

Hey what's this, no one interested in an idea that could improve the AI's performance? Any thoughts, criticisms, suggestions or even Battlefront comments are welcome.

How do you make Mods? Get into northern soul, wear parkas and ride Vespers.

CMBB is good, but its just a game, get things in proportion chaps!

Yes, is this "dooable"?

From what I've observed the AI infantry doesnt seem to use the move to contact order. If I'm wrong please correct me. Here's an idea which may help improve the unrealistic and poor performance of attacking AI infantry: The non defending Strat AI seems to give repeated move/fast/advance commands to its infantry towards the VL's despite incoming fire, resulting in unessessary casulties and not enough return fire. In most cases, except all out assualt, infantry battles in reality are firefights - ie they seek to win by the gun not the bayonet. Ok you cant change the Strat AI's continual orders forward, but surly Move To Contact could replace the move/fast commands it gives. What would be the result you ask. I've solo played some hotseat games and used repeated MTC orders for infantry advanceing towards a VL thus simulating a Strat AI giving MTC orders: The AI inf MTC's towards a VL blocked by your force. Your side opens fire and the AI's side stops immeadiatly and returns fire, the suppressed squads going for cover. Next move the Strat AI renew's it forward orders - those squads still in contact with your side on reciving a fresh MTC order carry on returning fire while those squads out of contact MTC forward until they see/come under fire - stop and return fire. As the moves progress an intense firefight develops and as more of your squads become supressed and drop out the AI's sight the more the AI squads on MTC will advance. In other words the advancing AI inf seeks to outshoot the enemy and take advantage of the fleeting opportunities presented by your suppression to manover closer by degrees. Now is this not how infantry realistically engage? Did infantry in WW2 (execpting all out assualts) continually try to rush into incoming fire? As an AI opponant would the cautious behavior of an AI inf that fires back more than it moves not be a greater challenge to you the player? If the attacking AI's move/fast orders could be replaced with MTC then you could no longer rely on simply finding a good defensive position and letting the enemy come on in the same old way and you beating them in the same old way. Is it practical to tweak the otherwise unaltered Strat AI to replace its fast/move commands with MTC?

So does the AI use MTC? I would really like to know this one. If not it cant be that hard to replace the Move order with MTC? The non defending Strat AI does seem to give repeated move/fast/advance commands to its infantry towards the VL's despite incoming fire, resulting in unessessary casulties and not enough return fire. In most cases, except all out assualt, infantry battles in reality are firefights - ie they seek to win by the gun not the bayonet. Ok you cant change the Strat AI's continual orders forward, but surly MTC could replace the move/fast commands it gives. What would be the result you ask. I've solo played some hotseat games and used repeated MTC orders for infantry advanceing towards a VL thus simulating a Strat AI giving MTC orders. Ok the AI inf MTC's towards a VL blocked by your force. Your side opens fire and the AI's side stops immeadiatly and returns fire, the suppressed squads going for cover. Next move the Strat AI renew's it forward orders - those squads still in contact with your side reciving a fresh MTC order carry on returning fire while those squads out of contact MTC forward until they see/come under fire - stop and return fire. As the moves progress an intense firefight develops and as more of your squads become supressed and drop out the AI's sight the more the AI squads on MTC will advance. In other words the advancing AI inf seeks to outshoot the enemy and take advantage of the fleeting opportunities presented by your suppression to manover closer even if a couple of yards a time. Now is this not how infantry realistically engage intead of continually trying to rush into incoming fire? As an AI opponant would the cautious behavior of an AI inf that fires back more than it moves not be a greater challenge to you the player? Is it practical to tweak the otherwise unaltered Strat AI to replace its fast/move commands with MTC? [ November 24, 2002, 02:46 PM: Message edited by: James ]

Does the AI side use move to contact? From what I see it doesnt seem to, so correct me if i'm wrong. If not I think it should use MC as the first natural reaction of moving infantry coming under fire is to stop and fire back, not stop only when its suppressed. It would also encourage the AI infantry to give a better firefight instead of too much movement and not enough returnfire. The movement to contact order should definatly be used by the AI in meeting/probe battles.

Ok the worlds first solo hotseat CM senario is ready for anyone brave enough to try it. Mail me and i'll send it to you. Enjoy, a new experience if you dare.

Ok the worlds first solo CM senario is ready for anyone brave enough to try it. Mail me and i'll send it to you.

Hey chaps, stand by your beds! Today i'm going to produce what could be the worlds first tailor made solo head to head senario for CM. It will be heavy on the role-play. The briefing will contain not only the tatical stuation but the character, motivation and conflict between the officers. It can also be played as a normal loose/win game. I've played this one a few times and its a close run thing for either side. Anyone wanting the senario can mail me via the link. The briefings should be ready in a few hours if I'm not disturbed by normal life.

Mercury: Interesting idea about using a small operation. I'll try it out. By the way whay size no mans land do you use?

Quick tips for those wanting to try: 1: its best suited to company sized engagements, up to about 1000pts max, remember your handling both sides. 2: Esp good are meeting engagements, probes, any fluid situation that the AI normally finds difficult. 3: VLs are of secondary importance when your simulating a certain situation or role-playing the desisions of chosen officers - the actual situation is more important than game points. 4: The opposite is true when playing against yourself as a game rather than a simulation. 5: Keep an open mind, use your imagination and beware of schosphenia.