PiggDogg

See if you can use your new captured Firefly. Unfortunately, your Fly will be an eggshell with a hammer. :eek: :eek: Further, your opponent is screwed because he has a PzIV instead of a Sherman. Of course, both are eggshells. (Needless to say, I don't like PzIVs ) Cheers, Richard

I3w53r, Enjoyable post. Was fun. Makes one laugh & we all need that. Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

Scipio, I have had some (a very few) peculiar victory flag problems such as yours. It is frustrating. Actually, BTS (where are you Steve, MaddMatt?) may have a word or two on this. But you know what, maybe we should search the archives. Duh. Lol. :confused: :confused: I will do so later today. Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

A nice combination: 20 mm armored car with 75 mm armored car. The 20 A/C quickly surpresses and kills Allied halftracks & armored cars. The 20 A/C then surpresses Allied infantry. The 75 A/C then whacks the Allied infantry & can support the 20 A/C in the 20's vehicles killing duties. :eek: :eek: I like that combination (20 & 75 A/Cs). Jason, good analysis again to get the thread started. Everyone else, thanks also. Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

I prefer MEs, 1500 pts or so, definitely computer troop selection, random everything else (let the computer or dice decide as the program requires). In these battles, everyone gets crappe (no uber armies, that is: no all nuclear arty, no all hetzers, no all Jumbos, no all paratroop/falshimjagers). Also, everyone has to make do with what they got. :cool: :cool: Cheers, Richard

Tanaka, I 'prefer' computer troops selection CM games as compared to human selection games. I do not 'dislike' human selection games. I just prefer computer choose games. However, I enjoy playing CM & I want to play the game as much as I reasonably can. In order to play more and to have happy opponents, I play human troop selection games in deference to opponents who like to play such games. Additionally, I play human selection games because various tournaments require it. These above reasons are quite rational and satifying to myself &, hopefully, my opponents. Regarding the term 'armies', this is a colloquial referance to the CM squad and vehicle groupings that make up my reinforced company sized forces (1000 - 1500 points). I generally do not play games of much over 1500 points. Those really large games are too much like work. I'm playing for fun. Further, the all Hetzer, all Jumbo, all nuclear arty, all paratrooper, all KingTiger "armies" are not & do not feel realistic. Indeed, I can human choose troops with the best of them, but I prefer to just 'make do' with what the computer gives me. :cool: :cool: Cheers, Richard

I too buy lots of zooks or pzfausts when I have the 'misfortune' of playing a human pick troops game. I prefer to let the computer choose the troops. But I just 'love' the all Hetzer, all Jumbo, all nuclear arty, all paratrooper, all KingTiger armies. They are just so, so realistic force mixes. Cheers, Richard

Steve & Compatriots, Take as long as you need and want to finish CM2. If it comes out in Q2 or Q3 2002, so what. I had waited for nearly 40 years for CM (although 40 years ago, obviously, I did not know that what I was waiting for was CM)!! Don't get heartattack from customers complaining. Get plenty of sleep. Earn your living & make plenty of bucks. You deserve it. Get CM2 out when it is ready. I'll wait. I got patience. Cheers, Richard

Dvorak & Toad, Boy are you both some old. :eek: I am not nearly 'that' old. In 1958, I was minus 10 years old. Lol. So that now makes me a mere 33 years old. :eek: Yeah right. In reality, I was born in 1948. Seems like a long time ago, but it does not seem so long ago. I have played wargames since 1958 with Avalon Hill's Tactic II & the original release of the rectangular Gettysburg. With CM, I had initiallh read game magazine reviews of CMBO. These reviews said that CM was turn based. I told myself: "been there; done that. I have been playing turn based games for over 40 years. I don't need another 'steenking' turn based wargame like CM." In Jan or Feb 2001, a close friend (with whom I have played wargames for nearly 30 years) said get CM; you will enjoy it. Well, I acceeded to his recommendation. I purchased CM in Feb 2001 & I was smitten. For me, it is honestly better than the realtime combat games, & I liked those. Enough rambling. Great game. I can wait for however long BTS takes to complete CM2. I am patient. I had waited for 40 years for CM1, so I can wait for however long CM2 takes. :cool: Cheers, Richard :cool:

I hope that BTS does not waste their time for CM2 development by including such vehicles. Cheers, Richard

In my board wargame hobby (since 1958) or in computer gameing (since 1994), I have never joined any teams, any clans, or any clams (lol). I have not spent much time one any other computer game except a moderate interest in AOE 1 & 2 and a still present brainless enjoyment of Team Fortress Classic. However, when I got CMBO this past February, I realized that I have been waiting for a game like this since 1958. Boy, that is a long time. CM is not perfect, but, for me, it is by far the best out there. I really enjoy CM & await future iterations of the game with bated breath. Cheers, Richard

Determinant, Is that "underwear elastic giving out" because they are being filled with a substance ?? :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: I strongly suspect that this would be my reaction if I were in such a situation. Cheers, Richard

Wow! We all (including me) really gotta get a life. Lol :eek: :eek: Naw! We got a life: work, family, work, family, blah, blah, & entertainment - CM. Ah, life is good, good, good. Cheers, Richard

Does sound like Pieper & friends. It is not nice to fight Uncle Sam when Sam is armed & ready. Ouch. :eek: No wonder and not unexpectedly did the Germans lose at the Bulge. Indeed, after having played many board & a few computer wargames covering the Bulge, one realizes that, once the US applied its force properly, the Germans had no chance of success at the Bulge. :eek: Cheers, Richard

Wolfe, Thanks for the tests. I was not aware of such a severe accuracy penalty for firing from deep in the woods. Further, the coverage benefit for being deep in the woods as compared to being shallow in the woods does not seem to outweigh the above noted accuracy benefit. :eek: Moral to the story: set up guns near the edge of the woods if you are sneekily laying in wait. I have learned a lesson. Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

In CM, I have found heavy buildings to be a near quantum leap in protection for occupying infantry compared to light buildings. I do not know the math behind the cover value of heavy & light buildings, but I do know the end effect. Due to the high protection of heavy buildings, it is quite difficult to kill enemy infantry occupying the heavies. I have found that it takes about 3 robust (in numbers & firepower) squads or their equivalent (hopefully also in heavy buildings) at point blank range (40 - 60 meters) to quickly dispatch an enemy squad. :eek: In CM terms, heavy buildings 'act' like near pillboxes & I try to base my defense around supported (and I repeat 'supported') heavy buildings that I occupy. Indeed, get to the heavy buildings first with the most, give those guys some additional support, & let your enemy try to root you out. All things being equal, your enemy will have a tough time and you will have a less tough time. Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool:

Brian, I stand by my prior posts. In the island hopping battles, by sheer brute firepower advantage did the US overcome the brave and intrepid (yes, I said brave & intrepid) Japanese defenders. If you think differently, may it be suggested that you might be mistaken. Further, the CM system is not set up to handle the close in battles of the island hopping campaigns. Burma, may be interesting. China, I for one don't want to play that front, other may. Hong Kong, get real. Malaya, interesting. Singapore, a bore (lol). Island hopping, no way. Cheers, Richard

Tanaka, <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>.hmm, like 1:100 KIA in favor of the Americans ? <hr></blockquote> In the Pacific battles, the casualties were nowhere near 1:100 in the US's favor. In most Pacific battles (except Iwo Jima), the casualties were between 1:1 and 1:2 in the US's favor. Panzerwerfer, Iwo Jima was the only major Pacific battle where the Japanese inflicted more casualties than they suffered. In my opinion, in all of WWII, it would be difficult to find more consistently vicious fighting than what occured in the Pacific island hopping campaigns. In all cases (Europe, Pacific, Asia, North Africa, north, south, east, west, etc.), the carnage, destruction, and death were such a waste and so, so sad. However, the Axis 'was' bad/evil & we were forced to defend ourselves. Cheers, Richard

Gyrene, I agree with you that "the battles in the island hopping campaign in the Pacific were some of the most intense fights per square yard in the history of mankind, most of them make the war in Europe seem quite leisurely." (Actually, the 'leisurely' part might be overstated, but I understand.) However, these battles had to be corkscrew & blowtorch affairs where massive amounts of firepower (US very heavy firepower) were applied to dig out, smash, and destroy deeply dug in, most tenacious & fanatic (& I do not use 'fanatic' in a bad way) generally static Japanese defenders. Only the application of the most heavy firepower could overcome the tenacious, dug in Japanese defenders. :eek: Personally (& I say only for myself personally), I would not enjoy such tactics in CM terms as much as I enjoy the somewhat more open, more maneuverable, and more freewheeling combat of northwest Europe, north Africa, or the Russian front. But you know what, if there are some mods for CM in the Pacific, I would play them. However, my guess is that I would not much time in playing CM Pacific as compared to CMBO or CMBB. Cheers, Richard :cool:

I have practically no interest in CM in the Pacific. It would be little fun. Why? Japanese (by the way, incredibly brave but underarmed [bolt action rifles] soldiers) dug into hillsides and jungles in bunkers & pillboxes with machineguns. Alternatively, they are crawling stealthfully or making suicidal frontal assaults (aka banzai charges). Opposing these Japanese are US troops (fine, brave troops also) with a massive firepower superiority over their Japanese opponents. US tanks, flamethrowers (inf & tank), heavy assault infantry with demo charges; oh yes, did I remember to mention arty (105 mm, 4.2 inchers, 155 mm, destroyers [5 inch], cruisers [6 inch, 8 inch], a few battleships [14 inch]), close air support, rockets, blah, blah versus the Japanese infantry (yeah, the Japanese do have arty but not much compared to the US). Ouch, I'm getting a headache, or maybe the poor Japanese computer soldiers are getting a serious headache. The US in the Pacific defeated Japan with a firepower preponderance far beyond what had occurred in Europe. In short and in my opinion, CM in the Pacific would be, in general, not a lot of fun as a game. Of course, one can find a number of even battles. Indeed and in general in the Pacific, the even battles were fewer & farther between than what occurred in Europe. Just an opinion and a choice of my tastes. Cheers, Richard

In the poster picture, the guy on the left is playing Doom or Team Fortress Classic. Gimme one of those for my conscript Volksturm. That will do it. Cheers, Richard

Even if the Luftwaffe had acheived air superiority over the Channel, the Brits would have starved the German invasion forces by using and possibly sacrificing a relatively small number of destoyers. The Brits would not have had to even expose heavier ships (cruisers, much less battleships) to have stopped appreciable supply to the German invasion forces. :eek: :eek: This does not even consider the Channel weather which has approximately 20 plus gale force storms per year. The Germans were quite smart & fortunate not to have attempted Sealion. Cheers, Richard

Looking foward to seeing the Spanish Blue (brrrrh, it is cold) Division. Cheers, Richard :cool:

Tools, My KT recon units, scout for my Big-Bertha-near-nuclear-artillery-jagdpanzer-300 mm-armored-killer-super-jadg-triple-flying-tigers. :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: Wow, that was a mouthful. Cheers, Richard

I3w53r, If you have Allied inf without zooks/piats against nearby Axis armored vehicles, figure that killing the armor is unlikely. Maybe, a rifle gernade, a demo charge, a gammon bomb, etc. 'might' get lucky & get the armored vehicle. However, I would not bet on getting lucky in this situation. Now if you have Axis inf without schrecks but with panzerfausts, you are in much better shape. Still it is a matter of luck. Indeed, the pzfst German inf is substantially better off than Allied rifle gernade inf against nearby enemy armor. Cheers, Richard :cool: :cool: