Monty's Double

The other great thing about the WeGo system is being able to replay the action and find out what happened on any part of the battlefield. I gave up playing the Close Combat series because I found that it was fruitless to try and co-ordinate attacks in different areas. You always end up bunching your forces together on attack because it's the only way you can see what's happening. The turn based system in CMBO allows you to learn from your mistakes by replaying over again to try and work our where you went wrong (or right for that matter), and construct far more complex and satisfying plans. And if you want something more immediate and less reflective, get online and squeeze that timer until the pips squeak...

Three minutes Sir Uber General? Any more than 1 minute per 1000pts is for women and Manchester United fans. If you actually have time to give everyone orders you aren't doing it right.

Fantastic, a topic with all the frustration of normal Peng threads, which manages to avoid the one useful purpose of actually challenging anybody! This forum used to have standards dammit.

Just don't rely on the History Channel for unit stats.

Just one comment: in protecting those Tigers, you might not want to get too close with the Wirbelwind. When under air attack it's best to spread out, as rockets and bombs are pretty inaccurate but have a big blast area. If the Wirbelwind gets knocked out by the fighter-bombers, then it's done its job by protecting the Tigers. That's a 2:1 points trade off I'd take any day.

Hawkeye, just back away slowly and don't make any sudden moves. They can smell fear you know. Most of them can smell pizza too, but that's just their dinner. Both have pretty much the same affect and you don't want to be around to witness either.

Second that. If possible, advance under cover of your HMGs, then consolidate the position and bring them up. Remember the attack on the guns in Band of Brothers? The .30cal team suppressed the Germans while the infantry took the position. Same is true of tanks only more so; use their MGs and df HE to suppress while you assault, don't lead with them, or you'll find them popping smoke of the "one use only" variety. Just because they can outpace infantry doesn't mean they should.

Silvio has the answer I believe. When troops assault vehicles there's a degree of abstraction going on. In "reality", it's more likely that a single member of the squad is scooting forward to place the charge directly against the vehicle while his comrades give covering fire/pray/soil themselves etc. Remember also that the terrain is slightly abstracted too; "open" isn't a billiard table, the ground is assumed to have a small amount of cover. I'd guess that's why BTS chose to code this part of the game the way they did.

There's a book about Hurricanes over Murmansk. I think it's called "Hurricanes over Murmansk". If I can be bothered I'll try an Amazon search.

There have been previous threads about this, and I'm fairly sure that vehicles reversing are less likely to bog. Whether a bogged vehicle is more likely to unbog if you change its orders to reverse is the bit I can't remember and is, by some tragic coincidence, the only piece of information that would be useful to you. Oh well, I tried. PS Tropic, this is a civilized board, we don't have FNGs here, just SSNs. PPS Someday, probably in the dark small hours of the morning, tired, bored and staring into the abyss of existential angst, you might feel the urge to visit, albeit for purposes of purely scientific interest, a Peng thread. Just don't alright?

65.32%, what do I win?

It's a bit like the difference between a criminal case and a civil one. Civil courts work on the balance of probabilities (ie "most of the time") whereas criminal courts require a case to be proven beyond reasonable doubt ("almost all the time"). A Sherman 75 facing a Panther would lose both ways, but a 76 would only lose on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt. Just like OJ. Hopefully a lawyer will come along and explain how wrong I am then take away my house. Not that I'm bitter.

Can you split squads in the demo (it's so long ago I can't remember)? If so you can split a squad with two charges, and usually each team will have one charge. Makes them a little vulnerable, but you can always reform the squad later.

PDF, they aren't available in all months, so you might not have spotted them. Actually, I'm disppointed this hasn't turned into the "have you noticed the computer seems to have some wierd prescience about your picks" thread. So, without further ado, have you noticed the computer seems to have some wierd prescience about your picks? I played against the AI the other day and fancied picking allies that roughly approximated a US cavalry attack (several greyhounds and halftracks, a couple of jeeps, two M8's and some infantry with light support). The computer, bless it's cotton socks, as infantry defenders gave itself FIVE 37mm flak guns and two 75mm IGs. If a human opponent did that, wouldn't you be looking to get a new password?

And before anyone else gets in, these days they do it with radar, and it's very, very accurate indeed. Modern mobile artillery like MLRS and that american 155mm thingy (M109? Paladin?) is designed to grab a fire mission and be on its way in a matter of minutes, before unpleasantness arrives in return.

You can get more out of your arty by moving the tartget in the oders phase. Moving the target point a short way (and still in LOS) will give about 13 seconds delay, which will help spread the fire over an extra turn or so. This can have the added advantage of giving time for the enemy troops to get up. Even puny 81mm rounds are deadly against troops moving.

Ambush, remember to use the ambush command. AT weapons are much more accurate at ranges of 50m or so, but teams will often open fire much earlier if you let them, giving their position away and effectively signing their own death warrants. Remember that zooks and schrecks in buildings will suppress themselves with the backblast, and can even set the building on fire. PIATs don't have this problem, but are pretty inaccurate, so they need all the advantages they can get. Oh, yes, and the helmet does represent the number of men left in the squad (unless you've replaced the interface screen with a mod, in which case your squad icon could be anything from a hamster to a cheese sandwich). And another thing, it probably wasn't the grenade which took the men out, grenades rarely cause casualties, but they do suppress squads very well, and this often leads to big casualties, as their opponent gets a "free shot".

Plot the reverse move in as well. That way if you are targeted you have a good chance of getting back behind cover before you are hit. Even better, use a small, fast recon vehicle to do the ducking. If it turns orange and smokey then there's something bad there, try and other route.

Remember, the benefit you get, especially from light/medium arty, is not just killing enemy forces, but the effect on their morale status. That's why a rolling barrage is most useful; the closer your assualt is to the barrge, the more shokced your opponent is likely to be, and the more advantage you gain in assault. Supression worls fine on guns too. I find 81mm/3" mortars ideal for supressing guns (especially as they are usually in woods) so I can bring up direct fire HE assets to finish them off. Because they are cheap, it's often worth speculative fire against likely hiding places.

It can be done, because I've done it. I think the reinforcement marker has to be placed far enough (a couple of tiles?) away from land so that the computer has no choice but to fill the boats. You can't change who goes in what, so you end up with odd mixes, but that's no big deal. Post your email and I'll send you the scenario (don't use the one on my profile, it's down at the mo).

Some great advice there. All I would add is that when you have a couple of armoured assets in cover against superior armour, use Move and Reverse rather than Hunt. This works best with allied turreted TDs, as they should move out, get off a couple of shots and be back in cover before the enemy replies. If you use Hunt, the TD will tend to stick out in the open to duke it out. Must say that I'm surprised there's a perceived problem defending. My friends and I have started to give the attacker 10-25% bonus, as we've found that a well sited defence, especially on a small or medium map, is very difficult to shift.

Spot on redwolf. Also, remember that just because you can do something, doesn't mean it's a good idea. Tank crews give away a lot of points when killed/captured. You'd be better using a split squad to attract fire. And yes, you'll see lots of strange things in CMBO if you play long enough, but mostly you'll see an awesomely accurate wargame at work. Strange things happen in real war too.

Brian, you are a genius. Just think, coding the game would be a doddle: you just go straight from the mission menu to the after action report. Lots of Draws, I'd guess. BTW, do you rememeber the USAF used to have a nuclear AAM as well? Called the Genie I think, unguided. I remember reading something by a US pilot who got to fire a load of de-warheaded ones off when they were withdrawn from service. They shot off any direction but straight ahead apparently. I wonder if they ever developed a nuclear cigarette lighter in the 50's?

Calliope was indirect fire, I'm pretty sure, so if it was in CMBO it would be represented by off table arty. Why not try "Tulip" instead? 60lb rocket rails welded to the sides of Sherman turrets. Now that's the kind of direct fire HE I want.

Got me bang to rights gunnergoz. Actually, the first version did have a single Bofors (in an unarmoured mount I think) but the MkIII, which saw service, had two 20mm Oerlikons. Rate of fire was 450rpm I believe. Didn't know the Canucks had 'em, thought it was just us and the Poles. PS Cpl Carrot - they aren't always that small, have you ever been to Oz? My mother has a four foot long blue tounged skink living in her shed!