Erwin
-
Posts
17,464 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
32
Posts posted by Erwin
-
-
John: Panzer Elite SE still has a current board/development???
-
Thanks for the clarification, akd. It wasn't only me who was confused re this, since there are actual "Section HQ's" that have no crewed weapon, as well as HMG's etc that also function as an HQ. Wish this sort of stuff was in the manual tho'.
-
One issue that is time consuming for no apparent gain in detail or gameplay value is when one wants to issue orders to a platoon (let alone a company) of vehicles.
It's wonderful that one can issue multiple waypoints for all the units in one go. But, unless all the waypoints lie in a straight line, the waypoints do not keep the platoon/company in formation, and units will start hitting each other and generally acting like they're all drunk. Even though they may all end up eventually where you want them, they arrive in a mess, often facing in weird directions etc. (This can be a serious problem in WEGO.)
Yes, we now have movable waypoints. But, it's time-consuming to go in have to move (say) 20 units worth of waypoints when each single unit may have multiple waypoints, and one can't simply click on a waypoint to access the unit. (That is a feature of CM1 that many of us sorely miss.) In CM2 now, one has to go back to where the original unit is and click on that unit, and only then can one adjust its waypoints.
I am doing exactly that right now in the (xnt) CMBN Himmelfarht battalion-sized scenario (which I highly recommend for those who enjoy larger scenarios).
Whether it be a formation order, or simply have the waypoints keep their relationship to one another so one can set a formation manually and have the units stay in that formation as they move, it would improve the gameplay.
-
Old Spike did a huge amount of testing of CM1 and I believe is still active on other forums. Hope he wasn't banned as well. It would be great to have the sort of comprehensive testing of CM2 that he performed to help improve our play skills.
-
I hear what you are saying, w. My experience with the game is that troops that are not HIDING can be seen a little too easily - esp by moving attackers.
The default usually shows one guy on lookout and the rest in the dirt. That one guy should be hard to spot, and the guys in the dirt should be impossible to spot or shoot at. But, it seems as if the unit can be spotted as if all the guys are lifting their heads and rubbernecking. (I see this happening a lot in woods.) Certainly, when fired upon, the guys that appear to be prone in the dirt seem to take casualties as if the game system/AI can see all of the unit rather than just the guy on look-out.
However, I agree that there are other issues that may be way more important.
-
"I should give a FAST order from one side of the street to the other (or whatever stretch of ground I don't want them stopping in the middle of)."
Even FAST move may not prevent inf from stopping and firing in the middle. I accidentally found that my AT teams did that very successfully when I tried a FAST move from one cover to another in LOS of a tank. The tube guy stopped, aimed and killed the tank. I now use that tactic deliberately with success (when there is no better option).
-
Wonderful AAR. Thanks for taking so much time and trouble with pics.
-
The posters are terrific and add a lot of atrmosphere. But, yes, need to use em sparingly.
-
Downloading now. Thank you!
-
-
I tried your (embarrassingly obvious once you mentioned it) suggestion and restarted a scenario so I could easily mix and match units in the set-up turn to see who can share ammo.
For a German company with a 4th (Heavy Weapons) Platoon:
ONLY the HMG squad (composed of two HMG teams) can share. Neither of the 2nd HMG squad teams can share ammo with the 1st HMG squad teams even though they are all under the 4th Platoon HQ. (The 2 Stummels in the 4th Platoon can't share anything even when dismounted.) So, only the HMG squad HQ and its team can share.
The Shreck teams under the Battalion HQ can share. However, something weird happens. If you have 3 shrecks each with 6 rockets, the total comes to only 16, not 18. If you have two, the total is 11, not 12.
-
I didn't come up with that idea, Jon. I was commenting on someone else's suggestion.
But, I did happen to enjoy "automated" formations commands in other games. And I am firmly in the camp that wants to spend its time on tactical decision-making rather than micro-managing decisions. There is a difference.
And the reason that CM1 is still being played is that one can easily and efficiently play H2H with full regimental KG's/TF's on each side. I appreciate that some folks enjoy small scenarios and want more detail to make the small scenarios challenging. However, the earlier posts show that some of us like huge scenarios and CM1 has shown that they can be played easily if the UI is appropriate.
-
"In WeGo, it's not that big an issue for most ambushes."
Have to disagree with you there. I have given up trying to attempt ambushes in WEGO. It's too risky.
-
AP does have v good graphics, but perhaps AP gameplay is more comparable to CM1 (but with a much less intuitive UI)? I tried to like AP, but just couldn't get used to its complexity and figuring out how to do things "right". It does seem a bit closer to TOW which I had similar problems with.
CM2 is a much better simulation than either. So, apples and oranges...
-
I can appreciate the disadvantages that Womble mentions. But, the advantages of a simpler "universal" ammo sharing system (and the ability to ACQUIRE while adjacent to a vehicle) would be the lesser evil.
Obviously, the micromanage approach has many fans here. I'm in the camp that considers anything that gets in the way of spending one's precious gaming time on tactical decision-making to be irritating (after the novelty of the micromanage opportunities has worn off).
-
That makes way too much sense, Jason.
I find myself becoming a convert.
(Damn.)
-
That is perfect timing. I now have something to do during a week's TG vacation in the desert!
-
oh... right...
That hopefully will even answer my question re Stummel crews under the 4th platoon HQ as well.
-
+1 re Blazing 88's comments. Some of us really like CMAK (we still play). Wide open maps (altho' the terrain can still be varied and interesting with gullies, wadis, hills etc), lots of maneuver rather than one assault after another. Long range firefights.
-
xnt. Got em from CMMODS. Thanks mj...
-
The question remains whether there needs to be a middle situational order between the default and HIDE. I have "felt" that non-hiding troops are too easily seen by moving attackers - even buttoned tanks, whereas it can be suicide to HIDE (even with a covered arc) when in close proximity to enemy inf.
-
Ammo sharing is more complex than it needs to be. It would make more sense if any unit could share with any other unit.
eg: A German 4th Platoon is "heavy weapons". In a game I have right now the 4th Platoon HQ is ico 2x81mm mortars each with its own ammo carriers, and 4xHMG's. However, each HMG team is in a "squad" of two and one of the HMG teams is the "HQ" of each squad. (IIRC the 4th platoon is also ico 2xStummels.)
So, does that mean ALL the HMG's could in theory share ammo since they are under the 4th Platoon HQ, or only the two teams of a single HMG squad since one of those HMG's is a "HQ"?
(Until an HMG runs out of ammo AND an HMG is KO'd but its team is alive and with ammo it will be hard to test.)
Also, if the Stummels are under the 4th platoon, could the Stummel crews share ammo with other members of the 4th platoon? It's weird that the Stummels have ACQUIRABLE ammo, but you have to dismount the crew and mount inf to get it. (This is a good argument for simply having units adjacent to a supply vehicle in order to ACQUIRE instead of having to mount and dismount since in WEGO it's a PITA when one really wants to focus on tactics. And I dislike loading everyone to the max in the set-up turn.)
I did experiment having the mortars deploy next to their truck (and kept the carriers in the truck, altho so long as they are nearby I don't think it matters). What I found is that the ammo in the truck (not ACQUIRED by any carrier) is being used first. I haven't exhausted the UNACQUIRED shells in the truck yet, so not sure what will happen next: Whether the ammo will be used first from the carriers or from the mortars' own stock.
And speaking of AT teams, I had one guy WIA while the ok guy (with the schreck) performed buddy aid. While the WIA guy was on the map, the ok schreck guy showed 5 or 6 rockets. When he'd completed buddy aid and the WIA guy disappeared, the ammo count went down to 2 or 3.
-
Conscripted at 17 in '43.
-
Well, I guess we shold add it to the list of extra features we'd (or someone) would like to have: Tying an inf escort to a tank so they "work together" (however that is interpreted).
What ever happened to 'Fionn'?
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Even tho' it was a first person game, PE was definitely not a shooter... more like what CM would be if you could actually occupy individual tanks and fight em as a crew. The inf in PE was very much an afterthought however, and not done well.