Jump to content

Erwin

Members
  • Posts

    17,459
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Posts posted by Erwin

  1. The ease of being spotted and short life expectancy of ATG's has been often mentioned.

    Apparently, they get no cover from foxholes or trenches.

    We're supposed to place em further back in woods so that they can't be spotted so easily but can still see out. But, these exposes the "vagueness" of CM2 regarding exactly what terrain is a unit actually in, and indeed what can be seen.

    In CM1 we had charts that showed exactly how far into and out of cover LOS would extend. The "hide the ATG in woods" approach means that we again need that sort of info to be able to play CM2 well. And the the game system is designed to deny us that info.

    Another frustrating LOS example: An enemy tank had LOS to, and killed, one of my vehicles after seeing it across 500 meters of terrain that had trees in it (somewhere), through bocage with NO gaps (I checked), across a road, and through a 2nd bocage (this time with an inf gap) and then into yet more more trees where my vehicle was situated. My vehicle also saw this enemy tank and was attempting to fire back through the same arduous terrain.

    Ok you say, these sorts of fluke LOS situations happen and at least both vehicles could see each other.

    The problem is that the PLAYER (me) could not see any LOS after checking very carefully. If the PLAYER cannot see gaps in bocage and see any clear LOS when the computer can, this is very frustrating...

  2. Re insignia the point I am trying to make is that they would be subdued. What we see in some pics esp the Brits are bright red patches that would be rather easily seen. I really like the way Aris has been fading the vehicle patches out so that they blend in with the camo a lot better... unless one gets very close.

×
×
  • Create New...