Cameroon
-
Posts
889 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cameroon
-
-
scottdt, I was thinking the same thing a couple of days ago. Guess we can lobby for it in the engine rewrite
-
Pretty cool redwolf, good idea
-
Ok, someone has gotten a German victory out of this. I'm sure of it. I just don't have a clue how to manage the same.
I can't come up with any workable tactics to dig the Soviets out. The best I've managed is a tactical defeat (69/31 I believe). Hardly encouraging
So, anyone got any suggestions?
-
All I can say is that the tutorial gives you a pretty good "set-up" to work with, if you follow its initial timetable.
I did that and came away losing like 4 of my IS-2s and one immobilized in return for all the enemy AFVs. I fully admit to getting a lucky drop on all the Tigers. I lost one IS for all three of them.
As for the Panthers, the tutorial gives a good place to ambush them. I sent my best tank platoons over for that job (2 reg, 1 vet, 1 green). I ended up losing three of those, due in part to my own stupidity
But they held the Panthers at bay and whittled them down.Shoot & Scoot is your friend.
Sorry I'm not of more help, but since I'd just be rehashing the battleplan given in the manual, I figure it wouldn't be worth it to re-write it
-
I think that means we're supposed to start up a CMBB PBEM, right? I mean, before you get used to the game and I can still beat you and all...Originally posted by Len:........my little sister in Dallas.
CMBB arrived in London, UK today...........
-
Yes, I believe it was.
-
The manual states that setup zones are used, which I'm inclined to agree with since I just did this tonight and it seemed that the zone was being used
However, the manual states that Axis is always "on the west" and allies on the east. So maybe the setup zones are adhered to, but the troops will be facing the east or west, as appropriate to their side.
Which could mean, I suppose, that if you had the Axis setup zone on the east then they would also start facing east. Which would be inconvenient to say the least
Anyway, I don't have any other firm answers. My QB map import went smoothly, which was nice.
-
Hunt means they don't stop for infantry, doesn't mean they don't shoot at it AFAIK.
BTW, why use the Cover Armor & Move? Cover Armor & Hunt works just like you'd want it would seem...
-
I know that in both CMBO and CMBB you can fire through the corner of a building. It's bitten me a number of times. I also know that BTS is aware of that.
What I'm curious about, however, is whether it has gotten "worse" in CMBB. By that I mean, I had a tankette firing its MG straight through the middle of a building at a target hundreds of meters away. And receiving return fire the same way. I think the building in question was of the "shack" variety, if that makes any difference.
Basically, I'm trying to find out if hiding behind buildings has gotten less safe
-
I've only been subjected to one AI prep-barrage and that was in the demo when I'd set up my troops in too visibly a manner. That seemed entirely fine to me, now I don't set up where I can be seen unless I'm feeling like taking some quick casualities.
-
It sounds like, and maybe I'm just hearing wrongly in return, that there is some confusion. I'm not asking for someone to make small (points-wise) operations. I want to be able to do operations on smaller maps.
Like fighting over a village for several days without having to generate over a kilometer of terrain. Especially if the forces involved are small. Obviously it is less useful for ops where the intention is to push someone back, but for a static battle I think it would make sense.
Anyway, that's what keeps me from making operations. The closest I can come to doing that right now is to use the QB map import, which I'll probably try out.
-
Too bad CM doesn't allow TCP/IP spectators
I love AARs and read most that I come across. A live AAR would be cool, but maybe unreasonable time-wise. -
I really wanted something like this too, back for CMBO. I guess I should have voiced my opinion before CMBB got this far along
Not only do I not want to play over such a large distance always, but I don't want to have to BUILD that large a map where only a very small portion is of any relevance.
-
I actually can use my mouse wheel to zoom
For those with a Mac and a USB mouse, get USB Overdrive. It'll recognize anything (afaik) and will let you do a serious set of mappings. Then just map scroll wheel up to ] and scroll wheel down to [.
Right now I've got it set to + and - because I don't use zoom ever. Actually, I don't use + and - much either, but I haven't found anything better yet.
My fourth mouse button is M and my right is control-click (for moving around the map).
-
Originally posted by PeterX:
I'm firmly in the strongly disagree camp. I've played a bunch of battles against the AI so far and lost only in those cases where I could not, or did not, adequately support my infantry. Maybe it's just your copy of CMBB My troops are anything but wimps.SPOILERS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The first time I played Gefechtsaufklaerung, I got swamped. I didn't lose my men, I just couldn't advance. The second time I played this, I went out and layed down the law with the arty, mortars, HMG, and AFVs while my infantry covered. And THEN they advanced.
The second time I played it, this was pretty easy. But I also didn't have a problem mopping the floor with the Germans on Yelnia. And I am most definitely not a stellar CM player, as my current CMBO PBEM opponent can attest
The same goes for Bridgeheads (that you mentioned). My second go at that was to force the Germans to surrender 7 minutes into the battle.
-
Move to Contact useless? Are you mad?Originally posted by Rollstoy:Exactly why I considered Move to Contact a useless command! And a good suggestion to change it for the better!!
Seriously though, I use move to contact to great effect all over the place. Guess that's my vote for not changing it. Though I was unaware that the whole platoon stops, that bears watching.
-
Actually, the wish I have is entirely related to convenience. I want a graphic representation on the status bar of wire/radio. It's a real PITA to open the detail window when all I want to know is radio or not
-
Yeah, but that makes sense. The platoon HQ is going to stand out. EFOW just makes id'ing take more time, it doesn't make your troops blind & dumbOriginally posted by desertrat1943:Extreme. But did you guys notice that even in extreme settings you can still tell which is the tank leader by looking at the small icon? Bummer! :eek:
. Play any scenario, QB, whatever. Once you get in close (a few hundred meters), vehicles start getting pretty detailed IDs.And to vote in the poll: EFOW baby
It is just hair raising to run into a pack of something... and then realize it's a bunch of SMG squads (just did that tonight actually). Luckily they'd all been hammered upon so they ran more than fought. -
Thanks for the confirmation Pvt. Ryan. Still highly annoying
And as conscripts I couldn't even give them really small cover arcs (heh, amusing if I could give it to the rear of the pillbox) to keep them from using all their ammo. Sigh, well for the future anyway.
-
Probably because it seems relatively trivial to "add" the delay yourself by just waiting longer to plot the barrage?
I can't give you a realism or grog answer though.
-
I've been having a lot more fun with CMBB than CMBO, and I loved CMBO. I'm also a gamer, not really a "wargammer".
In all honesty, I do not understand where the idea that "gamers" will like it less stems from. Yes, CMBB is more realistic. I don't see how that is inherently less fun than a game that is less realistic. Maybe I'm just dense
-
Also remember that you will not get a boresight advantage if the gun has moved at all (minus rotating i hope).
You should get the boresight advantage to anything that your gun aims at as it passes through the TRP area. Note that I say "should", I can't confirm this 'cause i haven't tried it yet
-
Yeah, the attacker could buy TRPS, but only if they get to spend some points in fortifications. I've never seen the attacker get points there, and I haven't noticed any so far yet either.
So how does an attacker get to use TRPs?
-
bump, for those who might want it but haven't seen it.
But they held the Panthers at bay and whittled them down.
where did my arty go?!
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
This is a "new feature" but really it is how it should have worked anyway. Basically when the guns get the target wrong, they don't spread out their pattern, the pattern is just somewhere that it shouldn't be
I recall reading a number of discussions about this in the CMBO forums. Personally, I like it but it's frustrating. Means I need TRPs or LOS. That wouldn't be so bad, but you cannot buy TRPs in a QB on the attack or in an ME unless you use the "unrestricted" [edit: or so I've been told] setting. I really wish that this would be tweaked so you could buy TRPs any time.
[ September 29, 2002, 02:14 AM: Message edited by: Cameroon ]