Cameroon

In CMBO, wasnt it 1.5:1 ratios? If they boosted that up to just 2:1, I would try it out; as long as they promised not to buy any mg's! </font>

I guess this is a counterpoint to Claymore's post. I certainly agree with his points about the problems handed to the StratAI. However, what I've seen of the AI's gameplay has definitely left me with the impression that many improvements have been made. And no, the AI isn't whipping me in games. Its just doing a lot better than in CMBO. In every game I've played I've seen the AI use tanks much more intelligently than in CMBO. I've not, for instance, seen them playing bumper-cars as before and when they get too close to another vehicle (say it has become shocked or was in HUNT mode and acquired a target), they tend to back off and re-route much sooner and the movement to accomplish the re-routes is more swift than in CMBO. I've been playing Citadel a bunch lately, trying to do something effective there as the Russians. Each time I've watched the AI do some very cool things. In just my last game, it felt a pin prick (a LONG way from any flag, right near the start). The flank which was pricked, did a partial about face and sent a few tanks to check out the disturbance. Seeing nothing wrong, they resumed their advance at which point I really hammered them. From that point on, the AI seemed to say "ok, screw that flank and those flags over there." It definitely did not make an effort to renew the approach to that side of the map. In fact, it came up out of the riverbed on the left (as one is facing from the german start zone). Speaking of Citadel, I was expecting to see the 15 or so tanks all tangled up and doing nothing as in CMBO. Hasn't happened yet. Tanks stop in overwatch, advance in numbers and generally stay together. It's been impressive, to say the least. I pretty much agree with the infantry bit though. By and large you can guess where they will come from. On the other hand, I have seen the AI make a couple multi-pronged attacks (including dividing up AFV assets). I don't recall seeing many of those in CMBO. Like anything, YMMV and stay skeptical. I don't know what the changes were in the Strat- and Tac- AIs (there obviously had to be some with all the new commands) but what I've seen has been encouraging. Only time will tell if what's changed has actually made the AI a better player.

Yes, so long as the point ratios for QBs have been adjusted (I can't see how that could be missed). With at least 2:1 and preferably 3:1 as the attacker, I'd be excited to play a EFOW battle. EFOW is one good reason to take a tank or platoon of tanks, those big MG loads are super important for area-fire surpression (works well too, had lots of fun with that in the Yelnia mission).

Ok, I've played this one I don't know how many times now. FINALLY I got a minor victory tonight, but other than that the best I manage is a draw because the AI lingers at places where it meets resistance [Heh, I had two vet PTRDs pegging one PanzerIV from behind all the way from the first set of trees. On their last combined shot (yes, 150 rounds) they forced the crew to abandon. It was useful though, the continued resistance kept the AI slow to move forward]. Anyway, I can't figure out where to place the ATGs. Everywhere I put them seems to be bad. I'd really appreciate some pointers including how to set up the covered arcs for best affect. This is with EFOW btw.

Thanks for confirming that Rollstoy, time to go play with that

Be aware, that this info doesn't just magically appear the first time the tank is spotted under EFOW. That tank has to be observed for a bit before the fact that it is a HQ becomes known. That guy waving flags like mad from his (soviet) tank is quite probably the plt HQ. I find no problem with that and it makes sense to me. And if the rationalization that the radio using plt HQ has more antennas is grounded in reality, then I'm ok with that too. The point is (and someone mentioned this in another thread about this issue), NATO troops are/were taught to id the command tank(s). I find it reasonable to believe that eyes on the field (especially vet & officers) could figure out which tanks are the plt HQ. Now, that being said, perhaps the info is revealed too quickly. What needs to be determined is, how quickly (and under what conditions) is this determination made. In Yelnia, the Russian command tanks are quite quickly IDed. Then again, at those distances the flag-waving maniac is prol'y pretty visible I guess to sum it up, I don't have a problem with the plt HQ tank being IDed in EFOW so long as it is for the right reasons. Related only because it deals with FOW... I think that the absolute knowledge about a unit's experience under EFOW was a little disappointing. I was hoping for, at least, something like "High?" or "Low?" denoting the observed quality of the unit's performance (like, are those guys in cover doing a really bad job of keeping covered. Are they noisy? then they are likely "Lower" quality). [ September 04, 2002, 11:33 PM: Message edited by: Cameroon ]

[Edited because I can't read...] Might I ask, since some here have obviously used the command, am I correct in my reading of the Readme in that you place the hulldown waypoint on the location that you wish to be hulldown to? [ September 04, 2002, 02:13 PM: Message edited by: Cameroon ]

Much appreciated! I think I'm the one lcm was referring to

I'm pretty sure you can just click on the vehicle and the little figure on the left hand side (a soldier with a flag behind him) will indicate 'officer' or 'enlisted.' Of course, you have to know what an officer's uniform in either army looks like... And I don't think this works in extreme FOW.</font>

Not to be harsh, but I'd say that's the CO's fault Don't use Move to Contact in bad cover (such as open ground)! Plot your move into good cover with some other type of movement, then add a Move to Contact waypoint once in good cover. That way your troops will make their best effort to get to cover before stopping to return fire. Hopefully

This should probably be somewhere on the download page (if it isn't). CMBO and CMBB are not designed to run in OS X (or Classic _in_ OS X). Boot into OS 9 to play or do a search in the Tech or CMBO forums on how to get a workaround. The workaround looks really bad and goes really slowly because it cannot take advantage of hardware rendering. Heck, do a search in the forums for this topic just to see the lengthy discussions about this. OS X support just doesn't seem likely until the engine re-write.

I can't think of any way to adequately and concisely describe all the things I like about CMBB. Everything has been such a major improvement over CMBO, from graphics to gameplay.... Defense! Woot, you can defend I'd have to invest considerable time on just determining the benefit of optics that I don't know what to say here. I'll have to wait for the full game for that. Tank C&C is darn cool, sucks to lose your platoon leader. Here's a question: Can the Tac- or Strat- AI take advantage of learning which tanks are the command tanks the same way a human can? I think it's very cool that, after some observation by your troops, they can determine if a tank is command or not (well, at least for Soviet radio-less tanks). It'd be a shame if the AI didn't think to use that info. Still getting used to the mouse movement, so far I'm undecided. It doesn't drive me nuts but some habits die hard. I'm a definite fan of the new tracers, heck of the whole way that rounds are now. It'll be weird to play CMBO at this point, CMBB just feels much more "right". And yes, 3 weeks is going to feel like forever. Guess I'll stop slobbering like a mindless drone before Oh, ok, I do have one complaint It can be impossible to select units in foxholes by clicking (band selecting works fine), that's the only thing I'd like fixed.

I don't mean to ask the obvious... but are you sure that it wasn't just the angle you were viewing at when the two "knock outs" occured? OR, and here's a likely prospect, did the second knock out come after the 60 second mark? I've noticed that each turn almost universally has a few ticks past 60 seconds. If that was the case, then the tank was probably not knocked out in actuallity (this can apparently happen in CMBO too but usually(?) only if Arty/Mortars are coming in).

[Maybe a Spoiler?] . . . . . . . . . This is a small detail that went, not unnoticed, but reported as a bug! Play Yelnia as the Germans (espcially with Extreme FOW). As the tanks roll in, they will be given generic "T-34 Model" and unit portrait. HOWEVER, after some observation, command tanks will be idenitified. That is, their portrait will change to have the command insignia on their lapel. I assume, though I haven't tested this, that this is true almost exclusively for the Russian tanks w/o radios. This was reported as a 'bug' because the change from 'generic' rank to being id'ed as a command tank wasn't observed by the poster (see the Short Summary of with the Demo thread).

I don't know where you're getting the idea that it isn't going to win many players over or the idea that it won't bring in new players. Honestly, how can the lack of shockwaves and the (mod-able) different portraits be showstoppers? That's like not playing because the T-34 didn't have your favorite unit markings. The only people I can see not being thrilled with CMBB are those who can't handle the higher-fidelity of the gameplay or those who just hate the Eastern front.

I decided to take a look at this, and I'm going to disagree with you here. Play the Yelnia game and cycle through the tanks during turn 1. They all _begin_ identified with the same generic "rank". However, after some time being observed, command tanks are identified as such. I watched for this specifically, so I'm pretty sure that's intended. I don't know about radio tanks, which probably don't give anything away, but those without radios are prol'y pretty easy to identify as the CO's

Note the text when you go to assign a covered arc, holding down control means "Make a 180 degree arc" while holding down shift means "Make the biggest arc you can". Likely either you're accidently holding down control, or you've got some funky mouse button assignments

Played that scen. twice and had no boggins at all. Re: CMBO and bogging, the vehicle can definitely unbog. If it does not, however, then it becomes immobilized.

I recall this being altogether scrapped quite some time ago. IIRC it was a divided issue amongst the players and BFC (BTS? - whatever) was against it in the end. In any case, don't go looking for it because it won't be there. On one hand, it'd be handy. On the other hand, I'm glad it's not there. The game already gives the "commander" (i.e. you) tons of information that would not have been available.

Anyone else spot the pink spot on the PzIIIM's track? It's bottom-middle and I've got a screenshot to prove it I would never have seen it, but I've been admiring the beauty of this game from the get-go and, well, I happened upon it.

The information displayed only tells you how that ammunition performs in the gun, it does not mean that the tank or gun is actually carrying that type of ammunition. So when the information about the Tungsten (T) rounds (I'm assuming that's what you are referring to with Hartken / Hardcore) is displayed, that tells you what the gun can do with T rounds. Not that it actually has (or does not have) T rounds.

[Possible spoilers!] . . . . . . . . . I agree with YankeeDog entirely here. I didn't have a prayer to do anything to those T-34s from >200 meters. Even under 200 meters it was a gamble and lost both my 37mm for two T-34s. In a related note: It seems that the to-hit and kill chance info has been greatly improved when you target an AFV. I noticed immediately that changes in relative position by the AFV could produce great (displayed) changes to the guns' chance to kill. Sweet Oh, and hull down really seems to drastically reduce to-hit chances (by as much as 30% (absolute) in some cases at least).

That would seem entirely logical to me. You don't (usually) go waltzing around with tanks, you keep 'em back 'cause they don't need to be close. I was absolutely thrilled to see the tanks hanging back instead of the CMBO behavior where they sprint forward.

Yes, this was confirmed long ago (I think). In any case, IIRC that the reason that CMBO used rez files for the Mac version was that they didn't think that high-rez mods would be as popular/prevalant as they were. So, rejoice

I heartily agree. If we grovel, will we get a Mac mirror?