Caesar
-
Posts
232 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Caesar
-
-
This sounds rather like what happened to me. I was sure that all three of my 45mm guns in a group had been knocked out or abandoned. Yet a turn or two later one of them started firing again. I thought at the time that the game must allow a crew that has abandoned and remained close to the gun to go back to the gun. Since then I have watched for it but as I haven't seen it happen again I started to assume that I must have been mistaken. I will save the turn if i see it again (it never occurred to me at the time)
-
Glad I wasn't the only one. I took two attempts to beat it. Man do those infantry hit the deck fast when fired upon.
-
Tell me about it. I just fired for 3 turns at an AT gun thinking it was still alive. This EFOW is fantastic so far. I hardly ever knew where the fire was coming fromNote that infantry that is killed in rough or covreed ground will often become a marker now instead of a dead infantry icon, so you will need to do some recon to find out if they are indeed dead or just hiding.
-
Mark, I sent you your turn (Mech Bush) and it got bounced back by your mail server. Apparently your mailbox is full. Can you send me an email when you've cleared your mailbox.
Craig
-
OffWhite, I didn't get this for some reason. Actually I haven't received anything from Jerry (Dies Irae) for a while either. Sounds like my email must have screwed up somehow. I have emailed all my opponents that I have not received turns from for a while to check. I going to rev up my replies a bit and reply the same day I get the turn to speed things up a bit.Mech. Bushmen (Axis W1) - file 07 sent 11 Aug.
-
I am in the middle of a campaign manager type program and this is based around a remote control tool. I have built mine to use a kind of file defined record to control each action. This way different actions and resolutions just require a different file that contains the offsets etc. I have wrapped the whole lot in a series of COM objects (including the creation of the files) so that modification and upgrading is easier. The end result is that I can have my own map editor, storing the map in my own format and can then generate a battle. I am working on the map generator now. When I finish this part then anyone who is interested is welcome to it. As I say, I only want it to use as a campaign controller.
-
Lee,
Are you sure that it doesn't already take restrict where the tank can be hit based on the cover it is under. The Hull Down indication that we see, may only be used to tell you that the entire hull is under cover. I was under the impression that the entire flight of the shell was plotted right on to the target so the hit couldn't be on a covered part. I thought that once a vehicle was indicated as hull down that the TacAI then targetted the turret. I could be completely wrong, but this was the impression I gained from reading several threads on how the this sort of stuff worked.
-
Fionn
Thankyou, I'm glad that's cleared up. There is far too much invective spoiling good topics nowadays.
Back to my MG question, how do you go about dealing with them when they are used to suppress your scouts. If you are trying to move very fast so as to maintain your shock effects, I can't see how mortars are going to keep up (at the speeds I advance at normally, this would have been my first thought). I read in one of your posts (it may even have been this AAR) that you prefer to keep your tanks hidden until you have located his AT defences so DF doesn't seem to be the answer. What are the RL methods of dealing with them? Oh and if you are wondering about my monomania with respect to MGs, I have recently got pretty badly chewed up by them in a game - and that's in CMBO!
[ July 15, 2002, 03:26 AM: Message edited by: Caesar ]
-
Fionn
I never doubted the reason for your effectiveness nor did I attempt to imply that you were gamey. I fact I reworded my post about three times to avoid appearing to do that and probably in so doing reduced its clarity. I think it is a little unfair to assume the worst of me when this is the first time that I have ever spoken/written/whatever to you.
In fact, I was merely trying to elicit answers to some questions that I had after reading your AAR. I currently could not be decribed as either a manouverist or attritionist or any other 'ist' that I might not of heard of. This probably explains my lack of success which I am trying to rectify.
I was interested in knowing if forward placed MGs could/would suppress and hurt the scouting attempts in CMBB - from what I've read their effects sound quite devastating.
The FOW question did not relate to not being able to tell whether the opponent is dead or not, but rather the difficulty of not being able to know the terrain as well as before and not being able to see guns fire as well as before. Does this have to result in more losses or can you do something to counter it?
Hmmm - Having just re-read my post,
In hindsight this is badly worded and does not really say what I meant it to - sorry. When I wrote it I was thinking of the AAR much more specifically than general style of attacking - the question should really have reflected this i.e. would these changes in CMBB have affected your methods in this particular case or the efficacy of it in this particular case....have the changes affected your style of attacking or the efficacy of it?For future reference - I don't bother with implying things or having underlying meanings etc. If I thought something was gamey, wrong or whatever and I was motivated enough to post about it, I would state it expicitly.
-
Fionn, I've just finished reading the AAR (it was very helpful by the way). Form what I read, you seem to ram home the lessons time and time again about recon and high mobility. This seems to make sence though I don't seem to be particularly good at either at the moment. However I got to thinking - How much are the changes in CMBB going to affect this style of play. Will not the increased effects of the MGs give a defender much better chances of slowing you down cheaply as well as denying you some of your recon. Does the extreme FOW and deny you alot of your recon abilities. It seems to me (and I am operating under a whole heap of assumptions here as I have not yet seen CMBB) that a couple of reasonably well placed MGs could suppress your scouting troops and arty would then have time to anhiliate them. A defence in depth (which the bigger maps should allow), I would have thought, is going to be a much tougher proposition. Finding and removing AT defences and infantry guns would seem to be a much tougher proposition as well. If I recall correctly, you are one of the beta testers, have the changes affected your style of attacking or the efficacy of it?
-
I'll be in. Don't care what side
-
You can change them with a resource editor so long as you leave the length of the name the same. It's about 10 seconds work and is not worth all this fuss. It would take me longer to figure out which bmps I have to change.What they should do is add the ability to edit unit titles yourself. It wouldn't change the unit stats at all and the name would appear on your opponents system as whatever he has named it[ July 11, 2002, 08:53 AM: Message edited by: Caesar ]
-
I suspect that the doodads in CMBB will help the terrain perception quite a bit. This may reduce the need for such options.
-
Assuming that the unit names are put in CMBB in the same way that they are in CMBO (i.e. as resources) then it is a 10 second job to edit the resources to change name to anything you want, so long as you keep the name the same length (assuming you have a resource editor). I did a test just now and my Waffen SS are now Waffen HH.
The amount of ire raised about this is ridiculous considering how easy it is to change.
-
Why is it so powerful? Is the withdraw command faster than the run? Could you elaborate a bit on this - I truly suck at the art of fighting retreats. I think I am going to have to break out my manual to get an explanation of this command. I had presumed that it would have provided an abstracted orderly covered withdrawl.I couldn't disagree more redwolf. The withdrawal command is far too powerful as it is. A good defender can use withdraw to create murderous, perfectly formed, instant action lines of defense. I really hope BTS tones it down in CMBBBTW on the morale side of things, every type of wargame I have ever played that modelled morale has penalised nearby units for other units retreat. This does seem logical especially if this command is a high speed bug out.
-
Slightly off topic here, but how do you use the withdrawl command successfully. I tried to use it to get my men to back off in an orderly fashion (hopefully with covering fire) and instead they just bugged out, got panicked by some incoming fire and kept on going. Is it supposed to be used as a 'flee screaming, the big bad monster is coming' command or as a 'withdraw in an orderly manner' type command. Did I just have bad luck or is it just the same as giving a run command in the opposite direction
-
An amusing little trap is to place a couple of daisy chains in a row with an AT mine at just past the end. If placed in the right spot it can work quite nicely as your opponent goes around the obstacle. It may only work once per opponent but enables you from then on to get far better mileage from you daisy chains as your opponents won't go anywhere near them.
-
Come on people, lighten up. BFC is obviously going to keep a lot of stuff secret - it's called marketing. If you think you are being teased then don't read it. Personally I am green with envy of those who got to play (the cost of a flight from NZ to Chicago seemed a little extreme even for CMBB) and am looking forward to reading the AARs and hearing about the details they are allowed to reveal.
-
If I recall correctly CMBB is going to include much more sophisticated vehicle morale whereas in CMBO it was pretty limited. In CMBO the only choice the TacAI had in panic like situations was to Abandon the vehicle. You may find that with these changes there is a higher chance of the vehicle high tailing it out of there if a non fatal penetration occurs.
On the other hand, in my first ever game against a human I had a Panther take at least 4 (could have been 5) hits from US bazookas (3 of them at around a 100m - I was a little green
) causing penetration, internal armour flaking etc and the tank crew did not abandon 
This actually caused me to lose a lot of tanks in the future as I concluded the Bazooka was next to useless :mad: -
Originally posted by Gyrene
This is probably just due to simple statistics. AFAIK CM calculates the chances of each individual man of a squad being hit. If you start out with say a 20% chance of hitting each individual with shell fire and have 10 men then you have a very good chance of hitting a couple each turn. By the time you get down to one man however, you have only a 1 in 5 chance of hitting him.Sole survivors in CM are ridiculously hard to killIs this realistic? Who knows, maybe he is the one man who found a ditch to hide in or whatever (after all - he has already outlasted all his buddies) It does however, seem overkill to use a 105 to take out one man. A machine gun would appear to be a better bet.
-
Does anyone know if it is in CMBB.
-
I seem to recall in another thread someone mentioning that a sharpshooter can hide in the open effectively. I haven't tested this but I guess it would make sense that a single man could take advantage of minor undulations, long grass etc that larger numbers of men could not. Has anyone played around with the effects of range on these equations? I wonder if the hiding just reduces the ability to be spotted by a percentage so if the chances of being spotted are high enough there is no noticable effect.
-
Ropey, I wouldn't rely on that StuH to take out a pair of waspes. I have killed SPs with waspes before. They just don't turn fast enough to maintain target lock. Let me assure you, armour bails very fast when flamed
PS I'm a bit of a pyromaniac, they're among my favourite toys
-
Why not just a scout command for normal infantry. If they get fired on they are likely to fall back in an orderly way rather than continuing on to their destination and duking it out. Maybe they could automatically move fast when crossing open terrain and sneak through bush etc. When this command is active give them slightly better spotting ability to reflect the fact that it is their whole mission. Might be a bit hard on the TacAI though.
Alternatively, if you have scouts that you buy, increase their spotting abilities, reduce their fire power to slightly above crews, increase their stealth to that of the sharpshooter. I wouldn't make them cost too many VPs as they are likely to take high casualties regardless of how they are used.
I still prefer the idea of a scout command as it means you don't have unrealistic elements in your forces and you can use your normal troops in a realistic manner.
) causing penetration, internal armour flaking etc and the tank crew did not abandon 
This actually caused me to lose a lot of tanks in the future as I concluded the Bazooka was next to useless :mad:
Some thoughts on the new camera movement system…
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
When I went to one of the previews, I found the new system a real pain and was having constant problems with it. Having played using it now for many many hours, I like it a lot. My suggestion to those who find the new interface features a trial is to give them some time. I still cannot take in at a glance all the info from the bottom of the screen as I could in CMBO. Give me another week and I am quite sure I will be able to. I think that the majority of the problems people are having is just a matter of getting used to the difference, not that the new methods are at fault.