KEEF888

Which campaign(s) did you play? I believe there were three of them. We (me and my ASL buds) played them all, and played "the most popular one" (the medium-sized one - I think it was the second campaign) three times, over the years. That's great that you kicked butt as the Germans, :cool: 'cause all-in-all, the campaigns were all somewhat pro-Russian, balance wise. But who cared about precise balance?! What great fun it was! And that was on a flat piece of cardboard (read: map), with us pushing cardboard chits (read: combat units) around, in between the constant looking up/interpretation of the rules in that 300 page tome we called a "rulebook"! I didn't think it could get any better, but then here comes this damned thing called "Combat Mission", and my ASL days are now merely memories. Damn kids, they don't know how easy they've got it! Back in my day...

Hill 621 was/is one of my all-time favorite SL/ASL scenarios, too! :cool: I often thought how great it would be as a CMBB scenario, but also wondered if it would "translate" well. And as far as using old SL/ASL scenarios for CM ideas, (especially with CMBB due out soon), I'd love to see any scenarios from the "Streets of Fire" module! "Draconian Measures", "With Flame and Shell", "Storming the Factory", "Little Stalingrad", etc....drool. Maybe I'll give it a try sometime - I used to design independent ASL scenarios, which were published in various ASL mags (Rout Report, On All Fronts, ASLUG, Critical Hit, etc.), but I have not as yet really given it a shot with CM. Even with their similarities, they are two entirely different animals - and I'm not a good enough CM player yet, to feel comfortable with attempting to design a scenario for public consumption (especially with all the quality scenarios/designers already out there!). Maybe someday....

Thanks guys. Also, I appreciate the "definitions" concerning CMBO, CMBB, CMII, etc. I was getting confused by the different uses of the phrase "CM2", in various threads. Sometimes, it would be used in context with CMBB, and sometimes as another game entirely. Thank you for clearing that up. :cool:

Being an avid ASL player myself for many years, (began when it switched from SL in @ 1982...God, I'm showing my age!), I understand the temptaion to debate. But, to qoute Rodney "Ow, that hurts!" King: "Can't we all just get along?"

Does anyone know if there will be the possibility of using the CMBB system with CMBO? Since the new game will offer "new and improved" features, I was wondering if they would be transferrable to the original game? Thanks.

:eek: I've got a woody the size of a Buick!!!

Can't say enough, except THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!!!!

Just the other day, I was thinking how helpful it would be to have that information compiled so as to be able to make quick comparisons between units - and voila! - there it was! :cool: Hats off to Chris! Great job!

Hey there! I'm far from "the old hands of the pyro school of play", but maybe this can help a bit. Merely by their intimidating presence, a flame throwing tank ends up being the recipient of just about every anti tank weapon within range. I too, find my "mobile-crack-pipe-lighters" prime targets, and many times experiencing a short scenario life. As you mentioned, OBA, infantry/HE suppression fire, smoke, etc. can assist in the flame throwing tank's assault. However, depending upon various parameters, i.e. opponents AT weapons, quality of troops, placement of untis, etc., I still found myself rarely making it to the end of a scenario with my flammpanzer(s) alive. Face it, they're target-magnets, plain and simple - I know that when I realize my opponent is equipped with flamers, (on foot or tread), I try and keep a keen eye on them so as to rid myself of that nuisance ASAP! Much has been said about the intentional setting of terrain fires, when on defense, so as to create a funneling effect for the opponent to travel through, thus setting up an ambush spot - or the torching of key buildings so as to prevent the use of them by the enemy, etc., all of which are great ideas and ones which even I've used to various degrees of success. But, as I mentioned, these are basically defensive actions. When attacking with a flammpanzer, sure, I want to do maximum damage, but I must constantly keep in mind that it is a prime target.(And, in most scenarios, only one, maybe two, will be allotted). I don't want to lose it/them too early, (or at all, if I can help it), but unlike other mobile weaponry, it must get quite close to it's target so as to be within striking distance - and that's where the danger arises. There is a fine line between watching your *ss and being a wimp. If one is going to be too cautious, he might as well not even use them at all. As a general rule of thumb, I'd rather lose my flamer but have taken out an enemy tank and a company of troops, rather than have made it through unscathed but have virtually zilch in the info/kills box.(Unless I needed to exit the vehicle, etc.) As previously mentioned, the support from friendly fire in it's varied forms can help immensely. And it is so fine when it all comes together - watching the already fleeing enemy suddenly lose half it's troops to the cusualty box when doused with a lethal burst of tank jizz! (Jezz, I think I'm getting a woody!) But all it takes is that one hidden bazooka/shreck team popping up or that AT gun suddenly appearing out of nowhere, and your B-B-Q orgy has just been rained out! So that's why I've started to use my flammpanzers more and more as a mopping up unit as opposed to a front line fighter. Broken/routed/high casualtied units are "wounded gazelles", just waiting to be pouced upon, and even the shaken/pinned/panicked units can be taken advantage of, albeit cautiously, especially if they are somewhat cut-off/isolated. Now is the time to finish off these pests, so as not to worry about them coming back to haunt you later in the game! And as with all tanks, infantry support is all important - I never leave them unattended. Anyway, I'm certain that there are many other/better ideas out there, but I hope this might also help. See ya!

:eek: You know, with how damned hot looking CMBB is set to be, I'll be able to unsubscribe from all my porno sites!

Ooops..one thing I forgot to mention in my last post, is that I found no benefit in the ability to spot the enemy when under stealth ability. However, it of course, according to the manual, "increases the chace of remaining unspotted in ambush and while sneaking". Thanks.

From the few tests I've run concerning this, it seems as if the "stealth bonus" applies itself better when the unit in question is crawling/sneaking, as opposed to moving/running, regardless of the surrounding concealment terrain - which, in reality, makes quite a bit of sense. Be it the difference in physical stature or the difference in noise level, keeping a unit concealed is much easier when it is hugging the ground and taking it's time advancing, as opposed to exposing itself and rushing towards it's objective. See ya!

Thanks again, guys. Before I could take the time to conduct any tests, I was playing a PBEM game last week, and one of my Engineer Squads was in a particularly desperate situation. I was able to sneak around to the rear of a King Tiger(!) and lobbed my last demo charge as the beheameth slowly began to pivot it's turret toward my men, with various small arms and MG fire spraying nearby. My squad took casualties, but was still able to deliver its' package (they must've been "fanatic" or U.P.S. employees before the war!) and then proceeded for cover. The demo charge, unfortunately, did not K.O. the beast - but it did manage to blow the treads to shreads, thus immobilizing it and basically committing it to "mission killed", because of it's poor location! When replaying the scene (over and over - LOL!), I could see that the squad got within 10-15 meters, and then tossed their "bag 'o doom". Once again, thanks for all the info! :cool:

Thanks Dook...it's working fine once again. I'm not sure what was happening - maybe a computer glitch, but it's OK now. Could be that I just need to cut my medication in half (or double it!) Thanks again.

:confused: Hello all!...is there a maximum number of scenarios that can be "held" in the CM scenario list, or is it limitless? I ask this because I've had a bit of difficulty getting new scenarios to store in the scenario list. They download fine, but won't show up in the list. I've never had this problem before, and I'm wondering if it may be caused by the number of scenarios I already have installed. Thanks so much.

Thanks for the info, guys.

Thank you, thank you, and again, thank you. And the same goes to all those who contributed these pearls of wisdom. :cool: Your efforts make an already great game even more enjoyable!

Thanks for the tip, mate! And speaking of "Stalingrad", can't wait for CMBB!!!

Approximately how close to a vehicle must a unit be to use its' demo charges/gammon bombs effectively? Also, if the unit fires at an infantry target, will it automatically use the demo charges/gammon bombs? What if the target is in a pillbox/bunker? Thanks.

My Gawd, man. These mods are unbelievable!!!! :eek:

Just wanted to thank you all for the information! Also, could someone tell me the exact title of the book by Rexford, that has been mentioned? Thanks again.

I've noticed that AFVs which normally should stand up to certain weapons' fire, end up buying the farm way too often, i.e. Shermans with 75/76 guns, constantly taking out Panthers with front shots. In reality, this was a very rare occurrence. Now, I understand that the game takes in account such things as weak points, lucky shots, etc. But this seems to be a CONSTANT and CONSISTENT situation, which leads to problems in how to attack/defend a position. The US War Department even admitted that when dealing with a situation of Shermans versus Panthers, the ratio was 5:1! Shermans would try for a side/rear shot if possible, but barring that, much of the time their best tactic was to run like hell and get in a better position. Seems like in CM, a Sherman can go toe-to-toe with a Panther any day - which drives me nuts! Is anyone else experiencing this problem, or do I just suck? :confused:

I've just recently hooked up to high speed cable service, and now I can't play online. When I'm at the screen which shows four options: (1 Player - Hot Seat - e-mail - TCP/IP) the TCP/IP option will not accept when I left click. The option is written in gray instead of black, which the others are. Anyone know what the heck I should do? I've played through TCP/IP before I had the high speed service, and it worked fine. :confused:

I've just installed all the new mods recommended in Madd Matt's section on CM Headquarters site. Everything's gone well except that whenever a building has someone occupying it, the walls and roofs are invisible. The troops inside are visible, and so is the "base" of the building, but no walls or roof. Buildings empty of anyone look just fine. I've got a pretty decent system: Compaq Presario/Pentium 3 - 866 MHz processor/Windows ME/40 GB hard drive/Creative Labs PCI 512 sound card/ATI Radeon VE 32 MB video card. Anyone got any ideas what I can do? I've checked for updated drivers for my video card and that's not it. Could it be that my video card is not "good enough" to support these additions? :confused: