Thin Red Line

Oh, and, yes, for some reason, I've never been able to get the Mine Warning Sign working (rule 501, v30.01). Did somebody else encounter this problem ?

I'm using it. Thanks for the great work !

Tanaka, First, thank you for the exhaustive answer, I appreciate very much. I was looking for an external opinion, and yours makes sense. BTW, my problem is that I have not that much HE, (my AFV were Challengers and I picked up no arty). Well, at least I learned something from that QB. The rarity system will be a great improvement indeed. About the soft vehicules problem, in another PBEM I bought one of this 20mm AA german vehicules who behaved very nicely ; didn't about the game limitation, but I really like that quadruple gun sound !

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Notice that I'm not defending the gamey use of this or any other weapon, I'm just trying to state/demonstrate what the reality might have been? Any abnormal concentration of a specific asset would be sporadic and considered ?gamey? if used regularly. For instance, if I play the game on a company level (1000 to 2000 pts), as in my opinion it should be played, you shouldn't find more then 4/5 of this guns on defense side, any more and that can be considered gamey.<hr></blockquote> Tanaka, I'm very interested by what you say, and I would like to hear your opinion : I'm currently playing a 800 pts deense PBEM as the english attacker light tree coverage, village, and my opponent bought 9 (nine) guns (I'm not sure if AA or infantry guns, probably a mix). The approach process is a nightmare ,I have destroyed half a dozen but now my tank are out and my infantry is slaughtered : is his strategy gamey or not? is this common use of support guns ? <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Also notice I'm not including in the argument the unarmored AA vehicles, wish are currently poorly model in CM with those, it?s my advice, just don't use them completely if possible.<hr></blockquote> Can you elaborate about poor modelling of those weapons ? Thanks [ 01-28-2002: Message edited by: Thin Red Line ]</p>

Something of that sort, Mr President.

Abracadabrantesque site, IMHO... :cool: [ 01-25-2002: Message edited by: Thin Red Line ]</p>

I feel better now.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by JasonC: [QB]To make more tactically correct bocage, don't use the terrain type with that name (which is a tall wall or fence, practically). Instead, make a "berm" 1 elevation level higher than the terrain on either side, with a line of scattered trees or woods along it. (Use scattered trees to allow vehicles through but with a chance of bogging, woods to disallow vehicle passage in this or that spot). This is wider than the real thing, but it recreates the tactical effects of bocage very well. <hr></blockquote> I agree. Not only what you propose is tactically more correct but it simulates EXACTLY what actual french bocage is : a trench, then a slope with woods (not hedges) on top, everything covered by thick bushes. From far,the true bocage looks like woods or forests. Besides, it avoids the presence in maps of the bocage texture which is , despite all mods, the ugliest thing in CMBO. Maps are more realistic, and also better looking.

Snow + thick fog give an better feeling of winter time than clear days and don't hurt the eyes as much. Never tried night + thick fog + snow...

Awesome...

PBEM, definitly. I've been playing other games for so long against predictable AI, being able to fight REAL intelligence while living in country with no fast internet connections is a very, very, very great improvement. It's the reason why I bought CMBO, and why I'll buy CMBB. (By the way, internet distribution is also a great feature to get the game in remote parts of the world)and, from my experience, surprisingly quick.

You've got a nice job here at BTS.

32

Nice cemetery.