kenfedoroff
-
Posts
452 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by kenfedoroff
-
-
Great Idea. Hope they fix this someday.Originally posted by CMplayer:A related nit that I have, is that command delays should be ignored on turn one. A vehicle with a movement order should be able to be viewed as having already been in motion as the game began, for instance.
This latter, in itself, would go a long way towards remedying the problem, since vehicles could immediately start spreading out, to get out from under one of these gamey, defenders' first turn instant arty barrages.
Sincerely,
Ken
-
It's not so much gamey, but the result of some poor bastisch having to set up for target practice due to the nature of the map. Not much fun for either side.
My 2 cents,
Ken
-
Amen. In CMMC2 all of the above has to be handled by Game Managers (GMs) who freely devote their precious time. IF BTS or anyone else can ever create a tool to automate the campaign aspect and integrate the results into CM battle(s), I doubt I would ever bother to buy another computer game, unless it could integrate with a campaign mode.Originally posted by klapton:...But trying to move to something bigger requires paying attention to supply, large aircraft and artillery assets, lines of communication, replacement troops etc. That would be a totally different game.
Ken
-
I'd rather my opponents whine than disappear in the middle of a game without a word.Originally posted by Kaiser Soze 71:Actually...My opinion is that if there are 2 choices - have to read whining / opponent disappear for good, I would choose disappearing. A whiner can stick around like a burdock and getting rid of him might be difficult...
Best regards,
Willy the Whiner
-
Doesn't whining keep me one level up from those opponents who just vanish, never to be heard from again?Originally posted by Kaiser Soze 71:How do you feel about whiners?
I thought with v1.03, that if I whine loud and long enough, I get extra reinforcements.If you are a whiner, what do you get from whining?Sincerely,
Captain Unconscious
-
In CMBB I think you can re-set the FO target back to the original spot by hitting the "R" key... but I haven't done it in a while and am not exactly sure on this.Originally posted by KiloIndiaAlpha:...when the new location is selected it is not possible to return to the original location ...
Hope this helps,
Ken
-
Yes, that could be one way to order flame suppression. With the present order system, I can't get my flame tanks to hose down a (broad) designated area, which is what it appears they did on a routine basis. With the present order system, you can't get the full effect of what a flame tank can do.Originally posted by Tweety:You mean some sort of strafing command?
Ken
-
Originally posted by IntelWeenie:
OK. My bad. Thanks for the info. A while back I was reading how forward elements of an Axis attack in Russia had a dedicated vehicle to communicate with the Stukas. Now I have to try and remember which book that was in... duh.Unless I'm mistaken, they are supposed to represent armored cars that had long range HF sets for communicating with Rgt/Div when they were 30-40km behind enemy lines. Nearly all aircraft used VHF sets, so they wouldn't be able to talk to aircraft.Thanks,
Ken
-
...and another thing...
If a CMBB force has one of those AC(radio) vehicles, he should be able to designate a target for his Stuka dive bombers.
Ken
-
I just finished reading Flame Thrower by Andrew Wilson, the personal account of a commander of a Crocodile (Churchill) flame tank in France, Holland and Germany, 1944-45.
Many of his actions involved simply area fire (with flame) in a broad swath on suspected enemy positions.
I would like to see CM flame tanks be able to (some how) area fire (with flame only) a broad designated area. Wilson tells how he could never see a dug-in enemy so they would close in to flame range and expend their entire flame supply (about 2 minutes worth) while driving along, sometimes parallel to the enemy trench line, just hosing down anything that looked like cover.
I have no idea what Soviet doctrine was for flame tanks, but I imagine it may have been similar.
With the present CM game engine, I don't seem to get the same effect as what Wilson describes in his book.
Sincerely,
Ken
-
Thanks for the tip.Originally posted by Codename Condor:uk subs can attack other subs (without surprise) thats because they have sonar level 1, german subs cannot.
Waking up the research team now.
Ken
-
The book (Hell's Gate) has other photos that show the Germans had captured Soviet 45mm AT guns as well.
In this book (as well as others) it seems that when the Germans had time to set-up a good defensive position, they would augment their firepower with captured Soviet heavy weapons, so even though the German units were under-strength and had lost some of their regular equipment, they were still a tough nut to crack.
I'm not sure how captured support weapons would be modeled in a CMBB scenario.
Ken
-
I also recommend Hell's Gate: The Battle of the Cherkassy Pocket, Jan-Feb, 1944 by Nash.
From the book's dust jacket:
"The culmination of years of research and survivor interviews, Hell's Gate is a riveting hour by hour, day by day account of this desparate struggle analyzed on a tactical level through maps and military transcripts, as well as on a personal level, through the words of the enlisted men and officers... etc."
It's a somewhat expensive ($65, list price) book, but well worth the price.
It covers the whole battle (mostly from the German perspective) from encirclement to breakout and aftermath, from Generals to privates (with lots of maps and photos).
Lots of ideas for scenario designers as far as assaults, meeting engagements, combined arms, infantry only, etc. (has actual sketch maps used when recommending soldiers for medals, for outstanding action).
Seems to made of high quality material so it can be passed around without fear of damage.
I found one picture that may be mis-captioned: page 256 purports to show a "captured Soviet 8.5 cm AT gun manned by troops of the Walloon Brigade" ...but I am no expert/grog on the subject (I know Soviets had 85mm AA gun).
Sincerely,
Ken
(edit for spelling)
[ August 11, 2003, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: kenfedoroff ]
-
I haven't had much luck with AA vehicles on either side, but have had moderate success with fixed AA units.
If I am able to place my AA so they can pick up the target and track it for a while, they will sometimes even get a kill.
Ken
-
OK all you Grogs, Historians, Experts, etc.
1. Were there any Soviet KV-2 or Axis 150mm Inf guns used in Operation Mars during Dec., 1942?
I have read "Zhukov's Greatest Defeat" by Glantz, but going back over it, I can't seem to find reference to either weapon.
2. What was the Soviet doctrine for the KV-2?
I assume it's strictly close support assault artillery since accuracy seems to fall off beyond 1,000 yd.
3. Since they quit making the KV-2 at some point, I assume they weren't worth the trouble and/or production was changed over to something else?
4. Was the KV-2 considered a Soviet corp asset?
5. What is doctrine on German 150mm Inf guns?
6. Is this intended as a direct fire weapon only, or were they grouped together (at times) for indirect fire?
7. Would the 150mm IG be considered a division asset?
8. I am wondering if it is out of line to have both of these weapons (KV-2 and 150mm IG) on the battlefield in Dec 1942. I know they are rare, but, it does seem plausible.
Thanks in advance,
Curious Kursant
-
For what it's worth,....
Page 429 from "From Normandy to the Ruhr: With the 116th Panzer Division in World War 2" by Heinz Gunther Guderian
"Enemy troop concentrations around the road junction northwest of Kirchhellen were a rewarding target. Hauptman Adam, who led the 1st Battalion of the Panzer Regiment, reported the following after the war:"
"Four Storm Tigers were subordinated...to me...Since, due to the rocket propulsion, the projectiles left a long, meteor-like smoke trail behind them and thereby gave away the firing position, the position had to be changed after every round."
The first deployment was in the Dorsten-Kirchhellen area. After the evacuation of Kirchhellen, we took up position in the forest north of Feldhausen....We had a good view of the fork in the road north of Kirchhellen and observed that strong American combat units were assembled there and had come to a standstill. With all four Storm Tigers, a salvo...was fired. The effect...was hard to comprehend in those days. Vehicles flew through the air, and tanks flipped over like cardboard boxes. Of course, we had to immediately leave our position, but it took hours for the enemy to recover."
It's a good thing they didn't have too many of these STs.
Best regards,
Ken
-
Ahhhgggrrrrr... My T-34 platoons are being ground up like dog food... (sob)Originally posted by frankycee:Also had some luck with grenades and grenade bundles!
....They'll pay for it when the smoke clears though...right Ken!
The Heroes of the Motherland will revenge their comrades sacrifice!! Forward comrades!! Mercilessly reject the Hitlerite bandits!!
Fedorov
-
Ahhhhgggrrrr, choke, gasp, cough, wheeze...Originally posted by frankycee:...The first spotting round to land hits one of the T34's straight thru the commanders hatch, KO'ing it on the spot.
...And it was my platoon HQ as well, you bastisch.
Oh, the humanity...(sob)
Sincerely,
Fedorov
-
You have come across a weakness of the current game engine, which is the lack of a "follow road" order for vehicles.Originally posted by Lt. Stahler:...If I give a sequential number of "move" orders to negotiate a series of bends on a road, it seems to take longer to respond to those orders than if I just order a move directly across open ground, cutting off the corners and bypassing the road.
One way around this in scenarios is to make all (non-weaponed vehicles) the trucks, jeeps, etc., "Elite" status. This cuts down on the order delay and more closely simulates the real world ability of "convoy" movement.
The current game engine also lacks a command control for maintaing spacing in a truck convoy, so that your orders can result in a bumper-car match.
As mentioned by others, above, this will depend on ground conditions. If you fight nothing but "pretty" battles, where the weather and ground conditions are nothing but beautiful summer days and wide open (dry) spaces, roads have less of a value.So is there really any advantage to be gained by trying to stay on a road as opposed to just moving across open ground?
However, as soon as the ground conditions move to "wet", roads become very important (still depending on the cross-country ability of your vehicles of course).
...Which reminds me of a quote by one of our members...
"Combat Mission ... all the frustration of golf, but, without the exercise".
Welcome to the club,
Ken
-
As we sing in MoTown:Originally posted by JerseyJohn:The original round the Cape route also needs to be usable by warships as it isn't always feasable to move them through the Mediteranean. And that route also needs to run both ways. When a ship ends on an arrow, at the end of that player's turn a message should appear, "Continue around Cape?" so the hex also remains as a functional ocean area.
"I second the sEa-Motion".
Good idea, JJ.
Ken
-
Rolling On Floor AND Laughing Out Loud.Originally posted by JerseyJohn:....Farther south, a land hex should replace the water hex between Canada and the U. S.. Some maps indicate the two nations share a border.
JJ, you crack me up.
Thanks,
Ken
-
Aircraft Carriers
Aircraft Carriers had a big influence on sea battles in WW II, but because of their limited plane capacity (relative to the size of air fleets in SC), their effect on SC land battles is all out of proportion to their actual historical influence, yet their effect is mis-represented vs. ships.
Proposed:
Carriers suffer no loss when attacking non-adjacent ships. This reflects history in that they are not exposed to gun fire. (Yes, I realize air crews and planes are lost, but for the scale of SC, this will be ignored).
Carriers can only attack land units that they are adjacent to on the coast.
Otherwise, Carriers cannot attack land units. They can only intercept land based air fleets.
Ken
-
*********** minor spoiler ************
I am currently playing a scenario:
"B&T, Forgotten Front" (August, '42).......that seems to support the test results. As long as my T-34s stay hull-down against my opponents panzers, the slug-fest will continue. Some of my tanks may actually run out of AP.
Fun scenario so far.
Ken
-
Is there any vaild technical reason why the pbem re-load counter is missing at times, from the display? We are not compressing or de-compressing files. If someone needs to copy a file, why are they sending me a copy (if it is indeed a copy) and not the original?
This doesn't happen all the time, with all my pbem opponents. One turn will have the pbem reload counter diplayed, and another turn won't (with the same opponent). This happens with several of my opponents.
Ken
Just how realistic is all this anyhow?
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
I don't have a problem with CMBB(East Front) battles having massive casualties as far as realism. Since the dictators on either side did not have to respond to immediate political pressure from the opposition party(there was none) as far as manpower losses, they could order "Stand-fast" and "Human-wave", etc.
The Politicians in the USA and England did have to respond to political repercussions from losses.
My 2 cents,
Ken