Aaron
-
Posts
75 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Aaron
-
-
Tractics. Your not going to win any friends with that one.Originally posted by A.E.B:There was a wargame released around 1980 called Tractics that was the equivalent of CM:BO & BB played on a sand table with HO scale models. That game quickly taught you that all AFVs had weak points.
Yes, it would be more fun if it actually was a challenge to take out a T-34 with German vehicles. That's why I play CM. Even if it bothered me, I'd just play in 1943 instead.CM:BB is a game, not reality. How much fun would it be to be a German playing in 1941 if the forces that were realistically available to them were incapable of fighting T34s.Aaron
-
Gandalf was a commie?!
A
-
I did it once by accident. I thought my AT gun was in the trench but it started in a foxhole just next too it (the Place function in the setup mode doesn't actually say TRENCH). I pushed it in no problemo.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:Not really the point I was trying to make, sorry - the discussion revolved around "in the case of an anti-tank gun, think of it less as a trench than as a predug gun pit" - I am just wondering if it is possible (without opening up CMBB and doing a test scenario) to push an AT gun into a "trench", as this would seem to invalidate that line of thought...or was BTS way ahead of us on that one....
Aaron
[ January 28, 2003, 09:06 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
-
I like the wooden MG bunkers because of their huge ammo loadouts. They can fire from turn 1 and never come close to running LOW. Against infantry they reign supreme. This is another case of something's value depending on the scenario and what they are liable to face.
Aaron
-
I've just finished battle 19. I've had one Large Town and one Village. The rest have been Rural or Farmland. I don't know how you can have so many city battles since you can't at all in June->July.Originally posted by SuperSulo:PPS: I'm on my 18th battle, end of september. I've had 8 Large Town battles, with 3 more in pipeline! So in 21 battles I will have fought 11 City battles. Does that sound much?
Thanks for the note about QB flags. That'll help.
Aaron
-
As for the 2nd Chart ? you say: ?The advantage of this method is that Replacements can never be used to gain Exp for you squad (unlike the current system)? Bit worried about this: what happens if a Green/Conscript squad loses most of it?s men and they get replaced by vets?
Well, using the second method, you don't actually get "Veteran" replacements. Its all abstracted.
I remember a few years ago reading a long article show the differences in the replacement methods of the US, Germany and UK and the different advantages of each. Unfortunately, I've long since long the article and forgotten much of what it said. However, I'm not sure its even possible for conscript units to get high quality replacements. Anyway, I intended to research the actual german replacement system before I finally decided what system I would personally use.
I don?t like the idea of the player placing the flags ? worried about subconscious cheating. This should be out of the player?s hands.
Also worried about the player creating setup zones for the same reason. Obviously you can use the default QB setup zones, but they are quite boring.
As Apache said, its really not an issue. I just have rules for flag placements and setup zone areas. So, when I build a Medium map, the map is 1000 m by 1000 m and the setup zone is 1/3 axis and 1/2 allies and the flags are either one the edges of the setup zone (for probe and assault) or in the middle for attack. If I stick to the rules (which I do simply because I'm trying to do it as fast as possible) I can't really get an advantage out of it. My rules are currently in a nearly unreadable set of notes.
Aaron
-
Ok, I'm on battle 17 (still september) and here are some general comments. I appologize if they sound overly negative. Just assume that everything I don't complain about I like.
Ok, first off let me talk about Favor. For one, calculating Favor after a battle takes too long. I know this sounds wimpy but it seems too involved for what you get out of it. If I'm fighting a straight infantry force (or partisans) my Favor award is usually about what I get for the Victory level. However, if I'm fighting a mech force, I've destroyed so many light armor and tank units that I quickly max out at +50. Maybe if it were simplified to just use the number from the battle results screen? Secondly, there aren't enough things to spend favor on (more on that later) so I've got over 350 points. I've started burning them on Infantry just to get rid of them.
Secondly. With the modifiers for Immediate Attack, I now don't ever want to get a Total Victory. The effects of an emergency reorg are so bad that I'll sometimes request a Ceasfire to get a Draw rather than risk a follow up attack. It's just not worth sending my troops across a field for the final VL when every wounded soldier cost me 10% of my Experience.
Ok, I've been thinking about Exp alot lately and have two ideas.
First, I was looking at the formula for Exp and realized that dividing the Exp for the replacements by 1.25 is numerically the same as treating Regular replacements as 8 instead of 10. And since they are just a number anyway, why not have a smooth progression on the table rather than the 4/8/20 results we have not. So, make a new replacement chart (in this case June to Aug)
DR Exp
1 3
2 4
3 5
4 6
5 7
6 8
7 10
8 12
9 15
10 20
This way its is -always- better to spend the 30 points of Favor to get a slightly better number. Thus Favor will be more important for keeping your guys from turning Green (or worse).
Secondly, I was also thinking about my early post and looking at the CO Died chart and wondering if we could use a similar chart to determine the effect of casualties on the unit. The chart could look like this
DR Exp change
1 -50%
2 -40%
3 -25%
4 -20%
5 -15%
6 -10%
7 -5%
8 -5%
9 No Change
10 No Change
Use the Losses modifier from 52 and instead of the charts for number 56 (replacement quality) you can just have a Replacement DRM for a given month. Assume that if the Exp drops dramatically its because the squads Gruppenfuher or its best soldier got hit. If a "No Change" result, assume that the guys who died were not part of the leadership element of the squad or perhaps were just lightly wounded. The advantage of this method is that Replacements can never be used to gain Exp for you squad (unlike the current system) and you can also use it to keep track of Exp on a Platoon or even Company level. This might help Apache who is commanding an entire battalion from having to keep track of Exp for every individual squad but rather just for the company.
That's it for now. I hope my charts don't get messed up.
Aaron
-
I had an entire platoon assualting some rubble which contained one guy manning a HMG. A StuG was hanging back and decided to fire canister at the one russian. His canister shot went through my assaulting platoon (now in the open) and totally decimated it!
Aaron
-
Your troopers might get concealment from a trench, but the trench itself is easier to spot than troops hiding out in the open.Originally posted by Walpurgis Night:So why use the cover of terrain at all on defense? concealment? you still get concealment in a trench (not very mobile, but you can hide).
Aaron
-
Are you using verion 1.00 or 1.01? Tank HQ spotting was one of the things changed by the new version.
Aaron
-
When it rains it pours ...Sounds like you have a great Campaign going there Aaron. Loved your trials and tribulations AAR
.... send some more.I got Partisans Attacking me at night followed by a Partisan Counter Attack in the rain. It was a slaughter. 1318 russians wounded, 382 killed and 207 captured. All for the cost of 8 german wounded and three killed (most from my attached recon platoon running into a MG on a flanking mission). Those partisans didn't stand a chance. The only way they could have won is if they more guys than I had bullets. The Stug's Canister rounds proved to be clouds of death. Each of the three Stuges had at least 100 kills. After those easy victories, I've got four veteran squads plus two veteran tanks.
I've been doing some numerical analysis on the experience rules. Assuming a squad get +2 XP each battle (average) and only suffers one casualty every other battle (unlikely) and gets Veteran replacements every time (very unlikely), his max experience will be 54. Well below that needed to be Crack. If, by some miracle, the squad can consistantly muster +3 EXP each battle, they will Max out at 73 points but this is extremely unlikely. If the squad getting same +3 each battle are stuck with Regular replacements their max EXP drops to 64. I'm thinking of a couple things. One is allowing a squad to suck up 1 or 2 casualties with no loss is EXP (enough veterans to get the newbie up to speed and keep him from getting them killed). Another would be a roll for each casualty and on a 1-2 he's only lightly wounded and is back in action for the next battle. On a 3-4 he'll be back in one week (not sure how to keep track of that). Or, lastly, each squad keeps track of the highest EXP score it ever had and if its current EXP is lower it gets a +1 exp bonus each battle. The Max EXP value is reset if ever the squad gets Eliminated or if disolved due to Emergency Replacements.
Finally, how are you planning on handling the changes to the Infantry Company's organization that happened in '42?
Aaron
[ January 17, 2003, 04:37 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
-
I'm at battle nine and things haven't been going well. I started with a Green Infantry Company and a platoon of StugIIIBs. On my second battle, two turns from the end of the game, I had two full platoons and my last movable tank ready to assault the VL that I've been softening up for the last 10 turns or so. Of course, that was the moment that my air support decides to act and, in their wisdom, they decide to drop their 1000 lb bombs on my last tank. Only four men out of 90 walked away from that one. On the next battle, one of my StugIIIs decides to fire canister right though my own guys. He killed 12 Germans and -no- Soviets.
My last battles were a Meeting Engagement where I decimated some low quality infantry. Next came an immediate attack (no problem, my Aux units covered me). That battle didn't go so well so next comes a Allied Counterattack. I was down three full squads when the replacement roll comes up Green!
Still, it seems that I've destroyed the entire production run of BA-6s. They're everywhere. No real tanks as of yet. Its July 4th, 1941.
I'm using the Editor method. I've not switch to Variable rarity instead of the two-stage Quick Battle. I only buy the NO CHANGE (and maybe a few +10%) things. Also, when a HQ unit gains an experience level, I purchase a new platoon and look at the platoon leaders skills. If he has more than the one I own, I'll randomly roll to increase his skill (I delete the new platoon, its just a randomizer). Also, if the company commander bites it, I will replace him with the First platoon's LT. Using the Scenario Editor allows me to keep the same names on the units. This really helps get the "feel" of commanding individuals. I know that Lt Edelstien's third platoon is capable of any task (thanks to his high Combat and Stealth ratings) or that Stug commander Penner's gunner hits the first time every time. I was glad when Robbe's squad finally made Regular so he didn't have to Run when everyone else was Assaulting
Aaron
[ January 15, 2003, 06:10 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
-
I'm a semi-lurker whose been playing for a few battles now. I've got some questions. I just got CMBB for X-mas so I'm behind the times. Forgive me if these are redundant.
1) Is the Battle Groups (minus attached units) always considered to be 653 points even if veteran or green. My Regular PzIV got replaced by a Green one and I don't know if this number should change.
2) Why would anybody ever use Favor to increase the size of their Task Force? Between the force size calculations rounding up and Handicap bonus, all your doing is creating more Russians that can kill your Battle Group.
3) Why is there such a small limit on number of Attached Units. I was thinking about buying several AT rifles, Tank Hunters and Snipers but your better off just buying a big tank. Maybe the limit should be in points instead?
I'm thinking of starting over as a normal Inf Company and replacing the tanks with a platoon of StugIIIs. I'll use the editor method next time as well.
Aaron
-
Anytime you invest your victory in heavy tanks (or likewise Crack/Elite Infantry) you are, essentially, opting for a Big Win or Flaming Death descision. If your entire plan hinges on one unit, as it apparently did, then of course luck will play a bigger roll.
Aaron
-
There's a scene in one of the earlier Band of Brothers episodes where they are firing that thing (I forget what its called). Lord knows what they are firing at.
Aaron
-
I keep thinking that it would be nice if you could get a simple program that would load a save game file and print out the kills/losses of each unit and keep track of their experience. Has anyone tried to figure out the format of the .cme files besides me? I could use some help.
Aaron
-
I would be interested in running the test again, only this time put 16 HT in woods and only one HT in the open. Increase the number of open HTs to see how many open HTs you need to "cover" the 16 hidden ones. Do you need one per plane?
Aaron
-
My favorites are the StugIII followed closely by the Lynx*. Favorite American vehicle is the plain jane Mark 4.
Aaron
*The 20mm autocannon make a cool noise in Close Combat. I've liked the Panzer II since then.
-
The Med game should have M3 Lee/Grant tanks which have a similar multi-gun arangment. IIRC there was also a french tank with a large hull gun and a smaller turret gun.Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:The CM "engine" can't handle multi-turreted vehicles, so they won't be in CMBB. You can probably expect them in the next CM, but since it's in the Mediterranean/African theatre, I don't think that will be relevant.
Aaron
-
Everyone is familiar with Easy Company and the US's habit of lettering the companies within a battalion. Did the Germans and the Soviets do the same thing or did they number them (first, second etc)?
Aaron
-
I don't actually expect BFC to patch the game for meOriginally posted by Firefly:Your idea of encrypting only PBEM files would be a possibility, but I'd hazard a guess that it would not be an easy solution that could be catered for in a patch and would probably have to wait for the engine rewrite. You need someone familar with the source code to answer that one though.
as I doubt very many people actually care. I would like to edit the save games files to make a simple campaign game that allowed you to pull units out of a end-of-game file and import them into a pre-made scenario (a random campaign can already be done via quick battles as was mentioned before). Also, I have access at work to an entire library of high resolution digital mapping data. One of the tools I use allows me to convert the original polygonal data into point data (where a point is any specified size). It would be easy for me to set the point size to 20 meters (the size of CM's tiles) and convert real world locations into CM maps. I'm an exclusively against-the-AI player. Because I travel so much, I can't really commit to a PBEM game and my internet is too slow for a TCPIP game. I'm stuck in my own little world.
Aaron
[ December 31, 2002, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: Aaron ]
-
How about only encrypting PBEM save files?Originally posted by Firefly:As you guessed in your first paragraph it's to prevent cheating in PBEM. You don't need a third party editor to create scenarios or operations and I can't think of any way of allowing one and maintaining PBEM security. The dubious benefits of allowing save games to be edited are not worth undermining the trust between players engendered by the current system.
Its not like CMBB players are a bunch of 12 year old kids. I just don't see cheating as that big an issue. Also, with high-speed internet being more and more common, PBEM is required less and less.
I'd trade PBEM capability for a Steel Panthers/Close Combat-esque Campaign game. In a millisecond.
Aaron
-
I also tried to edit the saved game but they are, indeed, either compressed or encrypted. Why they would bother to encrypt the data is beyond me. Maybe for security in PBEM games?Originally posted by Udi:Can you edit a saved game?
If they did it for that reason I would be shocked because doing so means that there will never be a 3rd party editor, scenario designers can never create a scenario that goes beyond the limits of the official editor and, finally, there will never, ever, ever be a decent campaign game. The last one really irks me.
Aaron
-
I like some of the Operation map and I want to "cut" them out of the .cmb files to use for various new battles. However, I can't seem to figure out the format of the save game files. Its both compressed and bit packed. Anyone have C code for reading these files? Even a header file will help.
Aaron
.... send some more.
Feature suggestion with engine rewrite.
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
I'd like the abitily to tell a unit to concerve ammo rather than having to hide him completely. Maybe just taking the occasional pot shot at very exposed enemies.
And maybe a "Target Once" command where the tank (esp) just sends one HE shell at a squad rather than continueing to fire at it long after the targets been routed.
Aaron