bsd
-
Posts
24 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by bsd
-
-
Spotting ability was reduced by hiding in CMBO. It's pretty noticable, hence the reason that short-range units were needed to spot (eg. bazookas) or FOs. Sharpshooter couldn't be used for this, for example...either they are hiding and can't spot properly, or they are not hiding and fire all the time. It was a very unrealistic situation.Originally posted by jdmorse:I did prefer the CMBO ability to spot while hidden.
-
Yeah they are a huge revolution. For one, a unit can both spot AND not fire. This wasn't possible in CMBO.Originally posted by jdmorse:Covered arcs for inf units will take some getting use to..
In CMBB there should be fewer reasons to hide now.
[ September 03, 2002, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: bsd ]
-
If he is spotted because he is firing first, then give him a small cover arc. If he is spotted without even firing, move him further back into the trees.Originally posted by jdmorse:This is my most irksome problem. When i unhide the HQ he gets spotted. Oh look at all those loverly targeting lines in Yelenia! Anyone found a way around this?
-
As germans, it is possible to use your MGs and arty to delay the soviets to such an extent that there ends up being little fighting around the flags. Just place your MGs with good LOS and let them fire from turn 1. With EFOW the tanks will not fire back until at close range, and they tend to wait for the infantry to catch up. I ended up with all the flags because the soviets were still not to the tall pines by turn 26. My MGs and arty had inflicted 100 or so casualites in the meantime. That's one way to do it.
-
While we are on the subject...
Ethnic groups, yes, races, no. Race theory is dead and buried, as it should be.
Also you use the apostrophe incorrectly in "Nazis"
-
Deanco, I hope you never read this awful thread, but if you do:
I think your interface design is excellent and a pleasure to use. Everything is clear and attractive, and a real improvement over CMBO. Good work!
-
Jason, I wonder if Glantz was specifically asked to write a paper on the layout of the Russian defences at Kursk, not why the whole battle was won/lost.
Like you, he knew those defence structures were not as important as - for example - the sheer number of Russian reserves, so he hinted at these other factors while talking specifically about the defences.
I think he is looking at a smaller picture (the Russian defences, at regiment level, particularly the front line) and you are looking at the big picture (the whole battle).
Or I may have missed the point entirely...
-
Thanks Jon, that's a very interesting test.Originally posted by John D Salt:In 10 replications, the Tiger got walloped three times; the other seven times the Daimlers ran out of ammunition without inflicting any damage.
-
Another note of thanks, kump. I discovered all sorts of mods I didn't know existed using your website, and my CM is now better than ever. I really appreiciate the work you put in.
Cheers
marco
-
You are certainly right about FOW on flags. This is why the flag is in the open, so it should be quite obvious who owns it. Also I will stay in communication with Mike about who holds the flag in each turn. "I've had it three turns now", that sort of thing. Hopefully it will work ok! Neither of us are too fussed about winning and losing anyway.Originally posted by Psyched:I may be mistaken about this (I'm sure I'll be corrected if I am
Another stoopid option would be to play with FOW off. Could be fun too, more like chess. Especially if you both have matching units, for example a queen (panther, 76 jumbo), 2 bishops (puma, greyhound), pawns (rifle platoons) and all the other chess pieces.
Anyone want to play a PBEM with me like this??
- marco
[ August 06, 2002, 07:18 PM: Message edited by: bsd ]
-
Cool, another kiwi. I'll send ya an email.Originally posted by Mike:Hey Marco I'll give you a crack at that!
We'll have to make a scenario of it rather than a QB, so maybe I can send you the map and then we can both send our picks to a third party to set up....that way the picks become part of the strategy, rather than me just assigning stuff.
It will be Fionn's short-75 rules, except no arty or guns, and axis are allowed Ostwinds and Wirblewinds (allies have so much ammo compared to axis, and in this game it will count).
If it's fun we should finalise a rule set for stoopid games like this.
-
[ August 05, 2002, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: bsd ]
-
Not really on topic, but anyway:
What about a game of CM that is 50 turns long and has one big flag in the middle, on a large building with no surrounding cover. The rest of the map is standard QB style.
VPs are ignored, and the winner is the player who holds the flag uncontested for 6 turns in a row. If this never happens it is a draw. Short 75 rules, but no arty or guns are allowed.
I wonder what the best strategy would be? Would anyone be interested in a PBEM like this, just for a change? Its more like Unreal Tournament than CM, but it might be fun.
- Marco
-
Hi redwolf.Originally posted by redwolf:bsd, you calculations are generally correct, but in a quickbattle where 800 points of units can be killed there will be more than 1 300 points flag
I have just read your guide and see you have studied this quite a bit. I agree with all your maths, just not your conclusions! I think dropping from an 88% win to a 67% win for the disputing of a single flag is quite significant!
In my original example above, if there were 2 large flags and 2 small ones and I held all of them, then if Harry disputed all of them and lost a whopping 500 points doing so, I would drop from 1300/1600 = 81% to 1000/2100 = 41%. That is huge.
Harry would only drop from 300/1600 = 19% to 300/2100 = 14%.
His flag rush has destroyed my win margin, from 81-19 to 41-14, despite him losing 500 points in the closing turns.
Obviously if there were 10 flags and all were sucessfully rushed, my win margin would decrease even further.
I understand your point is that if you are losing on kill points and your opponent has all the flags, disputing them will not make you win. You will still lose. But the margin by which you lose can be improved significantly.
BTW Harry is one of the most honorable guys I've played and he would never flag rush in real life.
- Marco
[ August 02, 2002, 12:53 AM: Message edited by: bsd ]
-
:confused:Originally posted by redwolf:Assuming that the rusher had more losses in the game, then making the flags neutral raises the importance of the knockout points, of which the rusher has less to start from.
If you are losing and the enemy has all the flags it is still beneficial to dispute the flags, providing you take acceptable losses doing so. Your score will decrease slightly, but your opponent's score will decrease a lot (by 300pts per large flag you dispute). This means a better result for you, even if you still lose.
It is always beneficial - points-wise - to dispute enemy flags on the last turn provided the losses are acceptable.
What is "acceptable"?
On a map with 1 300pt flag, player A (harry) has killed 300 points worth of enemy and player B (bsd) has killed 500 points worth and has the flag. Harry's score is therefore 300/1100. bsd's score is 800/1100.
Harry then rushes the flag because he is australian. But bsd kills 300 points MORE of harry's forces as he does this. Harry's score is now 300/1400 and bsd's score is 800/1400.
So what was a 72% vs 27% win to bsd has become a 57% to 21% win to bsd!
Hence losing 300 points worth of troops disputing a large flag was beneficial
This is an extreme example, but the principal is there. Flag rushing is serious and seriously effects scores.
I hope my sums are right.
-
You could try playing "no flag rushes". For example play a game that is 32 turns long and say that no one can move troops INTO a flag zone in the last 2 turns (but you can fire on troops already there). This works to stop rushes.
A simpler option is to make the games longer generally, to give you more chance to find his hidden troops or set up a good defence.
An even simpler option is to play someone else entirely, someone who plays more in the spirit of CM.
-
I thought Nashorns were rhinocerous, not carp. Can you quote your sources?Originally posted by Mike:At short range they are carp and will die to .50 cal MG's!!
(quiet voice that cannot be heard in australia : Mike, I am kidding! I am playing Harry in a pbem so I am giving bad advice. I don't really rush nashorns and gun tractors at the enemy.)
-
Some advice on Nashorns: like the real rhinocerous they are named after, they are blind at long range but can charge aggressivley with their thick armour and work best in packs. So buy lots of them and rush as close to the enemy as possible before firing. I like to team them with 2-3 gun tractors for maximum effect.Originally posted by HarryInk:(eg...say the darstardly BSD hits a flank I've TRP'd and I rush my nasty Nashorn over that way and target enemy units near the TRP.
Good luck!
-
Most of these people have got it wrong. TRP effects are cummulative, so put them all in a pile in one location, preferrably near the side of the map. Don't use them until a heavy tank rolls over them near the end of the game, then drop all your arty on it and it will explode.
Now set up your defence and send the first turn Harry. I'm waiting!
Marco
[ July 29, 2002, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: bsd ]
-
GenSplatton, it was specified in the first post that units had to be veteran or crack. Otherwise the selections would probably be different.Originally posted by GenSplatton:Heck, some of you are talking Crack units! Very surprising to me. I'd be real interested to hear why.
-
You are kidding, right? :eek:
-
Surely Ghost you would agree to play PBEM in this tournament, if the "best player ever" title was at stake? Anyway, none of your opponents would cheat.Originally posted by Ghost of the 90th:BURRRRNNNN! BEAVVIIS BURRRNNN!
-
I would suggest Wreck, Swamp, Fionn, Ghost 358th and Kiwi Joe. That would be a great tournament, cause they are great players and great personalities.
Graves, skelley, and lund "von-schalburg" kiilerich are also in the same league.
Maybe the winner would be allowed to change their title on this BBs from "member" to something more appropriate.
Short Summary of problems with the Beta Demo
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
Be proud of a job well done.