Brightblade

In general, everyone has to decide for himself when he´s ready for a human opponent. I wouldn´t fix that only on how good you fare against the AI. Humans often play very different. You should know how to use which unit and what orders are available. That´s basically it. Then IMHO there are two ways of beginning PBEMing: look for an equal opponent so you both learn by each others actions look for an experienced opponent who can give you some hints how to improve your way of playing You can find opponents either in the BFC Opponent Finder Forums (just scroll down the forum main page a bit) or by joining a wargamer club (for example www.theblitz.org). [ August 11, 2003, 01:37 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

In CMBO, engineers can´t use their demo packages for area targets. In CMBB they can. In CMBO you can destroy only wooden and "normal" stone bridges (no tall stone brigdes) either by artillery fire or with guns/tanks.

Originally posted by flamingknives: The first three versions of 75mm artillery in CMBB seem to be the lIG of the infantry regiments (2, 4, 6 guns), distributed to the individual battalions of the regiment (or given to only one battalion). The 75mm radio spotter however is division level and is probably supported by the 75mm Field Gun 38. [ August 10, 2003, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Yes, I guess there is some confusion about the definition of direct/indirect fire. What you said is certainly true. But IMO firing at a certain (high) angle can be called indirect fire, no matter if the gun/mortar has LOS to the target or not. Do you have any official definitions? Unfortunately I couldn´t find any. I never doubted that the IGs primary function was direct (flat) fire. But I think they could be used for artillery purposes as well when regular artillery wasn´t available and that this usage was intended when they were designed.

Originally posted by Michael Emrys: How would a gun fire there directly? Isn´t that already indirect fire? Usage similar to mortars? Spontaneously I can think of two possible explanations: 1. Firing from a higher position at a rather short distance. 2. Slightly sloped firing position (behind a hill crest or something). Just the same reasons why there is negative elevation for tanks. [ August 10, 2003, 06:26 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

The author on this site says that the IGs could be used similar to mortars. In addition to that, they could fire directly if necessary. The data sheets here for the sIG and here for the lIG give the max elevation of both guns of 73°. I think that pretty much implies that these guns were meant for indirect fire, though not exclusively.

You´re not mistaking it for the Nahverteidigungswaffe? Some German tanks (Panther, Tiger, some Pz IV) are equipped with it.

Use the in-game editor to open the scenarios.

Originally posted by Scarhead: Yes, it was my plan that the Pak would fire. But I wanted it to use AP rounds on some other target than the IS-2. That target just moved out of sight, so the AT gun did something I didn´t expect. I could have accepted if it had used up the last AP rounds. But the HE rounds had (almost)the same effect like throwing dirtballs.

In a QB against the AI I just had a Crack 75mm Pak firing HE rounds at a IS-2 at 630m. The AT gun is low on ammo, 3 AP and 8 HE left after this round. But it´s a waste of ammo anyway! When there is no chance to succeed with that ammo, guns and tanks should better stop firing and move out of sight/get down and hide.

Nice idea, though only one of about 14 platoons consists of four T34/85. So there could be only one such platoon in every other szenario. But I didn´t want to create a szenario, I just wondered how that platoon was created.

Did a little test with some AT guns against some trucks, ACs and HTs. I reduced the AP load to only a hand full while the guns had enough HE. Distances were max. 450m. Fog of war was partial, so as soon as a unit was spotted, it was correctly identified. The guns used only HE on soft vehicles (trucks and jeeps) as it should be, but as long as they had AP they used it against the ACs and HTs, although the penetration of their HE ammo would have been enough and was enough, once the AP rounds were depleted.

How do you get a platoon of four T34/85 Model 1944? I always thought Russian T34 platoons were composed of only three tanks. However, in the Royal Opponent scenario (stock) there is one platoon of T34/85 which consists of four tanks. Is there a trick in the editor to do that? Was this only possible before the patches? :confused: I tried every month from May 1944 (T34/85 Model 1944 first available) to May 1945. I even switched through most of the Russian divisions, but all T34 platoon only had three tanks.

In the very most cases you can guess from the gun what the vehicle is good for. High blast rate -> anti infantry High armor piercing rate -> anti tank The Lynx was meant for recon in real life and that´s what it´s good for in the game too. Its 20mm AutoCannon can take out most Allied light armor and is sufficient to pin some infantry. BTW, here you find some very nice charts with important data on the units in the game [ August 03, 2003, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

You can´t move vehicles into buildings (except in the editor, when you place the building on an already placed vehicle). Your mistake is that you think a factory square is empty. It is not. The interior is not displayed, but it is there. Think of partition walls, machinery, etc. All this will block a line of sight.

I may be wrong, but as far as I know neutral VL don´t count at all. The result composes of the relation of the points for each side´s losses plus the VL points under control of each side. The AAR of CMBB is very comfortable in that way, as it shows exactly who got how many points for what. Bruceov, might it be that you split squads when you defend? If you do, the attacker will get points for half of them until they join again as the engine counts the second team as dead (IIRC one of the patches prevents that for the final result, but not in the running game). The other possibility I can think of is when you play with casualties on, but I´m not exactly sure whether that really counts from the beginning. [ August 02, 2003, 09:05 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by SirReal: No, unfortunately they don´t. As long as there is one single AP round left, tanks and AT guns will use it against all kinds of vehicles, be that other tanks, HTs or even trucks, jeeps and Kübelwagen. Would be very nice if in a future CM the TacAI was smart enough to choose a more useful ammo type for certain targets, especially when the other sort is in short supply...

Originally posted by Patrick Moore: Exactly. The German "Umlaute" ("Ä", "Ö" and "Ü") can be spelt with an "E" instead of the two points, so "ae" = "ä", "oe" = "ö" and "ue" = "ü". However, some family names are always spelt with "ae", "oe" or "ue". Some rather sensitive people consider it an insult when their family name isn´t spelt correctly. [ August 01, 2003, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

I found two interesting links about the German helmets: Bookmasters.com and Stahlhelms.com By the end of the war, Germany developed a new helmet model. It looked quite different from the M42 model, but was supposed to offer better protection against penetration. However, the German High Command decided against this new helmet as the older model was just too popular and too well recognized by friend and foe alike (at least that´s what I was told about it). After the war, the East German army (NVA - Nationale Volksarmee (National People´s Army)) equipped their soldiers with this helmet model. [ August 01, 2003, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Command range is determined by the experience level of the HQ unit, its command bonuses and LOS to the commanded unit. If there is no LOS, the command range of the HQ unit is halved (not for AFV with radio).

IMHO Scarhead´s solution seems pretty good. Of course it´s not realistic, but this is a game, after all. Though a really good one. But the concept of the game is that the player is some kind of overmind (at least that´s how I get it). The player issues orders to every single unit on his side. That´s not realistic even on company scale. No company commander tells every squad or even team what exactly they should do. He recieves orders from the battalion commander (the idea of the battle), brakes them down and transmits them them to his platoon leaders and maybe some specialist squads and teams. Then the subordinate leaders brake these orders down to their level and so on. Like that it works on every level of command. In the game you sometimes have a regiment or brigade at your command and you have to tell every single vehicle, squad and team very detailled what they are to do. I really like it that way. But it´s not realistic. So why bother about features which would IMO only reduce the playability? You could still get the same information like now, only it would take much more time as you would need to click through every single unit to check what they see. Turns would take much longer and TCP/IP games would be almost impossible then.

Originally posted by Big Poppa Pump: No, doesn´t work. No barbed wire allowed in buildings (at least I couldn´t place any), not even in factories; so no full tracked vehicle can move on the wire into the building. However it works for rubble of course, like for any otherwise impassable terrain. [ July 28, 2003, 05:57 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

I assume it has to do with the reduced fire rate of the Superpershing and the slower turret. The Pershing may shoot up to 5 times in one turn (as regular) and has a fast turret. The Superpershing may fire only 3 times per turn (as regular) and has a medium turret.

Originally posted by Walpurigs Night: How did you place the barbed wire? Lengthwise? Like this: -----------X----------- OOOOOOXOOOOOO OOOOOOXOOOOOO OOOOOOXOOOOOO OOOOOOXOOOOOO -----------X----------- X: Barbed Wire O: Trees The barbed wire lane has to start in passable terrain and to end in passable terrain. You can also place the barbed wire across, but then you need four or five of them for one square of woods. If you did all that, I don´t know why it doesn´t work for you. Did you try to place a waypoint right at the beginning of the wire lane? So your tanks should move on the barbed wire like on a brigde and stop whereever you like (on the wire). [ July 28, 2003, 10:55 AM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]

Originally posted by Walpurgis Night: Just place the waypoints on the wire. Then everything should work fine. It doesn´t have to do anything with a specific tank - at least it worked fine for me for some Tigers, King Tigers and Brummbärs. [ July 27, 2003, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: Brightblade ]