walpurgis nacht

These maps are stunning. Very nice.

You are pointing out something important to note, yes, but, "weapons smeapons" gives the wrong impression. The ambushing infantry's firepower is equal in importance.

btw, what is KDR </font>

Run?! In the open?! That's guarenteed suicide if you come under fire. Run is the single worst mode to be in under fire </font>

I wouldn't sweat it. CM is all about luck. Just ask Flenser, who managed to avoid my final's group (all I ever wanted was a to trounce a Flenz in public. . . . . .)

Yeah but you know, that's just lipstick. I'm only noting that none of the section winners would change based on any of the suggestions I've read here.

I'm not sure I understand who's been wronged here to inspire this thread? I've heard my game with BigDog (Maleme) mentioned repeatedly with little mention of anyone else save a few. So what that that score gave me that many Nabla points . . . .who exactly was cheated out of a section victory by it? Even if any of the suggested improvements to the scoring system were put in place, I don't see how it would change anything, for any of the sections, in terms of the final results. Even if BigDog were a new player, which he wasn't (in fact he was the best opponent I had to face in my section), a scenario that's really tough for one side should reward the successful underdog with interest if he can pull it off.

I don't know if Jeff will allow such a classy beverage. It either says Fallstaff on it or it isn't allowed to enter.

12.7mm HMG can take out pz38(t)A models pretty well with ease up to around 250 meters with flanking fire. However it is effective out to 500meters with flanking fire, which still routs the pz38(t)A. I was wondering why the 38(t)a was the pz model chosen for this scenario

In which case I take my hat off to him and hope we never meet in battle. Cheers </font>

-First of all run tests in the various terrain concealment types, with a variety of guns to get a "feel" for when they are spotted moving in the given terrain, and at what ranges. -Don't obsess about finding ideal positions during setup. Better to just leave your IG guns attached to your transport until the scouting process is finished and the main enemy concentrations are isolated. You may think you have great spots from your setup zone but a keen defender is likely to make you regret this approach. Sometimes of course the defender has no reverse slope so it's possible but otherwise just hang tight. -try to purchase the light IG guns which move quickly and have a short setup time. If your armor is inferior setup your guns to over watch one gap, and once you've crossed it have their transport right next to them so you're ready to load and relocate. Effecieny is key when you're under the gun in terms of time. -Don't get hung up placing your guns in tree patches. The best overall terrain for gun placement (save trenches), is "rough" terrain. Newer players often underestimate the power of treebursts, and will lose their guns to a keen defender who will almost certainly purchase mortars on the defense. -Don't feel you have to bring your guns into some great over-watch position. Unless you're sporting 150mm sIGs, you've only got so much "bang" available to you. Move your guns up only as close as you absolutley need them to be. It takes time and experience to make that judgment but you'll get good at making the call in time. Find keyholes to the critical points that need to be broken.

And I thought I was the only orchestral musician to frequent the forums . . . . which orchestra?

Cemetery Hill-revisited Remember the pain? It’s been a few years (?) since this scenario has been thoroughly bitched about. I have not played Cemetery Hill (or any other game vs. the AI) since I bought CMBB right when it came out. I remember I couldn’t crack that damn defense . . . . or even get anywhere close to doing so on repeat attempts. And then I remember the *honest* folk who posted how they actually beat it on their first try (ahem, yeah right Dorosh). I was thinking yesterday, now that I have years of experience and who can know how many bloody hours of CM game-play under my belt (it must be 3,000+ hours by now), I should give old Cemetery Hill another go and see just for kicks how hard this thing is for me anymore. I stuck to the “locked” defensive positions, so I had an idea what to expect. I pulled a draw 55-45. I’m now convinced with certainty it isn’t really beatable. Now if I did it again, with the enemy positions fresh in my head so I setup to make sure all of my supporting firepower units were in the most efficient startup positions to be where they were needed quickly, I could probably do a bit better. But, the realistic test is how you can do without knowing where everything is ahead of time!

edit-wrong place to post! [ May 23, 2005, 10:16 AM: Message edited by: Walpurgis Nacht ]

Poor Old Spike. There's a name from out of the past. He used to post here and was banned under several identities. Apparently he immersed himself totally in Combat Mission, to the exclusion of everything else. He would have 25 or 30 PBEMs going at once. The ladder players grew disgusted with his, um, abrasive personality pretty quickly. So did the forum moderators. </font>

Don't stress as much about losing infantry, avoid losing any vehicles and that will help greatly.

If you're behind just meet up with your opponent and spend a few hours playing it out TCP. It's the least you can do considering you committed to finishing your games in what is quite more than a reasonable alloted span of time. sheesh.

One aspect of the perception regarding time or lack thereof is the difference between the different CM games. I remember when BB came out it took me time to realize how much MORE time was needed to do a proper attack, relative to BO. The difference from BB to AK is not so extreme as BO to BB, but it is another notch up in time from my point of view. In BB for a 1000 point attack QB, I would typical use 32+ turns. In AK I lean towards 34+ now. It's been so long since I've played BO I can't recall what I would have use, but it was certainly less.

Effective range and max range are synonymus for rpgs and wurmfminnen(sp) and magnetic mines. 39.5 meters, exactly. Grenade range is also 39.5 meters, but they increase in accuracy and ROF the closer you are to the intended target.

I was thinking Kursk right off hand. Of course there are plenty of exceptions. I was just thinking of your typical 1000 point attack/defense QB game with a medium map, where the attacker's setup zone is exactly .5 the size of the defenders so the front end of it is something you can forecast down to the exact pixel. With only 2-3 covered approaches on the forward edge of the setup zone it's just bleeding obvious where to prep bombard. You know me, I'm full of gamey tactics but this one is too rich for me blood :cool:

Oh dear. So many things. If this is a pbem turn email it to me and there may be a lot more to say. First off, what AT weapon was your Tank Hunter armed with besides grenades? -You shouldn't give 40m arcs for most standard AT weapons. The technical distance is 39.5 meters. I'd aim for the low side of 39, or 38 just to be safe. No reason to have your tank hunter reveal his position unless he's prepared to kill and kill fast. -some tanks spot better than others but one thing you should try to avoid is opening up on them when your tank hunter is directly in front of the tank. The spotting delay is multiplied dramatically when you're attacking from the sides and especially the back. -the real trick with tank hunters is trying to get them to attack when the enemy tank(s) are already buttoned up. Typically when your armor cover arc is tripped, if the enemy tank is unbuttoned, you'll start firing small arms first, giving away your position. Unless you're lucky enough to kill the tank commander and stun the tank, your odds of success just went down dramatically. -The idea is to prepare for the tank hunter assault, if you can be certain when you'll have your chance, by firing at the tanks with other things to get them to button up at the beginning of the turn. Use anything and everything you can to get those hatches closed! This makes a huge difference. You'll see. The only problem with all of this is that against an experienced opponent it becomes nearly impossible to prepare things like this, because the armor movements are dished out so that you're never parked in a dangerous spot from one turn to the next.

It IS gamey to prep bombard the attacker's setup zone in my book even on large maps. Especially once you learn how to measure the setup zones in QBs, so you literally know exactly how far forward the attacker's setup zone is.

In my experience, the more inexperienced your opponent, the more useful arty is. It becomes seriously limited in value with great players . . . who simply will not bunch up their troops. I think it could be useful to break away from the philosophical here and lay out just exactly HOW arty is most effectively used. There are so many points to make, but the one that strikes me the hardest and I see it against virtually every player I play against is: Don't blow it up just because you can!!! Wait until your are close enough to capitalize on the suppression/routing by COMPLETELY DESTROYING THE INTENDED TARGET. That means sucking it up and advancing through MG fire and the like. Once you're close enough hide and rest your boys up ready to thrust. Let the arty loose. Throw out a split squad to draw fire. Watch the arty drop them, charge, and clean them pinned troops up like a true capitalist bastard.

Oh and I do adore this. This highlights the biggest flaw with democracy. This fellow's vote counts just as much as mine.