kingtiger

Pritzl, That really happens ya know. It is only amazing how long the teleport actually takes. That was the germans counter to the Americans cracking the enigma code.(kidding). Richard Kalajian

John S (Gunner), Would the order be issued to retarget or would they ask how long will it take to retarget first, then if that is reasonable, retarget. Maybe, retargeting time shouldn't be present till we view the battle. My impressions of how this takes place would only come from movies and games. I don't know. Richard Kalajian

Dude, I hear ya. But I also heard from you, "I don't want to micro-manage, and I don't want the game to FORCE me to micro-manage (eg having to watch a replay from the viewpoint of each unit every turn to figure out what is going on, as has been suggested by others)". It just seems to me that you feel you need every little piece of information avaialable from every aspect for every individual (sounds like the needs & wants of a micromanager), just to make reasonable command decision. On the surface your explanation sounds a whee bit cookoo. You say you don't want to micromanage, yet you want the game designer to give a tool to empower you to do just that. If you and others feel the need to do that (watch over-and-over), well I gotta chuckle. It just seems like you are being way to hyper-critical of information needed to make decisions in this game. Richard Kalajian

Ummm... errr.... Well yes it is. What do we have here, an immediately available pop-up window that lets me know whether the position is effective. WOW. Guess I should read the manual. Richard Kalajian

Which is more realistic? Issuing new target orders and having someone indicate how much time it will take to deliver at the new target. END OR checking around the battlefield and looking for the lowest retargeting times and then picking the area that likely will have the least time-wait for retargeting and greatest impact. Richard Kalajian

John S, I would concur. More information at the end game would be cool. It would be nice to know how many kills the a specific machine gun crew had. But, I wouldn't want the computer to tell me these numbers until the game was over. Richard Kalajian

It was the "Last Defence" and everything would go as planned for me. Then machine gun fire and artillery shells pummeled my half-tracks on the main road and forced all my tank passengers to disembark. Eventually, when the M18's arrived they brewed-up (unbelieveable) all three of my tanks and every remaining Halftrack. I guess things didn't go as planned. Richard Kalajian

Moon, It really is a short list of desired add-ons. About that pop-up OOB. I think it is still uneccesary, but now I really don't want to see it mainly because of a comment by __________________________________________ R Cunningham: "So Richard, you are perfectly willing to be thrashed by a anal retentive control freak who will watch the replay 50 times, check the status of each unit and the kills screen where it tells you how many casualties have been inflicted by that unit, do a little math and beat you in the information game? Contrary to your idea that this would destroy the level playing field, I see no change. It may be advantageous to use it but Jedi masters of the "old ways" can still click their way to total enlightenment. The difference would be just a matter of time." ____________________________________________ Well what can I say: I can't believe that the "Jedi Masters of the Old ways" would really replay the video 50 times to gather information and write it onto little notepads. I love the idea of knowing that someone is spending 30 hours on a PBEM just to lose a game that I spend 150 minutes at. It really makes me chuckle. I think that if these Jedi Masters of the Old ways" truly are going to spend that kind of time playing this or any game to win a scenario, I say, "NUTS". I don't know why I chose to say that, but I remember it was used to reply to the surrender request from ...... Sincerely, Richard Kalajian

Mike D, I have the Viper 770 Ultra, but....First, Diamond has never updated it's drivers for the TNT2 series. Support has never responded to my request for updated drivers. It's new owner, Savage has never responded to my e-mails. Don't get me wrong, I love my Diamond TNT2 and the stock drivers offer some cool stuff. The Creative Labs TNT2 ultra is significantly better. The driver support from Creative is world class. Creative even has a mini-driver that provides support for games that only run on 3DFX. Just a suggestion. Also the GeForce ($100 more) is significantly faster, offers some world class processing power and new technologies that will surely provide better image quality and faster rates in the next 12 months. Just another suggestion. Richard Kalajian

Superbowl Halftime Commercial.

Fred, I don't know what review at GamesDomain.com mentioned the comments you stated, but "Tim Chown" at Games Domain actually said none of what you have in your post. Here is a link: http://www.gamesdomain.com/gdr.cgi?zones/reviews/pc/oct99/pg3d.html Apologies in advance if I am wrong. Richard Kalajian [This message has been edited by kingtiger (edited 11-02-99).]

John S, Here is a suggestion I hope will make finding units easier for you. Assume a camera angle with the area in question (could be your half of the map). Hit Shift-C five-10 times quickly and look for changes. Your units will pop-out like giants in a diorama. And/or turn off trees (Shift-T)- voila no trees. Hope this helps. Now if you still can't find a Stug or you are leaving units behind, I think a different cause is at fault. Sincerely, Richard Kalajian [This message has been edited by kingtiger (edited 11-01-99).]

Doug Beman, I know he will. Like anyone else on the board who rehashes Fionn's past events, be they CM scenario mishaps or his gaming opinions is either kidding (that would be me) or jealous of either his position in the wargaming community or his wargamming skills. I was amazed at the way he used terrain to his advantage (the Puma maneuver). I was rivoted to his detailed recounts of action and plan of attack. I was wowed by his real world knowledge of every unit in his command. I think in the face of insurmountable odds (retaking the city after some initial unlucky events , which I routinely regurgitate in jest), he made a most excellent run at the city. It is with great respect and admiration that I badger him in jest about his battle against Moon. Sincerely, Richard Kalajian

BBWar, Little hint for you. I have heard that the editor is really good ...and believe it or not very easy to use. Someone predicted 100's of scenarios from users within a short amount of time after release. I think it was Fionn. In case you don't know who Fionn is, he was the one who failed to take the city back from the Americans against a player named Moon. Sincerely, Richard Kalajian

--- Curious George mode on --- Two questions about MG's & MG42: 1) I like the jams. How long do they take to unjam in real-life and how long do they take in CM? 2) Someone mentioned some interesting stuff on barrel change-outs, is that a part of CM. How many barrels did they have? Can JAM in CM mean barrel change-out. --- Curious George mode off --- Thanks in advance for the help, Richard Kalajian

I like fishing. I like www. I like CPU. I like Curious George. I like beer. I like Marine Aquariums. I like Automobiles. I love Combat Mission and some gals and mom, dad, bro and sis. Sincerely, Richard Kalajian

Hello. Please follow the attached link to the AAR's for the first 35 turns or so between Fionn and Moon. Select BATTLE REPORTS One turn has the Nebelwerfer and the devestating effects. www.battlefront.com/aar Richard Kalajian

Kai, No whimpering. I fealt the same way when my Tiger and a Stug were knocked out immediately by the M18 kittens. But, then (2 seconds later - I laughed, kinda like a mad-man). It was awesome. Herr Oberst got smoked as well. You are not alone. Can you say HVAP? High Velocity Armor Piercing ammunition used by Hellcat. Very effective. It is always easier to shoot down at a target then to shoot up at one. Sincerely, Richard Kalajian

Zulu, Here is one example of a totally knocked out Panther (Artillery Ambush). http://www.history.enjoy.ru/destroyed/germany/panther_13.jpg Go here for pictures tons of knocked out Armor: http://www.history.enjoy.ru/ Make sure to "select" battle victims. Hope this helps, Richard Kalajian [This message has been edited by kingtiger (edited 11-02-99).]

Kai, Hi. I still wish it weren't being considered, but Steve or Charles from BTS said, it's on the list. Or maybe it was Fionn. In case you don't know who Fionn is, he is the one that lost most of his forces due to artillery and airpower against a fellow named MOON. Down with multi-select for units! Richard Kalajian ---*** As mentioned below by BTS, it's a lot of work and my concern is this, "If I select a formation and part of that formaion bumps into a house, do they go in? What about a forest? What happens if one of the five units enters a house and gets resistance. Does the rest of the squad help? Does the squad continue and leave a chunk of the formation behind? What happens if I am just moving the masses across open field and would like to use this tool to make my plotting easier and make sure to keep the units together, and one of the 5 units is supressed, do the other four stop? Do they stop and hide (logical)? In any case, it is a nice tool for the masses. It is something I am sure to use. I can definitely do without it. I would hate to have to code this sucker. ***--- [This message has been edited by kingtiger (edited 11-01-99).]

Just a quick story. Ma & Pa kettle (parents) were in Chicago visitng on Saturday. Aunt and grandma too. I couldn't stop talking about CM. My Dad said, "You need an OOB". He said, "The Panzerschreck was great, the screamin eagles tossed out Bazookas and used Panzerschrecks if available". He wanted to know if the Americans had 155's. Well, we left the party and played CM for a while. Until that moment, my 20 years of telling my Dad how cool computers were never paid off. I loaded a Last Defense Scenario saved at turn 9. I moved some armor out of position and put the camera in close to the Tiger with the Hill in view off in the distance. It was cool to see him jump when the M18 Hellcats appeared. He is 70. Now, he wants a Computer so he can play CM. Oh and Ma Kettle wants to surf the web. All because of CM. You know you have something great when you get my dad to want a computer. Sincerely, Richard Kalajian

Pixman hit the nail on the head. Similarly, I love occasionaly missing out on information about various units. Something that happens virtually every time I play Riesberg as Germans: When I scroll to the 88MM on the hill, at some point I will see that it was knocked out. I usually find out in the order phase. I love it. Someone or something has a way at knocking out the big gun. Usually I find out when I scroll up to the 88 issuing a command to send smoke in front of some of the advancing Americans in an effort to reduce crossfire which is suppressing my Panzerschrek and an Infantry squad in a house next to the road. It is very satisfying to find that the only remaining source of smoke has been knocked out. I find this to be a very rewarding experience in CM and an OOB would virtually gaurantee that I wouldn't have that experience. I know - I know, you can choose to play without referring to the OOB. But, in the heat of online battle or PBEM, I would need to refer to it. I am lazy and would refer to it. I would pay less attention during the playback. I firmly believe it would ruin my experience. I also dislike playing multiplayer or PBEM with individuals, who know the makeup of my squad better than I do for specific scenarios and then are willing to review the turn and note every little effect, compile and determine the next move. Compiling these numbers or having them for quick review makes the game more of a numbers game. The game becomes more like chess. How realistic is that? Come on, it's a war-game. It's not chess. No more frickin numbers please. Too many players put too much value on having all of the information available and used for decisions. In PBEM, some of the proposed-OOB's would make sure the player didn't miss any thing. It would minimize the importance of paying attention during the playback. Adding the OOB is step in the wrong direction. This isn't chess, please don't make it more like chess. Please. Harold Jones makes a reasonable suggestion: "Although, a hot list of your units with no information other than the terrain they are in and the ability to click on the unit's name and zoom to it would be helpful in finding units." However, I would always check my 88 and click to see it, and pick a target for it. I would know then that it won't be available 2 or 3 turns down the way, because I have seen it's current state. HHH3, I just read your post as I was typing this message. Sorry if I imply laziness for the "Order of the OOB"(OOB-Camp). I am clearly in the "Order of the No-OOB" (Non-OOB Camp) and would find myself relying on the OOB for information and paying less attention during playback. That would make me lazy. Harold Jones, in his message above, clearly articulates his method for playing out turns. I do exactly the same thing. I have heard Moon say something along the lines of look at the front, turn the camera, watch a couple more areas, make some decisions, plot and go - Easy and Quick. If it takes more than about 5 minutes average to do this, then I think you are spending too much time gathering too much detail. Adding the OOB clearly eliminates the level playing field. Knowing everything and having it all organized before plotting moves appears to be outside the scope of this game. By adding the OOB, we (the non-OOB camp) will be forced to rely on the OOB to compete in tournaments and PBEM. Players will be less likely to miss something (missing things is a nice touch in CM). Scott Clinton, I know, I know the information is already in the game. Well if it is presented to me, and I didn't look or I didn't bother to check then it isn't always in the game. I like the way the game enhances the missing of information. Mr. Hofbauer, I see your point. Let's not use the sniper for discussions sake. Because, a sniper usually knows it has a hit, but really can't know if a kill was achieved for some time Private Ryan wasn't really the best example). Of course, I may be wrong. Let's look at a common situation within CM and discuss it. Do you know the Reisberg scenario area with two wood buildings flanking the road? Of course you do. I have had numerous games with massive conversions of Americans onto that area. My guess is that many are 50-80 meters away and getting plunked pretty regularly as they walk (This is enuff info for me BTW). Oh and it just occured to me what BTW was. Often times I only see the whites of their eyes. Kidding. I only see the head notch back and can't get specifics on the size/state of the unit getting "plunked" and some are on the road (again enuff info fore me). Sorry if I forgot what you were calling for from BTS, maybe it was pop-up overview of what had happened during the turn or maybe it was markers indicating kills (like little -1 appearing above unit). I would think at that distance (50m-80m) you would know for sure you had a kill. Now my experience, from the playback (keep in mind, I rarely playback more than twice unless something cool happens), I can see the effects of my defense and the effects on the attackers (Americans) in one pass. I have a very clear idea of the force I am facing and have identified areas that need attention. I have seen pretty much everything I need to see regarding that specific area of battle. I have all markers on, so I can see during playback which units are pinned and which are low on ammo. I would prefer not to have an overview screen, but wouldn't mind a little minus-1 above units instead of head jerks. In any case, hopefully you can offer a better suggestion for what you are looking for and why, with respect to the road-jam in Reisberg that I just covered. At longer distances, 200 Meters I think -1 above the head is very questionable. A really fast computer with a very nice 19" may make this process easier for me, I don't know. Why am I so opposed to OOB? Maybe it is my style of play. During chess, 90% of my moves are instantaneous. Wargames are similar to chess. I wish they weren't. In chess I don't consider all of the available information. I have learned what to focus one and what not too. Same thing in CM. Sure, I leave myself open to a suprise attack from time-to-time in chess. The verdict is still out if my style of play will result in regular losses in PBEM. I say, "No-OOB". Sincerely, Richard Kalajian -----**** I re-read my post and I think it sounds a bit snippy. Ya know, like one of those little cute doggies that growls and shakes and makes agressive little barks ****--- I didn't mean it to sound like that, and I'm not cute or small -- [This message has been edited by kingtiger (edited 11-01-99).]

RCunningham, I stand corrected. Your comment: One of the biggest abstractions in CM is the one player control of a company or battlion sized formation. It gives the player a realistic amount of information for the opposing forces but gives an unrealistic amount for the friendly forces. No real commander gets 100% accurate updates on each subordinate unit (3 levels down when we're taling a battlion commander) every 60 seconds. .... Reply: This sounds like a point against having an OOB pop-up. We will agree that the game provides too much friendly force info. To get this information you must click on each unit, as though you were that unit. You mentioned: By making the player click on each unit to get that SAME LEVEL of information just makes the process take longer. It also makes you assume the role of that unit, which is the only way that information would be available. It is sounding like the argument for an OOB (I might add the more I hear the post for OOB, the less opposed I am), sounds like an argument to increase the unrealistic characteristics we deal with in a wargame. In the case of CM, the game provides to much information, i.e, individual level morale, unit strength, etc., but online OOB proposes to present that information even more completely and some have proposed even more information, like including destroyed infantry units. I will admit I like the looks of the pop-up OOB and would definitely use it as presented by Mr. Hofbauer in another thread. I see where it would be useful and definitely would make the game easier, but I also think it would slightly increase the unrealistim associated with this particular wargame. _____________________________________________ GHOSTONE, After reading posts from Hofbauer, Cunnigham and yourself the argument for kill-markers becomes more compelling. although I think it takes away from some of the chaos-of-war feeling that I get playing this game. It makes me think more. It raises my level of uncertainty. Kill flags with on-off switch is OK with me. You have pulled me into your camp. _____________________________________________ Mr. Hoffbauer, Outstanding post. Outstanding and compelling, clear and concise, especially considering you just wanted to sound off. Much of my confusion comes from a misunderstanding of command & control. I think Moon said it best when he said, "I think a unitscreen goes directly against why I play CM". And I think information presented in a summary format begins to swing the game back in to the formats of games of old. _____________________________________________ You mentioned near the end of your post: Moon: With one blink of the eye, you see the entire front line. Woops - a couple of prone squads and Moon said: there...stinks! Ahhh - a prone enemy unit...great! Doesn't go quicker than that. Mr. Hofbauer: Well, if they're prone, yes, but the thing is they keep walking around three people as if nothing happened even if they took losses Kingtiger: My question to you is: If you were the soldier who inflicted a casualty on this group, would you know whether you inflicted a casulaty or not? __________________________________________ Kingtiger said: Ohh and another thing, I really can't comment on what information a real commander would have in making command and control decisions at this level of battle. Please comment on that. My guess (Big Guess) is that CM provides the most realistic quantity and quality of information relative to a real-world commanders knowledge, especially considering 30 minutes of skirmish. Now I'm tapping you for information. How much information did the Commander (don't know who that would have been) have in the end-scene of Private Ryan? Probably a bad example. Mr. Hofbauer: no, kingtiger, CM would be entirely unrealistic if judged by the criteria you gave above (which is a not so reasonable thing to do). Remember the example where the players talked about using a halftrack as bait to get a Hellcat with a StuG? Do you really think that would happen in reality? Do you really think that a buttoned StuG that sits behind a house not seeing anything could conceive of much less coordinate such a trick with the halftrack which itself doesn't see the hellcat just the same? My comment: Actually, I think that ordering (via radio)the halftrack to move out and draw fire is realistic, and ordering the Stug to turn up the road, target the Hellcat and fire is not unrealistic. Rare, yes. Unrealistic no. But I ramble and babble - sorry. You have already accurately corrected me on my misconception of being a commander in charge. I just felt like rambling. ___________________________________________ Having ton-o-fun with CM, Richard Kalajian

Paul, Are you saying that you made it to turn 11 without a single casulaty? That is incredible. Nice job. Richard Kalajian

Ghostone, After reading your last post, I am in agreement with your reasons for having lost friendly unit place markers. Then Gatsby commented on the actual real-world battle situations and I return to my initial stance for no markers and no overview screen. In particular he described rarely seeing Commanders receive accurate up-to-the minute information. I return to my initial position of having no friendly place markers. Sorry GhostOne you had me convinced. I would also like to expand on the information presented by Gatsby. Not having an overall screen with accurate information and not having all the information about hits and morale for opposing forces and not having markers for lost friendly units is more realistic than having them. Richard Kalajian