Eden Smallwood

Tried that. Now before I say *anything*... This scenario is very clearly recommended for 2P, for which I just don't think I have the bandwidth; this is merely a *comment* on how it fares in SP, please nobody freak out. It was fun, if you enjoy routing huge quantities of Soviets, (and who doesn't?). It was somewhat bloody, I suppose- I lost 109 men, but the sovs lost 417, all their tanks, and weren't too happy by the end, (surrender). Unfortunately, really, I think the poor AI simply couldn't deal with the situation. My main reason for posting is that I think in the case of SP the AI might be helped out quite a bit by replacing the one big flag in the courtyard with a few small ones *in* the buildings themselves, or even in tactical positions overlooking the yard, or something. For prisoners of the SP mode, I would recommend dropping this scenario into the SE first, if it's not tournament saved, and 'helping' the AI with flag placement. Anyhow- was indeed fun, and tactics of a sort were indeed possible for me, in a messy sort of way- I was able to... Advance FTs even *in front* of my rifle squads; Set several bldgs on fire, (containing hordes, of course!); Bring down a bldg with numerous satchels, also containing hordes. Makes for a good day. One interesting thing I've never seen before- when I brought down the bldg with satchels, sure enough I found plenty of dead squads inside... but derned if there weren't some guys still in there alive and kicking! Perhaps that only happens with "light" bldgs or something. Eden

As self elect speaker of the low res install consortium, (am I the only one, in fact?)- There is only one mod which is absolutely crucial to the game, and actually honest to gawd still looks great downsampled to my wimpy machine- JuJu's definitive hakenkreuze mod. Unfortunately, it makes all the other flags look like a pile of hot, steamy doo dads. I'm hereby officially soliciting for other voices who also despair of the lack of definitive *rest of 'em* flags by JuJu- join with me, cast off your chains, call in your JuJu favors, let us collectively whine as one. Eden

One sophistication which I suspect is unfortunately not in the game: Has anyone ever witnessed a unit in a trench, who breaks and runs, (or crawls!), take an available *trench avenue* to safety? Id est, he could run through the trench maze I've set up back to the safe factory, but he doesn't- he always starts crawling or running out of the trench back to the map edge, over open ground... Eden

Hmm interesting. Actually, I had an epiphany-lite just today on this issue; would you like to hear it? Yes? Ok. I just finished playing a beta-ish scenario which I found to be superlative, so much so that I pondered overcoming my longstanding review-diet and going over to fill out the form. That got me to thinking on why I had long ago thrown up my hands in despair on reviewing, (for many reasons- half of designers loathe the rating system, half don't; many designers say they like negative feedback, but then it turns out they don't...) Well I realized this: the review itself has two audiences: One, the designer, and Two, other players. Right now, we have to make a review which is suitable for both. That rules out saying anything truly useful to the designer, because 99% of what I would say in re improvements (imho) would be spoiling for the player. So ultimately, the only scenarios I've reviewed have been those about which I can be universally and nonspecifically laudatory, which might be nice, but doesn't help designers much, I would suppose. I've said this much before, actually. But what's new is this idea: why not split the two audiences- have one section like it is now, for the players, with only vague statements about whether one liked this aspect or that, and another box which is culled for pickup by the designer, not seen by the public, wherein we would be free to say things inherently spoiling but more to the point of meaningful feedback, like "what the heck was with that tiger hiding in the building" et cetera. Or should I just get off my lazy butt? Eden

Use them early today, don't have them tomorrow! But why debate, anyhow- we're here for something more fun! I hereby nominate you to be our ArmeurFuhreur!! Yes! Take control of the *entire* armored force here (whatever that little light tank is that's left?), and show us what you can do, whaddaya say? In fact, I'll login with another email address and second the motion, so that's settled. Except that... of course I'm supposing/hoping that scottdt will be back sometime to post the autosave files for us- I admit there's not much one can truly see just by the pix... Eden

Wrong; impossible. No matter how clever you get with code, the data is being transmitted, ergo, the data can be copied. At a minimum, nothing can stop the user from grabbing a screenshot. Eden

Well we're working on it now, aren't we? Here we are, molding the "Poor man's CM3 w/ Live Aud Capability", like the valiant forward recon special ops players that we clearly are... Just grab your "Autosave.cme" file and upload it to the same place you're sticking these pix, (you poor, poor AOL customer you!). Brilliant! Completely obvious, but still- never occurred to me, anyhow. Shame it's too late for CMBB, that surely would have been easy to do. Dang! Nothing in this game is more satisfying than taking out a nasty T34 with a beautiful little satchel charge- Boom!! Well if that 105 doesn't take out the guns, or if he's got more than *two* around here, (quite possible, eh?), I sure hope we've still got those 81 mortars with fresh loads around! How about a compromise- let's not *waste* the 81s on *anything* other than a serious Gun? (At least for awhile, until the board is well scouted). Remember that your SS can sometimes poke a hole in those BigGuns too, if they're lucky. When there is a problem which a tank *could* solve, perhaps it might seem like a "waste" to let him sit in the back like a shy guy, but when we need a tank, and we don't have one... ! Now *that* can be a very serious problem. Here we are with one tank left... and we haven't even done anything yet!! Anyhow. So where are the 81s now? Eden

Good Lord! Or what exclamation would be appropriate when talking of such pictures... That's just insanely neat. For pete's sake MG, before you do *any* of those public things, figure out/find out how to keep them from disseminating all over the web and lose control over them... Whatever the legal terms are, you know what I mean. Scan them, stick a big Copyright watermark over them... something. Then let me see them, too. Eden

That's how it works for me, and that's what I want- whatever threat may be encountered, I want *all* my guys hopefully in contact, but *no closer*. Next turn I can look at the threat and figure out what to do... I've read that last paragraph by JasonC quite a few times, and... I really don't get it at all. "expecting to lose" wha...?!? I just haven't been sure of how to respond; not sure what it is I'm not understanding there, hoping sleep would bring epiphany or something... But no, when I wake up I just need coffee. Eden

Hey worry not. FWIW, I'm with ya- it's pretty simple. I've said everything you said up there before, probably more than once. There's one scenario I've played where almost my entire force was completely ambushed... by a defensive entrenchment!!! Figure that one out! Eden

Yeah... I almost failed that IQ test myself...and I've been there before!! You really have to dig deep to find it; here's a short cut: http://www.wargames.warfarehq.com/forums/showthread.php?s=fa71e12f6082297f4a81c8fbf8ae5a5a&threadid=103 Eden

And TO&E ; Table of Organization & Equipment A list of all your stuff, like when buying men/armor in scenario editor, or like in the briefing in alot of scenarios, the author lists what you've got in men & equipment... Eden

Ok, I'm impressed- how in the world did you figure _that_ one out? Tangential Note: Just had a tank become immobilized via bogging; pushed it "out" with another tank, and verily witnessed it getting pushed out and over to the side... but it remained "immobilized". Bummer. It would appear that once immobilized, always immobilized, even if you push it right onto a paved road. Guess I *could* just push it all over the battlefield... Eden

Why not Move To Contact for (pretty much) everybody? Assuming they are in cover of some kind, with MtC the whole platoon naturally arrives where they 'should'. Also, Move has a (minor?) morale penalty when contact is made, and of course the unit will continue "trying" to Move to it's endpoint even after contact is made, and is (probably) taking fire. Unless crossing open ground, what advantage does Move have over MtC for the remainder of the platoon? Eden

I think that's an enormously good idea. Can anyone think of a major downside? Eden

Setting Casualties to say 50% means that you'll get a force size twice as large, in points, and half of them will have been executed before setup phase. You still have X points total, just with a larger percentage of HQs, and a bunch of casualtied squads. Admittedly, fighting with two squads each of which is half strength might be tougher (?) than one full strength squad, but if that difference exists I would suppose it must be slight. If you want true random casualties, id est, affecting true force size, you'll have to limit your own spending, or walk them off the board yourself, et cetera. EDIT- typo Eden [ January 23, 2003, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Eden Smallwood ]

Maybe this is simple: Where "are" you? To hear a unit yelling about everything I think I usually have to have it 'selected'. With nobody selected I think it defaults to being just up in the sky. No tests, just ISTR, Eden

Hey well let me know if a Mac only programmer with CW5 can help. Eden

NML • No Man's Land VL • Victory Location NME • Lazy Man's Enemy Eden

One up, one down, one shine? Eden

A great concept, but I think it has a fatal flaw in the 'two threads' area. This is internet, ergo, we have dweebs- scout's honor doesn't quite suffice, I'm afraid. But this is a rich vein of thought. How about something similar: how about an SP game, either against the AI or against some anonymous Vet whom we *can* trust not to peek. Then, perhaps we would "vote" for the next move, or perhaps this: we ( we quasi players ), we each download the cme file, we each make *our own* move, then send it back to the moderator. Moderator executes each, decides which has the greatest integrity, then runs that move (must be run again, to be fair), and posts the result, repeat & rinse. Whatever they may say now, I think this forum is loath to miss a good argument- they will come. Eden

You didn't mention if you're using an arc. Remember that a Cover *Armor* Arc will ignore an Armored Car- a car, (even an HT!), is not "armor" enough to be, er, "Armor". Eden

Great idea!! I've prodded the forum a number of times for more voyeuristic social events... How about posting your cme files? Not much I can really get from the pic: Three Red Lines: Well, those lines look good, but what do they really mean? IE, although you've labelled three separate Kampfgruppen (is that the plural?), in reality you still have a uniform distribution of troops across the front... Is it more than a symbolic distinction? I don't see three separate tactical approaches being taken, as you're latest post seems to verify. Which is fine, really, as the map could be said to have a wide approach, but why the terminology? Compared to me, (and I admit to not being a grog- shoot me down if this is ignorant, but you asked), I see that you are confident in your motion across the field, whereas I always consider myself, (or I try to pretend to consider myself), in hostile territory at the beginning. Or more accurately, "at any time" territory, and I would already be using overwatch leap & bounds by the second half of your paths there. Probably just anal retentive of me, but it seems more realistic that way. Another difference I notice is that I would probably have sent that SS (I would have bought a few) a little bit ahead of the pack as recon, with Move To Contact/Hide through woods. They're usually pretty safe that way, and the only way to catch a TC with an SS is before they're buttoned up, so... Similar reasoning for Pioneers; they make me think short range, especially those satchels- how nice it would be to have them at the front, with some greater chance of using their stuff. In the case of playing SP, the defending AI often has the tendency to send it's armor out from good defensive positions, right past your waiting pios, but then that's really a gamey tactic, so let's not go there. Still, better a Rifle platoon as Reserve- bring to contact sooner/farther. For a force of that size I would have traded some men for more arty. Notice that the map is possibly a bit unfair to the AI- you have rich cover on the whole front until you are standing right in front of the flag! It will take eons, but you can jump from house to house... Two or three HTs with the infinite HE capacity would have been ideal for a couple of cases: one, you find enemy in buildings- area fire & forget two, you need the cover of a downed building smoke cloud to advance. If enemy is rich in armor, say a bazillion light tanks, the buildings may be tough for you. If rich in ATGs, you will hopefully suck them out of hiding when he sees your many eyes taking cover in many buildings, IFF you have not already teased him with your own light armor first. My vote, (rhetorically, I mean), is the same as always- armor is not called until the infantry run into something they cannot surpasse on their own. Might be especially suitable here, since you have such a good chance of discovering all ATG assets on foot. It's getting late- am I making any sense? Or just two cents? Eden

I meet too many people "from" Chicago who have not been to _Harold's Chicken Shack_. There are (were) 31 of them, but recipes varied; go to the one on Garfield near Univ. of Chicago; order a "White Half w/ Extra 'Hotsauce', Salt & Pepper". Then and only then are you cleared to do male bonding wargames, whilst eating the above. My conscience is clear, because I know that you enjoy addictions or you would not play CMBB, QED. Eden

The Mac version of CMBB is about as scriptable as a rock. It's the first program I've seen in literally a decade which doesn't even support the Core AppleEvents of Quit, Open, Open Doc... Are you going to cheat into the event queue and post key events or something? Well it sure sounds neat, (gawd, wouldn't it solve some problems! That $&$%&*^#$ Editor which can't load QB maps, etc etc etc), but I hope you're not relying on faulty assumptions...? Just concerned, Eden