moneymaxx

Thanks for the article. The article states one very important thing, you have to ensure that copying the game isn't worth the effort. To avoid problematic copy protection systems light starforce I think a combination of "light" copy protections is a possibility. Such a combination, that makes the effort bigger for the pirate but comes at nearly no cost/risk/time loss for the legitimate buyer, could look like this : 1) A simple CD copy protection for the people that don't understand computers too well. At the same time it raises the actual effort for those who want to use an illegal copy since they have to at least look for a no-CD crack on strange Internet sites (security). 2) A simple registration code. Again the casual pirate has to take the time to find one and can´t never be sure that the key isn't blacklisted for online play or even nastier patches (though battlefront would never release a game that requires a patch let alone patches ). 3) A printed manual, not a pdf file!. While this isn't an option for the simpler mass consumer games that even brain dead can play without the manual, for a more complex game like Combat Mission it is. What is the use of having a working copy of a program that you don't know how it works. Even if you can rent the game, copying 70+ pages is quite an effort. While being an effective copy protection it benefits the legal buyer too (HINT ) [ September 16, 2005, 05:40 PM: Message edited by: moneymaxx ]

There is another, reasonably large, vertical surface that can catch a HE shell on that picture, the atg.

[/qb]

1) As Panzerman said, the PIAT is effective only at a very short range. 110m is already a considerable distance and you might have hit the tank once not in spite off but because you had a crack unit. The slow reload time is a real life problem that all PIAT had. Quotes form this site : http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/PIAT "In general use the PIAT had a rated range of about 100m, but that was considered the extreme and was typically fired at much shorter ranges" " The PIAT could then be found in all theatres, although the slow reload time meant it was generally considered a one-shot-per-battle weapon" 2) Did you hide the gun or did you use covered arcs?

I don't know if the arty-units and planes are counted in the statistics but you'll still have enough units to look at . Weapons in CMBB fall in 6 categories, infantry, support weapons, vehicles, tanks, arty and fortifications. Everyting except the arty has some kind of visual representation in the game. A extremely good unit list for CMBB can be found here: http://users.erols.com/chare/cm/ Several thousand EXCEL lines of `basic` information for new CMBB players, lol. No pictures though, I guess that would make the file too big.

I don't know if the arty-units and planes are counted in the statistics but you'll still have enough units to look at . Weapons in CMBB fall in 6 categories, infantry, support weapons, vehicles, tanks, arty and fortifications. Everyting except the arty has some kind of visual representation in the game. A extremely good unit list for CMBB can be found here: http://users.erols.com/chare/cm/ Several thousand EXCEL lines of `basic` information for new CMBB players, lol. No pictures though, I guess that would make the file too big.

I had this anti-ATG tactic used successfully used against me (CMBO). My opponent bought some cheap 75mm infantry guns and hid them with LOS to suspected ATG positions. As soon as my ATGs attacked they drew fire from the inf guns. That was a very difficult problem because, as the defender, I didn't have as much arty or mortars as the attacker to take them out and I needed my arty to stop the infantry. So I was limited to fight the inf guns with my ATGs, which therefore couldn't target anything else and though ATGs fire more accurate they normally have less effective HE shells, giving the inf gun of my opponent the time to "zero" in on my ATGs and they don't run out of ammo as quickly as a mortar does. Therefore I buy 1 or 2 inf guns, together with a lot of on-map mortars of course, in a scenario in which I expect enemy ATGs and a setup position from where I can see expected ATG positions. I want to add that this tactic was used successfully in CMBO and I think that it might be even more effective in CMBB though I can't test it at the moment. The additional advantage the attacker has in CMBB is that those little inf guns should be hard to spot from a longer distance and, since the defender most likely doesn't move spotting units forward, they might survive longer than in CMBO or even stay undetected.

This is a CMBO tactic that worked fine for me but since I can't play CMBB at the moment I don't know if it still works in CMBB, but you could give it a try. If you played CMBO then you know that British infantry (firepower 161 at 40m) against Gebirgsjäger squads (firepower 315 at 40m) isn't easy (nearly impossible) to win without support weapons. I found out that the tiny 2 inch mortar is the key to win this battle. When I discover a SMG squad I order my 2 inch mortar to fire indirectly at them. That is usually enough to pin them or drop their combat effectiveness and morale. That tactic was so successful in the past that I buy an extra 2 inch mortar for every platoon when playing on heavily wooded maps. But a little bit of luck is needed since the platoon HQ must have LOS to the enemy AND must survive first contact, so if your men discover the enemy in the first second of the turn you're almost lost because the SMG will mow down your men and HQ before you have the opportunity to order indirect fire. I always wanted to try this tactic with German infantry and a 50mm mortar. The only problem would be the minimum range of the 50mm mortar but I think they lowered it in the last patch to some 50m?? That should be low enough to let the HQ have LOS to the target and COC with the mortars. If you try this would you please post the result here, since I'm interested to know if it works. If it does, the disadvantage of the reduced speed of your infantry because of the slow mortar will be acceptable.

No, this is not a common problem. I wonder what happened. But we won't stop until you get what you want . First, if you got the time, uninstall CMBO to start again. Second, install it again. This should get you back from where you started. I'll send you an email to your adress and try to talk you through the process .

AFAIK all the scenarios of the SE are user made and most of them can be found here: http://ns9.super-hosts.com/~dragonlair.net/combatmission/ More 1000 scenarios for CMBO, that should keep you busy for a while .

Sorry, I didn’t make myself clear. I don’t want a list of spot percentages by a sharpshooter Just, like I said, a rough comparison would be great, e.g. a rifle company, better infantry, is better concealed in: First woods, second scattered trees, third rough ..... (btw, the rifle platoon was crawling in a wheat field in JULY, there is no way anyone can spot them who is at the same level, but that’s off topic). Now that you mention it, it WOULD be interesting to know how a higher level affects spotting. Common sense would tell me that it is easier to spot infantry in a wheat field from above, while in woods it wouldn’t make a difference or they should be even harder to spot. Do you know? I don’t, therefore I would have to run a series of tests to find out. But NOT to gain a little advantage over my opponent but to see if common sense fails me in my tactical calculations. All this information would fill maybe a quarter of a page, and would be interesting for Newbies and Veterans. Anyway I don’t want to start a heated discussion, I just wanted to explain what I wanted to say. And if someone else is reading this thread where do I get more concealment in brush or in rough ?

Allow me to partially disagree. While I do think that most of the game can be played by intuition and common sense there are important exceptions. Those exist because of model limitations or simply because the graphical representation doesn't really give a clue what exactly the game engine takes into consideration. I do play CM a lot but I still don't know what flavour of terrain, as Redwolf put it so nicely, is exactly modelled. What is rough? Rocks of 3m height or bigger pebbles? What is brush? A bush from time to time on otherwise open ground or a jungle of brush? My favourite, what exactly is a wheat field? I just made a little test (with CMBO I have to admit) to clarify this. A Axis rifle platoon has to advance through different terrain (rough, woods and wheat) to a wood patch where a sharpshooter is waiting (July). Since I lived in Western Europe most of my life, common sense told me that crawling through the wheat field would be the safest thing to do. Surprise, the platoon crawling through the wheat field was spotted at a distance of 190m! While the other platoons crawled and crawled and weren't spotted at all. (I know, I only ran the test once, but there should be no need to run it again, someone crawling in a wheat field can't be seen unless he is maybe 10m away from the edge of the field). Veteran CM players know this by experience, therefore, especially new players would benefit from information about it and not the ladder player who does everything for another win. It doesn't have to be exact information, more like a rough comparison. E.g. a rifle platoon in a wheat field/rough/brush has a x percentage of being spotted from a distance of 100m by a sharpshooter. With this information a new player could really evaluate the different options.

You've been assimilated . I don't know which version of CMBO they ship in the bundle pack, since there are 2. There is a second edition of CMBO with improved graphics that BF.C recently started to sell in stores. If you recieved the first edition, don't worry, you can upgrade the graphics to be exactly or even better than the second edition of CMBO (If you already have the second edition then the graphics can't be improved much more). This is called modding and is quite easy. What it does is replace the original textures of the 3d models and the original sounds with new, better ones. I add some links where you can find mods. http://www.cmoutpost.net/lists/cmbo_german/pzva.htm I linked directly to a page with Panzer VA Panther mods, at the top of the page you can see the original textures (CMBO first edition) and underneath the textures you can choose. AFAIK you can have 1 summer and 1 winter version of a tank/vehicle etc. at a time. Installing a mod will OVERWRITE the textures you had before, so you should make a backup of the textures in case you want to go back to the version you had (.bmp files in the bmp directory). http://www.combatmission.com/MDMP/mdmp.asp AFAIK those mods of textures and sounds were made by some people of BF.C, I don't know if they are official. The site has a lot more mods to choose from, especially nice are some grass and tree textures. http://www.cmmods.com/ I think that this is THE site for CMBO and CMBB mods, I find it a little bit difficult to find what I want but you sure should bookmark it. Should you run out of scenarios/operations you can find new, user made ones here http://ns9.super-hosts.com/~dragonlair.net/combatmission/ There are more than 1100 for CMBO and ovcer 400 for CMBB, that should keep you busy for a while . René

I'm lazy, so I just adapted one of my posts to answer your question wether you should play CMBO first or not. Your objective: You have to move a infantry platoon out of a wood over 300m flat, open ground to destroy the last remaining enemy MG in a heavy building, it’s windy. You’ve got the infantry platoon 2 light mortars with smoke shells, a light infantry gun and a jeep (the jeep and gun are 600m away and don’t have Line Of Sight to the MG). Tactic class A(mateur) You give your inf platoon orders to boldly charge the heavy building while everybody else has a coffee break and press go. Result: the platoon charges, the enemy MG opens fire, your platoon drops to the ground, is pinned then panics and tries to get back to the woods while being shot at. A total failure . Tactic class B(etter) The same as above but this time the mortars fire smoke shells in front of the house to block LOS and you give your platoon to wait some seconds before charging so that the smoke screen can build up. Result: The platoon charges, the enemy MG can’t see a thing because of the smoke, your platoon nearly makes it to the house but then the smoke screen disappears because it’s windy (this is not modelled in CMBO where smoke screens disappear after a set time). The MG opens fire and causes some casualties but half your men make it to the house and take out the MG in close combat. A success but you lost many men. Tactic class C(rack) If you have time to do so (all battles have a turn limit) you could embark the light gun on the jeep drive it out of LOS of the MG to the woods where your infantry is waiting, disembark the gun, move them into the woods (all the time you have to make sure that the MG can’t see the gun!), fire smoke in front of the house EDIT: with the mortars, move the gun forward so that it would have LOS to the house if the smoke screen wasn’t there. When the smoke clears you have everybody fire on the house. The mortar HE (high explosive) shells and your inf platoon might not inflict any damage because the MG is in a heavy building but they might keep their heads down while your gun is pumping one HE shell after another into the house, which after a while will result in a dead MG. A lot of work, but if you’re lucky you don’t loose 1 man. CMBB is the more realistic game, therefore it is less forgiving and sometimes only the class C tactics can be used, which might be a lot of work. In CMBO even class A tactics might work (with very heavy losses) since infantry is more robust and MGs less deadly. I think CMBO is a good game for the beginner and might be considered a tutorial for CMBB.

I would like to add my opinion too, though some thing have already been mentioned. 1) I really can’t remember the tutorials of CMBO and CMBB and I don’t think that you really need them. The interface of CM is very easy to understand. For example you click on a tank, press M for move and then click on the map where you want the tank to move to. It’s that simple! After you’ve given all the orders CM calculates a 3d-movie in which you can see the results of your orders. During this movie replay you can’t do anything, though sometimes you would like to . BTW, the manuals that ship with the games are very good and easy to read. As YankeeDog pointed out, there is more to learn but since CM isn’t that abstract like many board games common sense will help a great deal. CM is a bit like chess in this aspect, learning how to move your pieces is easy but to be a good chess/cm player takes a while. An example: You have to move a infantry platoon out of a wood over 300m flat, open ground to destroy the last remaining enemy MG in a heavy building, it’s windy. You’ve got the infantry platoon 2 light mortars with smoke shells, a light infantry gun and a jeep (the jeep and gun are 600m away and don’t have Line Of Sight to the MG). Tactic a ) You give your inf platoon orders to boldly charge the heavy building while everybody else has a coffee break and press go. Result: the platoon charges, the enemy MG opens fire, your platoon drops to the ground, is pinned then panics and tries to get back to the woods while being shot at. A total failure . Tactic The same as above but this time the mortars fire smoke shells in front of the house to block LOS and you give your platoon to wait some seconds before charging so that the smoke screen can build up. Result: The platoon charges, the enemy MG can’t see a thing because of the smoke, your platoon nearly makes it to the house but then the smoke screen disappears because it’s windy (this is not modelled in CMBO where smoke screens disappear after a set time). The MG opens fire and causes some casualties but half your men make it to the house and take out the MG in close combat. A success but you lost many men. Tactic c) If you have time to do so (all battles have a turn limit) you could embark the light gun on the jeep drive it out of LOS of the MG to the woods where your infantry is waiting, disembark the gun, move them into the woods (all the time you have to make sure that the MG can’t see the gun!), fire smoke in front of the house EDIT: with the mortars, move the gun forward so that it would have LOS to the house if the smoke screen wasn’t there. When the smoke clears you have everybody fire on the house. The mortar HE (high explosive) shells and your inf platoon might not inflict any damage because the MG is in a heavy building but they might keep their heads down while your gun is pumping one HE shell after another into the house, which after a while will result in a dead MG. A lot of work, but if you’re lucky you don’t loose 1 man. Think what would work in real life and it most probably works in CM too. That includes that you have to know more or less how those weapons worked in real life. E.g. you have to know the difference between an AP, a HE and a HC shell but basic knowledge is sufficient. 2) Download the demos. 3) CMBB is the more realistic game, therefore it is less forgiving and sometimes only the class C tactics work, which might be a lot of work. In CMBO even tactic a of the example might work (with very heavy losses) since infantry is more robust and MGs less deadly. I think CMBO is a good game for the beginner and might be considered a tutorial for CMBB. 4) I have no opinion, I live in Europe . But someone I know who lives in Austin/TX got his copy of CMBB in 3 days. [ June 23, 2003, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: moneymaxx ]

Thanks a lot for the information. Do you (or someone) by any chance know how many gallons/liters they transported in their tank? (BTW are those British or American gallons?)

Those questionnaires are great, apart from the information about the wasps, I was quite surprised to read that they liked the PIAT so much. Keep up the great work.

I found this about the Canadian army: "REPORT NO. 173 HISTORICAL OFFICER CANADIAN MILITARY HEADQUARTERS 25 Mar 47 THE WATCH ON THE MAAS 9 NOV 44 - 8 FEB 45 ...As the days of January went by, the area of 3 Cdn Inf Div saw notable increase in offensive activity. On the 8th N. Shore R. launched a daylight attack against the well-sited enemy positions west of Wyler. The attack was made in heavy snow by a company of infantry supported by wasps and carriers. ..." "REPORT NO. 186 HISTORICAL SECTION CANADIAN MILITARY HEADQUARTERS 22 Jul 47 Operation "BLOCKBUSTER": The Canadian Offensive West of the Rhine, 26 Feb - 23 Mar 45 ... The company was being badly mauled from all sides, and a slow infantry fight developed in such close contact with the enemy that artillery support was difficult to arrange. While this opposition was being contained, all available tanks were kept ready to assist R.H.C. who had the vital task of maintaining contact with 6 Cdn Inf Bde on the right (Ibid). At about 1020 hours as the ituation cleared in front of R.H.C., first one, then two troops of tanks were shifted over to support R. de Mais, whose "B" Coy went forward under the covering fire of the armour to assault the last enemy positions. Wasp flame throwers were used against the stubborn resistance, yet it was later reported that many Germans preferred to remain in the slit... ...51. By this time N. Shore r., whose two forward companies were still pinned down and suffering numerous casualties, had a new plan in conjunction with "C" Sqn 6 Cdn Armd Regt. The squadron, 11 tanks in all, was to advance on Keppeln with one platoon of "A" Coy mounted on them. "B" and "C" Coys would move forward from their present positions to follow the armour. The battalion's Wasps and carriers were to follow up as closely as possible to take on all anti-tank opposition which disclosed itself. ... ... 53. While the battle for Keppeln and Hollen had been raging, Q.O.R. of C. were still attempting to fight their way ahead. "A" Coy met extremely stiff resistance as they moved up the slope from Mooshof towards the road junction (983459) north-west of Lookerhof and only after a vicious attack with the aid of Wasps was the objective won. ... " It looks to me that they were used quite often, which still leaves the question wether or not they are over-modelled in CMBO, since 1 wasp can set a whole tile on fire with just one shot, e.g. a big heavy building that's 400 square-meters !. At the same time you don't have to deal with the disadvantages, like spreading fires, unwanted smoke screens etc. Unfortunatly I don't know how many liters of flammable liquid they fired in one shot, maybe their destructive power is realistic after all? Though I didn't find a ammo loadout for the wasps, I found an interesting questionnaire here: http://members.shaw.ca/calgaryhighlanders/queslbacon.htm "Battle Experience Questionnaire - R Bacon Standard questionnaire, completed by R Bacon of the Calgary Highlanders. His remarks are in blue, those of the webmaster are in green. Some abbreviations have been expanded and some unintelligible comments have been either noted or deleted. Irrelevant portions of the questionnaire have been deleted and wording of some questions edited for Internet use. .... ...Have you found any of these weapons outstandingly effective? If so, which and why? Weapon Chief reason(s) for Effectiveness Bren Gun High rate of fire, mobility, accuracy Medium Machine Gun High rate of fire, accuracy, men like it, good flank protection 3" Mortar Good searching power, effective smoke screen, close support WASP flamethrower Always available, terrific burning power, bad for enemy morale PIAT Great blasting power, men who know how to use it, love it ...." It seems he liked them and he says that they were ALWAYS available. In my next 1000 point QB I'll buy 6 .

The force selections seems fine, personally I would have traded the 5.5inch VT for 2 4.5inch to have more flexibility. All in all you fell victim to the typical infantry swarm, that can hardly be stopped if you aren't incedibly lucky with your arty. The main reason of the success of that tactic is the lack of effective MGs, therefor infantry can just run over open ground without taking too much damage even if there is MG fire. That changed dramatically in CMBB, in CMBO you'll have to live with it. A tactical loss would be a good result for me . [ June 21, 2003, 11:04 AM: Message edited by: moneymaxx ]

You are of course correct that it makes it easier. I only wanted to say that a 88 isn't going to hit with a 70% chance a moving target that is far away, since the calculations for a moving target don't allow a lot of errors while estimating the input data. Assuming that the gunner got the velocity and the distance perfectly right and the gun is aligned perfectly, even "pulling the trigger" at the right time is crucial. The shell leaves the gun of the Nashorn at 1018m/sec (CMBO data, getting slower while travelling but I just leave that out). It takes the shell 1.18seconds to travel 1.200meters in that time a tank moving at a speed of 30km/h from left to right travels 9,83meters. With those optimal settings the gunner has 0,75second to shoot (considering the length of a T34, 6,75m). The gunner of a Tiger has to be quicker of course since the velocity of the shell is lower, it takes the shell 1.55 seconds to travel 1200m (773m/sec CMBO data). The tank moves 12,91m, 1/2 second to shoot.

I just read the Tiger Fibel http://www.geocities.com/tigerfibel/tigerfibel.htm and I found some interesting information about the optics and the 88’s accuracy. Of course there might be some propaganda involved, but since it is an instruction manual it should be quite limited. Some quotes: “wenn du mit dem ersten Schuss nicht triffst, hast du dich verschätzt oder die Waffe nicht richtig justiert. Du bist Schuld nicht die Kanone. “Bis 2000m schiesst die 88 nämlich Fleck” -If you don’t hit with the first shot, you have either misjudged (the distance) or you didn’t align the gun correctly*. You are to blame, not the cannon. Because up to 2000m the 88 hits exactly . *There is a whole chapter in the instructions how to align the optics with the gun but in this context it can also mean that the gunner didn’t target the objective correctly. That means that shooting at a stationary target should result in overshoots, undershoots or hits but rarely in misses to the left or the right, IF the optics are aligned correctly. Even against small targets like ATGs more than 1200m away the tank crew is supposed to hit with the third or fourth shot. Under 1200m the tank crew should hit with the first one. This refers to moving targets. It’s a quote from the chapter that explains shooting in front of the target to compensate the target movement, otherwise, because the target moves during the flight of the shell, the shell would miss. “ist dein Ziel über 1200m-aufhören, denn dann verschiesst Du auf fahrende Ziele zuviel Munition” -If your target is more than 1200m away-stop, otherwise you use too many shells on moving targets. So if the target is moving the hit probability should drop considerably. Superior optics are fine but they don’t help much if you have to estimate the velocity of the target. I don’t know if the T-34s of the original question were moving but that would explain the low hit probability. Even a KT has the same problem. The gun is perfect, optics are superior but to find the right aim point for a moving target is extremely difficult at great distances.

You are defending??? My suggestion, surrender . It's extremly difficult to win a defence mission in CMBO. If you still want to fight, don't forget to buy some TRPs. They are real life savers. A good combination are on-map 3 inch mortars and a TRP, because, attention important, all on-map mortars even mortar-carriers can fire on a TRP WITHOUT LOS when fired from their inital setup position, if you move them just an inch you loose that advantage (just place them somewhere safe with no LOS to anything). So if your opponent steps on a TRP you can directly attack him with no time delay. It's actually a double advantage, since the 3 inch shells will usually pin the enemy infantry around the TRP so that you can be sure that they'll still be there when your heavy arty arrives. Personally I'd use 4.5 inch arty because it has enough punch and enough shells. I hope that you win . [ June 19, 2003, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: moneymaxx ]

One small advice, don't defend too near to the flag. It's an artifical sign in CMBO that has "we are here" written on it. Especially against the Allies with their powerful arty that can be deadly. Since shells in CMBO fall in a north-south pattern, those areas around the flag should be avoided. 50m to the east or west would be a safer place for your troops, if you can find cover .

Please don't forget to post the end result and what you bought here. That would be very interesting .