Bartokomus
-
Posts
334 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bartokomus
-
-
i have no problem with that; this isn't really a complaint as much as confusion (plus me yelling at the screen and pointing at the MP40 or MG42 just lying there). it's the predilection for pistol wearing troops to not discard them in favor of a weapon which much better serves the squad.
-
I have a squad of Panzergrenadiers which lost a debate with a 60mm mortar, and now the squad is doing buddy aid. My question/confusion is why do the three squadmembers which are alive not take the smg, rifle, or mg42? this happens enough that i thought i would ask. To be clear, buddy aid is being done, but at the end, none of the members of the squad have exchanged weapons, and most particularly, none of the pistol equipped members have.
thoughts?
-
quick clarification; are we talking about any old grunt recrewing or the actual crew coming back to the weapon? i have no strong opinion either way about other units manning a de-crewed weapon, but what i don't understand is why an at/howitzer crew can't abandon their gun and come back. anyone know if that is in the plans to be remedied?
-
Yes, an AAR forum would be great. Is there a way to allow only the AAR posters to add to it? We get alot of 'fluff' cluttering up the turn by turn recaps.
Also, I understand the AAR is done during the game, but come on! AAR is the only logical term. Let's get some uniformity here.
+1
it would be great to read an AAR in it's entirety instead of the 400 accompanying posts.
-
IMO, GreenAsJade should be on BFC's payroll. His H2HH "app" (used with Dropbox) has done a great deal to enhance the enjoyment of CMBN+CW+CMFI PBEM gaming. A GREAT deal.
It's funny you say that, i was thinking the exact same thing; it takes a very awkward system and makes it quite seamless...
-
Ideally, I'd like to see reinforcements linked to losses, then they would only be released if they were required.
I am positive this is how it was in CMx1, at least for campaigns; i don't recall if that mechanism was in for scenarions...
-
this is incredibly exciting and most welcome news!
-
Bingo Erwin; i figured this out just this weekend. it was really irritating me...
-
Sorry, for some reason I was thinking Browning High Power because that's what the CF uses today. The pistols are so old and magazines so beat up that accuracy is only good at throwing distance and the magazines cause frequent jams. It's better to use to wave in the air in the direction Afghan kids throwing rocks at your truck than actually trying to harm someone.
Sigop those are probably the same damn Browning's we used 20 years ago; we relentlessly hunted sea snakes in the Persian Gulf during the first gulf war with those, up on the bridge or down on the quarterdeck. if a snake was being particularly hard to hit, we sometimes pulled out the C7...
-
it's funny; i always played at veteran in pbem for years until a friend demanded iron mode and now i can't go back. i like the added difficulties...
-
Beevor perpetuates the myths his sources does, as do most other historians. It is not a snide remark at Beevor so much as just inherent weaknesses in his works on the eastern front which rely very heavily on secondary sources. For example Beevors work perpetuates the "blame hitler" myth, especially in regards to Stalingrad. There are works more recently (last decade) which have shown there were generals who agreed with Hitler to leave the 6th Army at Stalingrad (at least initially) because it simply did not have the fuel to conduct a withdrawal of all its units without being mauled if not destroyed by the Russian pincers.
It is not that Beevor purposely pushes myths, his works are just a product of what is available and when he published his two work history of the eastern front (berlin and Stalingrad), the sources had flaws. The work is good for the time it came out, but it does not hold up as well with the more scholarly articles written recently that demolish many myths perpetuated by many sources Beevor used. I would not suggest Berlin or Stalingrad now compared to other more modern works, as I stated if you want one work on the eastern Front, "Ostkriege" is one of the most up to date regarding the continuously changing historiography of the eastern front in a single volume.
ahh well ty; i guess i just missed that overtone to the book or i automatically discount it, not certain. thanks for the tip on the other book, but can i get an author for that title? i can't find any book with Ostkrieg spelled like that (in english that is).
thanks much
-
in total non-snarkiness, please tell of the myths Sir Beevor perpetuates. i hadn't heard of that critique before, and i find his work to be very strong.
-
We used to have Finn's on this board, are they all gone now? i am curious about their perspective of *both* the SU and Germany. It always seemed to me they must have felt like piggy-in-the-middle with two agressive, psychotic regimes surrounding them. It must have seemed like a bad choice no matter what.
-
I guess everyone has a different "Holy Grail"; i'm just waiting for CM: East Front to come. Far East, North Africa, and the Western Front are all just ancillary theaters IMO.
-
thanks for posting that; it was an amazing little video.
-
I think mortars are dramatically more powerful in CM than they should be. The reason is the LOS model. It's not borg anymore, but from the realism POV the problem of the player knowing all is still there. Call it semiborg. Your units are taking fire. You see a ? -- what can it be but a team, at least 4-5 juicy bugs including a MG42 bug -- worth eating. So, without the mortar or its HQ or indeed any unit except one having seen anything, the mortar opens fire on the exact action spot containing the enemy unit. 1-2 minutes later -- no enemy unit.
I would make one comment; the mortar team in my mind isn't firing at the enemy, they are firing at the piece of ground. Why should the mortar be unable to fire at a piece of ground relayed to it at a certain height and distance from their location. if i can see the hedge to drop rounds on, do i need to see the infrantryman at the base of the hedge?
Of course they want to hit the enemy, but coordinate are for a location...
i think off-map arty is the real problem in the game personally in terms of lethality and balance, but i have no idea how to fix it other than in my pbem games on a medium map the attacker gets max 300 rounds of off map 81mm and the defender gets 200 rounds rounds. on map mortars/guns are unrestricted.
-
Er, the vehicles in the OP are clearly American. Otherwise, yeah, you're right.
Michael
Clint obviously suspected a ruse...
-
boiled down question:
why do some at dudes with no ammo pull out a rifle and some at guys in the same scenario have no secondary?
-
I am a little confused at something that seems fairly inconsistent and arbitrary. If a two man team (dedicated or detached from a squad) uses up all its at ammo it seems like:
a) half of the time the member with the shrek/zook pulls out a secondary weapon,
the rest of the time they simply run around with the weaponIs this experience common to anyone else? What is supposed to happen?
-
There's a lot of difference between a normal house ad-hoc occupied and a house that's been prepared for defense. Sandbags, grenade netting, drainpipes for grenades, flammables removed, interior walls knocked down (for AT weapons, comms) etc. A lot of this could and should be abstracted but not to the point where it is today.
I'm hoping that things like this will be addressed for the eastern front game as Stalingrad or Rostov with the current mechanics would feel a bit cheap.
This is exactly my concern as well; there are quite a few issues like this which i would like to see improved in CMBN, but without them the east front module won't be convincing.
-
I want BFC to know i personally blame them for the death of Pvt. Rawls and his unnamed idiotic squadmate. They were KIA'd in the line of duty, with the last words from Rawl's mouth being "WTF, why did you do that?"...
-
I'm sure you're right; but there is still a great deal more improvement to be done. but the concept of tank hunting is fairly broken right now.
-
I *know* this has been discussed; i just don't recall and can't seem to find if it's been addressed/going to be addressed.
2 man team zook team sneaking up on a Panther; after 20 minutes, i finally hunt them at the start of the turn and they make contact. the zook soldier starts aiming, and just to be helpful his good friend beside him decides he's bored and shoots at the buttoned up tank. ridiculous.
I like fighting against tanks with inf; i like the challenge and planning. There is no intelligent defense for the AI's behaviour to shoot a Garand at a buttoned tank.
-
In addition a lot of indie developers license big-developer engines to build off. BFC not only has to put out a very complicated product, it has to create its own game engine from the ground up.
This to me is the crux of it, and probably always will be. We can all argue about the gui, hotkeys, and other features, but the simple fact is with a 5 man team and the massive expense of licensing a big name engine not a lot can be done imo.
I think the review conclusion is fair, though i haven't read it. To me the game *does* look very dated, the gui is one of the poorer i've used in 30+ years of gaming, and some of the design decisions suffer from a lack. But having said that no other game is in the same league and i'll continue buying CM games until the lobster module comes along...
the rest of the time they simply run around with the weapon
Buddy aid/weapon exchange
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
This is consistent; i don't post over one offs to be honest. I play about a dozen games of PBEM at a time, and my own single player QBs and the behaviour doesn't vary. MP40/MG42/Kar98 will get left by a man delivering buddy aid, but one comment i would make is that this seems to be a bigger issue with CMFI than CMBN.