Sigurd

It would be great if what Wicky says could be possible : it would be a way to be able to play CMC and CMBB on the same OS9 and OSX complieant mac Otherwise we woul need 2 macs : one running OSX for CMC, one running CMBB on OS9, both connected via network game.

Ales : Me too I'm on a mac, still capable on running th good oldOS9, hope the mention "mac os version planed in the future" is not too long away... in the future !

Well, they were issued at the rate of two per man, some were blues, othere brown, but always of the same type for a given soldier.

Martin I didn't know at long range you could consume fewer than 1 amno point... Yet the 2 ammo stockpiles idea would go further in diminishing the extreme/long range ammo consumption. I thought it could be welcome for desert combat, where LOS can be very long, cover very thin, rendering long range squad fire more attractive...

I remember clearly discussions, where in a smoke barrage, in the beginnig of each turn, you had to wait for newly landed smoke shell to emit smoke. All the smoke emitted at the end of the turn would disappear at the beginning of the new one. The problem was, you hadn't a single-piece 3 minutes smoke screen, but 3 short screens during the last 40 seconds of the turn I wonder wether it was fixed in a patch, but I don't remember which. But I didn't find any references in the CMBO->CMBB changes list, or in one of the patches read me... Perhaps I saw these discussions when it was fixed in CMBO already ?...

Do you play with 1.03 ? Wasn't there a bug about smoke shells in previous versions, where the smoke screen present at the end of a turn would vanish completely at the begining of the following minute ?

Flamingknives, I just hought at the truth you said while re-playing Yelnya stare with 1.03. In the standard setup, most units are half-squads. while the russians are at long ranges, i requested only the LMG equipped hal-squads to fire, preserving the ammno of the other equipped with SMG for the final assaul of the russians. when they finally came at close range, my MP40 were on 100% amno to welcome the russkis Had I merged the half-squads, I would have had no ammo at all to repell the final assault. So I didn't change the initial setup so, to simplify the initial idea, perhaps just a distinction between long range amno (LMG, rifles) and short-range ammo (for SMG) would already help a lot the current system. Providing you the advantage of 2 half sqads and their separated ammo counts, without the disavantages of such an organisation (lower morale) what do you think of this intermediate term of the initial idea ? It would only multiply by 2 the ammo tracking memory

I don't know if the following idea was already mentioned : After the first rounds of an Arty Fire mission have landed, a LOS obstruction should not diminish the precision of the arty mission, as if it was plotted out of LOS from the beginning Once the coordinates are registred by the battery, and validated by the FO with the first rounds, it should continue whatever the LOS is after the first shells landed It must even more be implmented since in CMAK (and CMX2 I presume), vehicules and artillery explosions will produce dust obscuring the LOS...

Limit for number of commanded units by HQ suggestion for the Command & control system : The delay system represents the transmitting of the orders to all subordinated units (squads, teams, FO,...) through hand or voice signals, phone, radio, runners In the current implementation, a Company commander can give in one turn orders to an infinite numbers of unit, which is obviously too much I'd lke to see a system where HQ have a limit of number of units commanded, which would depend on the HQ's : rank experience casualties A veteran battalion HQ would be allowed o command , say, 15 units maximum, whereas a green platoon leader could just direct only his allocated squads with just an extra unit. I didn't see any suggestion like these What do you think of it ?

To better set you in the mood, I propose you 2 songs : 1°)an enthousiastic AK war song : Unser Rommel here (the lyrics there ) 2°) the melancholic Lili Marleen song here and its lyrics there both sides listenend to, in their trenches, on evenings... Hope you enjoy !

In fact you are not the first to ask, and the usual answer from BFC was : we haven't yet decided what to include / what period to cover do a search with "CMII feature" as keyword, and you'll know what players are asking and a few features BFC want to implement (like relative spotting) a recent thread "another CMII request list" from aka_Tom_w will give you an good idea too.

There is a little glitch in the 1.02 CMBB mac application that comes in the 1.02 patch : BFC has forgotten to update the version field in the "read the information about" finder window (Command-I). It still shows 1.01. I was a little worried, as after the installation of the new version, it still showed 1.01. But I'm sure it's the 1.02, it shows this right number in the game's main window (and I've got pure armor QB choice, and so on). Well, not so important, but still confusing when you're upgrading. A quick look in ResEdit, and our beloved CMBB makers will fix it, I'm sure [ February 13, 2003, 07:42 AM: Message edited by: Sigurd ]

from the review : Sure it doesn't only apply to the BFC team, the forum is a nice place too where this pathology is ruling... I wish they had put a link to the scenario Depot, for me the N°1 place to extend the life of the game

Just go and see the CMBB FAQ it's refered to the borgs in star streck, and their ability to see whatever another borg sees

The end of January approaching, here is a totally shameless bumpy bumping... BFC release it or say somefink !

thanks for the info hopefully that will be taken into account for the rewrite. I yet find strange to me BFC didn't model it in the first place, as the AFV models are very detailed in other much more complex areas (armor brittleness, quality, the math penetration model, all the different rounds, ...)

Hmm I agree I just say you have less mess with small calibers than with higher. It’s a relative assessment. Now, to obtain an absolute level of mess lethality/fear achieved by those rounds, only real experiences could tell, or veterans (or current soldiers with experience of the precise subject). Otherwise it’s just a best guess, and it’s diffcicult to argue with guesses… perhaps u’re right, but how can you convince other ? Perhaps you could try to give the estimated volume of the AFV a given round (say 14mm) should go through in order to damage/kill (keeping in mind the subsequent round fragments can hurt too). It would be a « killing zone ». For a ATR round on a HT, it the current system, such killing zone would be a limited volume of the overall vehicule, say 10% (you have to aim right to hit engine/crew). For a 88mm on a HT, 100% (wherever it lands, a 88mm overkills a HT). Just an idea of a « math » model to give better idea of the problem. Your idea would be to raise the "killing zone" higher than the low % of the current system.

When pointing downwards, tank’s gun have a maximal angle deviation (as compared to horizontal) of about 10°. It’s easy to understand : the end of the gun inside the turret would otherway hit the turret’s top. On another hand, the uwards possible gun’s elevation are higher (around 30°, practical for indirect fire too, as praticed by US tanks I believe), as the space downwarsds the inside ring can easilier be made free for the gun to come in this zone. Now, we all use hull down positions, where sometimes guns clearly are off the 10° downwards limit. In RL, in such positions, the gunner wouldn’t be able to aim target, but in CMBx he can The (rouhly) 10° and 30° angles limits come from some tank’s technical drawings seen on various WWII sites, including battlefield.ru So my questions are : 1°) Does the game engine not reflect (as I suppose) this downwards gun’s elevation limit ? 2°) What are your feelings about such a « gamey » trick. I’ve seen numerous complaints on some of the game’s engine limitations, but not yet on this. But I consider it important, it would be the end of those deadly tank ambushed on a slope behind a ridgeline. 3°) Aren’t you willing to see it corrected in CM2X ?

BTW waht do you think of this book "Fall of Berlin" of Beevor ? I read bad reviews on this forum on his other book "Stalingrad".

BFC posted recently it would be out by the end of January, but didn't answer when asked for the patch feature/correction list.

As some software ompanies usually answers : It's not a bug, it's a feature ! But here it's true. Indeed small AP shots like ATR tungsten rounds (which don't have any HE charge) have a good chance of doing no lethal damage when they penetrate small thickness of armour. Yhey have much smaller kinetic energy than bigger calibers, and have a harder work damaging some vital part of the AFV, or killing a crew member. Remeber what achieve a KO status when firing at AFV : Damage the AFV (particularly in the engine compartment, in the amno/gasoline storage) kill the crew, with armor flaking or shrapnels made from the armour, when it's penetrated. (or with a he charge included in some AP rounds) Don't forget too the large empty space present in some AFV : hitting an empty passenger compartment of an half track isn't of much help with small ATR rounds. i think the morale effect depends a lot on the experience of the crew, I saw conscripts/green become "shaken" rather quickly, even without any damage/kills.

You should try TCP/IP games with time limit, so you now the game won't last more than a few hours, your opponent will be force to play till the last round ! 20-25 turns games with 7' time limit only demands 2h30 for example.

the asterisks are with no doubt placed by the designer. In one battle of the stalingrad pack, it was the indication of the probable trenches of the ennemy. Look again in the op's briefing, it should say something about it Concerning the units in trenches : i've remarked that during the setting, the unit placed obsiously in trench is only labelled to sit in the surrounding ground terrain type (for example "steppe"), not trench. But in the 1st turn, it's corrected, the unit in trench is in terrain type "trench".

is the arty smoke bug in the in the list of 1,02 (or was it already fiwed with 1,01 ? or has BFC said it won't be fixed anyway?) you know, the smoke emitting at the end of turn n suddenly disappearing at the beginning of turn n+1

so you're saying the usual penetration values in the litterature , for the german 37mm, (and thus these used inside CMBB) are 20% too small ? Or are you just talking about the internal way for the germans to mesure their gun's penetration abilities ? Any über-pak-grog out there ?