Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

76mm

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,366

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by 76mm

    CMPzC Operation for CMRT: Anybody interested?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted · Edited by 76mm

    Correct, you cannot make new maps, you can only take portions of existing maps. You're probably aware, but for those that aren't PzC is one of very few games that allows you to revise saved game files, either by by renaming the saved game as a scenario and opening it in the scenario, or modifying the saved game text file directly.

    Also, you can use any OOBs from the series, or ones that you make yourself, with any of the maps. I'm in the process of converting Sicily into an "Onion Wars" style fictional country wracked by civil war, with the sides represented by German and Soviet troops. You can also use Matrix's Modern Air/Naval Operations (which has some Soviet WWII era stuff) to depict the naval and air portions of the war). Buhaha, if I ever get things up and running I'll probably never leave the house...

    Kohlenklau, what can you tell me about this "software project [which] is underway to automate some of the editing in a manner which maintains FOW"? I'm working on a similar project, but at pretty early stages, real life keeps getting in the way...

    0

    CMPzC Operation for CMRT: Anybody interested?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    I'm probably not interested in playing right now (too busy), but am interested in doing so at some point, so one of the things I've been doing is creating PzC units for each of the units in the CMRT OOB. In other words, creating a 43 Rifle Battalion, the various tank regiments, etc. The smallest units are platoons, which of course are generally not represented in PzC, but if you tweak a few parameters in the pdt file it seems to work pretty well). If you're interested, let me know and I can send you what I have. Note that to get all of the units in CMRT, you need to take unit values from a number of the PzC games, not just Mius (or Minsk for that matter).

    For a number of reasons (in particular, the scale, the fact that is not a board game (ie, has an AI, etc.), and the fact that all game files other than maps are easy to edit), I think that PzC is a good solution for CMRT operational games.

    0

    Red-on-Red in scenario editor?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    I thought that it was possible to set-up red-on-red battles in the scenario editor, but can't seem to figure it out, although it seems to be possible in Quick Battles.

    Also, at least in CMx1, it was possible to have a German force use items from the Soviet unit list (or vice versa), to represent use of captured equipment, etc. Is that no longer possible in CMx2? I can't find it...

    0

    Can CMRT maps be imported from CMBN etc?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    Actually, I'm still trying to understand your position:

    ...but I am of the opinion that content is actually the primary reason why people purchase the games because without content there isn't a game to play.  All you have is a 'war game construction set' with vehicle models and TO&Es and who wants one of those?  The sales of the vehicle pack should be proof of concept either way.

    Of course, but you seem to be defining content solely as maps and scenarios. Personally I'd rather have a couple dozen maps and scenarios with each game and the ability to share maps between titles than 300 maps, like with BS--pretty soon the usable map bank for the CMx2 series would be large enough that people wouldn't have to worry much about a shortage of maps. If people want yet more maps and scenarios, and the community doesn't provide them, then Battlefront can sell map and/or scenario packs as well. To be sure, I'm sure there are people who want 500 maps and scenarios with each title, but I'm of a different opinion.

    The very fact that individuals feel that the transferring of these QB maps between titles is something that they gain value from is essentially proof of my point that the content has value (otherwise why transfer it), and if it is content that was provided by BFC when a player purchased the game then that content, by definition, can be assumed to have been given to someone for free that which should probably have been purchased.

    I don't follow here; two issues:

    1) If I have both games, I've paid for the content, so I'm not getting something for free, I've already purchased the content. If you're concerned about people who have only bought one game being able to use maps from all the games whether they've bought them or not, I'd have no problem at all if they limited map sharing to maps for titles that you already own, but of course that would require a conscious policy decision and some programming from Battlefront, which at least so far they haven't shown much interest in.

    2) If you're implying that people that have bought both games still shouldn't be able to shares maps without paying more to Battlefront, because that right of common use should not be free, I'm not sure that I agree. Moreover, even if I was willing to pay for common use, there is currently no way to do so.

    0

    Max Effective Tank Ranges?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted · Edited by 76mm

    Vanir, thanks, that's very interesting data--more than 90% of 75mm kills and 80% of 88mm kills at less than 1,000 meters. On the east front at least, I would have guessed--without any data to back it up--that those percentages would have corresponded to 1,500 meters rather than 1,000 meters.

    Any idea how they determine the range at which a vehicle was knocked out? Seems like it would be difficult to tell in many cases? Seems like they'd have to conduct detailed interviews with survivors, if any, who may or may not have any idea where the tank that knocked them out was located ("...got us from that ridge over there..."), much less the specific ranges. Or is it German data? I guess they'd have some idea based on the aiming reticle that they used, but probably also difficult to say with much certainty...

    Anyway, it's probably the best data we're likely to get, so thanks again.

    0

    Max Effective Tank Ranges?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted · Edited by 76mm

    For NW Europe, K is about 950 yards.

    90% of engagements occur at less than 2200 yards;

    80% of engagements occur at less than 1500 yards;

    50% of engagements occur at less than 650 yards.

    I'm actually surprised that the ranges are that long in Western Europe, I'd have expected a bit shorter, and I wonder if the ranges would be a bit longer in the East, where the terrain is less built up/more open?

    Those max ranges reported by Salt (3,000-4,800 yards!) are an eye-opener, but I guess they are comparable to a "hole in one" in golf; possible (barely) but rather unlikely. Also, I wonder how they determined that a tank had been knocked out by a weapon 4,800 meters away?

    0

    Max Effective Tank Ranges?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    Thanks guys, very helpful, and more or less confirms what I thought--beyond 2,000 meters was rather iffy. Does anyone know the ranges involved in Operation Goodwood? It seems like as good a scenario as any for long-range panzer sniping, but I haven't read enough about it to understand if we're talking about 1,500 meters or 3,000 meters...

    0

    Max Effective Tank Ranges?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    A question for you armor grogs out there: what were the effective combat ranges of German tanks during 1944? I've always thought that typical max ranges in combat would be 1,500-2,000 meters, although I've just read that Nashorns could achieve hits at up to 4,000 meters under combat conditions (I read it on the internet, so it must be true!).

    Obviously one of the main impediments to hitting a target beyond 2,000 meters would be line-of-sight, but assuming that tanks had a shot--presumably firing from high terrain, etc.--could many German tanks hit anything much beyond 2,000 meters? Any good sources on this issue?

    Similarly, IIRC Russian tanks maxed out at about 1,000-1,500 meters, although I suppose the JS-II and some of the SUs could do better?

    0

    Can CMRT maps be imported from CMBN etc?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    ...once one person converts a map from one title to another then everyone, regardless as to whether they own both titles in question, has access to every map in every title.  So if one considers QB maps to be content that has been paid for with the purchase of a particular game, a map converter then makes that content available for free to all BFC customers regardless of which titles they own. 

     

    This then makes the case for questioning whether it would be worthwhile to actually create and sell new content...After all, why include 300 + QB maps in a release when you can just include twenty new ones and tell everyone to keep on using all the old ones that they are swapping between different titles.  Sure cuts down on the work load doesn't it?

    I don't understand what is wrong with people being granted access to more maps; they can already create maps in the scenario editor--if BFC wants to sell more maps, they should eliminate the editor as well. And I think it would be a good thing if BFC spent less time creating new maps for releases--because of the huge "map bank" built up for CMx2 games--and therefore could focus on releasing the most important content--more units, etc.--more quickly.

    That's why BFC does not allow adding or modding the actual units--because THAT is what they're selling in the new modules.

     

    This is why selling 'content' packs will always fail unless BFC creates some very good ways to keep individuals out of the files so they can send the content to all their friends.  All those who dream of putting together some sort of independent 'scenario packs' will never be able to do it in a way that works.  Only BFC could create and sell 'content' packs and only if there were a fool proof way of keeping control of the content restricted to those who purchased it.  The way this horse is being beaten makes one wonder if BFC will ever consider it to be worthwhile to produce and sell 'content' packs.

    As far as I know BFC has never stated any intention to sell "map packs", or even scenario packs, and we certainly haven't seen any. BFC has only spoken about the "packs" with oddball troops, etc., like the only one we've seen so far, for CMBN.

    I also don't agree that having more maps available will result in fewer scenarios--creating the map is only part of the scenario, and being able to start with a wider selection of maps means that scenario creators could spend more time on other parts of the scenarios. If someone wants to create "scenario" packs, people are buying scenarios, not maps, although surely it would be easier to sell such a pack if it included new maps as well. I also suspect, although am not sure, that people will be more motivated to create maps if they know that they can use them for more than one CMx2 game.

    0

    Tanks and reversing (backing up).

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    Well you don't really need to see what's behind you, because you know you just came driving that way, so the road is clear. And if it's not completely clear, well, you're in a tank.

    Not really; you've typically done some jockeying around to get into position, etc, and so its not like you drive straight up and then can back right out--the OP was talking about backing up "for any long distance", so not just backing up from your firing position back into a covered position, which I agree wouldn't be that complicated.

    0

    Tanks and reversing (backing up).

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    If the tank is unbuttoned, it is realistic enough to back up for some distance, although obviously in the absence of a second hatch (ie, help from the loader, etc) the commander won't be able to devote his full attention to any fighting.  I've never been in a WWII tank, but I'd guess that if the tank was buttoned it would be very very difficult to see to the rear via vision slits, etc.

    0

    CM Maps Universal Translator Tool

    in CM Fortress Italy Maps and Mods

    Posted · Edited by 76mm

    There is no obvious reason why allowing customers to convert maps between is beneficial to BFC in any way.

     

    Yeah, of course, best to  not allow players to touch or modify games in any way, why give them what they want?  Personally, variety of maps is of critical importance to me, and the inability to use maps from the various games together is very frustrating.
     
    OK, your turn--why is it harmful for BFC to allow players to increase the number of maps usable with each title?
     

    I would also appreciate it if you guys didn't take a map from a scenario that I made and convert it to something else, or if you do please don't post it on a site somewhere for general distribution.

     

    Huh?  So I shouldn't take one of your maps and make a new scenario with it?  Or I shouldn't change any units on it, or what?  Or would you prefer if I just 't use any of  your scenarios?  I can appreciate pride of authorship, but don't understand what you're getting at?

    1

    Are Soviet platoon/company snipers to effective?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted · Edited by 76mm

    Well read your own link:

    During this time, a total of 428,335 non-trained snipers, which significantly strengthened the combat formations of infantry units.

     

    Well, if you're going to give someone (who was trying to be helpful) a hard time, best not to rely on Google translate... Actually the meaning is completely different from your "translation":

     

    "За это время в общей сложности было обучено 428335 отличных снайперов, которые существенно усилили боевые порядки пехотных частей."

     

    "During this time, all in all 428,335 excellent snipers were trained, which significantly strengthened the combat formations of infantry units."

    1

    The problem with Bagration

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    Good call on the The Battle for L'vov and theVasily Grossman references though, these two sound like they would fit the bill and have plenty of details. 

     

    I've read the Grossman book, and while it is very good, I don't recall that it was a good source of tactical detail.  I have not read the Glantz book but have read very many of his other books and generally they do not include much tactical detail.  

     

    There are several other books, however, including:

    Soviet Blitzkrieg by Dunn; rather detailed, tedious book with lots of info about OOB and unit movements down to division scale--you could probably come up with plausible scenarios based on this book;

    Belorussia 1944 by the Soviet General Staff, translated and edited by Glantz; kind of similar to Dunn's book, although Dunn's is more detailed.

    East Front Drama by Hinze.  I have not read yet, but flipping through it seems to reveal more detailed info, sometimes down to battalion and regiment level.

    Battle for White Russia by Niepold (out of print).  Again, I haven't read yet, but flipping through seems to indicate a focus on the army/corps level.

    500 Days:  the War in Easter Europe by McAteer.  While this book focuses on strategic level, the author fairly often dives down to the tactical level with some interesting anecdotes.

     

    All of the books listed above are available on Amazon, although the Niepold book is out of print and $$.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...