Jump to content

jbertles

Members
  • Posts

    184
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jbertles

  1. warning - computer-dope post...

    Ok, I have a dual chip G4 tower (mac of course) with (according to my system profiler) an NVDA GeForce4MX.

    I tend to run the 17" flat screen at 800x640 (which seemed plenty big for me).

    After searching and reading the downsampling threads, it is still not clear to me whether my beast is downsampling or is just muscling through.

    Any insights?

    [ March 09, 2003, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: jbertles ]

  2. I think that ATGs fall into categories. One is the more-or-less stationary kill-you-from-a-mile-away ATGs - 88's, Pak 40s, certain Russian 76.2s and of course the powerful 57 ZIS.

    But I have become very partial to the other category - man-moved smaller ATGs and IGs- Pak 38s and 150mm IGs (to a lesser extent - 75 IGs), and Sov long 45s. Sure they die easy, but they're cheap.

    Moving 'em with ATs and trucks is usually a recipe for disaster - one tends to get greedy with covering ground. Instead, take the long view and run them (I admit - slooowwwlly) around the map looking for long views from wooded or scattered tree areaas. Then let 'em sit until some sucker comes into view - or as the situation develops, move them toward the action.

  3. I personally don't see anything wrong with Russian players getting and using KV-Is. I do it, the AI does it, and my opponents have done the same. Sure, it's rough, but it does reflect the shock that Germans got when they first faced the KV (and T-34).

    So you have to scramble to find a work-around.

    KVs are vulnerable to side attacks by 50mm PaK38s if you can find a way to get a shot. PaKs are relatively fast even w/o ht or trucks towing them.

    And of course KVs are also vulnerable to captured 76.2 ATs, though they are expensive and slow.

    Finally, suppress the KVs! Use your ATR to keep the KV buttoned up (ATRs are really hard to see in woods) and just pepper it. It won't hurt the KV, but the plink-plink will keep the hatch closed so you can close in with your brave Pioneers and slink around for side shots with your AT guns.

  4. Has anyone notice some strange differences in map building in 1.02? I am building a mountainous map with river gorges which I hoped would rise in a way that simulates rapids coming down a slope.

    However, every time that I go back and look at the saved map, the river levels have reverted to a single level. In other words, each river reverted to its lowest level. If there is a 1 elevation square, the whole river reverts to the elevation. If there is a 2 elevation square, the whole river reverts to level 2.

    This also makes bridge building in mountain areas impossible, since the units refuse to try to cross the bridge.

    I've got saved files in case anyone needs to check it out.

  5. I gotta disagree with the majority. The Soviet forces have one gigantic advantage which we (locked as we are in the CMBO/B universe) tend to overlook - speed and manueverability. The T34 was just so damn fast! and with those wide tracks had such incredible "crossability" - power to weight ratio. In CMBO/B we tend to play games that are on a very small tactical level, so I think that don't notice that huge advantage that speed and crossability would give at the intermediate tactical/strategic level.

    The other day I saw an atlas of WWII military history which had strategic maps which were all on the same scale (which was odd enough all by itself). What came out strongly was the gigantic distances covered by the Soviets in the last years of the war as opposed to the much smaller (though admittedly more challenging terrain-wise) distances covered by the Allies in Western Europe.

    The T34/85 was a magnificent vehicle - cheap, abundant, great gun (rotten optics), excellent armor sloping, speed and crossability.

    As for the Sovient infantry, the lack of a sufficiently kick-ass personal anti-tank weapon (Bazooka, Pzfaust, etc.) cripples them to an extreme degree.

    But give me T34/85s against Panthers ANYTIME over Shermans (inc. Fireflys) or any other US/UK tank.

  6. ME 5/44, 3500+ points, bumpy terrain, dry/clear: take the village of Velikovsky. Starts w/recon and then reinforcements pour in.

    Yet another purely fictional scenario with no pathetic attempts at reality. Shred and destroy to yer heart's content, but not intended to be a slugging match: manuever is called for.

    Could be 2-player or vs. AI. If vs. AI, play the sov forces for more challenge.

    At The Scenario Depot. Thanks and a tip o' the hat to Admiral Keth.

    Comments/complaints/insults welcome!

    If you like it, try my other extremely fictional scenario, "Tankheavy" also at the Depot.

  7. Wow, love those screen shots. Looks a little like my Santana black-light velvet posters from 1974.

    I run a dual-chip G4 mac (OS9) and sometimes my wife changes the color resolution (from thousands to 256) to play her tetris-type game while CMBB is sitting in the background. Whenever I go back to CMBB after she is finished the screen colors go all, like, Van-Gogh-ish.

    Moral: Don't change color resolution while CMBB is running.

  8. Something that would make the QBs even more useable (understand, I got no real complaints: totally hopelessly addicted to this game....) would be the ability to select certain elements of the QBs and then let the computer pick randomly from those selections.

    For example, take Time: while I may not really care whether it is dawn, mid-day or dusk, I may really NOT want it to be night. It would be great to be able to put checks next to dawn, mid-day or dusk, but not check night; then let the computer choose from those.

    This goes for many of the other selections, including force types, terrain conditions, map selection menus, etc.

×
×
  • Create New...