mididoctors

hmmm a lot of the arguments in this thread have the commanders in the field having realtime hindsight..if only axis of attacks where changed etc....... A re-evalution of Kursk must enevitably still conceed a strategic reversal for the Germans and all hope of winning or stalemating the east front......the outcome of the battle is more a indication of the wars turing point rather than a tactical or operational defeat for one side or the other......in essence any result less than total Soviet defeat is a German defeat!..the argument of operational goals is an admission of loss of stratigic initative. Hitler failed infront of moscow in 41..all hopes of knocking Russia out were over..pretence at reversing fortunes latter in 42 and even more in 43 where pure pipe dreams...(in my view invading in 41 was a ridiculus long shot in its self) Kursk was folly as was the whole Third Reich Mission in general....but thats another argument....... what could of the wehrmacht done instead in 43?...who knows but sustaining the east front for a further year in some stalemate is not going to help germany win the war after all the US are comming from the other side and Germany is steadily getting flattened.. War winning what ifs in 43 really boil down too: a German detection and defeat of ENIGMA (some evidence it was detected but Krammer sabotaged its discovery?). Advanced type XXI U-boats being available for N atlantic battle in large numbers Early introduction of German Jet aircraft to re-establish/maintain air superiority over all fronts in 44 further rationalisation of german production from an earlier date (1939 at least). even given these options your probably still need a Nazi Nuke..... Germany just was not going to win this war..what on earth they thought they were doing has always bamboozeled me!!!! Boris london

5 ss Pz grendier "wiking" is one of the best scenarios in CMBB for defense against AI. Boris

Over emphasis on graphics and mass market appeal will lead the series into profitable but unfortunatly different waters as it were. No doubt graphics should be improved but my intrests lie in being able to represent all the various tactical options that ASL can. (and more!) just to remind ourselves of all the areas not covered by CMBB presently but are covered by ASL ,here is a list of some of them. abandoned and captured equipment horse transport motorcycles and bicycles greater range of soft skin transport. onmap artillery. artillery barrage options abstract unit detachment for searches and mopping up buildings(scouts). mounted fire. portees! bunkers more realistic and can be occupied. caves. Tunnels. different density minefields. multi turreted AFVs weapon scrouging. numerous landing craft types Amphip AFVs/transport. parachute landings Glider bourne assualts scaling STAIRWELLS(damm fine rule) no quarter captured unit behaviour and guarding units engineering options special afvs (funnies etc) commandos FLARES infantary smoke(I have seen photos of it in use..perhaps not prevelant as ASL but none?) illumination rounds. inplace field phones afv+inf assualt movement 3 level buildings marketplace overhanging buldings sangars factory walls and breaches Demo charge ambush (SB) goliath demo tank WP fortified buildings BASEMENTS guns in buildings AFV trail breaks AFV and buldings/rubble interrogation civilian intel starting fires amphip obstacles naval gunfire naval observors Observor aircraft sledges Reindeer! sleeping throwing double fours and generating a random insurance salesman Boris London

any human being operating at 100% no matter how fit will enter oxygen debt in UNDER one minute...how much you can do in that time depends on fitness.... recovery from extending oxygen debt can take as long as 6 minutes to resting heart rate..... operating at 80% is sustainable for lengthy (hours) periods of time.. do not confuse stamina with VO2 performance/ capacities.. for instance you could march across Russia and gain a huge stamina base that let you operate at 80% for 12 hour stretches but running top whack for 30 secs would still wind you.... the recovery rates in CMBB seem a little slow if anything for fit troops.... also crawling does not require the effort portrayed (I went and tested a 100m crawl with a 20kg load). The dash uphill posted is a lung bursting effort and not unrealistic. in general the exhaustion rules in CMBB are not perfect but they are a reasonable representation of the efforts involved. adrenniline will allow you you to act faster and stronger for very short periods (less than a minute) for sustained efforts its presence is detrimental and will infact tire you quicker than being relaxed. former pro cyclist Boris masters2k

any human being operating at 100% no matter how fit will enter oxygen debt in UNDER one minute...how much you can do in that time depends on fitness.... recovery from extending oxygen debt can take as long as 6 minutes to resting heart rate..... operating at 80% is sustainable for lengthy (hours) periods of time.. do not confuse stamina with VO2 performance/ capacities.. for instance you could march across Russia and gain a huge stamina base that let you operate at 80% for 12 hour stretches but running top whack for 30 secs would still wind you.... the recovery rates in CMBB seem a little slow if anything for fit troops.... also crawling does not require the effort portrayed (I went and tested a 100m crawl with a 20kg load). The dash uphill posted is a lung bursting effort and not unrealistic. in general the exhaustion rules in CMBB are not perfect but they are a reasonable representation of the efforts involved. adrenniline will allow you you to act faster and stronger for very short periods (less than a minute) for sustained efforts its presence is detrimental and will infact tire you quicker than being relaxed. former pro cyclist Boris masters2k

Seems that the change from CMBO to CMBB reminds me of the old ASL vs SL debate... I did not pay CMBO but started with CMBB gamming recently after stubbling across the CM website...It is noteworthy that I do not consider the game broke compared to CMBO (I have only played the CMBO demo) since I have no preconceptions of what CMBO gamming was like. I can say I think CMBB to be the best tactical wargame I have ever played and owned (still have nostalgal for ASL and miss certain features of that game, goliath demo tanks anyone). As for hitting the dirt under fire, I think that more experienced units may do this QUICKER as they are experienced about the effects trans/super-sonic metal can have on your body...... those that hit the deck quicker get to live. As a seasoned ASL gamer I found to my delight I could assimilate my ASL tactics into CMBB with great effect (I was quite a good player back in the day, maybe a bit slow) that included patient build up of forces PRIOR to movement into final firebase position (advance/hide/+ maybe cover arc) ad hoc piecemeal occupation of firebase positions without fire superiority is a one way ticket to defeat in ASL never mind CMBB. The attacker chosses the point of contact and should with a reasonable amount of cover be able to establish a suppresive firebase. The features not in ASL such as progressive exhaustion and ammunition only increase my enjoyment of gamming as does the increased challenge make the whole experience more rewarding yet the good tactics in ASL are still applicable here. must be doing something right. NOW DOWN TO BUISNESS TacAI is of course bound to fail and be short of perfect (my god what a crowd of real anoraks we are)..panic behaviour is hard to model factors that need modeling of units under fire IMHO..(YMD) 1 unit under fire. 2 direction of incomming fire,this includes panic when fired at from three directions with angles greater than 180 degress in a single move...encircling fire! 3 intensity of fire 4 nature of weapon(+/- mods for flamethrowers , explosives ,wet towels etc) 5 Location terrain 6 proximity and direction to known enemy 7 proximity and direction to friendly troops 8 LOS and proximity TO LEADER 9 Proximity and direction to cover 10 crew manned weapons are "hardier" in maintaining position than small arm equip troops 11 tank fright 12 troop quality 13 WALLS....a unit should be able to hug a defailde whether man-made or natural...LOS from source of breaking/pinning fire could be used..no? 14 armoured units as cover? 15 fanatisim/human wave/berserk effects 16 SPECIAL SCENARIO RULES... EG.beach assualt, there is only one way to go inland.... As for troop exhaustion..I think apart from the sneak exhaustion behaviour CMBB has just about got it right....try running 100m with army boots on, just normal clothing and a pair of heavy work/squadie boots.....never mind all the clobber. anomilies such as foxhole behaviour and crew served weapons I expect can be fixed fairly easily. Fog of war in CMBB is superb. after playing with the extreme settings for Berzina battle I think I will stick with them..this is a major strength in the game system... there are a host of features I would like to see included along the lines of all those special chapters ASL use to have (I know many are modeled in ,wheather etc)..of course some are not that easy....tanks throu buildings, trailbreaks, captured equipment..the list goes on....ASL became very unweildy as you could alwas bolt a rule on to cover anything , god those pacific cave rules!!....computer 3D modeling is not so flexable in this regard as such modelling intails major re-writes..still one lives in hope...... well that lot is propably a bit much to encompass....but it is worth stating that current computers are very powerful indeed...my dated internet/ gamming machine, an upgraded (circa 1996) PPC 7600 350MHz G4 mac with a 32mb raedon PCI graphics card can quite comfortable play medium and large scenarios (the tracktor factory was off limits due to turn render boredom)....even so the new crop of PC's and MACs are blistering fast and any hardcore CM player is going to have some serious muscle to play with, so modeling all these characteristics and factors are not impractical from a gameplay point of view...perhaps from a programming one they are a bit excessive on human workload/debugging???? I would pay about $100 (£75-80 my money) for a ultimate game that needed a 64 meg card and at least 800Mhz G4 to run my present turn speed...but i would expect a hell of a lot more in depth modeling of TacAI and game features especialy as and when i retire my studio dual gigger I can use it for gamming. Great game hope updates are applicable to this version without need to purchase new version (would be willing to pay upgrade fee if jump was to my stipulated expectations which I have yet to air) oh yeah mac OS X version please. peace Boris london [url=http://www.conversion2.co.uk]