Jump to content

landser

Members
  • Posts

    500
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by landser

  1. I don't trust 'em. I recall playing Blunting the Spear a couple year ago. It was the final battle of the campaign, a big one too, about a battalion. Battalion commanders surely drink a lot of coffee. To get an idea of the scale of this battle I offer this wide shot about half-way through it. That's a big battle. If we could focus in on the upper center it would reveal a situation which played out like a white flag ruse. Trees are turned off. The two soldiers who surrendered were visible to me, but not the one laying down with the LMG. Thinking the position was secure I advanced to cross the open ground beyond (you can see the smoke deployed in anticipation), but as my troops neared the captured soldiers the hidden Ivan opened fire and you see the damage he's done. The bastage. Be wary of surrendering soldiers. Not all their mates might have signed on.
  2. That's like a super power. Wish I had it. Instead, the inertia of Combat Mission has made it mostly irrelevant for me over the past five years. It's disappointing that so little innovation has come to the series, for me personally anyway. Others see it differently and that's a view I would like to share, but don't. Improvements like engine 4 are too inconsequential to move the needle. I want a new Combat Mission that feels as fresh as Overlord did in 2000. But here we are 23 years later. Maybe one day, but those of us who played the CMBO demo aren't getting any younger. But I can still be happy for those who still find it compelling in its enduring form.
  3. Similar for me to many posting here. I played CC1 and CC2 prior to picking up CMBO. Steel Panthers was probably my first proper wargame. I was also playing some of the Talonsoft games from the 90s, the Battleground series. Steel Panthers though is what I credit for kickstarting my interest in all things WW2. Here is where I learned what a Wolverine was, or a Matilda, a Hellcat and all the guns and other weapons systems.I was in my early twenties and knew what WW2 was, but not much more. This was the beginning of my descent in to grog. My older brother played Steel Panthers too. I can still recall a battle we played hotseat. This was thirty years ago, mind. I was Germans and he was the British. it was a wide open desert map. I had only discovered what a dual purpose 88 actually meant just a couple days before. So I had deployed a line of 88s backstopping my positions. When my brother's armor appeared on the open terrain I would spring the trap and destroy him in detail. Delighting in the anticipation of my masterful strategery. On the first turn he sent over a bomber strike that wiped out my 88s before they fired a shot
  4. I've been playing Combat Mission for about 25 years and I don't think anyone has any clue about this. You're best off, I think, to treat it as entirely random. Pick any action, all are just as likely to have the same result, or any other result for that matter. Go slow, go fast, back up, bail out, twist it all about. You'll bog or not entirely due to the whims of the bog god. And the bog god, may she smile upon you.
  5. That's a close match to mine. Similar proc (although I have a Ryzen) and I have the same video card, same ram. This will handle Combat Mission no problem if everything works properly. I note it is renewed. But if all is fine it will run CM without issue.
  6. That's a fine trait to possess when talking about Combat Mission. But yes, it's the finest tactical-level wargame out there, still. WEGO is brilliant, it must be said, and the command and control, ballistics and spotting are all top notch too in my view. Enjoy your new game(s). And welcome to the boards.
  7. If and when there is a new generation of Combat Mission games, LOS should be able to be checked with a single key. Select any unit and hit or hold a key to either shade the terrain that the unit can see, or maybe shade that which cannot be seen. Not sure which is better. This should already be a thing. And to flesh it out further, instead of shading, use colors. One color for Mark I eyeball and a different shade/color for what sensors detect beyond sight, if that's even a thing in Combat Mission. In other words, does the game differentiate between crew vision and that which is only seen through optics? And of course in modern titles, this would be useful to show how it is the unit can 'see' a certain part of the map or specific units. Is it sight, optics, thermals, radar, etc?
  8. Having read your post, I think Shock Force 2 might be the better choice. Black Sea is harder, not that you cannot handle it. But SF2 has much more content, including all SF1 stuff which carries over. The chance of finding scenarios and campaigns that suit you is higher with Shock Force. The asymmetrical nature of the forces within SF2 does make it a little on the easy side in many missions. But it's still a good Combat Mission title with a boatload of content available.
  9. That's what CMx1 operations were. They were a single large (long) map where the front line moved according to the end state of the previous battle. It allowed the player to capture (or lose) key terrain that would carry over to the next battle in the campaign. It wasn't exact or precise, if a scout team moved to an advanced position you may not have control of it after the re-draw. Front lines seems to be calculated more on your force's mass than on actual occupied terrain. So you could find that the ridge on the flank you fought so hard for in the dying minutes of the previous battle was 'lost' for the next mission. But overall it worked pretty well. I wish this concept had been kept and refined rather than binned. Having player performance and results in one battle carry over to the next is fundamental to campaign play, but the episodic nature of CMx2 campaigns does not put a premium on this. Some campaigns do, like Kampfgruppe Engel, which has core forces, and damage and ammunition carry over in some missions. There's one mission in that campaign where you have to cross the river Dives. There is a single, well defended crossing site which under usual conditions would be a reasonable task given the weight of German heavy armor at your disposal. But in the event, I found it very difficult, as my tanks were battered and bruised. Damaged barrels and tracks, shot-out optics and mostly empty ammunition racks. All of which served to add a level of challenge and improvisation that is missing from most Combat Mission campaigns.
  10. No worries mate, any time. Have fun. Welcome to the boards. Good hunting.
  11. Bootie's got it! https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy/cm-battle-for-normandy-campaigns/devils-descent/
  12. Well I didn't get on well with Scottish Corridor honestly. And I had to keep my post relatively short. I could mention quite a few more. But I picked out a few that I think are worth the time. Scottish Corridor is well-liked though I believe. Not a criticism, and anyway we all look for different things. There's no accounting for taste.
  13. I don't have any suggestions for single scenarios, I don't play them. But for campaigns there are a number of good choices for Normandy. Task Force Raff Honestly I would recommend starting with Task Force Raff, the tutorial campaign .It's an ideal primer for CMBN, as the player commands a combined arms force, attacks and defends, has access to off-board arty and there is also some bocage. It's not so restricted as other bocage campaign maps, but it presents the player with some of the unique challenges of fighting in bocage country. The force strength advantage allows for mistakes without losing momentum so it's relatively forgiving making it a perfect choice for a first go at a campaign, but it's still fun for veterans too. Devil's Descent. This one places the player in command of a 82nd Airborne paratrooper company (C Company, 1st Battalion, 508th PIR) near Sainte-Mére-Èglise on June 6th. For me, company sized forces are the sweet spot for Combat Mission. Not so large as to be cumbersome, but big enough to allow some maneuver and tactical leeway. And paras are just hard as nails, so lots of fun to fight with. Hard to suppress, hard to kill, and stone cold killas. The opening mission is wonderful, reflecting the scattered nature of the drops. Your mission is to capture a farm at night with about a platoon of troopers as they trickle in over the course of the battle. As the campaign continues, your force grows to company strength as the misdrops march to the sound of the fighting and link up with the company. Several missions have decisions to make, for example after one battle you are asked if you want to leave a platoon behind in town, or to take the whole company with you. There are four mission branches that will result in different battles depending on your choices. Kampfgruppe Engel Over the years I've played many Combat Mission campaigns, but none have been more innovative or memorable than Kampfgruppe Engel. I rate it as hard, and it is. The player is given command of a mixed armor kampfgruppe in summer of 1944 in the Falaise Pocket. Of course we all know what happened here, so you have to reckon that playing a German campaign set then and there would be difficult right? Your task is to act as the German's fire brigade, trying to keep the pocket open so your kamaraden can escape.The missions are diverse and interesting, though one or two I didn't care for. My favorite sort of campaign is one with persistent core forces. Some campaigns, like Road to Montebourg, feature various battles involving separate but related forces. In this one, you get a core force, that grows a bit over time. It's another one where you'll know the names of your tank commanders and squad leaders. But it's vital to keep casualties and losses to a minimum, as the intensity doesn't let up and you need every boot and barrel in the line. At times the player faces huge odds, 20-30+ enemy tanks on the map at once. Careful positioning and terrain analysis are also vital. The Outlaws Another para campaign for CMBN, the Outlaws is similar to Devil's Descent as it starts small, reflecting the scattered nature of the drops, and the player commands an increasingly larger force through the course of the campaign. The majority of the campaign is played leading a platoon sized element of Company B, 1st Battalion, 506th PIR, with the final missions much larger as the paratroopers link up with forces coming off the beach. Missions are diverse, maps are very good. The briefings are of a different sort. Essentially, the briefings feature excerpts from an interview of the company commander as he recounts his experiences on D-Day. The briefings contain no tactical information, no intel, aside from what was recalled in the interview. It makes for a nice narrative, as you're given a framework and then fill in the blanks in the battle. But useful info for the battle ahead is minimal. Road to Montebourg One of the most ambitious Combat Mission campaigns, Road to Montebourg places the player in command of various American units during the fighting on D-Day and beyond. At sixteen missions long, RtM is a beast. Missions are highly varied, and some are on the difficult side. Created by Paper Tiger, this campaign utilizes some interesting mechanics. He makes extensive use of AI plans, with I think four for each mission. While Combat Mission is far from dynamic, including a number of AI plans promises some replayability as a subsequent run could see some alteration for enemy unit placement and movement. Of course you could get the same one again too. This campaign also features what might be called branching difficulty. As I understand it, the player's performance affects how hard or easy later missions are. Do well, and it gets harder. Do poorly and you're cut some breaks. In theory this sounds OK. I suppose it allows players of all skill levels to get through it, while maintaining the challenge for the best players. But I think I'd prefer the opposite. If I do well, I'd like to gain some edge. If I do poorly, find myself at a disadvantage. The campaign opens with an infantry attack over a huge expanse of open ground. At the far side of the map a small German force with pillboxes awaits, hemmed in by mines and supported by artillery. When I first saw the map I thought 'no way'. No way I'm getting across this ground without massive casualties. But this mission is a showcase for suppression in Combat Mission. Combined with tactical use of smoke, machine gun and mortar fire I was able to do it with surprisingly light losses. Find, fix, destroy. I think it's the second mission that puts the player in command of a combined arms force for an attack on a town called Ecoqueneuville deep in bocage country. When I played it I used a beautiful three-pronged attack, sending engineers the long way 'round the left flank, blowing gaps in hedgerow after hedgerow to hit the final objective from the flank while my main body converged through town. It all went splendidly until the final hurdle. At the last objective, the German company commander went nuts with his MP 40, defiantly mowing down my troops despite the deluge of fire directed his way. Quite disheartening to have such a well-executed plan devolve in to chaos with the finish line in sight, especially when a single maniac wielding a machine pistol holds off a company of well-equipped troops.. But it also makes it memorable. I wish I remembered his name. Respect Herr Hauptmann, respect.
  14. I mean trigonometry not geometry didn't I? Whatever it is, CMx1 gunners can place fires anywhere.
  15. I still play it occasionally. But far from regularly. CMx2 is better in most ways, but there a few things about CMBB that still stand out Command delay is nice feature and gives the forces a certain dissimilarity that I like Operations are a great concept that didn't quite live up to the potential in my view. Full war OOB, that we will never have for Red Thunder (Prove me wrong Battlefront) Hunt works the way I want it to Indirect fire can be directed to locations without LOS. Like they have maps and can do geometry. Crazy concept I know. Combined Arms force selection in QB, still better than any in CMx2 But it does show its age, and is missing the improvements that came with gen 2. It's still a great wargame. 20 years ago it was the bee's knees. One of my all timers
  16. I believe that. But I also think that is the problem. We should be able to knock out a playable campaign in ten minutes.
  17. A campaign generator would be fantastic. The player could set a number of parameters, and click generate, and Bob's your uncle. Endless content well-suited to the player. But with no real AI, it cannot succeed. A campaign generator would not work well in Cmx2, it would essentially be a series of connected battles that all play out like quick battles and that would not be a step forward. Proper AI that can deal with any force composition and map would be a necessity, and that is not on Battlefront's roadmap. This issue has been there since the beginning, and I've read Steve's views on the matter and I know this is not going to be a thing. My simple idea is something akin to how the campaign is handled in Close Combat games like CC5. It would be an operational map divided in to sectors. On the operation map various battlegroups are deployed. Each 'turn' both sides move their forces (or not). If two opposing battlegroups attempt to occupy the same sector, a meeting engagement follow. If one side remains, while another attempts to enter, an attack/defend or assault/defend occurs depending on how long the stationary unit had remained in place (and had a chance to dig in). The system would need to produce maps, although all could potentially be pre-determined based on the sector's terrain. A system like this is dynamic. Add logistics, reinforcements, off map assets and we would have a generator capable of adding an operational layer to this great game while giving lasting consequence to battle results.
  18. Don't want to clutter up the forum by quoting the entire post, and your defense of the editor is admirable, but at the same time I think it stands testimony to how obtuse it is. You're one of the generous people I referred to, and you obviously get on well with the tools. But reading your post, it's clear that even for someone who enjoys building campaigns, that there is an element of the ends justify the means to it all. But anyway, that sort of thing is subjective. Whether the editor is powerful is not really the issue, but instead it's down to how quickly and easily campaigns can be created. I remember a post you made years ago, around the time you released Montebourg, that it had taken you 800 hours to make it. I mean, come on. Such dedication is also admirable, but surely it illustrates the issue. Montebourg is possibly the most ambitious campaign in the series, so picking an outlier to make my point may not be convincing. I believe Combat Mission needs a campaign generator. And a new campaign system entirely. I'm not holding my breath, this 'episodic' system we have now seems to satisfy the community at large, but for me it has become stale and fails to give the players the sort of content that makes the underlying excellent tactical battlefields shine.
  19. And to add that he is also right about Quick Battles. They just are not good. The AI, or whatever it is, the scripting perhaps, is too rudimentary to fashion a convincing clash of arms. Quick battles work great in MP, but as a solo thing they are pretty bad. And it's not just the poor AI, it's the force composition. The AI does not make a good picker. In CMx1 we had the Combined Arms preset, and that worked pretty well. The AI would have a nice mix of units. For reason I don't know, this was removed from CMx2 and so you might have a battle against a dozen half tracks and and some scouts. And then, everything goes forward at it's speed. There is no veil of coordination. The fastest enemy units die first.
  20. I agree with some of the OPs points, and especially campaigns. Yes, there are a lot of single scenarios for the various titles. But I don't care about that. I play campaigns and that's it. And the options are too few. I've said for going on 20 years now Combat Mission needs a campaign generator. One of the issues for me is even if you have x number of campaigns, only some of them are going to be the ones I'm looking for. For example I like company sized campaigns. So the pool has been cut by 2/3. What if I want company sized paratrooper campaigns? Down to 10%. What if I want company sized American paratrooper campaigns? Maybe three or four exist. It's not enough to hang our hats on how many campaigns there are if only a handful are the sort we want to play. There must be a way for the players to generate their own content quickly and easily. Make my own campaigns you might say. Well, the editor is archaic and difficult to use. And even if I did so, I'd know every thing there is to know about it. I made it. And that won't do. The beauty of Combat Mission is in solving the tactical puzzle when it is shrouded in unknowns. If I know the enemy positions, and reinforcements and how many tanks and AT guns they have the mystery is gone. Well, that's the fourth AT gun knocked out. They've no more. No. I need to proceed as if they might have four more. I cannot know ahead of time what the enemy possess. So, under the existing formula there is no satisfactory way of obtaining the sort of content I seek, that suits me. And that's been a problem since Operations went belly up over twenty years ago. For players who are not keen to make their own campaigns it leaves us reliant on the few players generous enough to do so. But they aren't taking requests, asking me what I want. And I wouldn't expect them to. So we are left playing whatever comes down the pike while rejecting some as inferior or ill-suited to our own tastes. And that does indeed leave too few. OP is right.
  21. Welcome back mate, it's encouraging to know you may be producing new content, or even only revising existing stuff. Your campaigns are excellent. Road to Montebourg is one of my favorites. On a different forum I wrote reviews for a number of campaigns I played. I thought you might like to read what I wrote about this one. The campaign opens with an infantry attack over a huge expanse of open ground. At the far side of the map a small German force with pillboxes awaits, hemmed in by mines and supported by artillery. When I first saw the map I thought 'no way'. No way I'm getting across this ground without massive casualties. But this mission is a showcase for suppression in Combat Mission. Combined with tactical use of smoke, machine gun and mortar fire I was able to do it with surprisingly light losses. Find, fix, destroy. I think it's the second mission that puts the player in command of a combined arms force for an attack on a town called Ecoqueneuville deep in bocage country. When I played it I used a beautiful three-pronged attack, sending engineers the long way 'round the left flank, blowing gaps in hedgerow after hedgerow to hit the final objective from the flank while my main body converged through town. It all went splendidly until the final hurdle. At the last objective, the German company commander went nuts with his MP 40, defiantly mowing down my troops despite the deluge of fire directed his way. Quite disheartening to have such a well-executed plan devolve in to chaos with the finish line in sight, especially when a single maniac wielding a machine pistol holds off a company of well-equipped troops.. But it also makes it memorable. I wish I remembered his name. Respect Herr Hauptmann, respect. Another memorable mission is called Turnbull's Stand. It pits the player's paratrooper platoon against nearly a battalion of German troops supported by armor. You make your stand in Neuville au Plain, barring the way to St Mere Eglise along the N13. At times it felt all would be lost, but my plucky paras won the day, and the Germans eventually turned tail. I could imagine my troopers rising from their holes, smoking Garands held high, whooping it up as the enemy fled. An amazing victory and one of the shining moments of my CM career. Paper Tiger mentioned in a post that the player is not meant to stop the Germans, just cause as many casualties as possible and get your men off the map. But I managed to send the enemy running. Great stuff and highly satisfying. I use this Turnbull's Stand memory often, as it really did feel great to make the Germans turn tail. Having read the OP, I'm glad I played the 'old version', as I suspect it is about to get harder. Looking forward to playing whatever you cook up.
×
×
  • Create New...