Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

landser

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    501

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by landser

    Movement to Contact

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    14 hours ago, Simcoe said:

    A better term would be an attack order. Imagine a hunt order but the unit:

    1. Spots the target
    2. Engages
    3. Loses the spot
    4. Continues moving toward the location you set
    5. Repeat steps 1-4 until the unit is either pinned or reaches the end of the attack order

     

    This. Hunt is more like seek. Getting a spot stops it. It should instead continue when the spot is lost for any cause.

    Hunt should be persistent, only broken by orders, impassable terrain or disablement.

    0

    Do you plan to play your computer games if household energy bills will rise even higher?

    in General Discussion Forum

    Posted

    Rising power costs are painful, but I would take on a second job rather than curtail my gaming (which it should be noted, would curtail my gaming since I'd be working more, so maybe not the point I think it is!)

    This won't affect my gaming habits. And anyway it would have to get far worse for it to be an issue I'd need to deal with. I could cut back elsewhere if it really came to that.

    0

    A few wee questions about potentially missing features

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    There's an exit mission in Kampfgruppe Engel for CMBN, called Guardian Angels if I recall correctly. This mission really drives home the issue of how tedious it is to issue mass identical movement orders to strings of vehicles. This campaign is right at the top of my list of best in the series. Very innovative and memorable. But Guardian Angels stands out for how limited our tools are for dealing with this type of scenario. Effective group path options to quickly and accurately issue orders enmasse would be very welcome indeed.

    0

    Playing with conscripts only

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

    How would the early war time period affect game play when a veteran in the early war period, been fighting for three months, would be just as much a veteran as in the 1944 games in the same game engine and a fanatic in a 1940 game would be just as much a fanatic as in a 1944 game using the same engine?

     Because he is shooting a PaK36 instead of a PaK40.  You quoted me but I'm not making my point based on skill of the soldier, but the lethality of the weapons system he is using. Or maybe it's a Mosin instead of a PPSh. 76mm field gun instead of a 122mm tube. BT7 instead of a T-34-85. Less range, less accurate, less lethal. Slower fire rate? Inferior ammunition?

    0

    Playing with conscripts only

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    I understand your point about how this improves your experience. In a different but related way this is why I think WW2 titles would be better with early war (1939-1942). I think that lower lethality results in more tactical game play and it's why I think Combat Mission would be well-served by starting to focus on this part of the war.

    It's a similar result as your thread illustrates, but because the weapons are less lethal, not the soldiers manning them. A less lethal battlefield would be great in this series to put a premium on tactics, even more so than it already does, and it does a good job as it is. More suppression, more damaged but not destroyed vehicles. More failed penetrations, more casualties to administer to. Shorter ranges, more freedom to maneuver without being killed from afar.

    So yeah, we need early war. I know this isn't the point of this thread, but I do think it hints at why this time period would suit this game so well.

    Either way, your thread makes perfect sense and shifts the dynamic a little to change the gameplay patterns, expectations and results. And well, it's more tactical, isn't it?

    1

    Someone with high hopes or just a dreamer

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    I hope this succeeds, as Combat Mission's in a rut, and competition drives innovation. The 'heroic, yet doomed' vibe is strong here, even though Combat Mission is also programmed by one man. Charles may be exceptional, but also an example of why small dev teams aren't automatically doomed to fail (see Seven Years War and Grand Tactician). There's not much game there yet, but in what little we are shown I reckon this new game already has better graphics and camera controls than Combat Mission, addressing two of the most glaring weaknesses in the series. That's not going to dethrone the aging Combat Mission from the top of the sparsely populated tactical wargame genre on it's own, but it's a fair start, isn't it?

    Oftentimes in this forum I see comments along the lines of 'we don't want to forfeit gameplay in the name of graphics' as if the two things cannot exist together. It's a slippery position to take, and I reckon done so in defense of Combat Mission, which looks old. I think you can have both. And while I also am one that prefers gameplay over graphics -- I play Combat Mission as proof -- there's no escaping the fact that CM looks twenty years old.

    But even if we ignore graphics, Combat Mission has changed little in all that time. The AI isn't really AI, the editor is curmudgeonly, the camera and controls are clunky, the campaign system is too basic, the update and transaction processes are archaic and the way content is generated too trying. I don't want Combat Mission surpassed necessarily, after all I've been playing since the CMBO demo, I want it to kick in to gear, address the weakness, innovate and modernize.

    A successful competitor is not automatically going to affect the course of Combat Mission. Steve and Charles have their vision, which they've done well with. They may want to stay the course. CM is a great game. I'm a fan. An increasingly disillusioned fan, but one nonetheless. There are things CM handles better than other games (spotting, ballistics, command and control). What I hope is that those core strengths can be married to modern conventions and conveniences and if an upstart competitor is the catalyst for this change that's a win for all of us.

    4

    It's way past time to list titles in the My Order Battlefront...

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    Everything about Combat Mission feels like it's 2002 because BFC are banking on a big retro gaming revival.

    UI, transaction and update processes, graphics, editor and well, just about everything, appear to be from the turn of the century.

    Maybe we'll get another module?

     

    Wake me up when we catch up to five years ago.

    I'm a fan, in it since the start, but no longer pay attention since everything is just so far in the past. 

    2

    How do you think a US vs Soviet module would play out in Combat Mission

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted · Edited by landser

    If it were done properly neither would be 'over' or 'under'. One may be more powerful or less powerful, but your terminology suggests inaccurately so, if you can see the distinction I am attempting to make.

    In the event it were done correctly, my money's on the US, primarily due to the proximity fuse, fire control, and ammunition type and quality, but only just. Assuming this is a 1945+ scenario then I don't think unit to unit there is not much edge either way, so it comes down to technology and numbers. And if somehow Combat Mission figured out a way to properly incorporate airpower in to the tactical landscape of the typical scenario then it's lights out.

    Combat Mission is limited by it's purely tactical scope. If this series would become operational, then the US has a marked advantage in such a scenario with factors such as logistics, repair and supply. If strategical, then economy and production. As long as the series remains tactical only, these advantages mean little or nothing. What good are four-engined bombers and massive blue-water fleets in a game such as this?

    In a limited tactical scenario such as Combat Mission then I reckon it's a close-run thing and comes down to scenario design and how the designer 'balances' the starting state. If you take 100 of each side's best units and pit them against each other I think the result is in the air. Which just happens to be raining air bursts.

    0

    Is Red Thunder secretly the best CMx2 WW2 game?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    Books are so passe anyway. Old folks read books made out of paper. And I'm pretty old, so....

    Many years ago, I was at my local library and looking for something to read. Somehow my attention fell on Ernie Pyle's Brave Men. Pyle was one of the top war correspondents in WW2. At that age I was ignorant of what had happened. I knew there had been a war, Allies vs Germans, and the Allies won. Beyond that, nothing really.

    But I took this book home and it really changed my life. I became engrossed in it, it made me think of things I never had, about the human cost of war. Of the suffering and determination, of courage and despair. There's a chapter in the book called The Death of Captain Wasko, one of Pyle's dispatches home. Waskow was killed in Italy, in the Liri valley. The story relates how Wasko's men came by one by one to pay silent respects to their officer as his body lay along a low stone wall waiting for transportation down the mountain. Pyle described how each soldier acted, straightening the points on the Captain's collar, or speaking a few words of respect. Moments so personal that Pyle felt like an intruder as he watched at a distance. It really moved me, and led to a life-long pursuit of knowing all I can about what happened during the war.

    I ended up buying a copy, which I still have of course. But it is now surrounded by hundreds of books about WW2.

    0

    Is Red Thunder secretly the best CMx2 WW2 game?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    I get a sympathetic headache just thinking about playing Combat Mission on that map. Horses for courses eh?

     

    39 minutes ago, Sunbather said:

    Due to MMM's and Landser's comments about the variety of Fortress Italy

    I didn't speak of CMFI, for what it is worth. Not saying you should or should not buy that one, just that my comments were for CMBN (Normandy).

    As others have said, and gets repeated when these types of threads appear, the best approach is to buy the titles that feature the theatres you are most interested in. So take all of your WW2 books and sort them by front. Whichever stack is the highest reveals the Combat Mission title to buy first! Half-joking

    0

    Is Red Thunder secretly the best CMx2 WW2 game?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Warts 'n' all said:

    "The Balalaika Boys take Berlin"

    Top shout mate. I could get behind that.

    When it became known that whatever had been the original name for the module was infringing, and Battlefront needed to find another, I put forward several candidates. All were rejected in favor of the glory that is Fire and Rubble. I don't trust me either, so that logic follows and no hard feelings haha.

    These were my punts

    Across the Oder

    Final Assault

    Red Vengeance (maybe too much in that?)

    Reckoning

    Red Thunder: Reckoning though, does it for me. It's alliterative, and there's value in that. And indeed the time period covered by the module was a reckoning for what had come before. But there was also fire. And rubble. I saw some pictures.

    2

    Is Red Thunder secretly the best CMx2 WW2 game?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted · Edited by landser

    Personally I think Normandy is the top WW2 title. And objectively I think my opinion comes down to two things...content and subject matter.

    But I have Red Thunder too and it's great, although I skipped Rubble's on Fire. It it had been called anything else I might have bought it. Like Red Thunder: Reckoning. Then yeah, of course :)

    But seriously, I think which one you see as 'best' is simply a matter of preference.

    Red Thunder could hold this spot for me, but there are too many holes in its game, namely, too narrow in timeline, not enough campaigns and a module focused on the least interesting part of the war in the east. I know folks like big urban battles, but I think Combat Mission is ill-suited in some ways to this type of warfare and anyway I just don't find it fun.

    1

    Best first WW II CM campaigns?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by landser

    Blunting the Spear does have very big battles too. Not a beginner's campaign I don't think, but in my view one of the best WW2 campaigns in Combat Mission.

    Great map(s). Written that way because each battle takes place on a section of a single master map, right?

    The action this campaign portrays is not very well-known, but this was the largest armor clash that occurred in Poland. In July of '44 the Russians were closing the Vistula and the eastern approaches to Warsaw. Operationally, it was XXXIX Panzer Corps defending against Rokossovsky's 1st Belorussian Front, and in this region 2nd Tank Army, of which the campaign's enemy, the 3rd Tank Corps, was part. Model ordered a counterattack with four Panzer Divisions. The Hermann Goring and 19th Panzer Divisions attacked first and managed to cut off 3rd Tank Corps from 2nd Tank Army. 5th SS and 4th Panzer then arrived and the pocketed 3rd Tank Corps was destroyed. In the campaign we command elements of 4th Panzer, and the player is attacking/pursuing 3rd Tank Corps as they fall back in to the pocket to ultimately deliver the crushing blow.

    Historically, this action was a sharp success for the German. For the moment anyway, the Vistula crossings were safe, and the direct threat to Warsaw removed. It was a good example of how vulnerable armored spearheads can become after a long advance, and here, at the end of Bagration, 2nd Tank army was exploitable, Model recognized this and struck when the time was right. This action is also interesting for the role it played in the Warsaw Uprising which sparked as these forces approached the river. The Soviet defeat left Warsaw on it's own as they needed to cross the river elsewhere. Of course it's questionable whether Stalin wanted to enter Warsaw in the first place, as one might reason capturing Warsaw with no home army intact was preferable from a political point of view.

    In the game, this campaign is strong, but larger than what I usually play, battalion sized, with large maps 3km x 3km? As I said earlier, I really like the 'balance' here, between long-range gunnery duels, and close-in fighting. For me, balance is often a mis-guided aim in wargaming, not desirable in of itself, except for multiplayer fairness. But here I mean the way the nature of the combat is balanced between distant engagement and close assault in a way that appeals to me. I was getting kills at over 1800 meters, and these sorts of duels are always fun in Combat Mission.

    Despite how I tend to shy away from large-unit campaigns, I really took to Blunting the Spear. One of the biggest challenges for me when playing it was movement. The maps are so large that simply walking my infantry across from the jump-off positions was not practical. Not only does it take too long, the infantry then arrives out of shape, out of breath and nearly out of time. So I felt compelled to organize and execute motorized movement. This imparted a distinctly operational feel to the tactical framing.

    The campaign is split narratively between two 'flank forces' one with Panthers and the other with Mark IVs. One flank force has trucks and one has half-tracks. Both are vulnerable, but the trucks especially so. I found it a compelling challenge to bring the weight of my infantry to bear where and when I needed them, to safely get them in to position and in condition to fight. This compelled me to establish things like embarkation points, columns, disembarkation points and covered assembly locations where the troops could form up to reach their jump-off. More than once, infantry formations mounted up, moved forward, jumped off, took a position, remounted and moved forward to the next position and did it again.

    The very first battle was like this, where I used the troops to clear the terrain on the near side of the river, before loading everyone up to make the river crossing. To do this it requires planning ahead, good timing, overwatch, escort, suppression, smoke, co-ordination and luck.

    This is the opening map in Blunting the Spear

    [Linked Image]

     

    In this battle the Germans must cross the river you can barely see running through the center, take the VLs on the other side while attempting to deny the exit of Red armor. You can see the smoke I am laying as a screen against any forces in the village on the right edge of the shot. As it turned out that village was unoccupied, but you can't know that (and AI plans means next time it might be garrisoned and defended) and I did a full assault on that dead space, with smoke, arty and recon by fire. Once the near side was clear (watch out for surprises!) then all the infantry was mounted up on the tracks under concealment, and then all made the move simultaneously to cross the river.

    This is a big undertaking, massive co-ordination of assets, but I loved it. It felt like an operational challenge in the tactical Combat Mission.

    1

    Best first WW II CM campaigns?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    22 hours ago, FredLW said:

    Kampfgruppe Engel is really exciting !  Nice and innovative scenarios, and nice  stuff... miaow...

     

    Yes indeed. I like it for a number of reasons

    -- Fearsome German armor.  Your force is limited, but what you do get is top shelf

    -- Core force.  I prefer this for a number of reasons, not least of which is that each loss is keenly felt. I lost my Pak40 with twenty rings painted on the barrel, and you know how hard it is to keep an AT gun alive long enough to get twenty kills. Ouch, but in a good way. Core force also makes me learn the names of my commanders and officers, imparting a sense of attachment I don't get in campaigns with a different approach, such as Montebourg (except Lt Turnbull!).

    -- Ammo and repair state carry over. One of the later missions is to force the river Dives, which comes on the heels of the Hunters in the Mist mission. There is a single, heavily-defended bridge to get across. And the player must do so with battered tanks and nearly-empty racks. A tough nut, and forces you to find a different approach, since you cannot rely on overwhelming firepower applied at range.

    When I played I focused on keeping my armor alive, and was very successful at this, but by the end it was in tatters. Damaged tracks and barrels, shot-out optics, broken radios. Campaigns are best when decisions and outcomes have cascading effects on what comes next. One Panther was little more than a barely-mobile pill box at the end.

    -- Mission innovation. Some of the missions in this campaign are clever and innovative, such as Tiger Poaching, where you must recover an abandoned King Tiger behind the enemy's forward outposts. Or Hunter's in the Mist where you must capture a couple hamlets, while one enemy force meets you head on, and you also encounter a Canadian armored force moving across the map from side to side. As the name implies, the limited visibility negates the range advantage afforded by German optics, and you must work out how to capture your objectives while simultaneously denying the Canadian's exit. This is the mission I lost that Pak, grrr....

    This is the opening map for this campaign. Love this sort, with lots of open ground and broken sight lines that make it such an interesting tactical puzzle. I sent recon elements to OPs 2 and 3, another element to fix the troops at the road block, while my main effort went up the right side.

     

     

    [Linked Image]

     

    On the other side of the ledger I felt the exit mechanic was used too much (not a fan) and one or two missions I didn't care for, such as Guardian Angels which is a fairly tedious battle/exit mission. It may be more due to Combat Mission's limitations than anything. If we could easily give formation orders it wouldn't be bad. There is another mission, I can't recall the name, where you must traverse the map at night and exit your entire force. I perfectly chose my path and rather breezed through it. In the debrief I was shocked to see how strong the enemy had been, and it was only by good fortune that I weaved my way through it all. If I had chosen a different path it would have been very difficult and not a fun mission I don't think. I'm no fan of exit missions, night fighting or urban combat in Combat Mission.

    But in all it's one of the best Combat Mission campaigns I've played and well worth your time if you like German heavy hitters and don't mind having the odds distinctly against you (hard campaign). It is the Falaise pocket after all, and it takes all of your skill to get through to the end. Speaking of which... I got there through a combination of luck and skill, and was promptly handed my ass in the final battle, called Deliverance.

    1

    Best first WW II CM campaigns?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by landser

    Devil's Descent -- Pitch perfect company sized para campaign.

    Kampfgruppe Engel (CMBN) -- Not a beginner level campaign, but one of the most innovative in Combat Mission. Features ammo and repair state carry-over and core force.

    The Outllaws (CMBN) -- Ramping para campaign, where you start small as the troopers march to the sound of the guns, culminating in much larger battles as your paras link up with 4th Division straightlegs coming off the beach. Interesting briefing style that provides virtually no useful tactical information. but it does provide a narrative, and the player fills in the blanks.

    Road to Montebourg (CMBN) -- One of the most ambitious Combat Mission campaigns, and one of the biggest (16 missions?). Excellent mission variety, with the opening mission a showcase for suppression in Combat Mission.

    Blunting the Spear (CMRT) -- Battalion + sized campaign. I tend to steer clear of the larger campaigns, but this one is too good to ignore. A near perfect blend of long range gunnery duels and close-in fighting.

    Just a few suggestions

    3
×
×
  • Create New...