SteppenWolf

The LOS issue is one reason why I wish that a future CM version would offer a view that looks like a good old 2D military map. As it would help with planing and would make things less micro management... Another wish of cause would be that the HQ units become some smarts in regrouping their units and maybe for tank hq's to even maintain a formations... Yes you can call me a dreamer *LOL* but actually a napoleonic wargame called Austerlitz does that with leaders. They're not really smart but the computer HQ's do resonable well if you give them simple orders like defend this piece etc... without them moving over wide areas of space.

I would mostly see it as a problem when the last seen mark disapears after a while because I guess troops that spooted a bunker pretty well will remember the general area of where it was. And a bunker is not gonna run away. With loosing exact aiming sight I can agree with considering that most stuff was actually hidden and hard to spot in the real world... Even if they look like they're not camoulflaged at all in the CM graphics... In CM the only thing they could do to make it look less hidden is to paint the wooden structure in pink and write shoot me in bright yellow letters on it

And I guess they might be out in the first place because of a format limitation. Probably replaced by sand bags. Maybe there is either a max. number of different elements the editor can handle or that can be stored in the file format or both. Probably something like a byte as id for the building which would give them just a limited number of objects.

I don't know how available good maps where in WW II to german and other units but I know from my army time maps today are quiet accurate and the LOS tool from any location would basically simulate access to a good map. An alternate feature would be a 2D view of the battlefield as map and the option to issue orders over this map. Note that you've a lot of disadvantages as "Computer General" if it comes to exploring the elevations right. So I just try to get it right... About the tanks and at guns, I only know modern tanks where communication of cause is quiet good and sharing intelligence within a tank platoon and synchronizing fire is key to survival. I would just think that tanks with radio might within the platoon under fire shared such key information as "Hey an AT gun just fired at me but it bunched off, I think the shot came from 10..." So like I said I see borg spotting not as the root of all evil but on the other hand my experience is more with modern weapons which of cause have better resources if it comes to battlefield intelligence

I didn't found it that serious for MG's but yes it would be nice. The thing with MG fire is they supress stuff close to impact anyhow and normaly I've enough of available mg power to cover an area... With smoke tanks this is a bit different. Of cause a cool idea would be something along the line: If you hold the shift key while having a target line it changes to an target arc regardless of what you fire... But I doubt I will see this in patch *LOL*

The british CS tanks that offer only smoke shells are almost useless in CMAK thanks to how the smoke command works. It is basically not possible to lay a smoke screen with one tank. Would it be possible to give us something like a smoke arc? It just makes no sense to have a tank fire all its stuff basically on one spot, even worst, smoke doesn't last long enough to create an arc of cover yourself.

1. A 2d like map that shows elevations clearly to issue oders. Like the maps real commanders have. Searching for elevations on the 3d field is kinda not optimal. 2. A way to figure out line of sight from a point before you move a unit there. Its frustrating to think you found a cool spot and then the line of sight for it after you moved units actually is not as good. 3. Formations for vehicles, let tanks for example form a diamond formation and advance using it. Also it would be cool if there would be an easier way to let vehicles follow a road. In some scenarios its just micromanagement. 4. Really cool would be if company and higher level HQ's could be issued orders to automatically advance and defend or simly hold ground smart so you can focus on key elements of an attack or defence. In general I don't think that borg spotting is such a terrible thing. If you drive in a formation in a tank platoon and one of your tank opens fire on a location you are likely to suspect something and might fire too... Especially if you might have noticed a shell bouncing off this tank. So I think AT guns are handled not to unfair in the CM series. I also have no problem with the current graphics, I prefer improvements in the model more over the eye candy. If it gets improved cool but more functionality and realism first visuals later IMHO.

I wonder what made the tanks really retreat... Normaly tanks without inf cover hate to move into for example wood areas or towns since they are really vulnerable. So maybe what was more then the mg a scare for the tank crew was the fact that if they continue to advance they end up being hit by a panzerfaust etc. But on the other hand I never experienced the real affect of one or more mg's firing at the tank and how loud all the ping sounds are inside. But also I would guess that you can kinda hear from which directions the pings come if it is only one or two mgs and the tank would get a few rounds of in the general direction and would let its own mg fire.

I mostly wonder if the rates are different in Africa and in Italy. Think about it, advancing 100m through the desert probably with tanks next to you putting you in a big dust cloud must be more exausting then advancing 100m in italy with relatively normal weather.

I don't see it as a big deal but I guess that is because I've CMBB and since the orders are the same I can easily handle the .pdf file. I guess BFC just assumed that many people that buy CMAK are CMBB customers too and already have a manual. So personally I'm happy that I get the game cheaper and don't have to have the same manual twice sitting on my shelf

I want the propeller ones *LOL* I would think they would be very handy to provide dust cover... Just think about racing two of those in circles on the left and right flank making the enemy think a big panzer force is building up!

*wondering* now if these cars are presented in CMAK

No way *LOL* I guess since 1.03 is the final patch I just give up on scenario editing because this is to much of a hassle... Since I'm not really talented not a big loss anyhow *LOL* SteppenWolf

I don't know if it is only me, at least I would guess if it is a wide spread problem there might be more reports about it but I try anyhow just to make sure I tried to do a small map for me and a friend new to CM. I used the height tool, reduced the height from 7 to 5 and tried to plot a small river. Well the problem was the height number 5 didn't show up on the map. I was just drawing with the green grass background and had no way to figure out my river path. Only fix was to press the + button to enlarge the map a bit and then press the - button to shrink it and all was showing up. But when I tried to edit the river after that the same effect took place. I tried to reboot and see if it was an sideeffect of something else I use but it didn't changed it. I use a 2.8 Ghz P4 with Radeon 9700 and run at 1600x1200 resolution if that helps. DirectX is 9.0a. Anybody else seeing the same effect? SteppenWolf

After playing a few quick battles I wonder if my force composition for mechanised forces or the AI's is completly wrong My favorite battles are in the 1500 to 2000 points range depending on the year with the AI defending, since it's attack skills are pretty limited... If I build design my forces I normaly end up with medium tanks building the backbone of the armored part of my force, a few lights like a Pz II or armored cars for scouting and if available one heavy to deal with the unexpected keept in reserve. My inf. is normaly a company of regular inf, one or two platoons mixed of recons and pioneers depending on what I expect and where the fight is, with some heavy weapons (mg, 81 mm mortars etc). I think this would make a pretty much "regular" force for an attack. Now what wonders me is that the computer on the defence throws tons of scout cars at me and things like T-70's and buys for example tons of trenches that the AI never uses. Actually more often I use the computers trenches as positions for my troops. Basically I wonder if it would be really so hard to make the AI actually buy troops that match the role the computer takes over. As a defender I would not have bought tons of scout cars but invested into mg's, guns and a few fast mediums like the T-34 to give some flexiblity. So basically I wonder if I'm the only one that things that the AI force composition in QB is really crazy SteppenWolf

JayKey, I tried to expand the battle to 80 turns with variable ending and it turned into an quiet enjoyable battle. About the map, sure I would share but I've to warn you, it's the second map I ever did, so it probably just took me long because I'm new to map design. Also I don't know if my "accurate map" holds up to the standards used here *LOL*. I went a german website with maps from the Area arround Berlin (current maps)and selected the one of Oranienburg since I thought it makes in interesting fighting place So I got the basic layout, the main roads, the river etc but for example elevations are not accurate... I still wonder where people find old historic maps Steppenwolf

Yep, If I just want to reuse it in another scenario that would be easy. I tried sneaky things like remove all troops and rename it to the operation extension but that didn't worked either. Which figures because of the file headers... Now since I got some coding skills I guess I will spend some time looking if I can figure out the file format... Maybe I will be famous one day for the CMBB map export util SteppenWolf

Hi, I hope what I want to do is possible or I might loose the rest of my hair I sat here with a city map of a Berlin Suburb painting a map that I thought is pretty neat. It all started out as a scenario, but I soon realized capturing a 1000x1000m city and securing "Berliner Strasze" takes to many turns except if the russians ride on Porsche's. Now I thought, can't be that hard to reuse the same map as a source for a campaign... but so far I can't find a way to do that. How can I reuse my scenario map? Help! SteppenWolf

Thank you Gonzo, That was my first attempt at scenario design and I just expected the AI to touch and use the hidden units. Anyhow your information is useful even if it is a bit limiting for scenario design, it means a lot of options would not work if the computer controlls this forces Ah well there is always the new engine to look forward too. Maybe things are improved by then SteppenWolf

I don't know if this is a bug but I tried to create my first scenario. It had 2 platoons of german recon inf. in hiding as scenario defaults. The germans are supposed to assult. Now when I let the computer take the germans with scenario defaults it seems like none of the hidden assets are used! This reconds that are the closest to the enemy lines and are well equiped are not even touched. I simply wonder why is the computer avoiding the usage of hidden units. SteppenWolf

I don't think that russian tanks are crappy at all... like their german counterparts they have advantages and disadvantages and one just needs to use the right tank and tactic for the job... For the Pz III vs T-34. The Pz III comes in 3 gun flavours if I remember right and the long 50 mm could very well score a lucky hit at this distance. The Pz III also has better optics and a higher rate of fire the then T-34, so this alone could explain why it fired first and more often. I don't know how exactly it works in CMBB but I would guess that better optics might also allow to get the first shot off faster since the crew might be more confident about their target solution earlier. Another aspect is crew quality. I won multiple tank battles against human oponents playing the russians and I'm pretty happy with the JS-2 and T-34 performance in this battles. Oh one final thing? Was the Pz III fully identified? Like yesterday I tried to take out a partly identified Pz IV just to find out one toasted JS-2 later that it was actually a Panther. The Panther then toasted another JS-2 before the overwatching 2nd JS-2 platoon could knock out the Panther. SteppenWolf

maybe I got that a bit wrong. Ok I can understand if regular troops represent an HQ over veterans and up. Since like you all said in the real world it's not always competence that gets you forward... Maybe I just take the manual to serious: It sais about green units: "Second Line" troops. Received basic trainng but have little if no combat experience. Now I can understand if an ad-hoc assembled unit full of greens has a green HQ, but my point is you would go to somebody who finished basic training and say "Here is your tank platoon kid, now go and play in the big snowy area there to the east... bye, have fun!"... SteppenWolf

Oh and before I forget it: I wish there was a feature to figure out the LOS before moving an unit into this space... a tool like the current LOS tool that works without a unit select but just by clicking on a spot of the map. SteppenWolf

Maybe this came up before, but I'm wondering about one thing. In several QB I played I bought whole tank platoons. Now how come in a tank platoon with multiple regular and green units a green unit becomes the HQ? Wouldn't normaly be the most experienced people be used to coordinate the fight? SteppenWolf

MrNoobie, this are the points I had about Combat Mission since Beyond Overlord. If they would put this stuff in (none of this I would think really needs a new engine) I would buy the games again just to get these features. My dream would be if they revisit CMBO and CMBB add this stuff, bring the engines on the same level and make a CM Mega Pack But I guess that's just me dreaming for some excitement doing the waiting time... SteppenWolf