GerryCMBB
-
Posts
648 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GerryCMBB
-
-
Someone who has developed official scenarios for BF has contributed. Otherwise it is just players.
I recently bought CMBB. If I like it, I hope to play some H2H operations down the road.
Gerry
-
Thanks Ken.
Wondering if there has been any change to the lethality of the light mortars relative to other weapons. Or if there has been a change to the protective actions troops under mortar fire will take?
Gerry
Addressed in the dropdown list of fixes:Corrected an issue that allowed mortars to estimate range-to-target correctly too easily when changing targets.
This is due to the thread, here, http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=106327 , which brought this issue to the forefront.
Thanks,
Ken
-
What about the laser-guided mini-me mortar issue?
Thanks,
Gerry
-
My understanding is as follows:
1. At present no H2H campaigns have been created (something I would love to see but not so much for CMFI; I would like very much to see it in later titles).
2. There has been a debate on a few threads about whether it can be done or not. Some say no, some or one say yes.
Gerry
-
Very nice idea.
Gerry
-
This is a great way to state it I think.
Gerry
Very true.It goes back to in RL the mortar crew would not know the enemy is clustered in a 8m area behind a hedge and be able to drop all their load right on target.
They might try to drop behind the hedge up and down the line they would think the enemy is at, but they would not know for sure how close they were landing behind the hedge unless they had landed rounds in front of the hedge, had a locked in weapon and did the adjustment to drop it just a few meters farther.
And yes we see the same problems with other weapons.
My favorite is when tanks snipe infantry. infantry man moving across a wheat field, tank only sees head and shoulder of man. Fires, HE shell which takes man out with round going right through his head. Shell lands 70 m away.
Apply same stupid results to men behind walls and other such things.
So yes, we could disect likely each and every weapon in the game and find issues.
But a tank killing one man is better than if he had area fired like he should and get the HE hit where the whole squad was. So no one whines to much about that. But when in 30 seconds a mortar team wipes out any known target they know about and are in range of, of course you will hear complaints.
It is a game and it is not realistic no matter how much they try to make it just that. So until they learn to abstract somethings to get the feel just about right, then these threads will continue for a very long time.
Personnally I could care less how it is adjusted. But mortars need to be adjusted to match the capabilities of the other weapon systems. The fact that they can outplay and become the most important weapon on the map is all the proof that is needed as to that they need adjustment.
-
Wouldn't there be a lot of deaths due to MG fire also then, not just due to mortars and artillery? It seems it should be so and we are not seeing massive causalities from MGs.
Gerry
I haven't checked the numbers recently but I believe the allies lost as many men fighting the couple months in Normandy as died in all ten years fighting in Vietnam. As many allies died during the two days(?) of Operation Goodwood as died in the eight years fighting in Iraq. You can't play a 'tip of the spear' WWII tactical sim and expect to not generate casualties from mortars and artillery. Especially when playing as aggressively as 'armchair generals' tend to play the game. -
Even in CMBB they coded restrictions to prevent ahistorical use of units. Tank crews that had abandoned or bailed out were given reduced spotting ability so that if they were used as scouts they didn't survive long. So I don't see what would be wrong with coding some restrictions re light mortars here.
Also it would help the customer if we knew mortar behavior would be modified in the patch. Then we wouldn't keep asking about it I think. Maybe.
Gerry
-
Womble was responding to a command about Target Briefly below.
The problem I had with the command was different to Womble's. I started a thread about my experience with it previously. As a reminder, I thought they would just fire on the target for 15 sec. but they kept on firing after that. Someone in that thread thought target Briefly only worked as advertised as area fire.
Gerry
Except that it has been reported to not work very well for mortars, since they take about a quarter of a minute to get firing (even if they're not going to need ranging rounds, which requirement would make firing at anything other than a previous target, using Target Briefly, with a mortar, pretty futile) and thus never actually fire on the selected target. Does your experience differ? -
Thanks KR.
Gerry
-
I think what many people are saying is that the light mortars are killing machines. Admittedly there is that bug that is making them worse. But as someone said, find the opponents heavy weapons, bring up the light Mortars, and destroy many of his key assets. They zone in on foxholes right away, no warning so that troops can take evasive action, and they fire enough rounds and soon all enemy units in the 4 foxholes are dead, not suppressed.
Many people think this is not realistic and is more behavior you would expect from artillery.
I don't plat QBs so I am not choosing light mortars. There are in the scenarios and I like to play scenarios rather than QBs.
Gerry
P.S.
SPOLIER ALERT
In one CMFI scenario my Italians couldn't hold a candle to the Americans initially. Once the Brixias were well placed, everything changed.
Accounts of being mortared are necessarily written by those who survived the attack, those who got killed didn't get to write their impression of what its like to get 'stonked'. What precisely is wrong with mortars? The kill radius is about right, the ROF is about right, the ammo loadout is about right. Yes, they are a major bugger in-game and can be badly overused. The same goes for xylophone artillery rockets too, but that doesn't mean either are modeled wrong. I believe SOP is indeed to 'bring up the mortars.' If you're advancing troops with fixed bayonets against an unatritted enemy then you're doing something wrong. -
Hello All:
Wondering if there is a version for CMBB 1.04? The one I see posted is for CMBB 1.03.
Thanks,
Gerry
-
The effects of artillery definitely detract from the fun factor for me. There is a lot of heavy artillery, especially on the allied side. As people have pointed out, troops don't do a good job of self-preservation when it is falling. Contrast that to them taking MG fire. They are cowering very quickly.
Über-Mortars just make it worse. I won Avanti and the Brixias played way too great a role in that victory. All the other Italian elements, troops, tanks, etc. only took over when the mortars had their say. My opponent commented on their power.
I would like to see artillery toned down so that tactics other than nuking everything first with artillery come more to the fore.
Gerry
-
Hopefully the Fact Checkers will get working on Vanir's claims.
Gerry
-
Thanks to AKD for the diagram.
And stikky, I never even thought to check that. When I have time I will go back and do that. That is a good tip.
Gerry
-
Getting enough of that with Bil and ND?
Anyway, my Sherman survived but was hit a bunch of times, IIRC by a PzIV. A wall is blocking the Gunner I thought after reading your answers and it is a pretty high wall.
However I just realized I am still confused! Unless I am not remembering correctly I had that Sherman fire HE over that same wall to the left hand-side. So now I am wondering how it could do that!?
Gerry
Let us know how the turn ended, I hate cliff-hangers
-
Thanks for the help.
Gerry
-
Hello All:
I don't know if I am crazy or not but I just bought CMBB. (I have been playing CMBN and CMFI a little). I am interested in CMBB for the setting, the possibility of operations, and hopefully, it will require less micro-management that I seem to get into with CMFI.
I know there are millions of mods out there. But I want to start with something simple, i.e. grids to help me see elevation changes. If you could recommend one that would be great.
Also is there a different grid needed for different landscape (steppe vs grass, etc.)?
Thanks,
Gerry
-
Hello All:
Trying to target an enemy tank with one of my tanks. The target line is grey. The manual says "and gray if it’s mostly clear but not for every soldier in the squad/team."
This doesn't bother me too much for a squad but when it's a tank it's more important. I don't know who has LOS. I think it may be the Gunner that does not have LOS. They have seen the enemy AFV but just fired the MG on top of the tank (is that an AAMG on the shermans). Now the enemy tank is ticked off of course. And I still don't know if the Gunner has LOS.
Gerry
-
LOL
Gerry
-
Thanks for setting this up. And I hope the other things work for out well for you. Also thanks to the kind donor.
Gerry
-
Just tried to register and I get the same error message:
"We're sorry, but something went wrong.
We've been notified about this issue and we'll take a look at it shortly.
(If you're the administrator of this website, then please read the log file "production.log" to find out what went wrong.)"
Gerry
-
When I try password reset I get this message:
"We're sorry, but something went wrong.
We've been notified about this issue and we'll take a look at it shortly.
(If you're the administrator of this website, then please read the log file "production.log" to find out what went wrong.)"
-
Hello:
I cannot remember if I have an account or not. I don't see a register button, just a log in button. How does one register?
Thanks,
Gerry
Terrain Frustrations
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
I appreciate what you are saying. However, it is a bit late then as someone, or maybe two players, will have spent quite a bit of time playing a scenario that is now a bit messed up.
I don't understand why BF did not include a graphic image of special terrain features and their key characteristics (such as impassable to tanks, x% chance of track damage, etc.). Would have taken a page of two.
Gerry