GreenAsJade

But does this happen more often for Lees, in line with their reputation (as reported above)? IE is the Lee's particular susceptibility taken into account?

Hey, you owe me a turn, what are you doing posting here when you should be doing that?! My point was if you are playng with planes you get what you deserve, and any "advantage" from a free load of bombs is equally likely to be a disadvantage when they land on your own troops! I guess the real question is "does this reset behaviour happen each time a PBEM turn is exchanged anyhow?" If it does happen, then everyone playing PBEM gets the free bombs. (TCP/IP people can't "cheat" by saving and reloading). If the PBEM turn saving process does not cause this behaviour, then it's true that some unscrupulous person could generate themselves some more bombs. But who really cares? You hardly need more bombs to beat me, and I need more than a few bombs to beat you. It's hardly the most earth-shattering cheat opportunity... that's really what I waas trying to say, tongue in cheek...

I change all the time. Sometimes I repeatedly hit "C" so the units "flash" on the screen, to make sure I haven't missed any. You need'em big to find 'em and you need 'em small to check out LOS...

Who cares? I guess you're worried that your plane is going to drop that second lot of bombs on your troops as well as the first one, is that it?

They are boooootiful! Almost motivates me to pull my finger out and link scenarios to mod-sets in McMMM!

'cmon then - share with us history-channel-deprived some of the details! Why was the Somme a debacle? What was the deal with HE vs barbed wire? What mistakes did they make against MGs?

You don't need a no-CD patch. Just get a virtual CD drive, such as Alcohol 120%, and you can have all your favourite CDs in the drive at once!

I guess it depends on how competetive you want. Band of Brothers feels reasonably competetive to me, in a friendly way. It's missing any method of guaranteeing that you play balanced scenarios, but the ladder scoring is pretty stingent, and set up so that only people who are taking it seriously are likely to bother... works for me! GaJ.

This is a *Class Site* Carl!! I read about the random reinforcement idea in the same thread you did, but didn't take another look after it emerged that the scenarios at that time were for AI only. Your PBEM random map screenies look great. Has discussion about these started up anywhere? How many times have they been played? I'm keen to hear how the play balance aspect has worked out ... GaJ.

Well I'll be danged - I thought I kept up to date, but I was one behind! I hope this is it!! While we're on the topic, how nice would it be if PBEMH did a "refresh" when you maximise it!?? I have a few opponents who don't use it, so I have to save their files into the PBEM folder (the usual drill). Because I always have PBEMH running, I then have to hit "refresh" for it to notice the new file. It would be so weet if it just picked up the new file when I open it up from the task bar!

PBEMH is working, and I would't be without it, but for a while now I've had one irritation: it always gives me a warning dialog about "Email address is not the same as DIRECTORY". I can't see what it is trying to say, and I always say OK, but it would be nice to fix this up. Anyone else have this, or know what's going on? Ta, GaJ.

Knives is right: the two units saw each other at the same time. The problem was that I wasn't expecting the them to be in LOS of each other at all. When the tank was not in the position, the LOS marker indicated "sight blocked"... that was sight blocked to the ground. When the tank was in the positon, suddenly it was able to be seen. This caused the ATG to open fire at a hull down tank, which was bad juju....

In a thread not far away it was written: "As for advancing you zooks with infantry, I'd give up that idea. I prefer to keep all mine back with an hq of any kind, then use em like a fire brigade against any armor that shows up." Comments?

Also, you can get a nasty suprise that confirms a unit's height is taken into account - at least tanks. Here's how: suppose you set an ATG covered arc that includes a a place on the ground that is just over a hill. The gun reports out of LOS for that spot ... you don't want to trigger on a tank there, but it doesn't matter 'cause it's out of LOS so it won't trigger anyhow, and it's handy to draw the arc across other places you do care abouout. Youch! When a tank goes there the covered arc will trigger, because the tanks is higher up than the spot on the ground that was out of LOS! (This mistake on my part cost me a ATG, and probably turned a game from a potential win into a definite loss :-( ) Moral - don't lazily draw covered arcs through out of LOS places!

(edit)I take it all back: I just went and had a close look, and tanks do appear to be visible peaking over the top at normal scale before LOS is there. And this makes somes sense: LOS is given when you can _take aim and hit_. I guess when the tippy top of a cuppola is visible at the crest of a hill it doesn't mean you can "see the tank" in the sense that you can shoot at it. [ November 26, 2004, 12:44 AM: Message edited by: GreenAsJade ]

Follow the link at the bottom of folke's post!

Actually the fact that it's not statistically (or any other way) obvious was the whole point of this thread!

In fact, I originally was guessing that the "Stuart?" was really a Sherman, and that the Lynx was getting scared because somewhere in the depths of his heart he was getting the message "Sherm, Sherm" (IE speculating that run away code was using real, not misidentified identity). But any number of things made me retract that theory: - Stuarts are better than I realised, and Lynx is going to be scared of them anyhow - As Grim says, there was actually an ATG clammering for attention - I was going to wait till I had more evidence. - I thought I'd see how many responses I could get to a nonsense post.... GaJ.

Or, if you're after playing aids rather than aesthetic improvements, there are grids for lots of CMAK terrain, and there are also my "High Contrast" mods for some of the more common terrain tiles. GaJ.

(I'll repost if it does turn out to be a Shem. If it's really a Stuart, then I just have chicken Lynx drivers...) [ November 23, 2004, 04:02 AM: Message edited by: GreenAsJade ]

Um, hang on a second. Dude - do you have the manual? If you do - open it to page 172 (Beginner's tutorial) and start there. Then read lots more. If you don't ... why not? CM is not a "pick it up and play it straight away game". The interface is pretty intuitive, but you have to know how the whole thing works to really be able to play it. Then, as Seanachi said, you need to think about commanding troops and the realities of that. (BTW, congratulations on being the first person to ever get a sensible reply out of Seanachi. I can't imagine how he managed to slip up like that!) GaJ.

"Wolf In Sheep's Clothing" was an excellent scenario that got this completely right, by throwing the players in -after the start- !!! That's right - the scenario designer ran the first few turns to get the units into the "post recon" position", the battle was raging, and the players start from there. I'd love to see more of that, desipte the fact that it's hard to do (have to provide players with passwords etc).

My understanding of how it works: Hull up/hull down makes a difference to the overall probability of a hit. Once a hit is determined, it is randomly allocated to the available surfaces. Therefore, hullup/hulldown does affect the probability of a turret hit. Hulldown, the probability of a turret hit is equal to the probability of a hit. This is somewhat small because the turret is a small target. Hullup, the probability of a turret hit is equal to the probability of a hit (somewhat larger, because the tank is large) divided by how much of the available surfaces the turret comprises. These will not give the same answer for a given distance from the attacker. This is *** just how I ** understand it to work. Someone might know better...

But if your turret is half the thickness of the hull, doubling (say) the chance of penetration, and being hull down only reduces the chance to hit 10%, then you're worse off hull down. That's that calculation that I find I need a rule of thumb about. I have no general idea of how much being hull down reduces the chance to hit, nor how much a difference of say 20% thickness makes to the chance to penetrate.... it is no doubt all very complex, which is why a rule of thumb would be handy! So far we have one rule of thumb from diesel: stay hull up if the hull is thicker. Anyone else?

So - you have a tank with a thinner turret than hull. How do you decide whether it's better do be hull down, because of the reduced chance to hit, or better to be all up because of the better chance that the incoming shot will hit thicker armour? (I probably asked this before, but couldn't find it ... I guess it's a good question that could do with re-airing anyhow )