DavidFields
-
Posts
719 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by DavidFields
-
-
Ok, I am curious.
I am a bit obsessed with this scenario. To jog everyone's memory, it is a CMBO scenario, on the disc. It recreates the Allied push near Cherbourg.
Finely crafted, almost all infantry. I think it plays like a puzzle. (As the Allies, in SP) Even with 60 turns, the Allies have significant time pressure. I have been slowly improving my infantry tactics with it: learning to move large formations of infantry, not relying on armour to do everything, learning to use artillery better, trying to understand the quirks of fixed fortifications.
So....has anyone managed to last flag as the Allied player, the one in Fort du Roule? On my last attempt, I managed to get most of my batallion to the edge of platform with the main defenses. But then I looked at those defenses with a "you have got to be kidding" expression--I had forgotten their strength-- and moved no further. (I gave myself an Infantry Batallion Management medal anyway)
I think I could handle my artillery and infantry in this scenario slightly better, but I would like to know if it is even possible to take that flag.
Other questions (I just do not remember if these are in the FAQ section):
If a large amount of MG fire is directed at a concrete pillbox, if there a possibility it will suffer gun damage, of that it could be abandoned?
Am I correct in presuming that if concrete pillboxes are placed back to back, there is no way to smash through their rear door?
Am I correct is thinking that concrete bunkers are essentially immune from 105mm artillery?
Again, a very challanging and interesting SP Allied scenario.
-
I think most people do not realize how much work goes into the designing of the battles/games.
How you all find time to play so many scenarios is amazing to me. It can take me all week, intermittently, to play one battle. Then I usually want to play it from the other side, and then with a different approach. Before I know it, a month has almost gone by. And then I look at all the battles I have yet to play, on the disc and at the Scenario Depot, and I am both elated at all the fun I can still have, and with a silly remorse that I probably will not get to all the great scenarios before something else comes along (ie-CM2).
But it is hard to have appreciation for everything all the time: like the work that goes into making this computer, or my car, or the fact that the muscles in my lower arm pull tendons which move my fingers (or that I have two healthy children, and I have a wife who has put up with me for almost 25 years.)
So let's try to be kind, no matter what.
Merry Christmas.
(Or, Happy Winter Solstice, which is the holiday most celebrated in my household)
-
I try not to rate a scenario until I have played it from both sides. Still, it can be difficult to judge, because the first time I play it is "blind" and the second time, necessarily, I know the force structure. (Always single-player) I think a good reviewer will simply note this in the comments section--as a scientist would note his/her methods.
-
Thanks for the info.
So...it seems that LOS drops off in buildings as though the interior were scattered woods or woods? Is there a "wall effect" at all?
On the other hand, it seems to me that if I put something behind a building, even a small corner of the building will block LOS (I am at work, so am doing this from memory). I don't remember being able to shoot/see through a corner, even if the distance was small (which is accurate, of course--but implies that the game engine can tell when two walls of a building have been crossed in a LOS calculation, thus totally blocking LOS).
I hesitate to dissect the game engine too much. It might cause me to use tactics which are game-engine specific, rather than more accurate of real life. But I just finished an urban scenario with many large buildings (A Second Job at V____), and the oddities with building LOS were just too large to ignore.
-
I am having a bit of a hard time working with LOS and units in buildings.
I have a habit, from CC days, of placing my units directly adjacent to the wall when they are in a building--so, presumably, they can fire out the windows. In CM, however, the buildings sometimes feel as though they are glass houses when it comes to staying hidden.
But I find that units deep inside a large building can seem to fire "out the window" without much difficulty. This makes me wonder: should I be placing my infantry units, the ones I want to engage enemy units at close range, away from the walls and closer to the center of the building? Would they be, then, harder to spot?
-
Perhaps an odd question:
If you remove a minefield with engineers, does it count as a dead unit for the enemy in VP terms?
-
My oh my...someone else remembers 1776. Ever win as the British in a campaign? Darned hard to do. If we are going to mention Avalon Hill games, one of my favorites was Luftwaffe (I think that was the title)--best strategic WWII airwar simulation that I have ever seen.Originally posted by simovitch:Nothing though compares to the heady days of the 70's staying up all night playing the AH classics like 3rd reich, 1776, bulge, russian campaign, etc. etc. if you were/are lucky enough to have a ftf player (as I did) the experience of physically moving stacks of counters around is, i feel in some twisted way superior to the virtual battlefield, at least on the operational/strategic level.
I can't get my son (13 years old) interested in a game like CMBO. (Normal person that he is...) I think it was easier to ramp up to these very sophisticated games when you started with something like Africa Korp.(AH)
I bounce between CMBO and Europa Universalis II--both allow for thoughtfull, historical play (and do not require just quick reflexes).
But I liked CC3 and CC4. I look forward to comparing CC3 to CMBB (when I get a slightly more powerful computer). I have been surprised that CMBO does not even have beach invasion scenarios (I know there are mods), and that CMBB does not have a campaign system to compete with CC3s very sketchy one (I realize there is Biltong's very complex rule set).
I
-
Your analysis is excellent.
Which is why I like scenarios with covering terrain. And I tend to like scenarios which are not mostly armor.
CMAK is going to have to be creative in designing scenarios. I still remember playing ASL (I think) and being very unhappy with the desert tank scenarios--since flat, featureless desert seems to require tank rushes.
For what it is worth, I tend to concentrate and rush. As you mentioned, recon is hard to do unless the opponent is somehow forced to be in the open (rare--except for a pillbox or trench). And I hate losing recon armor needlessly.
But, if one has no idea what one is fighting, that means betting the whole game on that rush. Of course, to improve the odds, I try to pick a very narrow area, and likely a map edge. Ideally, one would blindly pound some likely cover areas with artillery, and perhaps use area fire with the AFVS while moving forward (though that burns a lot of ammo). Nevertheless, if the opponent has flanking AT fire with enough range, the results are likely to be not good.
Fortunately, unlike real life, one tends to know in these scenarios who is supposed to be the attacker and who is defender (or you know it is going to be a meeting engagement). That minimizes the chance that you will have a complete disaster by being lured into attacking a superior force. The attacker in the scenarios can usually assume he has more forces than the defender, concentrate the attack power geographically, and make an ugly blast forward.
-
Originally posted by Andreas:
[QB]
Strength return from 1st August 1944 (numbers in brackets are TO&E)
</font>
- Armour
Panzer III 5 (10)</font> - Panzer IV 36 (81)</font>
- Panzer V Panther 0 (79)</font>
- SPW, AC, FOO Tanks 75 (264)</font>
- SP AT 17 (31)
Artillery</font> - Hummel 7 (8)</font>
- Wespe 16 (16)</font>
- towed 41 (43)</font>
- towed heavy AT 41 (71)</font>
- MG 690 (1,104)
Vehicles</font> - Trucks 697 (1,637)</font>
- small vehicles 240 (677)</font>
I am interested that, in 1944, a German unit would have MkIV tanks, and no MkV. By that time, I would have thought that everything Soviet could kill a MkIV tank, and that no more would be around. Is this just the case of differences in production numbers and how they were used?
- Armour
-
Superb information, Dandelion, as usual.
As a practical matter, did the Allies use civilians much for scouting in their drive across France? I would have thought it would have been very tempting--and I'll bet the Germans were too busy to be prosecuting most of the population.
-
Not the worst tank, but the "most disappointing" to me is often the Mk IV tank.
I will explain: everytime I get one, I think I have a "real" tank (not a Mk III) and start using it aggressively--which usually means it dies quickly. Yesterday, I patiently waited with my Mk IV until a Stuart came into view.
Wham...my MkIV is knocked out by a turret shot. I took out the Stuart at the same time...but it hardly seemed like a fair trade.
-
In part, one could simulate being in friendly occupied lands by giving very detailed initial briefings to the side which had the support of the civilian population.
Spies...such a harsh word....but, I guess, it is "legal" in war to have such helpers.
-
I was playing one of the Allied Recon scenerios, and I had this thought:
If I led one of those thin-skin armoured car recon groups, I think I would stop at almost every farm house and ask, "Any Germans around?"
When I was at the edge of a town, I would do the same thing.
Is it against the Geneva Convention to use civilians to scout? ie--asking civilians to go into the town market to shop, and look around, and report back. I would bet that everyone did that, if there was a friendly population. But doesn't that make those civilians, perhaps women and children, combatants?
[ July 03, 2003, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Rankorian ]
-
Really OOT
Come on....
"Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name...."
Is a recurring line in one of the Rolling Stones songs. The devil is supposedly singing the song.
I wish I could remember some more of the lines.
A Matter of Honor
in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk
Posted
Thanks, Jimmy81, for your description of your efforts.
As to my technical question, can MG fire ever "gun damage" a concrete bunker, or cause it to be abandoned?