Sanok
-
Posts
319 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sanok
-
-
When bringing up a CM game, is the computer cooling fan supposed to kick on? Whenever I play BO, BB, or AK, the fan kicks on, often changing speeds while playing. When I minimize or close out the game, the fan goes off, but kicks back on as soon as I bring up a game. I did a test, where I brought up BO, then minimized right away, then brought it back up, then exited the game. Every time the game came on the screen, the fan kicked on, but shut off when I minimized. When I exited, the fan went super loud for a second, then stopped. It startled me, it so loud. It never did that before.
I'm concerned this may damage the fan, which could then damage the computer. My previous computer, an eMachines with XP, died because the power supply overheated. The fan did the same thing with that computer. I have a Compaq now, with Vista. When I played five or six years ago on an eMachines with ME, the fan never did that.
Is something bad happening here?
-
Jason, it just comes down to me not being able to get my overwatch set up properly, as well as being able to properly assess a good attack route on the map. I'm playing a QB now where I've done some things from your articles, and am doing better. I just need to be more patient, and keep practicing. Thanks.
Originally posted by JasonC:Well, I can go through normal timings and some of the tricks that speed things up, if it would help. Perhaps you might explain which steps seem to take too much time.
There are different cases for overwatch. Sometimes you can see the first likely defensive positions from the start line, and heavy weapons can start in their first overwatch positions without any movement at all. This is particularly common in small QBs with less than heavy cover, on the gentle slopes or flat hill settings.
At least as often, the first legal or sensible places for the defense to set up will not have LOS to the attacker's start zone across the entire frontage. Might in a few places, but not ones the attackers need to use. In those cases, the first advance is going to be made through dead ground, and can be done without elaborate bounding overwatch drills, using a simple "travelling" formation for the first five minutes or so.
A typical case is a hill crown somewhere near the map middle, so that the attackers can get closer behind it on at least one side, without drawing fire. Sometimes instead it is multiple tree lines of woods that can be interposed between likely defender locations and the moving main body, until up to the back of a last woods body shy of the defenders.
You also find the intermediate case, where you can get one treeline or so, but LOS lines angle in from the flanks to cover a field before the next, without that next being in the defender's set up zone. This usually means the defender can expect to delay, but not to stop, movement to that last body of cover. (Not to stop because he won't have enough firepower in place at close enough ranges etc).
Terrain analysis beforehand has to tell you which case applies. You should not be waiting to see where you take fire to figure this out for you, and you should be picking routes for the main body to grab ownership of undefendable no man's land as rapidly and cheaply as possible. Sometimes it helps to have flankers out assisting with this - by which I mean, a single platoon (perhaps reduced) off on a side of the map you don't intend to use for the main attack, but still want to grab early. As a side effect, this can make it somewhat harder for the defender to tell the main axis of attack.
The first five minutes are spent differently in the different cases. In the covered route cases, they are spent "travelling", usually using the "move to contact" command, and the leading infantry wave can cover up to 400 meters. Usually somewhat less, but enough to reach the LOS limits of no man's land.
Slow heavy weapons teams will trail in this case, but not by too much. They need to know it is this case and move immediately, with everyone else. HMGs ride tanks (Germans that is, Russians are transport class 3 so they can't, instead their 50mm mortars or ATRs can ride).
The main thing in this case is for the heavy weapons to move directly to the location they are going to want to fight from, and that they successfully avoid long range pinning fire. A slow mortar shot in the open will lose 5 extra minutes at best. And if you send them to a location that winds up unable to see any defenders, you can also lose 3-5 more minutes changing your mind. This comes down to good terrain analysis and attack planning, a good anticipation of where the defenders will try to stand, etc.
Towed guns can also be a problem in this case, lacking LOS from the start line. You can push a low transport class gun (e.g. leIG), but it is quite slow, with order delay at the start and set up time at the end, and only 25m per minute between (for transport class 4). You can only afford one such move, and you better be right about where you set up.
A force selection stage better solution, for all but the smallest or most open QBs, is to take 1-2 prime movers and shuttle the guns forward by vehicle, dropping them at the backside of cover. For the Germans, a single SPW 251/1 is the best answer here - it can pull sIGs and quad 20 Flak, or anything smaller, moves 81mms, has armor protection against long range MGs, and can fight itself late in the day.
For the Russians, I prefer the carrier. It is transport class 6, good enough for the typical Russian guns, and can move an MG. Armor sufficient to stop German HMG fire at range. Limited MG ammo itself though. The M3 scout car has a lot more potential MG firepower, but I find them brittle (the key being their side armor is not German HMG proof), and being wheeled they are no faster off road.
Another Russian option is the jeep - cheap and fast, but more vulnerable than the carrier. A downside is that the 82mm mortar doesn't fit in any of these, because of that dang 7th man (same is true of the company HQ) - those can only be moved by the US model halftrack (trucks don't count, worthless). The halftrack costs tons more than the carrier and is even less MG proof than the scout car. I prefer to take a carrier for guns and let the mortars walk.
If you don't have guns you do not need a prime mover. And you never need to buy one per item, that is too much spent on transport. The case you will want them is a dead ground start line with a significant move to first LOS, and in that case you can afford to shuttle. If the guns build up gradually, it is nobig deal, and the later ones are likely to have somewhat better choice of positions, as more will be known about the defense by the time they finish their final push-move.
HMGs dropped by tanks, and fast HQs spotting for mortars, should have no issue getting into position in a timely manner. Same for the tanks themselves, and items like the German SPW 251/2.
Infantry scouts may step out from the "first LOS" position before the full overwatch is in place. You want a shield in front anyway, and a half squad on "point". Limited OPs like a single LMG or split squads, should be readily overrun just by a scouting platoon. When you are hitting a full battle position and trying to move the main body, overwatch needs to be in place. But you don't have to wait for every last mortar to finish its set-up count-down to move off the first half-squad.
The other common case is scouting infantry gummed up by long ranged MG fire very early, like within the first five minutes. They get 100 yards and draw fire and their move to contacts start tripping, sending them to ground. A few maybe even sideways sneaking in "cover panic". That is the sign that an approach march is going to be slow.
You have to gauge at that point whether it is a full battle position firing at you, or just a few delaying MGs. Usually it is the cover state on your approach and on the enemy side of the map that tells you - sometimes, it is whether you are drawing towed gun fire already. If there is a lot of cover on your approach and the enemy had to sneak an obscure LOS line to see that field, it is just delay. If there is a nice big ridge with adequate cover all along it, it is probably a main fighting position. Not hard.
You deal with them somewhat differently. Delay MGs you basically want the squad infantry to bull ahead on "advance" on a wide front, lots pushing hard each minute. The enemy can delay a couple squads, at significant cost in ammo, but not stop fast infantry. The heavy weapons, however, cannot afford to step into open under fire. Nor can they fire back effectively, since you won't have spots yet.
You try to locate the shooters from who does and who doesn't get shot at, and find routes they can't see. You can risk light armor running forward for a spot, if the spotting location is keyholed enough at a deduced shooter area. Otherwise, you just have to hold up until advancing infantry gets close enough for a spot. The firing MG will be wasting its ammo the while, however, since it can't actually hurt anybody at such long range. You need a plan to move rapidly after spotting and silencing it. Obviously your overwatch should have LOS to its location, if you took fire so near the start line - at worst, you park a tank where a squad got shot.
But this is different from the main battle position, instant engagement case. If you are already under LOS of the whole enemy fighting position at the start, then reciprocally, your start line overwatch is already adequately positioned. You don't want to expose your tanks to that main position right away, though (might keyhole a piece of it I suppose). Instead you start FOs counting down and the ordinary infantry advances from cover to cover as best it can.
My experience is that it usually takes 10 minutes for the squad infantry to close up the no man's land area, if they took any kind of fire early. Occasionally this may stretch to turn 15, but it doesn't go longer than that. When I have "map fire" FO support, I generally call it for around minute 8 or so, with the idea that nobody is going to be ready for the main fight much earlier than that, and I want it falling during minute 10 (most modules have 3-4 minutes of shells).
By minute 15 I expect the main firefight to be well under way, with the ordinary infantry in cover just shy of the defender's set up locations, but with full spots to defenders opposite and firing themselves. Map fire FOs will be expended, on map ones will have their first missions already landing, though might have saved half for later. I expect the first guns to have shown themselves and gun-vehicle duels to have already occurred.
It doesn't take all that long after the main firefight starts, to resolve it. I mean, most units only have ammo for 5-10 minutes of all out fire anyway. Even with pauses due to sets of enemies being shot down, they are rarely going to have "ammo wind" past turn 25, unless specifically kept in reserve or otherwise husbanding ammo.
Once the main firefight starts, the defenders need to put up a new set of shooters regularly, or the attacking infantry continues to advance into them. A new set of shooters gets a good minute, a hard minute as they take replies, and a 2-3 minute tail as they deal with it or not. But five minutes after a shooter first shows himself, he usually is toast, or the whole attack has failed - one or the other. Every couple of minutes the defense needs to reach deeper into its bag of tricks, or the attacking infantry comes in another 100 yards and its firepower doubles.
Can the overwatch walk through the whole defense? That varies from defense set up to set up. You never want the overwatch heavy weapons to reposition more than once, after their first serious firefight, but you may indeed have to reposition them that once. When you have to, they can have 5 minutes of down time or more, and the whole fight can take 10 minutes longer than it would without any such repositioning. But this typically means a fight that would be over in 20 to 25 minutes, stretches instead to 30 to 35 - which most scenarios will give you.
Sometimes you simply don't need the overwatch to beat the last layer of the defense. I mean, once squad infantry is actually on the defender's initial positions, the defense itself is usually quite disarticulated, and its remaining pieces rarely support each other very well. You can frequently gang up on the holdouts on one side e.g. Defenses are at their most integrated at the first main battle position stage, and that is where you need overwatch the most.
Also, some of your overwatch stuff will be wholly expended after that bit of the fight, anyway. The foot mortars will often be out of HE, or down to 6 shells. Guns will frequently have been KOed in duels. Tanks will be reduced in number, a few left alive, and those low on HE, using their MGs more etc. Some of the HMGs will be broken, others jammed or low ammo. A few typically left with 30 ammo or so and out of visible targets, sometimes.
Well, if they threw it all at sensible targets they already punched their weight, and the defense is weaker by appropriate amounts. S'OK.
Robust weapons keep punching even at this stage. That includes deep HE ammo load items especially e.g. SPW 251/2 or for the Russians a living T-34 with scads of HE (US Sherman etc). MBTs that have hundreds of MG rounds are useful at this stage. Light armor that hung back until the enemy AT network was smashed can come out now and use its MGs.
The other thing that keeps the attack going at this later stage is just having asymmetric weapons will high kill potential, used along the way. That leaves remaining odds and ammo depth for the squad infantry and main tanks. The "payoff" for each specialist weapon that worked right earlier comes in a better morale, live numbers, and ammo state for the vanilla tank-infantry teams in the bottom third of the fight - because they didn't have to exchange off their opposite numbers in the defense, one to one or worse.
That includes the Me-109 strafes that got guns before they killed anything, and the flamm Pz IIs that waded into SMG platoons instead of sending infantry, and the IGs that blew apart whole villages instead of the panzers using up all their HE doing so, and the FO that twice let a friendly platoon wipe out its opposite number for a half of its ammo and few killed, instead of both sides ragged out and all ammo gone.
Better than even exchanges in the first half of the fight, are what make for speed in the second half of it. You go fast even with reduced strength late, only when and because the defense is collapsing due to accumulated losses. If you don't win the middle portion of the fight, the problem later isn't time, it is just not having the punching weight to continue. If the defense is on its last legs, you can push harder with vanilla infantry and the last scraps of armor, and it will just work.
I hope this helps. If there are specific places you find you typically don't make the above "timetable", please describe them.
-
No. I suppose I should try that.Originally posted by Wicky:Have you tried the disk in a different computer?
CMBO and CMAK both install and load with no problems.Will your drive see other disks?
Not recently, but at the time this happened, the surface was fine. A good cleaning wouldn't hurt.Given it a good clean?
I never considered that. I'm wondering if he would do it.You could try contacting Matt to see if you get an exchange.When the outage happened, the disk was in the tray, the game was loaded, and I may even have been doing a CMBB turn, if I remember correctly.
-
This is the problem I continually have. I can scout and advance, but once I get to the place where I know I've got to force my way into where the defender is, my problems begin. I've come to the conclusion, it's because I don't have enough overwatch in place. It just seems like it takes too long to get it where it needs to be. I also tend to be extremely overcautious with my tanks.Originally posted by JasonC:If you aren't set up to support movements within a given cell by fire, yet, then you don't push hard within that cell. (At least, if you expect it to be defended at all). A few scouts may push on ahead, but any main body of infantry or main battle tanks just hold up and wait, in that sector, until the overwatch is in place.
Same as above.That exception aside, normally you move the main body only after overwatch is in place.Your article was quite good, and some of it I already knew. The main theme I saw being emphasized, was overwatch. I simply need to get it in place sooner.
I still don't see how all of what you wrote can be fit into the turn limits of a quick battle or scenario. Perhaps I'm just too cautious and too deliberate.
-
Last summer, a power outage in my neighborhood that lasted one second (the power went off, but came right back on), seems to have damaged my CMBB disk. The disk was in the CD tray when the outage occurred.
Since then, I can't get CMBB to load. I got the bright idea of deleting it from the hard drive, so I could reinstall, but that didn't work. I put the disk into the tray, but nothing happens.
CMBO and CMAK are fine.
Short of purchasing a new game, is there anything I can do?
[ December 10, 2007, 10:02 PM: Message edited by: Sanok ]
-
This sounds easy reading it in a post, but how does one actually do it in a CM battle?Originally posted by JasonC:The sequence then is, (1) German infantry scouts until pinned by MG fire (2) light armor advances to get full IDs of the Russian MGs to allow reply fire (3) if a Russian ATG shows itself to kill the scout car, then (4) an 81mm mortar takes it out, while everyone else pauses.
The terrain affects the ability to set up overwatch. Mortars and MGs move slowly. When faced with a turn limit, how do I accomplish this?
Needless to say, I'm not very good as the attacker, and I'd *really* like to learn to become better at it.
-
Believe it. BFC's stance from Day One of release was "Don't let the door hit you on your posterior on the way out." They wrote the game they want, which is fine. They don't much care if you (or I) want it or not.Originally posted by dalem:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
It is easy to say, "if you don't like it don't play it," but that degrades BFC more than any of the players by implying that they could care less once they have your money. I don't believe that.
-dale [/QB]</font>
-
Isn't the whole point, designing the games the paying customers want to play?Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:I thought BFC was started so they could design the games they wanted to play, not the games we want them to make. No one is forced to buy their games and is free to buy games from other companies or design their own.
I wonder how well CMSF would be doing, if it was the very first CM game, without the loyal customers buying it, simply because of BFC's reputation with CMx1.
-
You mean Combat wasn't the best? :eek:Originally posted by Huntarr:Tour of Duty was about the best Military series there was until BOB came along and rocked everyone. Over There had potenial but started going in an odd direction.
-
I have Vista and experienced a driver display error. This is something known and common to many PC games and not just CM. A Windows update came that eventually fixed the problem, though it crops up every so often.
The user interface would scramble and the game would freeze, with the screen sometimes going black. You would need to hit ALT+ESC, then wait a few minutes for the drivers to reset.
With Vista, I can play BO and AK, but have a lot of problems playing BB.
-
Personally, I think the reason BB sold less than BO and AK sold less than BB, was the drastic change in the infantry modeling. Yes, BB and AK is more realistic, but a lot of players don't know how to use realistic tactics. Even a lot of players that have done CMx1 for years, can have difficulty playing well. People liked the BO uber infantry. I have regular opponents that hate BB and AK, just because they can't enjoy the game with the more realistic infantry modeling. It appealed to the more hardcore wargamer, but not to the rest.
I believe it's really as simple as that.
If you go by what BTS is trying to tell us, the CMx1 game concept HAD to be abandodned, reinvented and made RT if there was ever a successor to the CMx1 series. The evidence from "ecomonic realities" of the CMx1 series seems to support and vindicate their case for doing so.Originally posted by Lt Bull:I was reading the interesting "The Wrong Left Turn and the Uncanny Valley" thread by MD and was facinated when the discussion started to veer on pages 6-8 towards potentially "saving" the CMx1 concept by making it open source etc and the viability of it all and BFC views on it etc.
It got me thinking, "what went wrong" especially when I took a closer look and considered the implications of this statment made by BFC:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:
...As I've said many times over, CMBO sold the most, CMBB sold significantly less, CMAK sold even less than CMBB. You guys can have rose colored glasses about how great our past games are, but we can not. ...
Steve
This statement for me is both counterintuitive and extremely vulnerable to mis-interpretation and faulty analysis. I think there is perhaps a more sinister resaon why this may be the economic/market reality BFC state.
As a matter of fact if you look at these figures purely through "rose coloured glasses" and apply basic marketing/economic principles/reasoning, you could quite well conclude/reason the following:
1)The market obviously liked and bought CMBO the most thus it became the most commercially successful CMx1 game produced.
2) Sales dropped significantly with each successive CMx1 release indicating that at least owners of the original game had lost interest in the CMx1 series or were put off or not impressed enough by any of the attempts at introducing numerous new engine enhancments and feature additions made to the game each time and so consequently purchased the game in fewer numbers.
POSSIBLE EXPLANATIONS:
1) Market was saturated and satisfied with the intital CMx1 release of CMBO. Subsequent releases of CMBB and CMAK did not justify to either prospective new customers or owners of previous titles that they were worth buying or of any better value than CMBO.
2) BTS/BFC strayed from a winning formula. With each successive CMx1 release, BTS/BFC made changes to the game which made the product of less value and worth to their existing customers/prospective customers. They in effect killed their market by reducing the quality of the game with each succesive release of CMx1 making it less attractive for customers to buy than each preceeding release.
NOTE: Unlike the Total War Series or even the Madden football series, BTS/BFC do not know how to repackage the basic same game concept and make it more commerically succesful or at least commercially sustainable than previous releases. I guess they are not good at knowing what their market really want or knowing what a good thing is.
Can you see what I mean? Something isn't making sense here. This economic/market reasoning/rationale is totally justified if you look at it at face value. However, I do not for one minute believe that the gaming market is/was more interested in early CMx1 offerings (CMBO #1) than the later CMx1 offerings (CMBB, CMAK). There is something else going on here.
The thing I believe that might be the most important issue being overlooked here and resulting in a convincing case against CMx1 being "commercially viable" is ....software piracy! Being such a small independant game development company, I have always been concerend about their vulnerablility to the software piracy of their games. I believe with CMBO, they did the right thing. The game was exclusively available directly from BTS only. There was almost an unwritten undertanding between their loyal (niche!) customers and BTS that they would NEVER undermine the value of the game (and the economic rewards entitled to BTS) by either freely distributing the game to friends, let alone encouraging it's pirated distribution by whatever channels were available at the time. It certainly helped at the time that internet data transfer/volume costs and speeds were unlike how they are now, making downlaoding of even several hundred megabytes a chore, unlike how it is today in this broadband world when several gigabytes can be easily and effortlessly copied in a few minuutes.
But this relationship they had with their market was not one that they could count on indefinitely to keep them safe from the ecconimic pitfalls of software piracy on a small software company if they ever hoped of expanding their market and reaching out beyond the small niche one they had captured to a much bigger and diverese market.
I can't recall exactly when, but BFC eventually made the brave decision to also start distributing, marketing and selling CMx1 the way the "big boys" of the industry do: through third party retail outlets.
When they started doing this, they kind of lost control of their product and it's market value, though it certainly exposed CMx1 to a whole sector of the market that would probably have never heard of the game, let alone ever know or care about what BTS stood for (yes they did once have a mission statement) or how protective their traditional niche market was of the game. By this stage CMBO and the CMx1 concept had started to attract suprisingly fantastic accolades from both gamerd and the media. The latest CMx1 was certainly a game to check out!! But it was a double edged sword. The exposure had both the potential to make people take notice of the product and be interested in the game concept, while at the same time making the game appear to the general public as "just another PC game" that is probably worth a look but why spend the money they ask for it (after all, it looks kind of unproffessional and graphics are tacky looking, compared to other stuff on the shelf (from much BIGGER gaming companies)) when you can download it at home in 1/2 hr off Bittorent.
And I believe herein lies the demise of the CMx1 as seen by BFC as a commercially viable concept. CMBO/CMBB/CMAK almost became the IDEAL type of game to pirate. Relatively small file size for a game. Virtually no anti-piracy protection. Unlike many other games, a pirated version of the game was fully functional for multiplayer gameplay (unlike say most server based games that require registered unique "product keys" for online game play). Considering the game graphically looks tacky/unpolished/dated etc. unlike the "mass produced" junk on offer from the larger gaming developers, one might even feel justified not paying the unusually high $ for it and instead put it on the "find pirate version" list. But probably most importaat of all. IT WAS A FREAKN AWESOME GAME TO PLAY!!!!!!
So what I am suggesting is that perhaps BTS/BFC almost have themselves to blame for not "protecting their investment" and allowing CMx1 to become "just another game to pirate" whose market value subsequently saw it relegated to "baragain bin" status.
This is a crazy/extreme/melodramaitc analogy but I can't help but see it this way:
It is almost like they had this promising young little girl, who had so much potential, who was safe, loved and respected by everyone at home and the small local neighbourhood who knew her. They spent years instilling good wholesome values into her. Everyone believed she had something good to offer the world, they just had to see it. She was a little pimply and geeky in places but so are many awkward youngsters, especially those from a small town, and everyone was very protective of her. Still, everyone knew she would only become more beautiful with age, just give her the chance.
So the day came to let her go off to the "big bad world" of the big city to fend for herslef and find her fortune, competing with all the other pretty girls from all over the country, hoping she will find and earn the respect, trust and value she had back home.
But they did so without arming her with the knowledge or taking the proper precautions to protect her from and prevent her from being eaten up and taken advantage and used by the more unscruplulous elements that lurk in waiting in the hussle and bustle of the big smoke. There are lots of trips and traps in the cut throat world out there. People want to get something for nothing, and if you let them, they will. It was a mistake they would soon regret.
Several years later, and it's a sorry sight. That same fantastic, beautiful girl, that had (has) so much more to offer, now finds herself exploited on the street corner, selling herself for a few dollars, in the company of what you could only describe as human tragics and misfits. She looks uptown at where so many other girls, superficially beautiful, with little substance and without a fraction of what she could offer, go about their busy day dressed in the latest designer gear, gainfully employed by cut-throat organisations that really just want something good to look at and play with (after all, that is what they have all come to expect). Her hope of ever emulating and reganing the respect and value she once had back home in this new world has been forever lost. Everyone knows she sells herself cheap (you can even get her for free is you know who to ask). She is just another one of those stupid small town girls that niavely thoguht she was "special" and though she was "going to make it" in the big smoke, but she trusted the wrong people who told her how much she was worth, and now peddles the street for a few dollars. Now she is just another one of those tragic downtown whores trying to make a living. Such a waste.
The tragedy is this: How could they (BFC) have let this happen? </font>
-
BB and AK play on Vista, but there's a problem with the Vista display drivers. After a few minutes, the game screen goes black for a few seconds, then the user interface becomes distorted. Also, any words on the game screen become blank, white boxes. To fix this, you must minimize the game and wait for the drivers to reset. You can go back to the game, but it will happen again.
This is a known problem that happens with other games, as well.
Now, on the other side, I did get an update that seems to have fixed this problem, as it has happened only one time since I installed the update.
Vista has also reduced the speed of my cable internet connection.
If my old XP computer wouldn't have died horribly, I'd have never gone to Vista.
Originally posted by Colonel J Lee:..and what graphics card is working for you?
I've got to buy a new computer and need to know what decent graphics card works with Vista. THANKS.
-
I just got a new computer that has Windows Vista Home Version. I can get BB and AK to play on it, but each time I insert a disk and start up the game, I've got to reset the screen resolution and hotkey parameters. This is the least of my problems. Vista won't let me place pbem files in the proper pbem folders. It says I need permission from the administrator to do this, which I assume is me, because it asks me if I want to place the game files in a folder named after me. How do I correct this?
-
Will BO,BB, and AK work with Windows Vista?
-
I don't think there is a difference. Enemy squads in open ground, fifty meters away, still appear as Infantry?, with one man on the screen.
I think BFC made it too difficult to ID units. Can't my guys tell the difference between approximately ten men, and approximatley three men? I guess not.
-
Lol. I have no idea how to do some of this.Originally posted by Corvidae:Sanok,
Exactly what kind of terrain are you defending?
What nationality are you playing, and in which game?
Are you attempting a linear defense?
A deep defense?
Or a mobile defense, with or without strongpoints?
Is the ground favorable?
Have you designated a reserve?
Can you channel the attack into a kill zone? Do you have the tools to do that? Can you improvise?
Can you counter attack?
Can you identify your own weak points? And adjust them? Or use them as bait?
Have an active defense. Force the attacker to change his plan in mid stride.
-
I agree, but QBs are like that, as well as many scenarios. Scenarios seem to be pretty much designed to make the defender sit in place and wait for the attacker to come.Originally posted by GreenAsJade:Generally speaking, you can't just deploy your forces statically across the map/flags and hope to win, because you will be spread to thin.
-
I've thought of this, but with the attacker advantage in points or force size, isn't this just needlessly giving him a few more victory points?Originally posted by Cuirassier:Lastly, in most battles you should have OP positions, which need to be micromanaged. They need to advance to find the enemy, perhaps ambush some half-squad scouts, and fall back to the MLR.
-
I've thought of this, but it isn't always an option. Is this all there is?Originally posted by Bannon DC:Keep a reserve.
I assume you are playing against a human. Depending on how big the battle, you will want to keep a platoon (or company) in reserve and a few tanks. If you have the points, some trucks or halftracks to move your infantry. Guns are trickier to move and position but you could have luck depending on the terrain.
If the terrain allows you could mount a counterattack with your reserve.
-
When playing a quick battle, or a scenario where the defender gets no reinforcements, how do I make the battle more than just clicking GO each turn, and watching the action unfold?
In many situations like this, it seems all there is to do after the setup, is to just watch the attacker enjoy the game, while I do almost nothing.
Any advice is appreciated.
-
I don't know if this has ever been posted here, but it's a great video.
-
Maybe he thought this was a discussion forum?Originally posted by RMC:Who are you and why are you so special that you deserve to have your questions answered without expending any time looking for the answers yourself? [/QB]
-
Maybe he thought this was a discussion forum?Originally posted by RMC:Who are you and why are you so special that you deserve to have your questions answered without expending any time looking for the answers yourself? [/QB]
-
I never did a test to specifically count kills based on hearing a death scream. I just assumed it, but it does seem to make sense to me.
Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:Is that definately right Sanok, because I thought (read it somewhere) that the number of casualties that end up as killed was calculated at the end of the turn, not on any individual basis to every man when he becomes a casualty?
For example I once had a sniper wound a tank commander who actually cried out "Ouch I've been hit in the leg", or some such thing! Then that tank was brewed up by some AT weapon, IIRC a Panzershreky team. At the end of the game the Sniper had no kill stats while the Pzshreker had 5. Don't remember how many kills and wounded that there were but I like to think that that TC WIA became a KIA, not being able to move out of the tank fireball quickly enough!
Thanx for the screanshot Timu24, it might have been nicer at one or two camera levels down, but cool enough all the same. I can't see what the Panzer was canistering away at, the former Tank crews?
Sound Mod Question
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
Does anyone have a quality sound mod for the US M1 Garand and carbine, instead of the silly clunking sound that's in the game now? Thanks.