Jump to content

vincere

Members
  • Posts

    1,121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by vincere

  1. I was pretty much ok with the CM1 Front line system. I always viewed the kinks in it as how the lines settled after a mutual pullback for resupply and regroup. Was it perfect. No. Was it better than Campaign system that's largely a system of yesteryear. Yes. Somewhat disappointed that there is still a 'never' position towards operations or dynamic campaigns. That said, give us persistent damage, large enough maps, ammo dumps, and reinforcements then we have a CM1 de-facto operation. Some UI to review and pick units for next mission would be an evolution.
  2. Thanks womble, usefulness of having them in place and ready to kick ass good point ! I think I've been too conservative with the quick. Will use it more with longer pauses to eyeball threat areas. . Yeah, I think Bill's reasoning wasn't too off. 1/3 odds with 3 or 4 hellcats firing on one. Reasonable odds that due to FOW he could reasonably think he may not get in next duel. But Wow- friction hit bill in the face Agreed that I'm surprised he is all up front. But I guess he has mobility to pull back for some deeper kill zones
  3. 30% sounds like a good house rule to me. Been a while since I played pbem, but recall an escalating arms race with armour with each new battle. By the way guys, this mixed with ChrisND's lets play on youtube has prompted me to re-evaluate my use of quick. Seems like he used it all the time regardless of whether troops were tiring or tired. I tend to try and marshal them to keep them at ready state. Does it not affect pixel troop performance much to have them at tiring or tired state?
  4. Completely understandable if you have to take a mo' to for a pre battle song
  5. Ello matee, I am thinking that the Battlefront Company has diversified and can provide for all your needs.
  6. Well that's just being silly. He may as well leave the engine and transmission, buy the gun and cut holes through the base of the tank.
  7. Excellent !! But not entirely accurate. Sometimes they'd bratwurst break so they could counter attack instead.
  8. Chaos subliminal terrorism !!! ... what have you just done to my head.
  9. Hell yes! Love the intensity, and focus in his face. Everything in that stare is shouting out "Bad Intentions."
  10. Yep, it would be very interesting to know how many Panthers he could have got for his tiger. Or other thin skinned sniping AT assets if he'd reduced a platoon or two. That said, one of the great things about CM is how 'Friction' sneaks or jumps out to bite in the ass. A little too much friction on one side combined with logical but mistaken moves because of fog of war could swing things. Just hope Baneman has a tank past the 30 minute mark.
  11. I watched the vid yesterday. You did say it was an odd angle as the tank had stopped while pointing down a steep slope. Still, we will see soon enough. I guess the engagement range due to visibility will help Bill's armour; and possibly Baneman's infantry.
  12. Yeah, and we could well see the decisive moment before they realise it. Also, so Baneman confirmed battle is 90 minutes. I think this gives enough time for manoeuvre, some feints and even backing off and moving armour from flank to flank. I want them to kick off so we get confirmed max visibility range in the snow.
  13. Damn right. Gives time for spotting. But what I really like is time for more nuanced tactics.
  14. Good stuff, I hate feeling time pressured to rush in scenarios. The visibility could be a huge factor in this one.
  15. Well some open spaces on this map to see how they fair past 100m By the way- how long is this Battle set for? 60 Turns?
  16. He did say that he plans on movement. But like you say, will he be bold after feeling a few burn.
  17. CMRT mostly forest? Really??? I loved the demo, but never picked RT up as when I was ready Clack Sea was calling me. So looked at Bill's Map analysis again. He thinks his "AA4 is the least likely route as he will not want to slog through the town, but he could bypass it to the right" But that route could really help Banemans infantry take first 2 right side objectives. There's some objectives looking fairly open. But if he pile on the left flank too, and gets supported infantry in through KT5 and into 6 then the 5 rear quarter objectives are in around close terrain. At the moment, despite low number of tanks I think Baneman can afford to make a few more mistakes than Bill. Bill could be second guessing for a while on where the other tanks are
  18. I really need to look at the maps again. Cover approaches, tree lines. And he will need smoke over watch, smoke and more smoke. Squirting infantry into every crack and crevice is just how I like to play. He has enough to through feints, and sacrifice a few to make it look convincing. Heck yes, nearly a battalion. Plenty of shrecks in those companies if I remember? It an interesting asymmetrical choice they've gone for. Both could probably use more arty in different ways. I think the both guessed opposite- Baneman so numerous on grunts and low on tank numbers.
  19. Hey Bill and Baneman are cool for us to talk there AAR with spoilers in here. So to kick it off. I am surprised Bill is so light on infantry. Only taking recon companies. Ok much of the map is open, but still I can't battle without a slice of good infantry. Contrast this with Baneman's 2 company's worth. Will be interesting to see how this pans out. Thoughts?? Will Bill have enough stand-off fire power to support slowing infantry advance in the villages? My first thoughts are no, and that Smoke could really help Baneman in this. (Though he went light on fire support)
  20. Yah, thanks Bill. All is guud. I reckon your approaches already have spoiler talking points. Hey cheers, I also learnt something new today. I like the OCOKA analysis tool http://www.wpi.edu/academics/military/ocoka.html
  21. Ha, doh, why didn't I think of that. Hey best to ask though. I'll add, that I like your force pick. By the way overall have you found that you miss the MGs in squads or do the changed close in fire power more than make up for it?
  22. Bill: Question??? Can I start a thread for forum discussion of your battle knowing both sides? With spoilers- can you guys be gentlemen, agree and trust not to peak??? I understand if you prefer not, and I have asked the Axis. Also, I really like your OCOKA TERRAIN ANALYSIS And so looking forward to the action.
  23. Really looking forward to the action starting in this. Thanks for all your efforts in the AAR Baneman Question??? Can I start a thread for forum discussion of your battle knowing both sides? With spoilers- can you guys be gentlemen, agree and trust not to peak??? I understand if you prefer not. I will ask Allies too.
×
×
  • Create New...