dugfromthearth

you can order CMBB and CMAK online from this website (the official game website). I just started playing maybe a month ago CMBO and have switched to CMAK. for more scenarios you can try the-proving-grounds and the scenario depot.

the confusion here is that dirt=grass yes it would make more sense to many to have grass=grass, but select dirt and you get grass. Also note that early years in Italy have yellowish grass and plants, later years (44 and 45) have green grass and plants. Which seems to be the devs showing the progress from southern italy to northern italy. So select late 44 or 45, Italy, dirt, and it will look just like the mountains of Normandy.

I'm just worried that sometimes I forget to put a chorus of praises in between the verses of pointing out flaws.

I also found it strange that obsolete units cost more due to rarity. I wonder if rarity could be applied like the type restrictions (at 1000 points combined arms you can have say 300 points of support). So for 2000 points you would have the ability to purchase 1 rarity 200% thing, 2 rarity 100% things, etc. No extra cost, just limited access. So you might be able to have a Tiger in any large scenario, but just one (or tiger formation, however it is purchsed) I really like the rarity numbers for scenario design. It helps me decide what to include based on what was common.

nice to see science at work. hypothesis. Test. Resuls. all presented including methodology. others can attempt to reproduce results and see if they match and then validate the test. I am so impressed by these boards. You may have no idea what other game boards are like, but death threats would be involved by now.

looking over my posts I noted that they weren't always the most positive possible. So I wanted to write something nice I used to play The Perfect General, a massively flawed game that had FoW and interesting artillery (indirect and pre-called). Then I moved to Steel Panthers which had the flaw that one armor unit found the enemy and then on the same turn all of the others moved in response to it and killed it. Combat Missions is amazing. Not just the order system, but the detail. Zooming in to watch a squad toss grenades at the enemy nearby in the woods. Watching the turret rotate on a tank as it tracks its target. Mortar smoke upon firing and then watching the shell arc and take time to actually land. Just endless little details. And it plays well. Issuing orders is fast and easy. Nothing in the UI gets in the way of playing. The real flaw in CM is that you can do so much you want more. With so many choices for terrain you want that extra one. Or that extra choice of unit types. But I suppose that is why they release new versions.

I feel sorry for you. I have no real interest in the historic accuracy but I lament that the map editor doesn't let me put sloping water (so I can't have rivers coming down hills). So I know how annoying some missing element can be that screams out at you "this isn't right". you can always hope for a patch.

Andrew - now that is something I can sympathize with. If you don't want every quick battle to be Tiger vs Jumbo, then just have the computer select the forces. Giving the player the illusion of choice of what to buy but then artificially dictating what they buy though pricing seems a strange system.

Sergei I agree that meeting engagements were not the norm in WWII. I also suspect that the Allies did not think "We have 25% force superiority, we should attack. And we have 30 minutes to pull off the attack." I suspect the Allies attempted to mass 2 to 1 or greater odds before launching attacks. I mean if they decided "hey we have a 50/50 chance of winning, we should assault" they were extremely incompetent.

"to ensure that quick battles are not dominated by unit types that were not common at that time." Except that it does not do that. quick battles are dominated by panthers and pzrIV's, which were not nearly as common as shermans. Which is a huge problem and historic inaccuracy. If the Allies had been facing equal numbers of German tanks, you can bet they would have switched to producing tanks that were more effective against them, like fireflys. The game gives the Germans the advantage they faced on rare occassions - having equal numbers of equal or better tanks, and denies the Allies the advantage they had most of the time - having vastly greater numbers of inferior or equal tanks. If you look at a quick battle you do not see tanks being fielded in comparative numbers as they were historically. Instead you see the Germans having vastly more tanks then they had historically compared to the Allies. Every German formation includes tanks is as historically inaccurate as every German tank being a Tiger.

My understanding is that the rarity score exists not to balance scenarios but to enforce historic use of unit types. Well looking at a typical game it seems to be completely off. Basically the Allies have the same number of troops, tanks, etc as the Germans. If that were true historically, the Germans might well have won. Now I don't have the exact numbers, but it seems to me that for historic accuracy the Allied units should have something like a -25% or -50% rarity rating, because they were more common then German troops. Sure scenarios might seem to be imbalanced because of it, but again rarity is not to create balance, it is to create historic accuracy of unit levels. Basically the Allies would have a tendency to win. Which would be historic, afaik. It strikes me as odd to use rarity to force the Allies to use the bad tanks against the German good tanks as was historic, but then not use it to give the Allies the numerical superiority they historically had.

CMAK is not the same theater as CMBO. You do not have access to the same tanks and other troops necessarily that you have in CMBO. So it is not a way to replicate CMBO with CMBB rules. But you can do most of CMBO with CMAK. I have not played CMBB because I am not particularly interested in the Russian front. I find the pre-generated scenarios for CMAK to not be to my liking - basically empty desert for NA or fatalistic assaults in Italy. But you can certainly create your own scenarios (even using quick battles) that will have a decent France campaign feel.

a note which I have found important for the allies. in CMBO you can get Jackson's which mount a 90mm gun. in CMAK you can only get Wolverine's which mount a 76mm (I think, smaller then the Jackson's anyway). Jackson's become available very late. A Jackson can pop-up and kill almost any German tank with one hit. A Wolverine cannot. This is critical because one hit from any German tank will kill either a Jackson or a Wolverine. In practice this makes Jackson's good tank killers and Wolverines a waste of points.

Fictional scenario set in North African in March, 1943. An American raid is being launched against a rail depot deep in the desert. For support they helped repair an abandoned Matilda commanded by an Irish sergeant named O'Toole. Will dash and elan be enough to defeat the Hun? Lion In Winter

I have not played CMBB. Only CMBO and now CMAK. I do prefer the basics of CMBO to CMAK. North African terrain is not "fun" for me for battles. Italy is okay. Partly I want to play the U.S. winning battles. They did that more in France then in North Africa and Italy. Everything in Italy seems to be U.S. assaults. I wish CMBO were the last game. CMAK certainly has improved commands and such that make it a superior system to CMBO.

there has been a problem reported if smoke blocks the LOS before the artillery lands.

"When I use the arty in CMAK, I see one round drop in then within 5 seconds there is a salvo of rounds that is about 200 meters to the left of the target every dam time. Its getting to the point that I wont use arty anymore." just target 200 meters to the right of your enemy and problem solved.

Have you tried my scenario: Fallen Empires Desiliens? http://www.the-proving-grounds.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=153

two ways to conserve platoons while spending squads: if you do your own set-up, break up one platoon for all of the teams you are going to use for recon. Do not split up one squad per platoon. That gives you six teams which should be plenty for scouting on smaller maps. Use the platoon commander to spot for mortars, and split any weapons teams up amongst your other platoons. second, use your recon teams for recon. A mistake I made a lot early on when I played was to move a unit someplace to recon, and when I found nothing there I just left the unit there. If you come to the end of an area and find nothing, move your recon team back around so you can use them someplace else. If you want to check out a new area, do not just use the troops at hand, have patience and bring forward the recon teams. The major doctrine of tactics is: use the right tool for the job. This requires knowing what the right tool is, but more then that it requires patience to wait and bring the tool to bear. As a note to that: open topped armored vehicles should be taken out with mortars or artillery, not with your tanks. 3" mortars seem to be ideal for this.

not just CMBO, CMAK also. I just edited my last post to clarify "now CMAK" not "no CMAK".

I'm guessing you are playing the Russians in CMBB. I don't have CMBB, I played CMBO and am now on CMAK. Given the incredibly long delays for Russian artillery my recommendation is to not buy it. If you are stuck with it in a scenario just plan where to fire it immediately and if necessary move the target around to keep delaying it. If necessary, "waste it" at some speculative fire at dense terrain in the enemy middle somewhere. [ December 11, 2003, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: dugfromthearth ]

First off, CM is a game. They may say "don't do gamey things" but you must always remember it is a game and has inherent limitations and peculiarities. Do realistic things, but do not expect to do historic things. The major gamey thing is communication of information. If one guy on the far edge of the map spots a unit, you know about it and can respond with all of your units. This makes reconnaisance a hundred times more effective then realistic. The second major gamey thing is the time limitation. When faced with a major obstacle like a ridge with dug-in infantry, you cannot wait a day to move up artillery and drive them out. You have 15 minutes to take them out with infantry. However, ignore that. The game determines victory based upon points, and units are typically worth a lot more then objectives. Unless you are playing exceptional scenarios, conserve your troops rather then taking heavily defended ground. With that in mind, here is the basics of what to do (assuming meeting engagement or attacking): Lead with infantry, follow with infantry, hold with infantry. The front unit of a column is dead. Just write it off. All you can hope from it is to spot the enemy before it dies. Therefore lead with the cheapest thing you can. Typically an infantry team (half a squad). If you need to move faster lead with a scout car or a jeep. Until you make contact they should not move slowly or carefully. Run them forward. Remember they are dead to you, but you want the information they can provide as quickly as possible. If you are defending or attacking someplace you expect to have strong artillery support, don't even use squads to engage. Deploy a frontage of infantry teams (half squads) to engage (not attack). Two squads broken into teams that present themselves look like 4 squads, which will most likely be interpreted as a platoon. That can be enough for them to get pelted with artillery. Write off the infantry, and just know that all the shells raining down around them are not hitting your main infantry forces. Your next units should be infantry as well. Once you know generally where the enemy is you need to engage them. You may have seen some, but it is a sure bet you have not seen all of them. Move some infantry squads into decent terrain and prepare to take fire. They will fire as well, but basically you are using them as bait to see what develops. Use squads for this and maybe machine guns. Keep your bazooka teams hidden. Keep your mortar teams out of los, they should only be used indirectly. Next call for artillery behind where the enemy infantry has been spotted. Don't call it on them if you are near them, or short rounds will hit your troops. Also don't expect the artillery to land. Call ahead of time so that the pre-firing countdown starts. But be prepared to call it off. This is the critical time, seeing what develops. Basically you should have tanks and artillery in reserve. If the enemy shows guns or infantry, drop artillery on them. If the enemy shows tanks, kill them with your tanks. But don't be too hasty. Take a couple of turns to see if their resistance collapses to just your infantry. You should never be involved in a "fight" with your tanks. If there is a tank fight one side or both is being foolish. Tanks are not just armored guns, they have treads for a reason. Your goal should be to move just enough to engage and destroy their tanks, then have yours retreat to safety. If you know (not think, know) that you have tank dominance (including AT guns) then you can park your tanks to sweep the battlefield and use them as pillboxes. To sum up: You have 2 tasks, finding the enemy and killing them. Do not combine the two, and do not try to do them in the wrong order. You are playing for points. Tanks are expensive, almost nothing is worth losing a tank for. Infantry squads are cheap, spend them to buy information. Infantry platoons and larger are not cheap. Conserve them. Flags should not be viewed as objectives. They are bonus points you get for doing well. Having a flag does not let you fight better. Losing troops makes you fight worse. Concentrate on the fight. Take the devs advice - flags are gamey, don't try gamey tactics, play to win the battle and let the flags sort themselves out.

under Parameters you set the duration of the battle in turns.

I come from posting on the IGN boards about the MMORPG Asheron's Call. People on those boards post the most amazing things and are serious about it. It takes awhile to get the feel of a message board and figure out if people really are that crazy or are just joking.

since I am from Seattle and therefore have no accent, I feel that I am best qualified to resolve the primary issue raised in this thread: "We Dutchmen,Belgiums, Norwegians,Sweeds(? how do you spell that)Irish,Spanish etc etc are ALWAYS playing with foreign armies." I think we are all agreed that the next Combat Missions should be the 30 Years War or at least the campaigns of Gustavus Adolphus. Combat Missions: The First Adolph?