[Fire and Rubble Update]

I'm looking for partisans. Am I too early?

 

 

[Informal Poll Winner - Engine Update]

And you can target a wood if you centre on the front of it and then pull your circle to a far enough forward point that you take in the back of the wood. So effectively targeting the ground you can't see by targeting empty ground (that you're not interested in hitting) that you can see. This makes no sense to me.

[Informal Poll Winner - Engine Update]

11 minutes ago, Bozowans said:

You should not be so limited by the spotter's LOS to the target. For example, as it is now, you cannot call artillery onto the middle of a forest because the spotter can only see the edge of it at any one time. In reality it would be a simple matter. You can just call spotting rounds onto the edge of the forest where you can see them, and then once they are on target, you tell the battery to adjust to 100 meters back or whatever and then fire for effect.

Yeah, this has always bothered me. You actually have to able to see the patch of dirt the shell would land on. Except you don't because once you've picked the centre (that you have to able to see), you set the edge as long as you can see any particular point on the perimeter. So you can launch a barrage while seeing only two points on the ground but can't properly target woods or even buildings unless you include those two points as above. Feels intuitively wrong to me.

I confused myself typing that.

[Snow? I saw snow?]

On 8/1/2020 at 2:25 PM, Vacilllator said:

I had deep snow on the ground and heavy snow falling, even though it was June

Did it melt?

[Informal Poll Winner - Engine Update]

PTO!

[Fighting in woods]

6 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

The farther from the impact point you are, the farther your bullets will go. Many of them will get deflected by trees, but if you are IN the woods, you will only be able to target a couple of squares ahead, and that means most of your bullets will go into the ground. Area fire from farther away will have a chance of penetrating farther.

I didn't know that. My tanks had been pasting the edges of the woods but from fairly close range, partly because of the terrain (it was just over a crest) and partly because I didn't realise it's better from further away.

[Fighting in woods]

4 minutes ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

• consider using a lot of artillery before going in, 80-105mm range would be ideal

Funny you should mention that. The woods got a two prolonged 25 pounder bombardments. I thought it had done very little. However, at scenario end I noticed my spotter was responsible for 30 kills(!).

[Fighting in woods]

7 minutes ago, com-intern said:

Step #1: fireteams on line and within LOS of each other. One team advances a short distance forwards using hunt (about half of LOS maybe less) and then sits for maybe 20 seconds.

|

| -> |

|


step #2: Other fireteams then advance inline with the sacrifical element and waits 20 seconds or so before repeating.

| -> |
.     |
| -> |

This is (sort of) what I do. A sort of very short range bounding overwatch in the dark.

Problem with my recent experience was that it was a narrow strip of woods so it was quite hard to manoeuvre at all, especially as we were taking fire from the other woods if we got too close to the edge. It was like trying to advance down a corridor with you eyes shut

[Fighting in woods]

7 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

(if you HAVE to clear woods.. the best is to try to avoid it)

Oh, I do. Unfortunately the woods were an objective in this one.

 

8 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Then after hosing down, you crawl forward, and rinse and repeat.

Interesting. I was wondering whether "Slow" might be the better movement option. (Not that I had the time)

[Fighting in woods]

OK, that's not all. How do people do this?

Just played a scenario and one company took the village and several hedgerow lines with minimal casualties. Textbook stuff.

But the other company got chewed up trying to clear a single (not very big) wood. They were supposed to clear two woods but they were in no state to to continue and had only cleared half the first one.

I tend to use "Hunt" a lot in woods since we don't know where the bad guys are. But all that happens is a load of grenades go off (not mine) and loads of casualties appear (mine). Effectively there's no terrain to use (as it's all the same) and you can't see anything. Can't use armour support. If the enemy are in the woods and haven't been daft enough to pitch up at the edges, it's a death trap.

Anyone got any tips?

[Fighting in woods]

I hate fighting in woods.

That is all.

[Battlefront Poll Updated]

2 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Come on, you lost the opportunity to catch a completely fictional fish...

And at a low, low price...

[Battlefront Poll Updated]

On 7/31/2020 at 11:43 PM, kraze said:

But that will give a huge enough boost to sales to counter that.

 

Steam actually tried to flog me Ultimate Fishing Simulator the other day. You cannot help be be impressed by the sheer ambition. It was really cheap too. But my willpower held.

[CW Holy Ground: doors that aren´t doors]

7 hours ago, Lt Bull said:

You might get some solace from the fact that this kind of issue is not restircted to that kind of building or that scenario.

Yeah had some pixeltruppen ignore the door right in front of them to run round into a hail of machine gun fire to use the other door only the other day. Very annoying.

[My epic Stug III fail]

Yes, it was Holy Ground. It only took a couple of Cromwells (well one in the end) to get through to wreck the Stugs even though they were "surprised" by their presence. The Cromwells just moved too fast for the Stugs to get a shot off.

[CW Holy Ground: doors that aren´t doors]

40 minutes ago, Vacilllator said:

Infantry AT weapons saved my day to be sure

I can't quite work out how mine did so well, what with it being pretty open country. Got some successful ambushes in two corners of the map. 

But the Stugs and ATGs were woeful. Too much coming at them from all sides.

[CW Holy Ground: doors that aren´t doors]

I just played this and it was not my idea of a fair fight. "Some tanks", indeed.

Bizarrely ended up with a tactical victory. Not sure how. Must have been the target rich environment. The infantry claimed eight Cromwells (and assorted other things with rivets). Unfortunately the big guns only claimed one.

[My epic Stug III fail]

6 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I recall long ago reading the translation of a German report stating that concluded Stugs were a failure in Normandy. The problems you're having with them are the same problems the Germans were having. The combination of low mounted gun with high berms, limited traverse with short LOS. Normandy ain't exactly the open steppes.

Yes, I can see they'd be alright in long range encounters, ones longer than any they're likely to encounter in northern France.

[My epic Stug III fail]

Just returned to CM after many years but I thought I used to be quite good at. Knew what I was doing at the very least.

Find myself playing a scenario as the defender where I was expecting "some tanks". Turned out to be the entire 7th Armoured Division by the look of it but hey-ho. We like the challenge.

Not sure how to handle this but two Stug IIIs turn up as reinforcements. I quickly locate them behind a high-walled farm, one pointing north, the other south. They're protected and ready to take out the Cromwells as they storm past the farm. And storm they do.

First a Cromwell speeds past the northern Stug. It's at less than 300m and a side shot so it's doomed. Except it isn't. It's going so fast and crossing the LOF at ninety degrees that when the Stug fails to take the shot immediately, it has to track the target. But it's moving faster than the Stug can turn. After being in LOS for a over 300m, it goes out of sight.

While that was happening a Cromwell appeared to the south of the farm. Right it front of the second Stug, point blank range. But the Stug doesn't get the shot off. The Cromwell just passes it and the Stug tries to turn. The Cromwell then shoots the first Stug in the rear for a kill then rotates it's turret at a leisurely pace to take out the still turning second Stug it just passed.

Both Stugs lost in a minute without firing a shot.

I hit ceasefire.

What's the best way to handle these SP guns?

I must admit I love it when the opposition has them as they seem so easy to take out for the above reasons. I remember doing a scenario many years ago where the designer had put a Stug defending a crossroad. Which way to point? He opted for diagonally which might have hedged his bets but it guaranteed my lead Sherman got at least two shots off whichever way we approached it from.

The Germans made a lot of these so I'm sure they were better than I'm seeing.

[Battlefront Poll Updated]

The WWII bits we haven't got yet. Those in the poll plus PTO.

[Does slow movement tire out troops really fast?]

Quote

And yes, it takes a long time to recover from "exhausted".  Some players say they run their troops so they are tired most of the time.  I think it better to rest em b4 that.

My alarm bells ring at "tiring". Usually stop them unless it's a particularly inappropriate spot at a very inconvenient time.

 

[Someone jog my memory]

It is, indeed, 1 Training - Roadblock.

Cheers.

[Someone jog my memory]

Many years ago when I first played CMBN, there was a a first scenario I played that I think I was directed to after Basic Training. Couple of American platoon, possibly three. A handful of Shermans. Some hedgerows. A small farm to the left. Don't think there was any offboard arty. Pretty simple stuff. On that fairly useless description, anyone remember what it was?

Basically my son has taken an interest in playing and I thought it'd be a good one to start with (as I did).

Cheers

[Installing my old, old copy on new PC]

Thanks for the swift reply.

So I install the disc (which then won't launch), then purchase upgrade and run it's installer? No patches first or anything?

[Installing my old, old copy on new PC]

Bought a new PC a couple of years back. My disc of CMBN was bought in 2011 and installed on a previous PC and a laptop (never uninstalled on either) but I recalled you could run it on three machines. Thought I'd never track down my key but found it in my account here from when I first downloaded (assume it's still valid).

Ran the disc. Never asked for key or Internet connection. Hit "Finished" and got "UI not found... Application will be terminated."

I've now found an archived thread about this and Windows 10. It seems I need to upgrade to a later version. Can I do that if I haven't managed to install the old version? Would it be easier to just buy a newer version (or will I encounter the same problem with Windows 10?).

Apologies for my lack of IT experience here.