Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

JoMac

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,262

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by JoMac

    Bug and stuff thread

    in Combat Mission Fortress Italy

    Posted

    Using the new R2V Module and I'm in a PBEM, QB Meeting, Dec 43' as Germans, and both me and opponent are using the 'Suggestion' Box only to purchase Formations...About 50% of the time when I use the 'Suggestion' Box  I can get anywhere from 1 to 5 Panther Pillbox.

    I thought Fortifications like this are only used in Attack/Assault formations ?

    Joe

    0

    Axis Meeting Engagements w/Panther Pillbox

    in Combat Mission Fortress Italy

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    Using the new R2V Module and I'm in a PBEM, QB Meeting, Dec 43' as Germans, and both me and opponent are using the 'Suggestion' Box only to purchase Formations...About 50% of the time when I use the 'Suggestion' Box  I can get anywhere from 1 to 5 Panther Pillbox.

    I thought Fortifications like this are only used in Attack/Assault formations ?

    Joe

    0

    CM WWII: Are tanks "overpowered"?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    19 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

    But should they also fire left and right when they are not doing area fire, but firing against actively spotted infantry in the open?

    I'm assuming it's a gameplay balance thing, where they don't want infantry to be massively lethal.

    But that's usually handled by giving soldiers a "saving throw" to represent micro terrain. I think it looks a bit odd to have several LMG42 firing at 3-400 metres against an enemy team in the open and not hitting anything for several minutes.

    What I mean is that Infantry 'Area-Fire' more or less by default (not just by giving the specific CM Order) and should have their Small Arms (especially MG's) fire center-left-right, etc, along with giving appropriate 'Savings Rolls'...Yes, and technically, Small Arms should be firing over several minutes and not hitting anything (at least slow down when targets are less visible, in cover or falling-back).

    Keep in mind, I'm the guy who still thinks Small Arms (especially MG's), Arty, HE Direct Fire in CM are too deadly.

    0

    CM WWII: Are tanks "overpowered"?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    8 minutes ago, Kaunitz said:
    Quote

    Also keep in mind, ALL things in CM happen too quickly (more of a time compression) giving 3x fold more casualties then there should be...

    To be honest I don't buy the "time compression" argument anymore. If time was compressed, then why don't units run out of ammo three times faster, why don't units reload more quickly (cover narrow arcs of fire more reliably), why don't they move three times faster, etc. etc. "Time compression" is just the standard go-to argument whenever the topic "excessive infantry casualties" pops up. But this is not the result of time compression. It's the result of many factors, some of which are discussed here.

    That's just it...We use the 'Time Compression' or 'Game Balance arguments' to help us 'Sleep Better at Night, or Not' :-)

    0

    CM WWII: Are tanks "overpowered"?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    Try setting up a test. I think you will find tank MGs are much more accurate on both close and long distances than deployed infantry MGs. When tanks fire (both main gun and HMG) it seems they always point the gun directly at the enemy, but they just need to get the range right. With infantry MGs, they fire many bursts much to the left and right of the target.

    Yes, and since last patch, Vehicle MG's are firing even more so then before causing even more pin-point hits on Inf...At least Inf MG's are realistically firing both left and right representing Area-Fire.

    0

    CM WWII: Are tanks "overpowered"?

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    On ‎11‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 5:58 AM, Kaunitz said:
    2 hours ago, Kaunitz said:

    I thought I need to post this separatedly, as it is so important and I can't edit the initial post: 

    My point about the lack of AT close combat means is not valid. As it turns out, ordinary grenades are very effective in close combat against tanks in CM. 2-3 grenades will destroy the tracks and may even knock out a tank. In my quick test (US infantry in CM:FB), 3 ordinary HE grenades knocked out a Tiger somehow. I'm not quite sure how, as no hit info shows up in "grenade close combat" and the only damaged/destroyed part of the tank were the tracks. Anyway I think it's safe to conclude that weapons for anti tank close combat (mines, cocktails) are represented by ordinary grenades?

    Also keep in mind, ALL things in CM happen too quickly (more of a time compression) giving 3x fold more casualties then there should be...

    You are allowed to do what you want, anywhere, at anytime (this goes for both Armor & Inf)...ex, Armor can be too deadly at range (not enough cover for Trenches), but in turn Inf will become too deadly just by throwing a few hand grenades at armor at close range, and KO'ing within seconds.

     

     

     

    0

    New issue in 4.02? Troops reluctant to fire on spotted enemies

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 4:11 AM, Bulletpoint said:

    Since 4.02, I'm seeing several cases of my troops deciding to not open fire on enemy troops, even though they are actively spotted and within range.

    In the beginning, I thought it might be a case of the targets being out of range, but while designing a new scenario, I'm definitely seeing several cases of infantry not shooting at enemies in forests at 80m range, and armoured cars not firing on infantry at the range of some hundred metres.

    The funny thing is that I can manually order them to fire, and then they start shooting. So they definitely have LOS and LOF. They just decide not to use it.

    Has the TacAI targeting logic been tweaked recently?

    Anyone else seeing the same thing?

    If there's interest, I can of course provide save games, but I wanted to hear if it's something other people have noticed.

    I'm posting this in the general forum, because I think it might be a fundamental thing with 4.02, but I'm seeing the behaviour in CMFB.

    I generally use CMBN (now with 4.02) to Test Game Components, etc...

    I would Setup a Squad vs enemy Squad 250-300 meters apart, stationary, Open Flat Terrain, troops fire themselves,  just to see what happens during a 15 minute Fire-Fight...The Troops would open fire for 1-2 minutes, then decide to stop shooting for most rest of the game, even when there are 2-3 troops on either side still coming in and out of LOS every turn.

    I remember in older versions of CMBN with exact same conditions above, troops would shoot more often every turn and with more LOS of individual troops until just about everyone was KIA/WIA.

    So...Maybe some sort of issue with 4.02, or possibly BF decided to make troops more conscious on when to fire (sort of J Bennett's thoughts) to give a better overall representation of Lower Casualties during a ranging Firefight ?

     

     

    1

    PBEM Opponents...WWII Titles

    in CM2 Opponent Finder

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    Hello Guys,

    Looking for a couple PBEM Opponents for any of the WWII Titles (all modules)...Small Meeting Engagements Mixed Random Maps & Units, etc...I Use Dropbox for Communication & Game Files along with House Rules...PM or respond back below.

    Joe

    0

    Stuarts 37mm vs PzIVH

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    16 hours ago, user1000 said:

    Maybe an elevation jam on the barrel? If so tank is useless and crew would bail.

     

    I tired this in a scenario with stuart hidden in tall hedge, pz ivH coming at it down the road head on. The hits on the mantle do not show as visible marks.  Stuart disables it every time.

    Yeah, and think it might be a problem...I figure 1 in 3/4 rounds would hit the Turret Mantle and cause little or no Penetration Damage...If it hits the Turret Face (50-60mm Armor), then Partial Penetrations and some damage...If it hits the Gun Sleeve Box, which is probably only 50mm Armor (Box where the Gun meets Turret Mantle), then I also think Partial Penetrations and some damage.

    0

    Stuarts 37mm vs PzIVH

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    I have been playing around with some QB's and in numerous occasions  that the Stuarts 37mm is penetrating/partial penetrating the front of the PzIVH Mantle (which should have around 80-88mm armor) anywhere from 500-1000 meters, and causing it to either destroy the Optics/Gun or causing a Crew Casualty.

    I could understand hitting close to the Optics and taking it out, but actual penetration and taking out the Gun ?...I assume CM simulates the difference between the Turret Face (which the Stuart can partial or fully penetrate), and the Turret Mantle (which I'm not sure if Stuart can penetrate).

    Thoughts..?

    0

    Frostbite Infantry

    in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    Well, in-game troops in detrimental weather will eventually get tired & fatigued (unfortunately, it doesn't effect weapon capability) more quickly (compared to good weather).

    Your best bet to represent this in-game is to have troops in bad weather in an already "Weakened" state or give all troops an additional -1 rating.

    0

    Headcount - Please Fix It!

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    6 hours ago, RockinHarry said:

    while I generally like bits of all the randomness in the game, the 50% headcount issue is one to me as well for a particular case. I tend to use snipers (teams) in my missions more oftenly, particularly in AIP hands. Yet I want a single guy and get rid of the spotter in that team for stealth and better, more flexible in tile positioning. Otherwise the spotter might take just that most preferable window position (building example) that allows the actual sniper to have perfect LOS/LOF to that most desired keyholed enemy map area. Also a two men team gets more easily and quicker spotted by any enemy no matter the range. So more oftenly than not the random reappearance of the spotter in a set 50% crew strength team somewhat defeats my various AIP optimization purposes. :mellow:

    Interesting...You would think by Game Default a 1 or 2 Man Team would be difficult (regardless), Fire Teams a little easier, and Squads much more easier to spot.

    0

    Irrational Behaviour

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted · Edited by JoMc67

    Now, what I want to know...Are Units Running away in due time depending if Green, Vet and in what types of Cover....I think I remember someone saying that 'Green' troops in buildings are too resilient and most of the troops die in place before finally moving out of cover. This could also mean Vet troops will most likely die in place to the last man before leaving said cover ?

    I would figure  'Fortifications' in general would give most quality troops a higher resilience factor (fortification bonus if you will), but troops in lesser cover (woods, buildings, etc) would still have them run from cover in short time (a bit longer if Vet, etc). 

    0
×
×
  • Create New...