Statisoris
-
Posts
413 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Statisoris
-
-
Where the heck is BF, Steve could settle this sound contact thing so quickly. BF has been a little too absent from their community latley.
-
Before I started playingwith mostly human opponents I too thought ammo bearers were useless. In long battles where your forces take lots if casualties they become more useful. If the main team is knocked out or has sufficient ammo I use the bearer teams to treat casualties, collect special weapons and equipment from downed soldiers, aquire AT weapons and act as tank hunter teams and also as basic scouts if its needed.
-
You need Fraps, screen capture program. I use the full paid version which has full functionality. The free version only takes Bitmap images. Before I got Fraps, nothing else worked for CMBN screenshots. I tried lots of free program but no dice.
-
It surely is sort of compromise to the C2 in CMBN to abundantly equip german units with radios, when if fact there were none and runners and wire where the most prevalent means of communications in german infantry army.
In CMX1 there where command delays, to some extend also simulating runners and there was wire for certain FOs.
With single soldier modelling in CMBN, you can rule out runners, but when it comes to the eastern front at the latest, will we still see russians abundantly equipped with radios?
I really hope that BFC improves on the matter, as it´s one of the worst aspects of the current game system, no matter if the problem comes from not dumbing down from CMSF enough or with RT play in the way of getting WEGO improved.
As a matter of fact, C2 needs to be worked on to give it more resemblance to WW2 conditions. Until then, I don´t really care not seeing radio backpacks on german soldiers, as they mostly didn´t have them anyway.
I have a bad feeling that this "stick in a radio" C2 work around is here to stay, atleast for a very long time. Every time a valid concern like this is brought up, the usual answer is "It would be great and we would like to, but that feature would take us six months to code & test, won't significantly contribute to gameplay and so you can basically say we are not going to do it".
-
In my situation, I am PC and my opponent is running Mac. Our setup zones got switched. Somewhere on the boards, someone said that this is the situation in which the problem still occurs.
-
Are you running on a Mac? I've heard there are still problems with setup zone switching with Macs even after patch. I know there is in PBEM games atleast.
-
Stay far away from German 120mm mortars too. They were causing casualties to my guys at ridiculous distances yesterday.
-
Go away Ad spammer, someone kick this guy.
-
Check out this nice site for some detailed info on US vehicles. http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/index.html
-
While reading "Tigers In The Mud" about Otto Carius, I think I recall him stating a couple of times that mortar strikes to the engine deck messed up a couple tanks. Not sure what size Russian mortar they were though. Also, I know from a several real life accounts, HE artillery shells 150mm and over messed up tanks and crew pretty bad even in frontal hits. I have done tests in CMBN for artillery vs tanks. In my tests knocking out a tank was rare even from direct top hits from 155mm artillery. Usually the tanks would just get immobilized and all the equipment would get damaged. I noticed in the tests that Stugs, Stuh42 and PzIVs would get their tops penetrated the most often with resulting catastrophic kills.
-
I was hoping that was an attempt to draw Steve -the vicious rabbit (look at the bones!!) out of his den. He's been too quiet lately.
Your people call your name Steve! Come forth and address us, your unclean followers, we need your guidance!
-
It is frustrating to not be able to mount (non-sexually of course) certain vehicles.
I don't know man, some of those vehicle models are pretty hot.
-
Also for anyone who doesn't know, effect (Personnel), airburst via timed fuse, can be called in TRP areas as well as in preplanned barrages.
-
I have stopped using AT guns period...
I know what you mean. Its sad though because sometimes you really want to see those AT guns, infantry guns and other rarely used units on the field. Im thinking of setting up some matches where each player is given maybe 4 base force mixes by their adversary to choose from and they choose which they want. Something like 1) INFANTRY + must have some of any of the following. AT Guns, Inf Guns, Armored Cars, Wood Bunkers. I feel that might make matches a little more varied and let people try their hand at commanding a more natural force mix.
-
Your observations are pretty right on, here are mine
1) There is so little leeway for mistakes in a PBEM vs a decent player that all game bugs and quirks become very very annoying when they pop up.
2) I hate to admit it but when Im being beaten badly in a PBEM and there really is no decent chance for victory, those matches become much more of a chore and work than a fun game. I only continue the match bc of good sportsmanship but hate spending an hour of my day on a lost cause turn.
3) Artillery that takes less time to arrive is most effective in PBEM. On map 60/81mm mortars can be very effective in PBEM.
4) Agreed, TRPs are a must especially for heavier/long delay artillery.
5) Bunkers, trenches and foxholes are nearly useless vs a good attacker.
6) You've got to keep the pressure on and not give the other guy time to think. Every turn you are not attacking or maneuvering, you give the human defender more of an advantage.
7) Vs a good player with decent AT assets, maneuvering and succeeding at armored warfare is very difficult and nervewracking.
8) Smoke can be a lifesaver under the right wind/tactical conditions.
9) Hiding and not attacking "until you can see the whites of their eyes" seems to be very effective in bocage vs humans. Its also frustrating as hell, lol.
10) Resist the urge to bunch up your units, split squads, use overwatch and keep a close and ready reserve. I recently lost 50% and 75% of 2 platoons due to bunching and exposing too many guys at once.
-
Yes, the extra 50 points comes from the (C2) Command and Control links those units gain from being part of a larger organizational structure. The units gain (I think) morale and command check bonuses when in contact with the C2 chain.
-
AT guns change facing too slowly in game too.
-
I find placing AT guns behind bocage hit/miss. I would really like to do it but it seems like half the time the AT team can see and shoot small arms through it just fine, but the AT gun ends up with no line of fire out of their position. Same thing with deployable MGs sometimes.
-
Maybe because the US army at this stage of the war didn't have any? All they had were a few guys who were handy with a gun and might or might not have had experience with stalking game. There was no serious attempt at specialized training.
Now, the Germans did have that, but the number that they turned out was limited. Does anybody have any figures on how many were sent to the western front during the period covered by the game? I have yet to see them mentioned in historical documents. My impression is that there wouldn't have been enough for, say, every battalion to get one, which is probably the minimum needed to justify them showing up in CM.
Michael
I was speaking mostly about German snipers in my statement thats why I wrote (Atleast for Germans). I am aware that the US Army "snipers" did not have special training nor did they practice the true art of stalking/stealth.
-
Since the Commonwealth tanks won't get Cullin plows I have a feeling that BFC might ease up and allow Churchills to smash some bocage. Knowing the way BF does things though, it will only be low bocage that can get smashed by the Churchills.
-
I wonder why Battlefront decided to not implement a true sniper unit. Was there some technical reason that an accurate and stealthy(for germans atleast) sniper could not be implemented? Maybe they settled on marksman/sharpshooters because they feared that actual snipers would be used as uber weapons in unhistorical numbers.
-
He might load up on 60mm mortars which can move up and direct fire. Even if they are called in, it only takes ~4 min for those to start falling if indirect fired. Same goes for on map 81mm which can be called in indirect in about 5 mins. Lack of mobility is almost always, eventually a bad thing on the battlefield, even if you are not facing any artillery.
On a different note, I have found it very useful when playing with non-armored (no halftracks) infantry, to purchase a couple trucks and strip them of all ammo during setup. It will give your squads staying power if they have a few hundred more rounds with them. US truck crews come with a set of binoculars so after u strip their trucks you can use them as makeshift scouts, im not sure if german truck crews have binoculars, I know they are better armed vs US though.
-
Since you can't have panthers I would purchase some PzIVs and upgrade their experience and leadership to give them the edge they need to make up for lack of armor. You will definitely need a mobile defense on such a large map with so many points. Your opponent is sure to purchase significant arty with his wad if points and so anything immobile like bunkers and AT guns will eventually get pounded.
-
For personal knowledge and for scenario design reasons I was wondering where in the ToE and in what numbers were US Army snipers assigned?
Also, does anyone know if US Army snipers went forward for scouting or did they usually stay on the front line and fight with the infantry?
HQ Attributes and Subordinate Units
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
I too would like clarification on all of this. So many aspects of CM are really mysterious. While we are on the mysterious, do shadows provide concealment and What's the difference between the Leader vs Commander infantry specialties?