noob
-
Posts
1,934 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by noob
-
-
Could anyone designing a scenario create exit zones for either side in the relevant places, this will avoid the trapping of ineffective units on the map, and possibly contributing to the opponents score.
-
Could anyone designing a scenario create exit zones for either side in the relevant places, this will avoid the trapping of ineffective units on the map, and possibly contributing to the opponents score.
-
19 hours ago, noob said:
It can be seen that the buttons to allow the mortar to create a cover arc, and to deploy their weapon once dismounted, are not available.
Ooops, my bad, the mortar is a light one, so it doesn't need to "deploy" in the traditional sense.
However, it should be able to create a cover arc, so that's still an issue.
-
Below are two screenshots from the scenario "GL In for a Pound" played on CMFI 1.20.
They show a truck at rest, and a mortar team, with a move order to dismount the truck.
It can be seen that the buttons to allow the mortar to create a cover arc, and to deploy their weapon once dismounted, are not available.
This happens with all the allied units, in all the vehicles in this scenario, apart from the Bren Carrier.
-
21 hours ago, IanL said:
Interesting. The vehicle that is itself armed is the one that allows the passengers to set a target arc.
At any rate during setup you can compensate thusly: with no orders for anyone involved dismount the passengers, give them a target arc, remount them and plot your moves. The passengers will maintain their cover arc orders as long as no other combat related orders are issued - which you cannot seem to do anyway.
Each time I created an arc for a non mounted unit, then mounted them, the arc would disappear. I tried to give them an arc while mounted, but the arc buttons were not present for mounted units in any vehicles but the Bren Carrier.
I placed squads in all the vehicles, with no move orders for the squads or the vehicles, then tried to give them arc orders. The arc buttons were only present for the squad in the bren carrier.
Once the first turn was completed, the squads in the jeep, and carriers, could create arcs, but the squads in the trucks could not.
-
In the ME battle "GL In for a Pound", there are five different types of non tank vehicles on the Allied side.
A Bedford, a Morris, a Bren Carrier, a Universal Carrier, and a Jeep.If each vehicle is given a move path from the set up zone to outside of it, and the vehicle contains a squad, which has a move order to begin once the vehicle stops, only the squad in the Bren Carrier can create a target arc at the last waypoint of its move path.
This is particularily annoying if one wants to drive to a multi storey building, and drop off an observer, as their is no chance of stopping the unit from firing, unless it travels in a Bren Carrier.
-
The waypoints disappear during the playback, as once the next move turn after the playback is accessed, the waypoint shift is apparent, forcing me to replot.
Also, it only happens when I create two long travel paths, divided by one or more long short paths, when driving units through gaps in hedges, walls, etc, or to cut the corners of roads.One of the short path waypoints disappears, thus straightening out the travel line, resulting in a more severe turning circle, which throws out paused movement calculations for preceding vehicles, resulting in jams.
-
Thanks for the reply.
The situation arises when multiple waypoints are stacked on top of each other, irrespective of danger, or tight spots.
What I will do is play the same battle in hotseat mode, and recreate the traffic situation under safe conditions, and see if I get the same results.I'm aware of the pitfalls of multiple selections, so I always re check all my units paths before hitting the red button.
-
I have just played a CMBN battle that involved a lot of traffic management, and I was constantly dogged by waypoints that would shift position, or disappear.
Is this a bug ? -
The presentation was a work of art, shame the Allied defence was not as masterful.
-
Nobody said it was all exposed.
Ok, I just assumed that when the allied player said he was stranded out in the plains, my apologies.
You are correct in stating that the assaulting units cannot assume they have moved across their hex to the boundary with the enemy hex, this has to be done in CM.
-
I don't think you should allow CM battles where all the attackers deployment zone is exposed, you will only piss people off doing it that way.
In open terrain, the attackers deployment zone should be a touch lower to avoid this sort of thing, even if it's just a 50 - 100m strip at the edge of the DZ.
-
A nine man Axis squad can only be split into two parts, which means that if a two man AT team is created, one is left with a seven man team, with all the automatic weapons.
However, IMO it's more important to split the SMG's from the LMG's.
-
Good points made by all.
Regarding a standard split, I like separating the short range automatic weapons from the long range ones, because that way you avoid the situation where one weapon is out of its comfort zone, so the Assualt Team split is standard.
Regarding the weight factor if the SMG half team had fausts, I agree that would undermine their role as a fast and manouverable unit.
Therefore, taking into account all previous comments, I would like to modify my request to one that would enable the Axis squads to split again after an AT two man team has been created, then the SMG, LMG, and fausts could all be separate.
-
When I split axis squads using the assault team function, the panzerfausts are allocated to the half team with the MG42, and not the half team with the MP40's.
Given that panzerfausts are short range weapons, I think it would be more logical to give the MP40 half team the panzerfausts.
-
Oh noob is there a link to the PC Caen demo still?
I have added a signature link to the PzC Caen demo.
-
Thanks Noob and all you have done in the past and hopefully the future for the community.
Thanks....
-
The CMPzC test operations I had on the go have been cancelled. This is because of real life time constraints, which have also prohibited me from finishing the rules in the manual.
However, there is the ongoing development of COO, which, if successful, will make CMPzC redundant https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/combat-operations-overlord-game-group
If I get some time to finish the manual I will announce it on the forums, but there is enough finished material in the manual to allow players to use PzC as an operational layer for CM.
-
Use a Churchill IV, they can kill a Tiger from the front, thanks to the APDS rounds they carry.
-
Why don't just forbid CM battles which aren't valid PzC assaults?
I do, it's in the manual.
Strictly enforcing stacking limits, and a slightly more lethal artillery, might work well enough to avoid those huge battles.Stacking limits are enforced by the PzC game, and can be modified to whatever value one wishes. In the case of my rules, I recommend reducing the stacking limit to 600 - 700. This, along with the one hex versus one hex only rule, means that no CM battle can have more than a supported battalion per side.
-
Activating the Alternative Indirect Fire resolution optional rule might not be a bad idea at all.
I agree.........
-
CW Wittmann's Demise.
-
It all went horribly wrong for this SWP not long after...
It was worth losing it just for that moment :- )
-
Buttoned HT, on fast move, behind enemy lines.
Oops, looks like it's curtains for the beans in this particular can.
But one bean jumps to the fore.
Thank you, and goodnight.
What I liked about this action was the MG gunner sitting down again :- )
A request to all scenario designers
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
Could anyone designing a scenario create exit zones for either side in the relevant places, this will avoid the trapping of ineffective units on the map, and possibly contributing to the opponents score.