noob

Interesting logic, so you think that anybody that criticises your theory is really sending out a smokescreen to cover for their unethical behaviour, this implies that you think that because you could not possibly be wrong there must be something wrong with the critic. If you are saying a persons personality comes out in the way they play a game then that could be said about anything a person does, so you might as well be saying the grass is green, hardly a profound insight. Also i would say that real life is a far greater test of character than any game because its real life that builds our characters, or at least thats what i think, i could be wrong. So now you are saying that everyone including ourselves arent trustworthy, which makes your golf test pointless if everyone is potentially corruptable. Usually when people say things like "most of us" they are usually talking about themselves only.

What happens if you dont catch them cheating ?, it doesnt mean they are not, so your test is flawed, and what if your new friends dont want to play golf, how do you test them then ? And why the hell would you want to test whether people are trustworthy or not unless you are a spy, paranoid or just really unlucky when it comes to making friends. Out of all the home spun wisdom that gets propogated in forums this is definately high on the list of the stupid and wierd variety.

Here is the third picture.

Thanks for showing an interest, it's going really well, it only took ten days from team recruitment, deployment and movement to the first round of CM battles so my first goal was achieved, to create a system thats simple and quick. One unforseen occurence which i couldn't of scripted better was that both teams commanders are servicemen which adds a certain spice to the events. At the moment there are three CM battles progressing quite quickly, here are some screenshots, one of the area of operations and three showing the CM battlemaps of the first contacts from the perspective of the advancing Axis forces. The CM battlemaps are 2 x 1 km and represent the two operational hexes the opposing forces occupy. The six hexes with walls represent a fortified line so the Allied CM units occupying any of those hexes get trenches, barbed wire, sandbags and foxholes in the event of a CM battle. Its been such a learning process running this that ive nearly finished a revised version of the system which simplifies it even further, the object being that anybody that fancies themselves as an umpire should be able to run it with the minimum paperwork for themselves and the players, in fact most information passing between the players and umpire will be pictorial so all thats needed is a decent paint package and they are ready to go.

Well having no knowledge of the realities of artillery missions i will defer to the manual, i'm just relieved it's not a bug, at least now i can take steps to avoid the situation happening again.

Thanks for directing me to the manual, if its in the book its in the game, my knowledge of the realities of artillery spotting are non existant so as long as i know its meant to happen im ok with that, however there wasnt much i could do as my spotter was in a safe place and just got unlucky by being in a building next to a couple of tanks my opponent targetted with some heavy artillery, i guess the lesson there is to keep your spotter away from potential targets. My spotter still has a radio and im happy with the mission to carry on, i was just a bit suprised and frustrated that i couldnt access it just in case i did want to adjust it if it fell short.

So you are saying that if a spotter calls a mission and then gets killed the mission becomes locked to the corpse even if a superior officer decides to cancel it ? sounds like a bug to me. A mission can be called from a safe rear area with long LOS anytime during the battle so to assume that the spotter was in a dangerous position is erroneous and your tone is also a touch patronising.

One of the guys in the HQ unit is dead so i guess it is a bug as i have a Battalion Commander that should be able to override his subordinates orders i would of thought.

In a game im playing i have a HQ unit that has set up two off map mortars to do an area fire mission with a 10 min delay. During the countdown the HQ unit was panicked by an artillery blast near the building it was in but it has recovered now, however i cannot access my artillery orders, it says denied and busy in the mortar picture box, when i try accessing it through another HQ unit it shows me a go to spotter button which takes me back to the spotting HQ unit but still with no access to adjust or cease the barrage. I'm assuming something has screwed up because the spotting unit went through a drastic morale swing, has anybody else experienced this ?

I meant these Blasters, im being silly.

What about Blasters then ?

Light sabres please.

Teleportation or time travel, both work fine IMO.

Just wait until the Eastern front module, then every player playing the Russians will claim their lone unarmed jeep speeding towards the enemy lines was a penal unit, and they would have a point

Any advance with units that can fight seems fine to me, it's when people use expendable unarmed vehicles to trigger combat units that i use the term "gamey".

I would say that as long as the vehicle is armed and moves cautiously one would be acceptable.

This comment is also supported in the German field manual, groups of armored cars or platoons / companies of bike riders were sent out on recce missions with at least one radio car or carrier to relay information back to the main body, the recce units were expected to be able to conduct a fighting withdrawal or force back a weaker opponent so basically they needed to be numerous, armed and have radio communications.

The specific situation i was referring to was that the player knew there were enemy units in the area he drove the Kubelwagen, it was basically a suicide mission to trigger guns. As mentioned in the link i posted in a reply according to the field manuals the Germans used horses, bicycles and armored cars to scout, all of which allowed the scouting units to return fire if engaged, the bicycle scouts could be up to company strength but were rarely used if the enemy was suspected of being a large formation unless the terrain was to restrictive to armored cars which were the units of choice in such missions. A single Kubelwagen with a driver cannot practically engage the enemy if spotted so it would not constitute a viable scout unit in WW2, so if one wanted to add some realism to a CM battle the use of non armed vehicles as advanced scouts would have to be banned. Armored cars, half tracks and foot units would all be able to defend themselves if attacked so they would all constitute a viable advance scout unit. As for modern warfare the same rule would apply as i inagine most soft skinned vehicles used as an advance unit in combat have at least a mounted MG to protect themselves.

Firstly as to "who cares", you obviously do and everybody that has responded to this post. Secondly, do not take this thread personaly, no one is telling you how to play CM, the discussions are trying to determine a set of values for what is unrealistic which is perfectly reasonable, if this thread was a petition to CM to somehow restrict the use of ceratin units in the next patch i could understand your ire, but it isn't so calm down.

Here is a link to website containing WW2 intelligence articles. http://www.lonesentry.com/intelbulletin/index_subject.html Enjoy.

Here is a link to an article that claims to be from a captured German field manual on recon. http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/reconge/index.html According to the manual there are three different forms of transport used by German recon units, horses, bicycles and armored cars, allthough right at the end of the section it says this. "[1] Against a major opponent, German reconnaissance units seldom use bicycles unless the terrain makes this absolutely necessary." In short all the different forms of recon transport mentioned in the manual allow the units using them to conduct offensive or defensive operations should they need to, so according to this field manual a Kubelwagen being unarmed would be insufficient to carry out the type of recon necessary for an advancing force.

As far as im concerned certain vehicles were designed for certain tasks, and i'm going to make a big assumption here but i think the armored car and the half track were designed for first contact in a known hostile area, so although there might be exceptions in real life it seems reasonable to me to ban kubelwagens from performing the duties an armored car or Half track should. Also in an operation between two teams of players you do need to have a list of gamey tactics to avoid a mutiny by one side or the other

The situation in the games i am overseeing is that the attacker knows that the enemy will be in the immediate vicinity i.e. within 1 Kilometer so im banning it

Would the community regard the use of Kubelwagens as scout vehicles as a gamey tactic, i'm running an operation as an umpire and i have the option to ban the practice but i want some confirmation first, if they were used as bait in real life then fair enough but i doubt it, what say you all ?

Checkout my signature for a system i have created for campaigning with Combat Mission. Im running one at the moment called CMBN Noramndy 44 with two teams of seven players and me as the umpire, its taken ten days from getting the teams together, them submitting their operational moves, and the first contacts and CM PBEM battle files sent out.