J Ruddy

jacobs_ladder2, I see you are in Canada. D-Day Dodgers: Canadians in Italy by Dan Dancocks is one important book in my library that isn't mentioned here. It is completely from the Canadian point of view and well worth the read.

Like I said before - you can never stop piracy. (Just like 128bit encryption is not 100% safe) Nothing is unbreakable, nothing is 100% safe. If it were my software company (which it isn't) I'd add CD keys to the CD's, find bargain priced unobtrusive cd protection and implement a manditory on-line registration process before PBEM and TCP/IP Multiplayer game hosting is possible. (lets face it, if you don't have internet, you ain't playing PBEM) Put on the box "An internet connection is required to play PBEM and TCP/IP Multiplayer. So now you have a three layer protection to defeat. No doubt someone will crack it eventually, but I still stand by my earlier statement that big sellers like BF2 are the ones the punks really like to crack. What this scheme does is keep usually honest Joe Gamer from calling up his buddy and saying - "Man this is a great game, I'll burn you a copy!"

This thread has been spawned off of one of the Newbie threads. Steve - is there going to be a Quick Tips dialog in CMX2. If so, maybe we (the community) can brainstorm some ideas for content? For example: Support Armour with Infantry. Armoured vehicles are susceptible to attack by man portable anti-tank weapons and anti-tank gun emplacements. By supporting armour with Infantry you provide the ability to effectively counter these threats. I know there are a lot of more knowledgeable people on this board than myself, if it's ok with BFC, we can put our idea's forward and save you the time and effort. (You'd only have to edit for consistency/spelling and weed out the bad ones) waddayathink?

I also agree with Tom. The game mechanics and user interface should be fairly intuitive and a first timer shouldn't be overwhelmed by too much information or too many clicks. However, the game shouldn't contain a tutorial on tactics. So, "This is how you deploy your units." "This is how you check their firepower / penetration values." "This is how you spot for Artillery." "This is Shoot and Scoot" etc... is all GOOD. "You shouldn't assault the trench with your Clam LPG (Light pearl gun) squad.", "Your 2lb Gun will not defeat the frontal armour of the Space Lobster.", "You are an idiot for isolating your 2nd Gnome Engineer Squad." etc... is all BAD. [Edit] I gave this a bit more thought and *maybe* a quick blurb on the roles of different units in a combined arms action could be helpful for newbies. Start of Battle Quick Tips: Support Infantry with Armour Support Armour with Infantry (that aught to confuse them!) Use Indirect and Direct HE to Suppress Enemy Infantry ? [ September 16, 2005, 06:42 AM: Message edited by: J Ruddy ]

Of course this would open up the opportunity to cheat in a PBEM game as you could save the game as a scenario and view your opponants layout. I imagine there would have to be some kind of red flag that would need to be sent to the other player(s) (still hoping for 4 player) to let them know you've created a scenario from the battle.

I think a few other posts mentioned this: I would like to be able to save a battle as a new Scenario. In your case, Abbott, you would save your game in the deployment phase as a new scenario. Then you could go back, open the scenario and play on the opposing side with the exact units that the AI (or your opponant) had.

I agree that the TACT AI could be a bit smarter when engaging armour with an AT team. But I also think that we still want to leave some of the decisions up to the player. So For Bazooka / Piat / Panzerschreck / Karl G etc... I'd like to see: - More intelligent targeting - if a tank is coming up the road, and you know you can not possibly take it out with a frontal hit, don't fire until you get a flank shot. This can be done in CMX1 to some extent by setting your cover arc to the area where you think you will get a side shot. - Add a shoot and scoot order. This is how modern CF Karl G teams operate, because the massive back blast reveals your position and you can expect a pretty strong reaction if you miss. (Or if your target is supported by infantry). The sequene of actions would be: Hide, Cover Arc, Aquire Target, Fire, Run like Hell. (I know the Karl G is hardly modern, but I believe our (Canadian) reserve units still use them. This applies to any other of the one man portabe anti-tank tubes)

Disclaimer - CMBB and CMAK are possibly the best tactical wargames I've ever played on the PC. Not to flog a dead horse - but I tried CMAK East Africa 1940 - Italians Assaulting British. I purchased units for the the AI (Brits) so I could be sure of an Apples to Apples comparison to my CMBB games from yesterday. One trench is in an OK position, the other... well... not so much. The 2lb Pillbox is in a rather silly position as there is a small rise in front of it and it can't see down map at all. The choice minefield location is also a bit odd. (unless the ai is trying to keep its own troops from fleeing in that direction.) I would love to see the AI place units for newbies in CMX2, but in this specific case it may confuse them more than anything. Maybe the old saying is true, if you can't beat them, confuse them?

Keep in mind I'm a Canuck and this was about 15 years ago - I'm hoping things have changed. Bah - I was a radio technician - what the hell did I know, I just sat in my 5/4 ton playing with broken radios... lots of broken radios... I don't even know how they'd model Chemical agents, I've been thinking about it for a couple of hours now, and I think it is a non-starter. If we were talking at a batallion scale, things would be different

I haven't seen any posts on this yet. I'm not sure if it fits in to a Company sized wargame or not. Specifically I was thinking of Modern and WWI combat, and simple chemical weapons. Will CMX2 be able to handle clouds of chemical weaponry? If I remember my NBC training correctly, if a suspected biological or chemical attack was happening one poor sucker would be selected to be the canary, I think the term was half-down or something, and would not have his mask on while the rest of the section sat and waited to see if he would do the 'funky chicken' Anyways, is it in the scope of CMX2?

Hi Bewildered, Just a reminder that in the interest of stopping us from killing each other in wicked flame wars about government spending and the role of war in a modern civilized society, there is a "No Politics Allowed" rule. War sucks! Down with Greed! Viva Canada!!!!!!

Thanks for the tip! I haven't tried playing single player in CMAK very much, mostly TCP/IP. The next time I'm bored I'll try playing black shirts against Brits in Crete or something equallt interesting and see what the STRAT AI does.

Dang! I left my cheat sheets at home. Assuming 75mm APC M61 munitions, and the ultimate goal of penetrating the Tiger's 80mm @ approx 90 degree armour, I would have to guesstimate under 100 meters would be ideal. [ September 15, 2005, 01:44 PM: Message edited by: J Ruddy ]

God! I hope the Strat AI is improved! Last night I played a CMBB QB for a lark against AI - 1945 Germans Assaulting Russians 400 points. The silly AI bought all the wrong things and placed them in the worst possible locations. (su-76's up front and in the open, BA-64's running around behind the line for no apparant reason, the limited amount of infantry was set up pretty good) I was being pretty gamey and picked a Brummbar and a Panther and a green Inf Platoon (total 688 points) the Computer Player didn't stand a chance. Anyways - if the Strat AI can do a decent job of placing units, then I am all for an auto-deploy. btw, after disgracing the AI, I ran the game again, only this time I picked the AI's troops and didn't buy 'gamey' stuff for myself - the silly AI put a 76mm pillbox behind (yes BEHIND) a house. grr...

If you are lucky you will get penetration. If you are unlucky you will have a perforation.

OK - Thanks for the clarification Steve! I'll leave the previous post as is as an example of what not to expect.

Wow - I though this thread would be locked by now. My initial prediction was a bit tongue in cheek to get folks going (my tongue - my cheek) So I guess I put down my official guess: - there's no horses, so pre WWI is out. - Steve is telling us it *might* not be WWII - so it is probably WWII - There's been a few guesses of BotB, or Americans in Normandy. If it is WWII I agree, and I guess I'll have to be the Germans until the commonwealth is represented... But there's been hints of Reactive Armour modelling etc... So now I'm thinking it may just be modern. (Leveraging cross sales off the popularity of BF2 & AA) It would make sense as far as developing modules. CM:Modern Battles - Module: Gulf War #1 - Module: Gulf War #2 - Module: Six Day War (OK not exactly modern is it?) - Module: Soviets in Afghanistan - Module: Bay of Pigs - Module: Yugoslavia (Hypothetical) - Module: Invasion North Korea - 2008 - Module: WWIII in Europe - 1982 - module: Middle East Burning - 2006

I think you forgot your sarcasm tags...

Thank you for correcting my feeble attempt at butchering the German language.

Because YOU are NOT the crew, you are the commander. </font>

I can hear the conversation: "You have 50 minutes to take hill 117" "Yes sir!" (49 minutes later) "er... sir? Can I have another 20 minutes please?" "I don't know, son, what does Jerry say?" "What do you say, Gerhard?" "Nein! Amerikanisch Hund!

OK - bad example (or bad commander) (or bad situation) (or bad revenge on the tank crew who stole all of my looted Vodka!) If memory serves, one of the bones was that BF was hoping to implement systems damage - so lets say in the brief tank exchange some internal flaking fried the radio...

Indirect FF is a no brainer, but to follow up an earlier thread on MultiPLayer/Batallion command, I am wondering about single/two player direct friendly fire within the Tac-AI. One example is: (East Front - Urban Combat) I have a captured T34 (radioless) that I send ahead to scout out a blind alley. The T34/76 disappears around the corner and engages a Russian T34/76. As the battle progresses a T34/76 tank exits from the blind alley. Having a 'Battle God View' I know this is my tank. But my Wespe crew 300M away doesn't. They are not in contact with the tank and they can't be 100% sure if it is friend or foe. What do they do? A Wespe has no chance of taking a direct hit from the Russian 76. I imagine they examine the markings on the turret, is it a German cross? Do they misidentify the markings and fire on their own tank? Is this even in the scope of CMX2? I think that a Pre 1900 type battle, where Volleys were fired, if you are agressive enough to charge your cavalry in to a unit that you are also firing volleys into, that some kind of FF would be required to avoid 'gamey' play (Charging Cavalry in front of a firing friendly unit for example) Finally, if >2 player multiplayer play is implemented at some point and some Green Yank in an M10 misidentifies another players British Cromwell as a Panzer III, could he shoot first, ask questions later...? (Imagine the radio chatter! Cease Fire!!! Cease Fire!!! What the (bleep!)... Bloody Yanks!!!)

For Quick Games anything is better than what we have in CMX1 (which is nothing). If they do put in an Auto-Map creator, I would also like to be able to override the Map file in my scenario's so that I could put in a scanned sketch or hand made topo-map instead.

I don't think this level of detail needs to be handled in CMX2. Units can be pinned for a number of reasons, tending to the wounded can be abstracted by the pinned status of a unit. All casualties should be static, maybe with the possibility of surrendering when the enemy overuns their position.