slysniper
-
Posts
3,916 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
Posts posted by slysniper
-
-
Actually, I did some testing to see how effective arty is in WWII
vs the same size arty in CMSF
My test was to run armor through arty barrages and see how effective it was. There was no point targeting envolved.
I was actually very pleased with how much armor was damaged in the WWII test. A few lucky kills and many more immobilized.
The modern era stuff , the tanks were pretty immune.
Of course there is precision arty that is very effective vs stationary tanks in the new era stuff.
But in general, the results looked pretty realistic in the testing I done to what I understand for what one should expect.
-
foxholes and trenches will also work well against direct fire with the hide and pause set on the unit.
The issue of course being that they are worthless as to returning fire.
But the tactic I use often in h2h fights is, Hide my men and let the enemy blast away, especially if I have a trench system.
I can crawl my men away from pinning type of effects.
The important part is, having other friendlies, normally farther away. concealed but keeping a eye on the enemy and set to open up on any enemy unit wanting to rush the defenses.
I have many a win because the enemy thinks they have my men pinned, they rush my trenches. I see the attack and unhide my units in the trenches and engage the enemy at close range.
guess who wins the fire fight in those situations.
-
I think the foxhole and trench thing will never go away.
I know for me the first few times I ran troops to these features hoping to save their lives from some type of arty attack and feeling very disappointed after the event.
But I am much older and wiser now.
also instead of asking others to do test (learn to test things yourself) really you can do it.
OK, I have learned that these features work great, only if you place hide on your units, I also put pause on them. With those two settings. Your men are very well protected.
Test it for yourselves and you will see a major difference.
But in general, the men will have a tendency to stick their heads up if not on hide. (The pause is a good way of preventing any coward from wanting to crawl out of there and make some fleeing move.)
the test is easy, place two identical groups on a map, hit them with whatever arty you think is a good example and set the one group with my discussed settings and the others without.
The results are drastically different
-
Adding new units from another nation is what makes a module just that for me. If they do nothing more than add a few units to a existing country I am disappointed. That feels like nothing more than a scenario pack in a way.
-
Most of the Scenarios focus on the new available units.
If you have no interest in them, then I can see why you lack a desire for the game.
The scenarios that are placed in any of the games are generally a lot higher in quality than the after release ones and 3rd party stuff, in that they are reviewed and worked and reworked many times. I generally have a few that I love from each game release.
There are a few really chose ones on this game release also, but I still have plenty to play before I can say which are my favorite.
For me, I could care less about which units I have or what time frame, I look for being given a battle that I have not played before that gives me a different type of challenge than what I have had to deal with in the past.
That can be done with one of a kind terrain, units with a different mix of weapons from what I am accustomed to playing with and things like that.
In that sense, this module delivers
-
Interesting, because someone is not actively playing the game and don't really care about updating the engine. When the later version of the game gets new material, they feel they should get the later version of the game for free. With the purchase of the material.
Where as BF sees it as they offer products for the latest version of their products.
Really, Ok, maybe it is a little harsh to the casual player that does not use the product much. But If $10 is the make or break of them buying the latest material and version of the game, then I doubt they are serious about buying the game anyway.
And would anyone not serious about buying the game even be on this site.
So get you $10 extra and get the game and start playing.
(dress up like a beggar and get the money for the whole game in a hour or 2) you will have better luck doing that than getting BF to change how they sell their product.
-
The best trick I have learned is to use the target and move commands together.
here is what I mean.
What can the enemy unit see. Example - I know the location of a enemy tank. I take one of my tanks and plot a move to the enemy tank location.
when that point is plotted, I then use target command from that point and I can see what is indicated from there as blue line visible.
(just remember to clear these commands after getting the info.)
Where will I be able to move to and for sure see the enemy.
(same as above but I am targeting the area I think I want to move to, when I see the blue line I know I have a spot that will likely give me my visual I want.)
Anyway, a very painful way of doing it, I don't use it much, but when its a critical situation I want to get right and it really matters. its the best way to get good results.
-
it time to start placing your guesses as to when it will be released.
I assume they are wanting it out of their hair before the Holidays here.
-
17 hours ago, weapon2010 said:
why would you talk about it on another site?
A few good men (Site) is pretty much centered on this game, yes there is other things there also, but the majority of activity is CMX2.
So yes there is other locations where discussions are had about the game, but the impact is the same everywhere, seldom is there a present need for much discussion since most everyone understands what they are dealing with and know what to expect.
But anytime there is a newer player, there is questions that they generally ask, but the answers are quick and precise since most on any of the sites can give a good explanation.
So no long discussions as when a game is new and many are putting out concepts instead of facts as to how they think the game plays.
-
Does anyone actually talk about CMX2 anymore.
Not really, especially if on another site.
Face it , its a system that now has been around for many years. There is not going to be any great new or major changes.
For those of us that like the game and the system, its a time where us die-hard players get some new toys or features to let us
play around with a new scene as to area of the conflict, but no, its not a brand new toy that is going to pull in a bunch of new enthusiasm.
Until a CMx3 engine comes out with all sorts of new approaches to the same old challenge of how best to reflect combat as to how it actually plays out will we see any massive wave of forum discussions and tons of debate and discussion on how that system could be improved to do it even better.
But when a new engine ever does come, it will be as different as CMx1 was to CMx2
and I am sure that magically there will be plenty of activity on the forum from long lost players and new players that we have never seen before.
-
The details that these games go to, really does create problems as to getting things right and how fast the work gets done.
But keep in mind, I bet you if we looked at all the request over the years, its the players that have requested most of these details, and still do.
I bet you I can find 50 additional things player are still requesting to be added to these games.
So if there is delays trying to get it right, you can blame the player that buy the game as much as you can blame BF for trying to provide such detail.
November is a good month ( most of us are starting to be indoors much more)
-
The copy command would not be a exact copy in my mind, it would be a duplicate path with the way points at the exact location of the unit that you have selected to match.
So the only path difference would be the first one, since the units do not start in the same location. The first path would have to be plotted to the first known way point that had been copied.
So this leads to another likely need, adjusting the path once you have it. We can slide waypoints presently, but being able to add waypoint along any portion of the path is a tool which we lack.
-
Well, add this to the concept, I think it was common practice in WWII for all jeeps in combat areas to remove the glass. No it had no bullet stopping capabilities, but was causing nasty injuries, so it was directed by high command for units to remove the glass.
The photo's above with some having armored plates installed looks like a typical field modified addition. Many units did such modifications to equipment. ( so personally I think of it as just that as to what is in game, A jeep that has been modified with some steel plates that can deflect small arms fire. )
So I think the test should be with a heavy MG at closer ranges, no light steel plates would do much against that, it would shred right through that steel.
-
actually THE COPY MOVE COMMAND is a pretty good suggestion. Since they have never been able to program a smart follow command.
I could see the use of a copy command, then one would only have to adjust the command for the unit once it has the same move point locations shown.
-
Well, there is no question in that there are those that see the glass half empty and those that see it half full.
Yes, CMx2 has been around for a long while. Its like driving that old car you have with 200,000 miles on it.
Back when it was new you enjoyed it so much and cared for it in every aspect. Now its just that old machine that you are trying to keep running without throwing away any good money on it with any major expense, milking out the last miles of its faithful service.
But for me it also means I have saved tons of money, ready to used to purchase that new car I want when the old one is finally done.
BF has been actively engaged in new projects on those government contracts, they have produced continually new items in the CMX2 product line. I think you can rest assured that they have plans on a new engine and new product at some point to replace that old car with a shiny new one. (when and what will it look like is anyone's guess, but those boys are not ready to retire and I am sure they are not planning to run on the cm2 engine til their finial days.
And how can anyone ever get tired of playing these games. I never lose the thrill of playing in a h2h match and have a plan come together where I see my forces kill my opponent forces and succeed in the desired plan.
-
If the forum lack discussions you want to have, then start threads about such topics and see what happens.
If you want to discuss tactics, put the question out there, and it gets replies.
In general, the forum has been quiet, as pointed out , most that visit here are old hands at it and don't have questions. Not much to talk about if there is nothing new to discuss and so until that changes the status will stay the same. And even when the next game does come out, the engine and how it works is still the same, so there will be discussions for a while on the new units and some of the new scenarios. but other than that, things will settle back down pretty quick once the new items have been indulged in by those that visit here.
As others have pointed out, unless a whole new game system is released, I doubt we will see the forum as active as it once was when CMBO first came out or when CMSF or CMBN came out.
When CMRT WAS RELEASED, I was amazed of how short of a time it increased forum activity and how few topics it created.
So I don't know why after all this time and all the other releases since then, you would think the forum would suddenly get more active because it does not.
Until CMX3 happens, the forum will be only as good as you personally want to make it, that means, you help by creating discussions instead of sitting back and wondering why such discussions don't happen.
-
6 hours ago, lsailer said:
Keeping in mind I am a total noob here.
How do people feel about "experiments" to test ideas in a throwaway game before you try them in a PBEM game? Like, "I wonder if my mortars can destroy that footbridge if the enemy tries to cross it?" So, create a separate game and try to blow up the bridge? Once you know, you can use the result in the PBEM game. You could use that for finding tricky keyhole/hulldown positions too, maybe.
as a noob I would suggest you just play the battle yourself, both sides which you can do very quickly and that will let you understand many things that are possible or not possible in the game, then use that knowledge to play a real opponent.
In h2h matches which I have a few going at all times. If I have a match up or situation that I am not sure as to what the results likely will be, I just set up a test map with the similar condition and run it and see what the result are when running it enough times to get a sort of a average outcome, that helps me decide for my real battle. I have done that so much over the years I don't ever use charts or stats, I just know in my head what most situations will likely do because of seeing them play out so many times
-
All true, But they were also are doing something never done before, so I am sure that they did not get everything as stream lined as maybe possible. But they have likely learned a lot about what works well and what did not work well in the CMX2 engine design.
Now I figure that when the time comes for the CMX3 engine, they will be doing many thing different that will improve and hopefully help them with their production.
They are talented people and they give us something no one else seems willing to do, so I can be patient as they do what they feel best as to making a living doing what they like to do.
-
Or you all are not accounting for the fact that BF has been producing and the reason it seems like there is a slow down is that they are producing products that are not us.
With the fact that we now know they have a couple of government projects is likely a big part of why we see the amount of finished projects we now have.
BF is actively producing, we just are not the beneficiary's of it.
-
Very well said Vet 0369
That is basically how I looked at this thread.
We live at a time where there is people that have no patience and all of their thoughts are self centered.
So this thread is a perfect example of that.
Person likes the game, wants more of the game and is not getting more of the game fast enough for their personal wants. - Thus there must be a problem and that problem must be from the source of who makes the game. They need and must do it faster.
Never in the process of their thinking is there a care or concern about that source or how it would impact that, the thought is focused on getting more faster, nothing else.
Never does the thought cross their mind that the method presently being used is what is already creating the thing they enjoy so much.
They have no respect for the efforts of others if it does not meet their perceived needs.
The sad thing is, their view does impact things and how people view this company.
But what is even more sad, I am sure this trait is impacting their life in more aspects than what we see here. I am sure their frustration with life is constant.
-
Aurelius is correct and he has it down to perfection on his times as to how to get a shot off and then run back into cover.
And his proof was how he managed to keep one ATGM team alive after multiple firings on my American force that I could not get a lock on him with.
-
Yes, and letting the player know that certain decisions lead to negative results is a good concept.
I think a campaign that lets you know there is 10 battles to play if you do well but then shuts you down in earlier battles and stops you because you have not made certain requirements representing commands expectations for your force is a good concept.
I don't remember which campaign used that concept but I remember playing one battle poorly so it ended me a couple of battles from the full campaign and not being able to complete the full mission felt correct since my one battle performance was not good.
-
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:
I think designers should be more worried that their scenarios are too hard than too easy. Even a basic static defence can be very challenging to overcome in this game.
Well, it all depends on what is wanted from the design.
For those here that are wanting a feel in the game that seems realistic. Then any design done with that 3 to 1 ratio, will likely get it. No matter the size.
For no real life commander is going to order a attack with infantry unless he believes he has at least that type of a advantage.
( but as to the challenge of game play, there is hardly any at that ratio unless there is some great defensive terrain advantages.) thus boring to many players.
Where as, to create a battle in CM that gives the chance of the battle to swing either way in its outcome generally requires that ratio to be 3 to 2 and limiting the time so that the offence cannot take its time to dismantle the defense piecemeal. (which none of these things are realistic to as to situations that commanders would want to commit there troops to.)
But when the goal of the design is not to portray history as much as it is to create a situations where a player decisions will either bring a victory of defeat type results. Then that is where the design for a single scenario goes. (So I would not expect that to change in many of the scenario's that get created)
Just feel fortunate that you do have campaigns that you can have as one sided battles as you like and that there is interest in the fact in that you are wondering if the losses you do suffer will cost you down the road as battle upon battle adds up. (That is how the interest is created)
But no matter what you design, there has to be a way to create a interest as to your decisions making a outcome as to the results.
I personally hate most campaigns, why, because after investing way too many hours into them , I find most, even when making poor decisions allow me to go on from map to map, continuing to give me the impression I am doing a good job and rewarding me. Where as in truth, there is no real punishment towards me for bad choices.
I don't care how the designer creates the battles, what I care about is has the designer made a situation that I feel my decisions matters - that is the key to a good design.
-
Had not played much CMFI lately so decided to mess around.
Set up a QB against the AI on a very small map and selected Italian infantry as my force against a AI attack using forces of its choice.
Normally I hate these things as to what they create.
So the battle starts and I quickly see I am against Canadians with Sherman V's and a little bit of supporting infantry.
I have MMG's and 45 MM mortars, well perfect stuff to take on Armor, oh I did have two tanks, if you want to call them that. But hey, at least they had a chance of taking out the armor.
But I started this thing , so lets see what I can do with infantry and having to use them in close assaults verse armor.
It came out it had 8 Shermans, and about 20 men in brems and such.
I started hiding all my men behind walls, hedges and in grape vines.
Since the map was very small the AI kept the armor together as it moved to its objectives.
Thus doing a good job of covering its own units if and when I let the infantry attack.
But this turned into one of the funniest battles I have played in a long time. .
My armor only accounted for one enemy tank.My infantry destroyed 3 Shermans and immobilized 4.
The MMg's kept what little infantry there was at bay.
I used the mortars on the tanks trying to help immobilize them. they accounted for one immobilization and maybe aided in one or 2 others.
In came down to swarming infantry on the armor and close assaulting (Too bad there is no graphics other than HG's flying. but they were busy doing that.)
It cost me 110 Italians, literally using ammo support troops on the mmg's as part of my attacks.
Bloody and fun - sometimes this game really delivers.
When I was done, It was like I started thinking, this would make a great scenario. What a mismatch .
(and amazed that what is or should be the weak side did have strength in only one thing, numbers, the number of men I had to throw at those tanks).
How do you advance over open terrain?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 2
Posted
Good suggestions.
Most players need to learn to use recon more, somebody has to be sacrificed for the good of the whole.
You always need to find the enemy location first, before risking moving any units of value.
find / pin / maneuver to killing positions / eliminate. (This is the basics no matter the terrain.)
Yskonyn, it sounds like you have the tendency to want to move to contact in force, this is not a tactic that plays out well in these battles. (That is a tactic in real world situations where you have a massive advantage - that is never the case in most cm battles)