slysniper

actually you are almost correct, I would do as you and get them the heck out of there but I would use the evade command for my movement.
Evade button is the best tool in the game. Not only will the troops run to cover, but they will resist the urge to drop and get pinned again. I have found evade to be one of the best movement commands in the game.
 

This is by far not a question that is easy to answer.
First, I think you need to get your head out of how board games work, its hard to get cm to work on similar concepts.
 
But my suggestion to you is this, you need to get a feel for how cm works with movement, yes, what you are requesting is good to understand. but getting a chart handed to you is not likely to happen.
 
The best thing to do is set up a test map. place your units on the map and then run a test for what they will do in the terrain you want to check them against.
you will get pretty direct results on distances a unit will make in that minute. Run the test multiple times, in each terrain type you want to check.
 
But here is where the problem begins, ok that might get you a good number if the troops are in perfect order and no one is firing in their general area.
but the truth is, the troops condition and how exhausted they are impacts how fast they move,. they might not even take your orders and follow them if they are having morale issues.
Terrain does not work like a board game, woods is not always the same, depending on how the woods are created in the map, they can portray many different levels of obstruction to movement and viewing, none of which is easy for you to tell until your troops are actually in there doing it on the game.
So in CM, its more of a feel for what you expect your units to do instead of knowing for sure what they will do. You will only get good at it after playing it alot and seeing the general tendencies of how troops react under certain conditions.
So running troops that are fresh at full speed on turn one will result in what is expected. but running troops that might be exhausted, have a few men killed and still having to haul the same equipment is going to be a whole different world in what will happen.  There just is no charts for this.
The game is like real life, you don't know how far that second group is going to get in a minute, because in truth, you wouldn't know for sure in the real situation either. you would assume a logical guess and hope for the best, the same is true in the game
 
 
 

I have used them successfully to close with the enemy as to a approach when no other option is available.
First, you need something else to give the cover fire or aided concealment like additional smoke.
Second break up your infantry into fire teams, spread them out and rush them in quick burst then drop and hide., Then crawl side ways from any expected area fire from the enemy you might receive, maybe one or two action squares.
The trick I find that works best is rush all units at the same time, the enemy will likely only fire on one or two units, then make sure to shift when hidden to prevent any area fire that the opponent might try to place on you.
Concealment is a powerful tool if used correctly in the game, area fire is hard to place on you in wheat fields, so learn to use that. Don't give the enemy a target.
So do not bother trying to fire from a wheat field, you are just exposing yourself, Keep hidden, and remember short bust when moving.
Only after crossing the field and closing in on the enemy will I pop them up and use them in the attack. And that means I am pretty sure that I will have such a fire power advantage that I can expose them to such a move.
So in other word, it is a way of approach, not a terrain to use to fight from.  Using my method, you can cross and use wheat fields without exhausting your troops. As for fighting from them, think of them as clear ground with no cover. Because showing your troops from them is placing them in that exact situation.
Hopes this helps

I have used them successfully to close with the enemy as to a approach when no other option is available.
First, you need something else to give the cover fire or aided concealment like additional smoke.
Second break up your infantry into fire teams, spread them out and rush them in quick burst then drop and hide., Then crawl side ways from any expected area fire from the enemy you might receive, maybe one or two action squares.
The trick I find that works best is rush all units at the same time, the enemy will likely only fire on one or two units, then make sure to shift when hidden to prevent any area fire that the opponent might try to place on you.
Concealment is a powerful tool if used correctly in the game, area fire is hard to place on you in wheat fields, so learn to use that. Don't give the enemy a target.
So do not bother trying to fire from a wheat field, you are just exposing yourself, Keep hidden, and remember short bust when moving.
Only after crossing the field and closing in on the enemy will I pop them up and use them in the attack. And that means I am pretty sure that I will have such a fire power advantage that I can expose them to such a move.
So in other word, it is a way of approach, not a terrain to use to fight from.  Using my method, you can cross and use wheat fields without exhausting your troops. As for fighting from them, think of them as clear ground with no cover. Because showing your troops from them is placing them in that exact situation.
Hopes this helps

I have used them successfully to close with the enemy as to a approach when no other option is available.
First, you need something else to give the cover fire or aided concealment like additional smoke.
Second break up your infantry into fire teams, spread them out and rush them in quick burst then drop and hide., Then crawl side ways from any expected area fire from the enemy you might receive, maybe one or two action squares.
The trick I find that works best is rush all units at the same time, the enemy will likely only fire on one or two units, then make sure to shift when hidden to prevent any area fire that the opponent might try to place on you.
Concealment is a powerful tool if used correctly in the game, area fire is hard to place on you in wheat fields, so learn to use that. Don't give the enemy a target.
So do not bother trying to fire from a wheat field, you are just exposing yourself, Keep hidden, and remember short bust when moving.
Only after crossing the field and closing in on the enemy will I pop them up and use them in the attack. And that means I am pretty sure that I will have such a fire power advantage that I can expose them to such a move.
So in other word, it is a way of approach, not a terrain to use to fight from.  Using my method, you can cross and use wheat fields without exhausting your troops. As for fighting from them, think of them as clear ground with no cover. Because showing your troops from them is placing them in that exact situation.
Hopes this helps

Well, don't take me wrong in that I do not personally understand that it is a numbers game. No matter what it always will be.
I also will say that I do plenty of calculations as to what might happen within the game and with my units. I do think there is a place for it. But in the game now, I see that place with each weapon and how that weapon works. And to me, that is very much how I see what someone does that is leading real troops and is wanting to use the weapons at his disposal to their best effect.
Example, when black sea first came out, The first thing I did was make a bunch of little fire fight scenarios and made determinations as to what effective ranges different rifles were being effective at.
But did I chart it, I guess I could have, and yes many real soldiers have a similar understanding of that with their weapons.So it makes somewhat sense to me that someone would do that.
But It only took only one time sending troops into a barn and seeing them mowed down to understand it is nothing more than concealment and I don't need no chart to tell me that, just like any other terrain on the map. its pretty easy to understand the likely results of the terrain without any numbers to verify it. That is all I am saying. Of course that comes with playing the game and seeing the results of such terrain.
Where as , in cmX1 I will say, terrain was very much more like a mathematical formula. The results were pretty consistent also. Now, I would not say that anymore with the terrain, it can give you surprises.

Personally, anyone playing the game with charts have issues as far as I am concerned.
Winning the game is more important than playing the game for what its enjoyment factor should be.
Now, do solders in real combat  use charts and data, Actually they do. There is always a study as to best engagement distances with the enemy and what weapon match ups do and to try to engage at ranges that best suites what you have to fight with.
But there is no terrain charts, soldiers cannot measure wall thickness and know for sure what building gives the best cover. But players in the game sure will go to any length to know that and other similar stuff.
What is better, that group of woods or the building for cover, in real life is there a answer for that. Not really. But here you are wanting it in the game.
Play the game enough and you know what the terrain does as to protecting you, stop making it a math test. that is not the point of the game anymore.
Terrain cannot move with you on the battlefield, your units have to deal with what terrain options there are with where they are going, their choice should not be a percentage number. but should be for the logical sense of what they likely will be engaged by from the enemy with.
I love buildings if the enemy is throwing light mortars and small arms fire at me. I hate them is there is a big gun that has direct fire on them.
I would prefer a wheat field vs a large gun just for the fact it has a terrible time getting a bead on anything lying in the grass.
One of the good things about the game now is just that, terrain choices can now be made for the sake of terrain. Its not a numbers game any more and its time to stop trying to make it one again.
 
 
 
 

A HARD WAY TO LEARN A LESSON,
But you can at least know many of us have learned the same lesson in similar ways.
It is a high risk move to  have your armor units that close to each other. Even if the explosion does not get more than one. If they are spotted first, you are giving the enemy the perfect set up to get a second shot off on a second target before you even fire.

I like to send in just one on a mission early if I have multiple air units for support that has a juicy sweet target that I don't want to deal with from my other forces.
Consider him the scout, you will find out real quick when he arrives as to what might be anti air support sitting on the other side of the map in the enemy hands.
Pay close attention and now maybe you can counter strike them units with arty since they have given away their positions.
If nothing returns fire, now you can release your hounds and let them cause continued problems where ever you see fit.
 
But in general, I do save them other than the first unit for what I consider critical missions where I can use them to help support a combined attack where I really want the outcome to be decided in my favor. Combined arms baby, and in that type of situation, I am willing to lose them. Since the outcome will for sure affect the battle.
 
 

Well, don't take me wrong in that I do not personally understand that it is a numbers game. No matter what it always will be.
I also will say that I do plenty of calculations as to what might happen within the game and with my units. I do think there is a place for it. But in the game now, I see that place with each weapon and how that weapon works. And to me, that is very much how I see what someone does that is leading real troops and is wanting to use the weapons at his disposal to their best effect.
Example, when black sea first came out, The first thing I did was make a bunch of little fire fight scenarios and made determinations as to what effective ranges different rifles were being effective at.
But did I chart it, I guess I could have, and yes many real soldiers have a similar understanding of that with their weapons.So it makes somewhat sense to me that someone would do that.
But It only took only one time sending troops into a barn and seeing them mowed down to understand it is nothing more than concealment and I don't need no chart to tell me that, just like any other terrain on the map. its pretty easy to understand the likely results of the terrain without any numbers to verify it. That is all I am saying. Of course that comes with playing the game and seeing the results of such terrain.
Where as , in cmX1 I will say, terrain was very much more like a mathematical formula. The results were pretty consistent also. Now, I would not say that anymore with the terrain, it can give you surprises.

Personally, anyone playing the game with charts have issues as far as I am concerned.
Winning the game is more important than playing the game for what its enjoyment factor should be.
Now, do solders in real combat  use charts and data, Actually they do. There is always a study as to best engagement distances with the enemy and what weapon match ups do and to try to engage at ranges that best suites what you have to fight with.
But there is no terrain charts, soldiers cannot measure wall thickness and know for sure what building gives the best cover. But players in the game sure will go to any length to know that and other similar stuff.
What is better, that group of woods or the building for cover, in real life is there a answer for that. Not really. But here you are wanting it in the game.
Play the game enough and you know what the terrain does as to protecting you, stop making it a math test. that is not the point of the game anymore.
Terrain cannot move with you on the battlefield, your units have to deal with what terrain options there are with where they are going, their choice should not be a percentage number. but should be for the logical sense of what they likely will be engaged by from the enemy with.
I love buildings if the enemy is throwing light mortars and small arms fire at me. I hate them is there is a big gun that has direct fire on them.
I would prefer a wheat field vs a large gun just for the fact it has a terrible time getting a bead on anything lying in the grass.
One of the good things about the game now is just that, terrain choices can now be made for the sake of terrain. Its not a numbers game any more and its time to stop trying to make it one again.
 
 
 
 

Personally, anyone playing the game with charts have issues as far as I am concerned.
Winning the game is more important than playing the game for what its enjoyment factor should be.
Now, do solders in real combat  use charts and data, Actually they do. There is always a study as to best engagement distances with the enemy and what weapon match ups do and to try to engage at ranges that best suites what you have to fight with.
But there is no terrain charts, soldiers cannot measure wall thickness and know for sure what building gives the best cover. But players in the game sure will go to any length to know that and other similar stuff.
What is better, that group of woods or the building for cover, in real life is there a answer for that. Not really. But here you are wanting it in the game.
Play the game enough and you know what the terrain does as to protecting you, stop making it a math test. that is not the point of the game anymore.
Terrain cannot move with you on the battlefield, your units have to deal with what terrain options there are with where they are going, their choice should not be a percentage number. but should be for the logical sense of what they likely will be engaged by from the enemy with.
I love buildings if the enemy is throwing light mortars and small arms fire at me. I hate them is there is a big gun that has direct fire on them.
I would prefer a wheat field vs a large gun just for the fact it has a terrible time getting a bead on anything lying in the grass.
One of the good things about the game now is just that, terrain choices can now be made for the sake of terrain. Its not a numbers game any more and its time to stop trying to make it one again.
 
 
 
 

Also keep in mind many of them disgruntled gamers you are referring to on some other sites.
Own the game, play the game and have even posted additional stuff here to use with the game.
Created scenario's  and so on..
 
Now day's people just love to whine and say things thinking it will impact  the outcome of what will happen with the game and its future development. Like saying stuff, hoping to get the price to drop ( Oh sorry, but really that is what I think your motive is) 
Anyway, Battlefront has been pretty good at ignoring most irrelevant comments and developing a game that works and sells to those that have the ability to see it for what it is worth.
 
So, its time for you to make a choice, buy or don't buy.  But continuing to debate your un-logical view as to the game not being worth the money is a good way to continuing to show a lack of intelligence.
 

They keep the price as is to keep people like you from buying and playing the game.
 
Its a real elitist group with the price of the game so high.
 
No bargain basement players here'
 
 
Really, sad when someone cannot handle a one time cost to get a game that has some substance.
 
And really, you know the price is really not that expensive.

Converting from CMx1 to CMx2 games is not a easy task.

But the first thing to remember is not to compare.

There is many differences besides how you give commands or control the camera.

I Found I had to re-address how to use my units and what type of commands to give them also.

But the truth is, the CMX2 game plays much more realistically than the older games.

Just be patient and remember to do proper things and the game will be rewarding. With time you will not think about the interface and how you have to use it, all that stuff becomes second nature with time.

I don't even think about how I control the camera anymore, its just second nature.

Converting from CMx1 to CMx2 games is not a easy task.

But the first thing to remember is not to compare.

There is many differences besides how you give commands or control the camera.

I Found I had to re-address how to use my units and what type of commands to give them also.

But the truth is, the CMX2 game plays much more realistically than the older games.

Just be patient and remember to do proper things and the game will be rewarding. With time you will not think about the interface and how you have to use it, all that stuff becomes second nature with time.

I don't even think about how I control the camera anymore, its just second nature.

Oh, no, lets not start trying to encourage a font grog on the site - My heart might not take it.

They keep the price as is to keep people like you from buying and playing the game.
 
Its a real elitist group with the price of the game so high.
 
No bargain basement players here'
 
 
Really, sad when someone cannot handle a one time cost to get a game that has some substance.
 
And really, you know the price is really not that expensive.

They keep the price as is to keep people like you from buying and playing the game.
 
Its a real elitist group with the price of the game so high.
 
No bargain basement players here'
 
 
Really, sad when someone cannot handle a one time cost to get a game that has some substance.
 
And really, you know the price is really not that expensive.

I am not attacking you as to the previous comment.

Just pointing out that if you feel you have insights, you should go ahead and share them.

Holding on to insights does nothing as to helping educate the forum members, many of which really do lack much in depth knowledge on how to approach certain things within the game.

Personally, if I can do or say something that makes another player better, that is great, because I want to play against people that have skills, There is plenty of players that have helped me improve, I feel I should do the same.

Plus sometimes by posting how you do things will bring additional comments from others, sometimes bringing more insights as to ways to approach thing and can in return help you also.

No, the only complaint I have is also with your post. I am a terrible speller myself, so misspelling a word is no offence to me. But your post are so bad, it is sad that you cannot even understand what you are trying to communicate at times. you have given the reasons multiple times, but really, you just tried to shared some of the tactics you believe work, but it is so unclear, that I could not comment if I wanted to.

Well, since most of the players on this forum have no training at all in tactics. ( they have the money to buy the game) so they become company commanders or battalion commanders for the investment of $55 dollars. you should not expect many of them to have your great wisdom in the use of all the equipment at their fingertips.
 
So it sounds like to me, you better start giving training as to the great insights you have as playing the Russians vs a American force.
 
And it needs to be tactical training. (Not QB purchase decisions)

I mean seriously. After spending 400+ hours, It's down to 10 cents per hour of entertainment.
 
All video game companies should charge more, say by the hour. Going to a movie costs $15 for 1.5 hrs entertainment. So games could be the same. $10 per hour!
 
 

To this day I still think ASL is what helped make me into a engineer. - If you could understand those rules, you pretty much can learn to understand pretty much anything.

Man, BF better release something new real soon.
When someone complains about leg length. We are getting way to bored and nit picky.
 
Come on get something released quick before I start looking at this leg modeling issue

Man, BF better release something new real soon.
When someone complains about leg length. We are getting way to bored and nit picky.
 
Come on get something released quick before I start looking at this leg modeling issue