xian
-
Posts
827 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by xian
-
-
Yes.. okay, point taken.
Agreed - my tactics are terrible... I shouldn't use buildings as fire bases.
(btw, my troops ran in there on their own accord)
But, and here's the rub... do I deserve to be unrealistically penalised for choosing a poor tactic?
Admittedly, I'm still not certain whether the LOS into a building is abstracted or not. It may be that it doesn't matter if a soldier stands in front of a window whilst he reloads, write letters home, eats K rations etc because calculations are being performed in the background that give him a fair chance of not being hit.
-
My guy was on the second floor of a large two-story stone farmhouse. But he was standing before the window when he got popped. If I had known the risk was that high, I would have had him hide until I was ready to have him spot. BTW, from the start I gave the HQ group a ten meter cover arc, so that wasn't a factor. I'd hazard a guess that the guy who popped him was 100 meters away, more or less.
Michael
Which brings me back to the to my original point: soldiers unrealistically expose themselves to incoming fire when inside buildings. They even reload standing up in full view of the enemy!
-
I don't think penetration is relevant here, as the concern raised was the vulnerability of troops in front of windows.
Exactly. It's the way troops behave inside buildings that seems to put them unrealistically in harms way.
I think it needs looking at.
-
Okay, okay I know I keep going on about it... but I am certain that infantry in buildings are far too vulnerable to small arms fire.
Could it be something to do with the fact that soldiers don't duck out of the way when reloading and spotting? Or is there an LOS modifier built in to approximate this? I can understand that it might be difficult to model the behaviour of soldiers finding cover in buildings, but a simple 'to hit' modifier could solve the problem.
Soldiers tend to stand stock still at windows, and I'm pretty sure that as a result the game engine sees them as more vulnerable to incoming fire than a soldier lying in the grass.
Is this something that BF are looking at - or am I a just a crazy lone voice in the crowd?
-
Only mission so far that's caused me any problems. Loved it though. Managed a DRAW.
-
To increase the fun factor, I would like to be able to lock-on enemy units and be able to pivot around to get an idea of their LOS and to watch them during replays.
Is hitting TAB to lock on and then rotating with W and E no good?
-
We're taking this request seriously, though we don't think we can do anything for CM:BN right now. It would have to be a part of a larger UI redesign which is slated as the "next great thing" for CM.
Steve
Oh please don't make the core game easier... isn't that up to the scenario designer? There are so many suggestions on the forum that could help to improve the game - but surely dumbing down shouldn't be one of them.
Perhaps some kind of difficulty rating for scenarios could solve the problem some people are experiencing, or maybe the inclusion of interactive tutorials on tactics?
-
I too find it too difficult.
I sent Moon a PM about the difficulty of CMSF with the NATO module. The original CMSF with the Marine module were at a perfect difficulty level for me.
CMBN is very difficult and the fact that I have a terminal illness called Huntingtons Disease that causes brain damage is the reason why.
Regards,
Greg
Sorry to hear that you have such a disabling disease.
When it comes to getting good AARs with CMBN I really think that it's just a matter of getting the knack. It will come with practice.
I'm not a hardcore military gaming fan but I've learned enough from playing the game and discussions on the forum to get good results.
Here are a few of my suggestions:
1. Be cautious! For me every causality is a tragedy. Many missions score points for friendly casualty objectives, so it's doubly important to minimise casualties.
2. First contact is often the most critical moment, so I recommend splitting a few of your squads to create separate scout teams. Use 'hunt' to send them forwards, moving from cover to cover.
3. Once you have made contact try and send troops around the enemy to outflank them.
4. Don't be afraid to withdraw your squads if things get too hot for them.
5. Avoid sending your armour into areas you haven't get scouted with your infantry. Tanks find it hard to spot enemies. It's very easy to lose tanks to hidden panzerschrecks or AT guns. Once you spot an AT gun - move any tanks out of the way and try and hit them with your mortars.
6. Try and keep your HQs in contact with their squads - this dramatically improves morale and a squad's ability to lay down serious fire on a target.
I hope these few hints help you. I'm sure you'll get many other/better suggestions. Just use what works for you.
-
I love the way that the light changes according to the time. It's great to see the shadows lengthen and the light fade during scenarios set around dusk. Really good job BF.
Also, I've noticed just how much detail is given to individual soldiers in CM2. You really have to check each squad/team individually to really see what's going on. I love the attention to detail. But I am also very thankful BF included the floating icon flash when a soldier has been hit. Again, really good stuff.
That said - this level of detail combined with the absence of quickly accessible unit information from the HUD or floating icons makes CMBN work better with small actions compared to CM1.
In CM1 you could get a lot of feedback without needing to zoom in and check on everyone individually. This allowed for battles with many more units without the player losing track.
In CMBN I really enjoy missions when I can spend time looking at each squad in detail, checking suppression levels, morale, ammo levels etc.
-
Thanks - that explains it then. :-)
-
Well, i suck in this game, playing campaigns at easisest level and still get beaten.
:eek:
Be thankful that the AI gives you a great challenge. This means you'll have lots of fun trying to outwit it.
In 3 months you'll be complaining that it's too easy on 'Iron'.
-
The Scenario Editor won't load campaigns in the Mac version.
Is this a known issue?
-
Perhaps scenario designers should make two versions. Should a player really decide how much extra time he needs to complete a mission? Kinda goes against the spirit of the game.
-
I agree wholeheartedly - WeGo is the creative jewel in the CM series.
-
I've tried to give one side the opportunity to score 'unit objective' points from spotting mines. For some reason the Unit Objective always comes up as empty in the AAR. Does spotting a mine NOT count as spotting in the traditional sense? It doesn't seem to trigger the unit objective.
Can anyone help explain?
-
IF CM ventures Eastward how will tanks racing ahead of their infantry support be modelled,
How about...
Start a mission with tanks only. Have infantry enter as reinforcements 20 minutes later.
-
I think it's a combination of thinking time and plotting moves for units. RT just seems to eat into the clock quickly. In WeGo you have all the time in the world to make your tactical decisions and plot your moves.
I know you can pause the game in RT, but if you pause all the time you might as well play WeGo.
-
Panzer III
Flail Tank (to deal with those UNDETECTABLE AT mines)
-
I raised this issue just after CMBN's release but it was pretty much unanimously dismissed for the reason that players thought that having a short time limit seemed somewhat 'gamey'.
It was reasoned that battles should come to a natural conclusion instead of being cut short due to imposed time constraints.
I still think there is a call for publishing 2 versions of a mission if it is 'time critical'.
-
Only occasionally do Mods conflict.
As long as you put the unzipped file into a subfolder entitled 'z' in your CMBN 'Data' folder it should work no problem.
-
I agree that BF might have made AT mines undetectable on purpose. It would be good to get confirmation that this was intentional.
-
Yes, engineers can spot mines (usually quite easily) by moving close to their square or through their square (move and slow are best). They spot them whilst on the move, so no need to stop.
That said - they never spot AT mines. This is good to know - vehicles are on their own when it comes to mines.
-
Well - I've tested it...
Engineers can spot AP and Mixed mines but not AT mines. Of course they can mark AT mines, but only after some poor vehicle has exploded one of them.
This complete lack of AT mine detection normally wouldn't bother me, but I'd just designed a scenario based around the feature - DOH!
I suppose I could used mixed mines instead, but this means more infantry casualties.
-
Hmmm.. I read that too, but I'm not finding it happen in the game. AP mines are spotted no problem, but AT seem to be undetectable. Maybe this is intentional?
"Would be nice" feature list
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
A few more...
1) A slightly different 'floating icon' for TEAMS separated from squads (perhaps a little A or
2) Floating icon suppression info. Currently we have a flash to indicate a hit and a dim icon when control is lost. Perhaps adding a small suppression bar next to the icon would work.