Zalgiris 1410
-
Posts
544 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Zalgiris 1410
-
-
Originally posted by dalem:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:
I can't believe that some BFCs expect all us foreigners and the Germanophiles including those in North Anallier to be comfortable having to reduce ourselves to US Forces (and minor Arab Allies AIUI and WTF does anyone want to play them for - including most Arabs to be sure) especially cosidering all the veriety of CMx1.
So BFC is forcing you to buy their next game exactly how? And if they are not actually forcing you, then why react so venomously? It is, in the end, just a game, and your CM:BO, :BB, and :AK CDs will still work just fine even after CM:SF comes out.
No, of course it's not.I am discusted on this issue, this is not a case of me primarily US bashing,
Righto, commercial U.S. arrogance and imperialism, but no U.S. bashing.but a lower gut reaction to this kind of another example of commercial US arrogance and imperialism, I had thought better of them to have disgraced themselves with this myopia. :eek:
I suggest you go write your own WWII game and leave the rest of us to rational discourse.I suggest that CMx2 ought to be tagged McCMs until they become more broad in scope and less so full of saturated US greesy fat. :mad:
-dale </font>
-
McCM: Struck by a lightening bolt on the road to Demascus.
(i.e. the exciting Christian killing life of Saul of Tarsus unfortunately was completely reversed after the hammer blow of electric shock from being struck by lightening while travelling on the road to Demascus...changed his name to Paul and wrote the Acts of the Apositles etc, etc.)
Think about it BFC and let it sink in.
BTW note that I didn't suggest it in the title as 'struck by a bolt of lightening', because that could be miscontrued by some BFC as implying that I really meant it as a complimenry 'light bulbed' completely good idea.
Regards,
Saul.
-
My fears that CMx2 was really only going to be an improved version of the Close Combat series has come true!
I can't believe that some BFCs expect all us foreigners and the Germanophiles to be comfortable having to reduce ourselves to playing only US Forces (and minor Arab Allies AIUI and WTF does anyone want to play them for - including most Arabs to be sure) you arn't even gonna be able to go British or the Israelis for veriety. That sucks for a near future Lavantine / Near East wargame simulation IMHO.
77mm I agree that alot of the post 45 Arab combat history is pretty interesting but I don't think that any of it will be covered in McCM Stryker Force, of course that's going to be the case because it's really a Sci-Fi game after all!
I don't consider the setting all that exciting, very tense for sure, but not as intense as the WWII setting. The assymetry of the setting makes me think that one side will be playing a shoot'em up kind of game while the other is playing a spy killer type of game. And the Assymetry will force this situation IMO.
WTF would anyone who is not a terrorist actually want to wargame playing militant Arabs against US and their allied Arab Forces anyway?
-
On the subject of this thread, I for one am definately disappointed with CMx2 cum Styker Force.
My fears that CMx2 was really only going to be an improved version of the Close Combat series has come true! :eek:
Even the North West ETO 44-45 WWII second CMx2 release is another bloody US Forces focused game!
I am boycotting both of them, not buying either, nope... bloody f'ing oath. On principle, I refuse to allow myself to be railroaded from such a multi-national military simulation as CMx1 is to the myopia of U-arSed-Sodomy. :mad:
I'm not displeased with the efforts of the designers in any way, since the screen shoots look terrific, however I understand and appreciate what they have and will be doing for the CMx2 engine and research etc, but I wonder how their OS marketing research went? :confused:
I can't believe that some BFCs expect all us foreigners and the Germanophiles including those in North Anallier to be comfortable having to reduce ourselves to US Forces (and minor Arab Allies AIUI and WTF does anyone want to play them for - including most Arabs to be sure) especially cosidering all the veriety of CMx1.
I am discusted on this issue, this is not a case of me primarily US bashing, but a lower gut reaction to this kind of another example of commercial US arrogance and imperialism, I had thought better of them to have disgraced themselves with this myopia. :eek:
I suggest that CMx2 ought to be tagged McCMs until they become more broad in scope and less so full of saturated US greesy fat. :mad:
[ October 08, 2005, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
My recondmendation for playing a campaigne to do some of what you have been describing very well is mainly intended for CMx1 at the moment and for bigger stuff with CMx2 much later on when CPUs can handle them.
Your points Drusus are certaining fair enough regarding foxholes especially considering that one's Infantry units can "dig in" two foxholes each, such issues as gamey repositioning manoeuvres by the defender did come up in the thread that Steve threw this particular bone. However, I'm thinking more of the attacker actually finding trenches, more so because they are harder to eliminate the occupants of than foxholes, through first battle reconnaissance in the first intance for planning targetted preparatory consentraitions of artillery fires durung subsequent battles.
The size of the attacking force during the reconnaissance phase is an another interesting issue and so is the concept of holding the defenders units in situ some how until spotted or for the next battle or whatever. I can't offer to many suggestions on these but I guess it would be something that the senario designer whould have to get right to make it all work and feel right!
[ October 07, 2005, 10:43 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
Thanx no one, sorry to have had to have asked.
-
Drusus, strange to find a Finn on these forums who doesn't own a copy of CMBB, at least to my mind, intereseting post to be sure though.
Regarding being able to have information on the enemy's positions etc, a recent bone from some BFC for CMx2 is that there will be some sort of percentage setting for being able to know where some enemy units and positions actually are by means of allotting enemy units as starting spotted even if out of the LOS of any of your units.
This is supposed to simulate pre-battle reconnaissance or other kinds of intelligence which should allow some better planning and help with plotting preparation artillery fire plans, I should expect at a guess.
OTOH Drusus in terms of attempting to replicate in some manner this pre-planned artillery fire preparation plan it might be an idea to consider playing a campaigne. During the first battle or two the attackers main objective is to obtain information through reconnaissance on the defensive works such as trenches and bunkers and likely dug in positions etc, then being able to better plan artillery fire preparation from the next battle onwards. This series of techniques could be repeated several times on an advancing campaigne map of course.
[ October 07, 2005, 09:01 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
It's best to place units "dug in" even if you place them in buildings, rubble or trenches even though there is no bonus double up of protection for them. It's just easier to be placing all of your units, except vehicles with the "dug in" toggled by default both for those units that you actually place where they can dig a foxhole and for one's that you may make a mistake with their placing.
BTW what does "IOW" stand for? :confused:
-
I would like to know if you have guns and armour that have retained special rounds such as HC, tungsten, canister and even smoke, to the end of a battle when in a campaigne do they retain them inparticular when they receive their re-supply of ammo?
For example I'm thinking about say German 75mm leIGs keeping their load of say 5-9 HC rounds if I don't fire them during the first battle that I have them in will they still have them plus their re-supply of ammo on top or not in the next?
Same goes for say a PzIVD-F with their amounts of special rounds of HC, canister etc. as well as for those unfired tungsten rounds other tanks and guns have?
OTOH this is making me think about the special extras the Infantry squads, pioneers and tank hunter teams can carry such as the number of grenade bundles, demolition packages, rifle grenades, panzerfausts etc. If individual units still have three of such extras at the end of a battle is it garenteed that they will still have at least those three extras plus their re-supply of ammo going into the next battle?
Also on this subject do units that the designer of the campaigne at least retain heavier loads of ammunition from the first battle that they are in to the next? Also are they re-supplied with the heavier amounts of ammunition loads if they fire below the normal level of ammunition loads or are they just re-supplied up to the normal maximun load only?
If this last paragraph doesn't make sense, I shall try to clarify what I'm talking about;
All Infantry units, that is squads & their HQs can be provided with an increase of 50% ammunition above their normal maximum load. So if an Infantry squad has 50 rounds max for a quick battle the deseigner can increase that up to 75 rounds. If a Panzergrenadier Squad has 35 rounds max for quick battles then a designer can provide it with up to 52 rounds of ammunition. 35 x 1.5 = 52.5, it unfortunately gets rounded down.
For support teams and all on board mortars it is the same as above so that HMGs such as the MG 34 can receive an increase from 105 rounds to 157 max rounds, while an 81mm mortar can go from 27 rounds in a quick battle to having 40 rounds max by a senario designer.
All types of on boards guns, be they AA, AT, IG or whatever, can receive double their allotment of rounds which usually means from 50 to having 100 rounds max that a designer can choose to provide them with.
All Artillery batteries can be increased fourfold so 150 rounds becomes 600 rounds, 60 rounds becomes 240, 50 becomes 200, 35 becomes 140 and 20 rounds becomes a max of 80 rounds that the designer can choose to provide them with.
My question is if these levels or such assigned by the designer of a campaigne are mantained as the level of ammo that the re-supply between battles will try to reach when in full supply, of cause?
[ October 07, 2005, 12:17 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
No the best on board mortar is the heavy half tracked version, the 81mm carrying Sd Kfz 251/2 because it comes with 66 rounds!
-
My Polish is not so good Kingfish so what exactly is 'this'? Can some Polak please explain, thanx.
Good pics Aragorn2002, very interesting indeed.
-
Will I gather from your 'melb' part that you are in Melbourne and if you are then I can only recomend Hylander's Military Bookstore in Flinders Lane in the CBD as the best specialty bookstore to check out if you haven't already done so. The other place is Readers Feast Bookstore down the stairs near the corner of Bourke and Swantan Sts. It's got a fairly good Military section in it. I think that I've seen Divisional Histories in both for each of the 3 Aussie Divs that served in the Middle East.
I have a copy of Chester Wilmot's 'Desert Siege', also and IMHO I remember it being quite a good read for a book that was writen in 1943 IIRC! If you feel that you need to be inspired to actual get around to reading it yourself I recomend watching the B&W film staring Richard Burton called "The Desert Rats", which is actually a fictionalised depiction of the last Aussie Infantry Battalion in the Tobruk garrison right up to the relief in November 1941. The film doesn't have anything to do with the 7th Armoued Division whatsoever, given the name strangely, but greatfully, though it ought to have been titled "The Rats of Tobruk", but anyway.
Regards,
Saul.
-
That's excellent work JasonC and while it might make my testing a bit redundant I think I'll have some fun when I'm checking - though that'll have to be for a few days or a week or so, 'cos my PC is being swiped, fixed and upgraded, I hope. I think I'll be able to get some reading done in the mean time!
BTW I would like to point out that steppe terrain changes in its actual lenth over the months with as is mentioned in the manual different ratings levels of concealment. That's gonna be fun for me to work out I'm sure.
Another thing to bear in mind regarding the experience levels of the troops that both are sneaking and trying to spot anything is that you often have a section or two in a company or platoon with an experience rating one level below or above the norm. This needs to be taken into consideration when both advancing and sneaking your troops. Apparently, the higher experienced sections can advance / sneak further than the rest before they're likely to be spotted and it might be a good idea to have them in the lead as SOP. OTOH obviously the lesser experienced sections are going to be spotted earlier and further out than the other units with serious implications no doubt.
Players are going to have to be careful about handling the different levels of experience distributed throughout their formations and manage them accordingly as well. It may simply come down to allowing the better units to lead in the van while holding back the under-experienced sections by a minimum or maximum distance as an SOP or such. Of couse there then is the factor of HQ stealth bonuses to assist with the advance and sneaking approaches.
I must admit that this is an area of my CM game playing that I massively need to improve upon, since my usual tactics revolve around gaining fire superiority to provide the fire dominance required to allow for the movement phase to proceed. I normally conduct pretty much all my Infantry movements using just the 'move' order! My troops never tire that way, but O.K. now I'm learning better. I'm liking the 'advance' and use it a bit through concelled terrain but I'd like to get a bit sneaky now also.
-
I've done a few crappy tests and sneak is not that great as an approach technique IMO, advance kicks arse over it. The sneakers don't have very good spotting themselves and are more likely to get ambushed at meddium range because of it. I let the Tac AI handle the target firing and during a clear warm CMBB mid day it would generally fully spot the sneakers in October steppe at 340 metres but start shooting at 250 metres supprisingly effectively.
I have found out so far that sneaking across a road or soft ground ain't especially too good, for example they were easily spotted by regular enemy Infantry without binoculars beyond 350 metres. In marsh precisely at 300 metres. On the other hand sneaking seems to work well in woods even up to only just about 40 metres away, even when the enemy troops had a clear LOS to where they were. So I'll test further with sneaking through such concelling terrain as brush, scattered trees and buildings etc.
-
We are still interested in learning a little from no one's experience gained while employing the sneak comand, where's the help? How about a few pointers?
I'm sorry I mustn't have been programed instinctually as no one apparently is in CM sneak tactics, or perhaps he meant to refer to his massive amount of intuition!
Off to do some sneaky tests, see ya.
-
The short answer is yes, 88s could be aimed at and fired against single low and fast flying fight-bombers, but AIUI the guns needed to use an extra fire control aiming system or director/predictor device called a 'Kommandogerat', the KdoGr 35 relied upon the use of telephone lines, while the KdoGr 36 was attatched with cables. They were distributed one per battery. I've got a good little book on the 88 Flak/ PAK gun with a lot of data on its workings, including fuse cutting for setting range and aiming and firing capabilities that leads me to conclude that they were able to be aimed and fired at very low altitude Jabos. For instance they could fire at the practical rate of 20 rpm against arial targets. In another thread which was discussing the 88s capacity for firing airburst against enemy Infantry targets IIRC it was figured that they could because of the minute adjustments for the fuse settings were sufficient for doing that with a round travelling at from 819m/sec initial velocity. The only problem would be the speed of traverse and elevation which would limit the practical coned out area of fire that the gun could target. Basically it could fire fast enough but only at aircraft in its relative line of fire. So any unfortunate Jabo that flew into their fire zone was probably going to be shot at by a few high velocity rounds of 88mms.
One point that seems relevant here is that the Germans (specifically Albert Speer actually) did not proceed with the development of a self-propelled version of the 88mm Flak as was done with the SP 88mm PAK in the Nashorn and JagdPanther/Tiger versions for dealing with the low flying Jabo threat for moblie units; because this role for an SP mounted AAG was being adequitely served by the 20mm and 37mm SP mounted Flak. This decision was mainly due to the fact that the 88s still required the above mentioned wires and cables linked aiming connections to their KdoGr director/pridictor device. So from this I surmise that they were indeed capable of engaging low flying Jabos. That said I don't have any information on how effectively.
[ September 27, 2005, 11:51 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
I wish that you had of proof read this JasonC, esp " Not, pace Zalgris, " 'cos that really isn't clear. However, I think I understand that somehow here you mean to imply that I ought to do my own sneak command tests for myself. Fair enough, you didn't need to prompt me since I intend to anyway, but I am still very interested in seeing what you come up with and compare etc. I'll post what I learn myself also.Originally posted by JasonC:Testbeds are useful and I encourage others to do them. Not, pace Zalgris, to wait for me to do them for them. Nothing like seeing for yourself.
I second JasonC's call for no one to enlighten us with his entirely battle experience based wisdom on the subject of employing the sneak command and to provide us with some explainations of how it works in CM. However one learns this stuff and everything else in CM doesn't bother me, whether it's just through battle experience, running multitudes of tests or whatever, because players still have to put it into practise themselves in the end.
BTW no one I think exchanging passwords at the end of PBEM games is gamey, obviously not cheating, but gamey, not that that will stop me from doing so. Thanks for the idea though.
[ September 27, 2005, 07:27 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
Thanks no one fair enough but I just want to get my CMx1 tactics right first for now, especially 'cos I expect to continue playing it forever after CMx2 is eventually on my PC.
-
Thanks very much jeffsmith for providing the links on the "Swing riots", especially the long version and its further links. I'll have to now dig up the family tree material, awesome.
Thanks Wicky I've had to use another computer to link to the thread, but I've done that now so I'll quote it here so that I can check it latter at home:
Press PrintScrn, switch to the desktop, open MS paint, then use the Edit/Paste menu and you have it in the paint program.
I hope that that is all there is to it!
[ September 27, 2005, 12:28 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
Fair point of view for no one to hold, but the point of the tests is also to learn through experiment what the basic funtions are from which players can then attempt to employ while in real the real CM combat environment against an opponent. True there are going to be multiple factors that are going to mess with the best tabulated results of testing out the 'sneak' command, but it will help me to know at least the ways to try to use it in the game properly.
-
I have to stick up for JasonC here (and I bet he's bloody supprised), there are many things in CM that I amoung others haven't mastered or don't know about such as how to effectively employ the sneak command and all the game tactics involved. Since there is so much to learn each player is gonna miss things for a long time, however I don't think no one has yet run the tests on the operation of the sneak order and spotting distances etc, as JasonC is evidently in the process of doing and which he will do well I'm sure. From this thread alone I think it is clear that we need 'sneaking' to be properly looked into and explained.
JasonC is a master of this kind of CM game play grog stuff, so no one get in his way and let him inform us of all the details, and if I have any problem with what he posts I let him know later as he very well knows - from experience.
-
Just a question regarding bunkers placed inside two story builds by senario designers; does collapsing the building have any effect on them or even knock'em out?
-
So Steve why don't you make CMx1.04 combining everything so far with the Spanish Civil War, the early WWII Campaignes 39-41, including the Winter War and add on the Korean War as an all in one onto the old CMx1 engine with minor improvements? How cool would all that be!
O'h and on the subject of this thread I agree that WWII is the most interesting War of all time and will remain so even after we've all gone and the personal reasons for people disapear. For me the NKVD executed or transported to cold Siberian gulags many of my father's relatives while others were pogromed by the Einsatzgroupen, I'd always tried to make sense of all that and understand just how it was that his parents brought him out down here to the land of Oz.
On my mother's side, while their had been more of them both in and who died in WWI, my Grandfather was an RTO on a bomber plane based in Darwin for the most part, but his older brother was captured at Sinapore and died after surviving the Sandarkan Death March by being bombed by allied bombers. Now that's not just bloody ironic, because yes my Grandfather was in those arial attacks, I've checked!
[ September 25, 2005, 09:45 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]
-
Hmmm, very interesting JasonC thanks for explaining your tests and you're right further tests now ought to be carried out on the sneak command etc. I'll bloody have to start doing me own if I want to be good and use it.
So, who's disappointed?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Overseas, since my country's land is apparently girt by it.