Zalgiris 1410

I don't know personally about 75mm IG 18 or 150mm sIG 33 accuracy but all sourses and referrences to both IGs describe them as extremely accurate guns especially when compared to mortars, even at short ranges. The Germans bloody loved them. I like your technique proposal about how to employ the IGs in CMx2 if they are actually treated accordingly and as you describe I've always wanted to use them for both kinds of fire, controlled by other observing unit for indirect steep fire and say keyholed/FPF/defilade whatever kind of direct flat angle fire. Sorry I may just be a small minded grog about IGs and yes it is that important to me! [ August 31, 2005, 07:43 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

Great to hear, but does that also mean troops from inside armoured half-tracks, please tell me that ya gonna try it so. :cool:

I did find max. elevation, though -- 75 degrees. That's almost as good as mortars, which usually top out at 80-85 degrees elevation. Don't have time to do the trig for a specific answer right now, but with only a 240m/sec. MV and a 75 deg elevation, a SiG 33 would be able to drop a round in very close. </font>

I'm liking this whole tread, thanks BFC I definately don't want to have to micro-manage each and every single trooper, since my focus is at the squad/team level of control especially considering the large sized games I perfer. Cool diagram Gpig and I also like your lightening bolt 'zap' C&C lines, awesome and better then all those bold red lines that I'm a bit sick of now. I'm all tapped into your descussion with Cpl Steiner on LOS/LOF issues with troops behind walls and the reality of foxhole depth effects on their exposure. Very interesting, my only suggestion to the topic, since I agree with what's been said, is that there could also be sandbagged up foxholes (think of sangars)availlible to be included as an option for such cases as positions behind a wall.

Would definately be good in the sense of being assumedly realistic but should only happen in an emergency such as in an ambush or other tight close fighting at a reduced level of effect because it is from a vehicle and not every member could fire every time.

Boo, each to his own so now I'm thinking that pumpkin pie with whipped cream is the real American Pie as apposed to apple pie at least for Thanksgiving. (Why then only, was it something that the Indians also saved the pilgrams from self induced stavation along with the quince and turkey?)

Well explained MD and now that I understand what might be done with such a UI concept I am absolutely all for it since it would especially help with large maps and big sized battles.

Things to change: 21) Dragon teeth and and other abatis. 22) K 18s the German 105mm field gun availiable for on board deployment on top of the 105mm leFH. 23) Hobarts' funnies at least especially flail tanks and bull dozer tanks. Also Bocage busting Allied tank additions. 24) Penal Battalion option for the Russians with reductions in the number of rifles distributed and handled somewhat like disarmed troops, say with between 2-5 men per rifle. (May be also Ostbattalions for the Germans.) 25) MG battalions for the Commonwealth, the Germans and for the Russians in their Fortification Regions (MMG Divs). Would help with purchasing Coys & Pltns and I would like to see the same treatment with ATGs, for I would like to buy Coys or at least Pltns of those like as with AFVs. Things not to change: 6) Keep Katyushas and Nebelwerfers even the tracked kind off the on board map. As cool as they might be they don't have a level direct fire capability and I understand this as a perfectly good reason for not having them outside their distant indirect fire role. 7) Keep the rifle grenades capacity in the German Infantry squads and outside of player control, ie under the TacAI direction. However I think that they should have a larger layout of grenades becuase I have a sourse that says that the rifle grenadier was given 5 AP and 10 HE rounds normally. It would be more realistic if they could be fire according to their proper ranges since they were intended to replace the 50mm mortar AIUI. 8) Keep up the ammo, especially allow for the designer to assign higher levels of ammo than normal if they want. Even increase the maximum amount and make it quicker to do so as well please. 9) Keep the capacity for Infantry and teams to be able to ride on top of AFV, though I would like to see them perform a mine and obsticle detection activity that according to their degree of experience would lessen the likelihood of their AFV bogging and avoiding mines. 10) WWII historical focus over game play eye candy or else at least make as much eye candy and game play that reproduces WWII as historically as possible just as I found the CMx1 series to be, thank you. Edit: Sorry for all the posts, I hope I haven't made a massive donkey vote! :eek: [ August 31, 2005, 08:41 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

Things to change: 16) More terrain types such as Beach terrain, proper Orchards and Y road intersections. 17) Phases of the Moon for night fighting even if just no moon -quarter -half -full moon which would effect vision distance for veriety and may be more realistic night fighting. 18) Reinforced concrete bunkers or fighting positions that Infantry and crew weapons can occupy so that such sieges as those of Bardia, Tobruk, Odessa, Sevastopol, etc as well as fortified lines (walls) can be better depicted. 19) A hold fire on the move order for AFVs. 20) Some concept of light wounds category so that troops can stay until the end of a battle or say a day in a campainge but count as a half-casualty in the tally. Same half cost should go for damaged and immobile AFV as well. [ August 31, 2005, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

Things to change: 11) Gun traverse limitations according to stats for effects upon on board guns similar to the penalties that turrettless SP guns face when targeting outside their gun traverse arc. 12) Coned out area fire arcs which will make for much better zoned area suppression effects rather than the case with pin pointed single lined area fire. 13) Individual loadouts of ammo for each differnt weapon in squads so that LMGs can fire off at distance while rifles still keep enough rounds for themselves. BTW I haven't liked the way extra SMGs lower and run down the ammo of squads so much. (ie; IMO it shouldn't matter to the riflemen how many SMGs are in the squad as they both carry their own full loads of personal amounts of different kinds of ammo.) :confused: 14) A move to contact and a fire range setting for all units or types of units that distinguish between tanks and Infantry and MMG and TH teams so that I don't have to set so many individual covered arcs. 15) I wish to see or hear somekind of in game modelling and reporting feedback on say their target braketting by all gun and AFV crews as they fire at specific enemy units.

Things to change: 6) Better night fighting with pistol flares, very lights and with artificial moonlight provided by AA spot lights when documented or acceptiable. 7) OoB table availiable at start, finish and during play to help with checking and finding my units. 8) Provide an ability option to set rate of fire for units and artillery including TOT. 9) Allow for actual though some what retarded spotting against hiden units, considering all those binoculars and have an ability to recon hiden units accordingly. 10) Coloured troops to represent US, colonial French and British Negroes, Indians and esp the NZ 28th Maori Btln.

Things to change: 1) Improved CPU/StratAI that could be used by the player to optionally help with ordering own units, but especially for choice between different solo opponent settings. (Especially StratAI handling of on board mortars, guns, armour and indirect artillery fire plans please.) 2)Formation command of units that are realistic with options that ease control and playability with of course column and follow road movement. 3) Artillery fire patterns that the player can arrange as well as options such as curtain and creeping barages including perhaps with multible batteries. 4) An area of sight / vision freature especially for units and for HQ spotted mortars and artillery teams and may be even for map postions also. 5) Blind fire into and through smoke sceens, dust clowds, fog and at night, also allow actual blind fire by martars and Infantry guns and for plotting artillery. Things to keep: 1) WEGO system though it could be improved by perhaps having optional 30 second turns or elso at least in solo games the ability to interupt at any point to make orders. 2) Small countries as in CMx1 for the variety though I wish I could have Slovakia! :confused: 3) Planes as they are outside of my control and exciting but I wish I could actually see them! :cool: 4) Sandbag positions but not as a terrain tile as in CMAK but like trenches, also rock contructed sangars could be treated the in same way and availliable especially for NA and the ruff. 5) Wide variety of historically accurate ET&O in a WWII setting, just what I always wanted, thank you very much.

I also hope that nebelwerfers have a much better morale sapping effect in CMx2, BTW I've read that they did more killing through air pressure concussion than Russian and Allied rockets.

I have to disagree with you Paul, as there was absolutely a Blitzkrieg in Poland since the surprises that are collectively referred to under the term were pretty much all used in that campaigne. You are right in saying that by and large the German tactics had previously been been used during WWI and certainly the Infantry fought with such, but it was the combining of those tactics with Panzers and air support that made it the surprise that it was. The tactics were developed late in the 1st WW from AIUI the combining of the indirect approach with Sturmtroopen infiltraition tactics along with direct air support. Afterwards built upon the mobility of the Freikorps and not only the addition of Panzers but Guderians' insistance that they be their own operational component in a self-supporting combined arms formation, ie proper Panzer Divisions, equals Blitzkreig as it was all catch phrased. IMHO the Blitzkreig in the West during 1940 was just the clssic example of it, it was the ultimate Shock and Awe Blitzkreig campaigne. [ August 31, 2005, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

Too right Mace even in dreary Melbourne to be sure! :cool:

A battle with 8-10 platoons is practically a battalion, 8-10 squads though would be a company fight but too small for my liking. (Sorry to nit pick.)

1) I assume you mean 'sauce', not 'source'. 2) Mint is vile on meat. 3) And what the hell are you doing with the 'pumpkin'? No one eats fecking 'pumpkin'. Not even Aussies. Or is 'pumpkin...bean...' an Aussie code or alcohol derived slang term for some sort of 'back door beauty' insertional device? </font>

I have to agree with Ardem on the playability of large scale battles, it has been IME much more fun for me to fight with Battalions up in CMx1 than with single or only a handfull of Companies. I find them too small and frustrating at times. IMO CMx1 allows for the Rgmt vs Rgmt scale battles quite well, I'm not denigrating Coy vs Coy scale arrangements it handles them well enough if they're to your taste. However I haven't enjoyed Pltn vs Pltn scale battles in a serious way, though they can be a lot of fun when I treat them trivially.

Things to change: 1) Improved CPU/StratAI that could be used by the player to optionally help with ordering own units, but especially for choice between different solo opponent settings. (Especially StratAI handling of on board mortars, guns, armour and indirect artillery fire plans please.) 2)Formation command of units that are realistic with options that ease control and playability with of course column and follow road movement. 3) Artillery fire patterns that the player can arrange as well as options such as curtain and creeping barages including perhaps with multible batteries. 4) An area of sight / vision freature especially for units and for HQ spotted mortars and artillery teams and may be even for map postions also. 5) Blind fire into and through smoke sceens, dust clowds, fog and at night, also allow actual blind fire by martars and Infantry guns and for plotting artillery. 6) Better night fighting with pistol flares, very lights and with artificial moonlight provided by AA spot lights when documented or acceptiable. 7) OoB table availiable at start, finish and during play to help with checking and finding my units. 8) Provide an ability option to set rate of fire for units and artillery including TOT. 9) Allow for actual though some what retarded spotting against hiden units, considering all those binoculars and have an ability to recon hiden units accordingly. 10) Coloured troops to represent US, colonial French and British Negroes, Indians and esp the NZ 28th Maori Btln. 11) Gun traverse limitations according to stats for effects upon on board guns similar to the penalties that turrettless SP guns face when targeting outside their gun traverse arc. 12) Coned out area fire arcs which will make for much better zoned area suppression effects rather than the case with pin pointed single lined area fire. 13) Individual loadouts of ammo for each differnt weapon in squads so that LMGs can fire off at distance while rifles still keep enough rounds for themselves. BTW I haven't liked the way extra SMGs lower and run down the ammo of squads so much. (ie; IMO it shouldn't matter to the riflemen how many SMGs are in the squad as they both carry their own full loads of personal amounts of different kinds of ammo.) :confused: 14) A move to contact and a fire range setting for all units or types of units that distinguish between tanks and Infantry and MMG and TH teams so that I don't have to set so many individual covered arcs. 15) I wish to see or hear somekind of in game modelling and reporting feedback on say their target braketting by all gun and AFV crews as they fire at specific enemy units. Things to keep: 1) WEGO system though it could be improved by perhaps having optional 30 second turns or elso at least in solo games the ability to interupt at any point to make orders. 2) Small countries as in CMx1 for the variety though I wish I could have Slovakia! :confused: 3) Planes as they are outside of my control and exciting but I wish I could actually see them! :cool: 4) Sandbag positions but not as a terrain tile as in CMAK but like trenches, also rock contructed sangars could be treated the in same way and availliable especially for NA and the ruff. 5) Wide variety of historically accurate ET&O in a WWII setting, just what I always wanted, thank you very much. [ August 31, 2005, 02:06 AM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

This has been interesting but I'm a still a bit of a ludite so generally when I talk about the AI I'm referring to the CPU opponent StratAI not the TacAI. (Too complicated for me, but great so far IME in CMx1 thanks for that.) As someone who has never actually played against a human opponent (I don't count myself as one) my main interest is in the area of StratAI immprovement for CMx2 to increase the enjoyment of solo play. Essentially I would like to have the CPU opponent able to use artillery and on board mortars properly, make co-ordinated attacks, know when and how to tow guns forward on the attack and to set up and fight on the defence effectively etc. All StratAI resonsibilities to be sure. Also I would like to be able to choose or radomise between different StratAI opponent setting options to provide veriety and to increase re-playability of battles. Senario designers should suggest which option they think should be chosen for solo play, they could even nominate a few options that might be unwarrented and be unavailliable if they are realy concerned. This kind of arrangement could even be used in multi-player games if one of the players could no longer continue or there weren't enough players to begin with and thereby provide a specifiable CPU/StratAI opponent fill in, hopefully more adequitely according to the situation. An improved CPU/StratAI could also be use by a player in either solo or human vs human as an optional subordernant commander of certain elements or to deal with unplotted or forgotten about units. This would also allow the player to concentraite on what's important to them or even provide them with different recommendations from which they could follow or interpret their own solution from. IME some techniques to use for getting around some of the CPU/StratAI poor tactics have been to give it planes which it doesn't control instead of Artillery spottered assets since it fires them all at one central place though rockets fire too wide for it to totally foul up with. It does also seem to do much better with re-inforcement arriving or else as first turn surpressed Artillery spotters in designed senarios. Bearing in mind above give it light mortars or off board 81mm mortars instead of othem on board. It doesn't employ Infantry guns properly either and doesn't move guns forward effectively when on the attack, even just to get them in range of targets. Appart from attatching them to vehicles and making the CPU opponent unable to adjust them the only over option is to exchange a few guns for spottered assets as above or for SPA which it tends to use without due care. I am seeing posts including improved AI in the main poll thread and I have been reading them as I imply I would at the start of this post- as calls for a much better CPU/StratAI opponent for solo play. (Sorry to be winging, doesn't mean that I haven't been greatful for what was manged in CMx1.) Edit: What I would really like as a player is to be albe to employ as a hotkey is an option where the StratAI provides order according to a nominated tactical precept which is also adjustiable though that can be set by me at a default if their are options during a game. This would help me to handle large scale battles that I tend to play and I think it would immprove playability especially for others to ensure that they can keep up while against human opponents on line. (I like to imagine it as depicting an orders group so having a reset button like with artillery plotting would be important for this too.) Am I asking too much? [ August 30, 2005, 08:49 PM: Message edited by: Zalgiris 1410 ]

I feel that you may be asking too much for the senario design perspective. That said, I agree with you about the problem of the behaviour of the AI from plenty of experience. I hope that at least there is some good tweaking of the AI's own programming to keeping units in good positions when on the defence. However hopefully it could be arranged as a options chioce setting for AI before battles that range between hold at all cost-elastic-counter attack as mush as necessary etc. In that case I would be up to the senario designer to suggest which option he recommends while allowing players the ability to try others or a default or random AI tendancy. Especially good in case the designer was wrong or not to players liking and for the replayability of designed battles etc. That's what I would like to see in CMx2, the cioce between different AI opponent options settings rather than just one hopefully default good AI opponent.

Good example of the difference between what I meant above by operational assistance as aposed to tactical airial recce able to be immediately followed upon, thanks Andreas. BTW you seem to have an unrealistic opinion of the Pizza Hut delivery service, IMO!

I agree that if cracking armour could be depicted it would be cool and a bit more realistic but if it can't be included in CMx2 I must say that I would like to see some sort of an account of damage done to AFV especially in terms of points accumilation that are also attributed to the firing units who inflicked the damage. At lest for AFV with damaged guns and turretts.

I would suggest to put in some better accents and national characteristic lexicions employed by the troops for example especially the Aussies bloody oath, I was more than a little disappointed that the mungrels spoke just like as if they were pommy barsteds! It would have been a bewdy if we weren't lumped under the collective British tainting tag yet again, hey fallahs. (Cooee, or am I alone in this?) I'm sure others would appreciate the added sence of being there, ay. Call me a wanker but I think anyone would agree that it's just not cricket. (Especially for the Ashes at the moment.) :eek:

Yes they had air liason officers but they were more for the targeting of supporting bombing attacks than for receiving recce observations at the tactical level as Dorosh posted. Certainly recon flights were an important capability and the Luftwaffe devoted much resources to it especially for the early Blitzkrieg but it was more operational than tactical though there was a tactical aspect to it. However, AFAIK, pre-battle tactical airial-photography was definately used as well as running battle observation made but I think that there was a time delay in the processing and dissimination of this material down to the tactical level far outside the scope of CM scale battles. I do know of plenty of instances where airial photos were used in the planning of smale scale actions, especially of assualts on prepared positions but no where have I come across a source where direct battlefield airial recce obsvervation was able to be immidiately exploited tactically. I can think only of it being used to check or ajust artillery fires may be but not for against pin point individual unit targets as apposed to say deep counter battery fire where it might have been used, though to what degree I'm not sure.