mav1
-
Posts
296 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by mav1
-
-
Its hard to get supression against troops in cm at the moment. Troops in the building have to shoot throgh the doors and windows which can be covered by suppression fire. But in cm they carry on blazing away even when being shoot at. No considering goes in to the way when you are being fired at your return fire is less accurate than not being shot at.
-
Its something you can't do at the moment. Hide behind a wall, building or hedge, then the soldier pops his head round the corner and fires hes gun then hides behind the coner again. You can't do this because you wouldn't have los round the corner at the moment. You have to move the soldier round the coner into the open, then fire.
-
I think thats becuse the 76mm gun is undermodelled.Originally posted by MikeyD:I *think* a Lend-Lease Sherman's 75mm gun can pierce a Stug's 80mm front, something a T34's 76.2mm gun has a hard time with.
In terms of sheer fun I think I narrowly prefer CMBB to CMAK (Eastern Front is cooler). But perversely, my favorite tank in-game is the Lend Lease 76mm diesel Sherman! Go figure.
-
The same thing happened to me. I managed to take the right flank. But in the end I got slaughtered But that was ages ago and I have improved as a player, so I will have another go. Iam sure the right flank is the key to winning the battle, or taking the house in the front middle of the hiil.Originally posted by Clark7848:Curious if anyone has had success playing the Finns for this battle? The Russian's seem to be extremely well dig in. I've had moderate success taking the right flank east of the cemetary.
Thanks for your feedback in advance.
-
Well, the centurion missed ww2 by a few days, they could of squeezed it in.Originally posted by John Kettler:mav1,
You're welcome! The Super Pershing was included, I believe, because it saw combat, whereas the Centurion did not. The most advanced British tank in CMBO is the Comet.
Regards,
John Kettler
So why did the americans not build the super pershing instead of the pershing after the war?
-
I think the soldiers in cm tire too easy and take too long to recover. They don't recover when they walking, which you would do, to go running again. What does everyone else think?
-
Will there be an editor for the campaign? If not why not?
-
Thanks for the info John Kettler. If they put the super pershing in cmbo, they could of put the centurion in. The British needed something better than what they have.
Why didn't the americans build super pershings rather than the ordinary pershing after the war?
[ August 07, 2006, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: mav1 ]
-
What is a super pershing? I know the americans developed a pershing with a high velocity gun. Also another pershing with more armour. But i don't know of a pershing with a high velocity gun also with thicker armour.
-
So Hungarian tank hunting teams can have panzerfusts if you don't edit them, thanks for the info. I can't understand why you can't choose this in the setup.
BfC were slack with Infantry anti tank weapons, theres no early sovier anti tank granade and theres no British anti tank granade in cm.
-
It would be good to have a choose of choosing individual weapons for the infantry rather than the game doing it for you. Choosing the length of your attack for area fire would be useful, rather than having to area fire for the full 60 seconds. So if you wanted to area fire for 30 seconds and save your ammo you could do this.
-
It would be nice to have different backgroung terrain choices. In cm its allways mountains or hilly terrain. But if you are doing an amphibous assault on the coast of Syria it will look weired if there a mountain in the middle of the mediterranian sea behind you. So instead why not have sea background terrain. As well you can have town, forest and flat ground disappering into the distance, background terrain.
-
What about two set of seperate equipment setup's for two player game on the same map? This will mean the opponents will not know what type of forces the opponent will have to face up against. Like in real war you will be surprised at what you come up against. At the moment you dont know where your opponent forces will be on the map but you do know the type and strength of the forces he/she has.
-
Yes you are right MickeyD, troops do surrender more easily in cmak than cmbb. But should that be the case for the Soviets at the beginning of the war. At this time the Soviets did not know of the brutality of the Germans and were ready to surrender when in trouble.Originally posted by MikeyD:I'd bet mav1 plays CMBB. On the Eastern Front the soldiers are much more willing to lay down their lives for their country because they know the alternative may actually be worse! In CMAK surrenders are much more common. In CMBO in winter (Bulge) scenarios I recall watching in horror as SS soldiers executed their Allied prisoners!
What about surrendering in Shock Force. Would the americans dare to surrender to religous fanatics? Would the fanatics take prisioners for propaganda purposes? So that they behead their prisioners later for internet and tv coverage.
-
I dont see why you can not make a cm game based on the Arab Israeli of the wars of 1958, 67 and 73.
These battles were similar to the wars of ww2 but with more modern weapons. For me it would be more fun than usa against Syria in 2007. The battles with be even because the equipment was very equal between the sides (even though Israel won all three wars). Theres less of the disparaty of quility of equipment like the german tanks and the allied tanks of ww2 and the weaopons of the usa compared to Syria.
-
What about a breakdown option for vehicles in shock force for operation and campaign games? So that theirs a chance that a vehicle will suffer a breakdown. Vehicles that are more prone to breakdown's will suffer more chances in it happening. It just would be more realistic.
Like in cmx1 were the king tiger might be all supreme but it has a high chance of suffering a breakdown. While the Sherman is very realible.
This option would be optional, to turn on and off becuse it would get on some players nerves.
Regarding fuel consuption, fuel would be taken account for vehicles in operations and campaign battles. So that if forces are badly supplied they will suffer fuel problems. So that on the map vehicles would have limited travel capacity or become immobile when the fuel runs out.
This would stimulate things like the German fuel supply problem towards the end of war2 and the possibility of the Syrians having small supplies of fuel towards the end of the war with the usa.
-
It seems strange that Romanians and Finns get panzerfausts in cmbb while the Hungarians dont.
-
What is this Hotseat mode you write of? :confused:Originally posted by PseudoSimonds:Like the Hotseat mode that is already in CM? :confused:
-
What about a two player option for tha game. So that you play one turn and then your friend plays the next turn. I don't know why this can't be done, since you can have individual turns for you and your friend. I don't see why you have to have internet access to play against a human opponent.
-
Yes that's all true C'rodgers, I don't dispute what you have written. Actually in cm I think it's too hard to suppress a unit, than it is in real life.
The point I was making is that no cover existes. That does not mean you are automatically hit by enemy fire if you are in no cover. It all depends on the acuretsy of the enemy soldiers and wether you have covering fire. Just like sgtgoody wrote its hard to target men even in open terrain.
But some people think that open terrain dosn't exist and that every area is covered with cover. Like in cm were open terrain is not actually open terrain, so that no open terrain exsists in the game.
Its all abstracted in cm and would be better if it was less so in CmX2. Were you could create liitle dips in the land and individual rocks other individual cover. So that you wont have to abstract dips and individual cover into a terrain square tile. The problem being that every square terrain tile in cm has some form of cover.
-
I don't blame the other tanks, the Jagdpanther is a very attractive Tank.Originally posted by Earl Grey:Apart from that, THERE IS NO SUCH THING as late/early model Panther D's. Common misinterpretation of the photographic evidence we have.
But a lot of people still think there were and most of the books on the topic still claim it. So why bother?
By the way: Did you know the Jagdpanther had very good aerodynamics and therefore the other tanks were so impressed by his looks they coudn't turn away?
<- That's something a book of a so-called 'expert' claims... 
-
Yes I know you can area fire.Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):You can area fire now, just target a point on the battle field rather than a unit.
Squads should never be firing at the same target. Even during movement everyone in the squad is assigned a sector and so every squad would have a fan rather than a point as its area of fire. Firing at targets outside one's sector often is impossible because the rest of the squad often can't see what everyone else sees without moving out of position, a definite no-no.
But is the squad only firing in that small section that you have selected as your area fire. Rather than a broad sweep of a larger area. Like I gave the example of the anti tank rifleman. Unless you have several units firing area targets you wont supress the anti tank rifle team. One unit won't suppress an unseen unit anti tank rifle with area fire targetting, unless you now were the unit is hiding.
[ July 19, 2006, 05:10 AM: Message edited by: mav1 ]
-
Individual units never surrender when I play the game. They prefer to rout were they get slaughtered, even green troops, rather than taking the sencible option to surrender.
By the way MickeyD, I do like to play CMBB the most. But I like to think that the Germans and Russians are more civilised in the game than in the real war. Just like the British.
-
Yes everytime all the turns are complete, in each turn, the computer would rest, refit and resupply all your units like in operations, so you wont have to manually refit your units yourself. The difference being you can't move your units like you can after a battle in opereations. To me this was strange because it left a gap of time between battles. I much prefer a system were units are actually are resting or sleeping rather than an artifical time being created between each battle. Or another way is to remove the unfit unit after the battle for it to rest and put back in the game later on as reinforcements or at the start of another battle.
Yes your right each battle has to be played each turn, with each battle with the same turns so that all the battles are syncranized with each other. Each battle forms a grid of a campagain.
I know it might be a pain for some fighting each battle for one turn then having to go to another battle. So you can change the turn limit for each battle to your liking. so that you can play 10 turns before you move to another battle. You would lose some sycranicity between each battle but it wont effect the game too much.
The problem with the new cm campagin game is that the battles are too artifical with the flag in the middle of each battle.
I can't think of another way of formimg a large scale campaign, than the idea I have given. So do you have ideas longleftflank?
Mortars against trenches
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Mortars in cm seem to be totally ineffective in cm against trenches. Even though they were invented for this purpose. They do no injuries against the troops and have no supression effect.