Vinnart
-
Posts
2,570 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Vinnart
-
-
Well, the confusion is that it's called a "compass". Most magnetic compasses use a needle which "seeks" magnetic north. The needle on this compass disdains such limitations and rotates with the player, not the earth's magnetic field. So, if you're well trained
I have been trained in compass reading, but I guess it has been such a long time since using one I have been able to adapt to the game one without confusion. I think the key to it in game terms is what Ken said, which is it is a "compass", or in proper military terms it would be a “devise, camera, pointing”, and not a compass literally. The good thing is there are mods out there for it that seem to be helping people adapt to it.
-
As far as testing on this goes so far we know the inaccuracy penalty applies to a tank when it has been given an indefinite pause with a move order when it has not moved at all. Which we seem to agree doesn’t seem right since it is no different than a tank that also has been stationary. This leads to the follow up questions where no testing has been done as far as I know.
Does this apply to incremental pauses as well? My guess is probably yes in that the coding is treating all pauses the same, and might be rather involved in differentiating different times with different accuracy penalties.
How long does a tank need to be stationary to be at max accuracy? Any answer here would be speculation as I doubt anyone here has experienced being a WW2 tank gunner. Is it 5 sec for crack? 20 sec? 1 min? 5 min for green?
Is the indefinite, and timed pause penalty applying to infantry as well in the same manner?
With the assumption that the penalty applies to all pauses regardless of indefinite, or incremental this could change how one uses units quite a bit. Should one no long split teams with quick hops with timed pauses like Lt. Col. Paulson uses in his Armchair general vids when advancing, or do I get better accuracy if I use assault as there is no pause command involved?
Vanir’s test raises more questions than it answers in regard to how players will use pauses in the future.
The indefinite pause followed by move orders is a valuable tool for those who RT. One uses it so they can think about, and plot the moves before the unit actually moves. It is also used for coordinated attacks.
In WEGO I would say I use the indefinite pause most to have a unit hold up if I have plotted a bunch of orders instead of canceling and having to issue move orders again.
As far as the timed pause the uses are many.
Poor Steve and team, It’s “the attack of the Pause grogs”. Hopfully, they can get it sorted without having to have too many stiff drinks.
-
Battlefront have been strangely defensive of this baffling non-compass. But then "let's make it counter-intuitive" seems to have been their CMX2 UI mission statement.
The arrow points in the direction the camera is pointing in the 3D environment. When playing one is looking in the direction the camera is pointing. I don't see what is so counter - intutive. It sounds simple, and straight forward to me.
-
Despite all I have read here on this by the hyper realism grogs to come up with logical reasons why a tank that has been given a indefinite pause order with a move order (keep in mind it has not moved at all, so it is no different than a tank with no move order) should be less accurate I’m not buying it. Hasn’t moved is no different than hasn’t moved. I’m sorry but I think some are really trying to grasp farts in the air on this one in trying to explain it as logically modeled this way intentionally especially since I am sure no one here has experience as a WWII tank gunner. I think it was not intended as that is a big difference in accuracy shown in Vanir test considering NONE of the tanks moved at all during the test.
In all fairness to Steve, and the team my guess is they never intended this inaccuracy penalty as shown in the test, nor did they ever notice it. Lots of guys here including myself have been playing CM for years and never noticed it. The important thing is that BF is aware of this now, and can look into it.
In this case my preference is to keep it simple for game play. Stopped is stopped, and moving is moving. The faster the tank is moving the more inaccurate while firing on the move.
-
I don't see how either case affects the gunner.
It's the tank commander that tells the driver to move, not the platoon HQ. And it will often be the case where the tank commander actually tells his crew to "shoot and scoot", which is the whole purpose of placing the 10-20 second pause at the beginning of a turn in CM. So, if the gunner is prepared for this tactic then I don't see why there is any detriment to his aim.
I agree, unless someone can tell me the difference between not moving, and not moving. In my mind there is no difference. Stopped is stopped, and pausing should not make a difference in accuracy as it is not moving.
-
Oh, yeah for sure. I have never been able to make use of wind direction in the briefing.
Knowing wind direction is VERY important in deploying smoke effectively, and is really the only time I use the compass. To figure direction just rotate till the arrow points in the direction the wind is coming from, but remember it will be moving toward that back azimuth. If it is moving in a favorable direction it can be a great screen for moving troops behind, and is sometimes the only option that will get you across ground safely.
Funny, more people no go land nav in real life than most other things. I couldn’t believe how many people failed it when I went through it at the NCO academy. Lots of officers wash out of it too during OCS.
-
Nope. I meant in reality a cover arc in conjunction with hide would equal to an ambush. Only my wishful thinking it would work that way in CM.
Now you understand it. Think of hiding as more of a behavior SOP rather than the graphic one sees which is the same as being prone. The behavior SOP is not to engage, stay hidden with head down, while peeping up to look around now and then. One can still give hide + cover arc for ambush, but it is not as effective in reaction time which can result in the enemy seeing the ambushee first. (I have had that happen). This type of ambush is not really an ambush, but rather a more flexible SOP than hide alone. This tells the troop stay hidden (avoid contact), BUT if the enemy moves in the CA zone they may fire. This is more of a self-preservation ambush rather than a tactical planned ambush. Hide + CA is a much slower reactionary ambush, and not as effective. I would use this if I have enemy that is dangerously close to the hidden unit with good chance of it being discovered. In a CA ambush alone the ambusher will almost always spot, and fire first which is more effective. I used to ambush with hide + CA, but found losing the “hide” is much better in reaction time. This quick reaction time is important in getting the first shot off preserving the element of surprise.
As far as ATG tips admittedly I do not have much experience with them as I have found myself on the attack 90% of the time, but as in any ambush terrain concealment is the key, along with an armor cover arc in the AT units case.
-
Yes, good observation, and thanks for bringing this up as there is a big difference in the stats. If the tank is stopped it should not make any difference in accuracy regardless if a move order is given with the pause. I wonder how many "shoot and scoots" were misses simply because of this. I hope BF looks at this.
-
In most situations, when you are setting up an ambush, as long as there is good cover in your setup area it's better to just give units a Cover Arc and not hide them.
The "Hide" order in CM seems to represent a "go fully prone and try to remain unspotted at all costs" SOP, so units on Hide are very well concealed, but also have very poor spotting ability. Think of soldiers fully prone, becoming intimately familiar with the dirt under their noses. Every once in a while, a member of the team will look up briefly, but this only provides the barest minimum of situational awareness.
In comparison, units without a Hide order maintain good situational awareness; as long as they have good cover/concealment and are not shooting or moving, they're still pretty hard to spot (especially small units like infantry AT teams). So a Hide order is usually unnecessary to a good ambush setup.
Personally, I mostly use the Hide order to tell infantry units to go prone and stay prone when I think there's about to be incoming artillery/mortar fire -- Hiding will usually considerably reduce casualties from this type of incoming fire.
I would say what Yankee said is spot on.
DO NOT use Hide for ambush. Use Hide for:
Incoming arty
Evading the enemy when contact is not desired at all. STOP associating HIDE with ambush in your mind. The very word means to avoid detection.
The thing to remember is HIDE is a passive behavior, and that it reduces spotting ability while maximizing concealment (i.e. hugging the ground keeping head down.)
Use cover arc for:
Getting a turret to point direction for tanks.
Setting an AMBUSH zone. The important thing is good concealment terrain to ambush. If you want your ambush to be more like “hide” with better concealment give a SLOW order one action square away so the troops stay prone, and give cover arc. If you want the troops to go prone without moving to another action square give a slow order in the same action square occupied. NEVER give HIDE in association with ambush.
For RECON use a tiny cover arc without hide. Terrain concealment is a must along with a sneaky approach into position. Use slow, or hunt and one can sneak right up on enemy with good spotting.
I know it make take awhile for all this to click in the mindset, at least it did for me, but there is no need for an additional ambush command. The behavior would be no different as using cover arc as it works now.
-
I'm not sure how to test. We don't know where the thrower was in relation to the wall or how he even had LOS to the other side to know anyone was there. For that matter we don't know if that squad was even the intended target.
The Thrower gets the grenade off right before getting killed. The grenade arcs up, and then down hitting the ground on the German side.
Here is the point of impact with the ground. From that point it bounces up a bit toward the wall, and goes through instead of bouncing off the wall as one would expect. The only other theory I can come up with is there must have been a second grenade thrower…. Perhaps hiding in the grassy knoll
There is no way this was going over the wall.
-
I don’t think the abstraction argument washes. The wall is there, and is a solid physical object. It is not an abstraction. If the wall allows for physical objects to pass through it defeats the purpose of the wall being there in the first place. These next shots may shed more light on the strangeness of this.
I went back, and replayed the replay movie, and noticed an oddity with the wall. If you notice it is transparent except for the top. You can see the grenade passing through as if the wall is not there. The last pic catches the grenade as the handle sticks out of the side, but notice the transparency of the wall. In the first pics I posted the wall looks solid, and not transparent. Very strange, but I do not recall loading a “Merlin's Secret Magic German Weapons with grenades that pass through walls mod"
. Must be hopefully a fluke bug.
-
Here’s a first. In this first pic you can see a potato masher on the right side of the wall landing near the base of the wall. It was thrown from across a lawn. I felt I had my troops in an excellent cover position behind the tall wall, but the grenade went THROUGH the wall, and exploded on the other side resulting in pic 2. I have never seen this before, so I do not know if this is a bug, or just a freak occurrence.
-
Yes, I must have hit that lucky sweet spot "trap" just when I needed it. I'm sure it was a "D" model.
-
In my very first PBEM the first tank I took out was a Panther with 76mm Sherman. It was a tense turn as the first 3 rounds bounced off with the last shot penetrating. From the angle it looked like it ricocheted up under the turret if that is possible. I was in a good hull down within 200m, and at about 25 degree angle to the Panther’s front. We were on opposite hills with my tank slightly higher. Luckily the first shot seemed to daze it as it never acquired my Sherman with no return fire. The Panther is tough no doubt, but not invincible. My favorite match for it in Cmx1 was Hellcats. I hope they make an appearance soon. The Hellcat is my favorite as Allied.
-
For those who are having a hard time setting weapons platoon up here is a formation I often start with that has some flexibility, and good C2. I call it the “martini glass formation”. Here the HQ support has the primary function as a forward observer. If I need to move him up further to observe I will move 4th HQ in it's place if I have vehicle radio with mortars. The ammo bearers I use differently in campaigns than in QB. In campaign I try to protect them more by keeping them back, and use them as a reserve or for medic aid for the MG if they need it.
-
My main wish for a QB selection feature is the ability to mix forces (like one can do in the editor to create scenarios). Obviously, it would fit in well with the MG module.
I would like to see that make a comeback too from CMx1. One could make some interesting forces mixes this way. My favorite was mixing British and USA units.
I realy like the freedom to make mix force of ones choosing that is availabe now. I am not speaking of mixing nationalities as above, but mixing armor/inf and whatever. I hope that never goes away, but I think it would be great to bring back the combined force limits option also from Cmx1. This was the option that allowed so many points being spent per type to make a combined force. This was the option I used most for QB games, and it always made for making a balanced force not alowing someone to buy all artillery, MG's or whatever. Like I said I like the freedom of making my force as I see fit, but think the return of combined forces with fixed spending per type ala Cmx1 would be popular, and a help to those who have a hard time putting a balanced force together.
-
Not during a battle. I don't know about between battles of a campaign, but I doubt it.
It would not be very historical to allow depleted squads to recombine while actively engaged in combat. That sort of thing, if it happened at all, would occur during some quieter time between bouts of combat.
Michael
Actualy, adhoc units were rather common on D-day with all the chaos, and loss of commanders from my understanding. I recall 82nd guys mixed with 101 guys happening on the drop. There was an 82nd guy in with the 101 guys on the attack at Brecourt Manor. I think it is certainly not the norm, but possible depending on the chaos of the situation.
-
I think it would be good if they brought "jamming" back especially as the MG's are more deadly now. In every movie I have ever seen they always say” wait till he reloads, then we move". Since that will only work RT with timing the "jam" would level things better for WEGO.
-
Yeah, it's current employment is not satisfactory. A good XO should be able to take over if a platoon HQ gets whacked, or to lead an ad hoc battle group. But I am not sure how to define what a "good" XO would possess as defining attributes within the game. Strong leadership and morale factors, I suppose. But what else?
Michael
I think it would be great if XO's could do those things like take over a platoon who lost it's HQ, or have influence over troops cut off from their HQ like Coy commanders can.
-
The BEST use for HQ support as it is now is as a Forward Observer. He can call in fire with his radio. My prefered set up is HQ support up front as FO, 4th HQ with the MG's, and a radio vehicle with the mortars.
-
I always get some 76mm tanks as USA. One must assume they may meet some Panthers, or Tigers. Better to have and not need, than to need and not have. I'd tell her to blow it out her arse, and pick some Panthers next time if she is afraid of 76mm. It is not like a pzrIV can't take out any of the USA tanks anyway.
-
This is one of those things that just works better in the game environment to make pathfinding smoother, and less frustrating. Also, it avoids making road blocks by simply putting a vehicle in an opening, and dismounting the crew. I have no problem with it being as it is in that regard. Sure, it would be cool to push stuff out of the way with a tank, but IMO it probably is more work for BF than it is important.
-
Yeah, but they are making the perfect the enemy of the good. You can buy 320 rounds of 114mm US rockets for fewer points (72) than 2 60mm mortar teams (82 points, 64 rounds). Items that are obviously out-of-whack by huge margins should be corrected.
If something is worth doing it's worth doing well. Well doesn't have to be perfect.
I agree some refining in that particular cost difference sounds more reasonable.
-
Pre-made QB force selections would be a feature that I would not see myself using very often. If I want to pick my forces, I play QBs. If I want my forces selected for me, I play Scenarios. Sometimes, just for the hell of it, I'll play a PBEM QB with computer picks forces for both sides. I personally would not want to see BFC spend man-hours implementing this feature.
I never use the suggestd auto picks for QB, but a player's pre-made QB force selection is something RT multiplayer's would use to speed up getting the game started. A player would make for example a medium 4000 point force and save it to file, then simply upload it for that size battle rather than having to pick it each time. The force would populate then the player modify it, save it, or just hit start to begin the game.
. Must be hopefully a fluke bug.
Gustav Line QB AAR - Allied
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
Very cool to see a QB Meeting Engagement in a preview AAR for a change instead of a scenario. Meeting Engagements are my favorite battles so it is always interesting to see another players purchase choices, and strategy. I think Bil will find those trucks were a VERY good purchase giving him a logistical edge in this type of terrain. This looks like it could be a dynamic fight on this map.
Thanks for restarting with better lighting. It really improves the screen shots.