Wrath of Dagon

That was during Kursk, there was so much dust the Russians didn't realize the tanks driving next to them were German, so the Germans took out almost the entire column at point blank range.

Why would you want a Tiger when you can have a Panther? Unless you like to expose yourself.

I think we need to wait until after TOW3 is released.

I still can't believe Battlefront doesn't see the value in this.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/02/16/norman-wisdom-a-combat-mission-qa/#more-51163

No, there's no random stuff, that's all taken care of by the quick battle system. Btw, you can have quick battles against AI, right? How does that work without AI scripting? The only thing the campaign AI would have to do is distribute the defending forces fairly evenly across the front line. The reason they haven't done it IMO is they see no value in it, they're afraid of criticism if they release something this rudementary in a commercial product, and they're so philosophically opposed to a dynamic campaign they won't even consider any suggestions.

So creating just the maps you need for a campaign generator shouldn't be that much worse than creating a full campaign now. As far as importing and exporting data, that should already be done for the current campaigns, no? Don't know how it would work with Quickbattles though, but in any case it might be possible to use savefiles to import and export data.

Yeah, I know they won't, I'm hoping someone else might step up. I might try it if I had more time. How do people make campaigns then? Edit: Or do you mean an operational map?

I know all about it. IMO the reason it faltered is they tried something very immense and complicated to start with, would've been great if they succeeded, but oh well. What I'm proposing is something very rudimentary, literally as I described with no other features.

I wonder how difficult it would be to write a program which supports an operational map made up of multiple BN maps. The player then selects which tile to attack, while the AI distributes its forces evenly along the front but forces from adjacent tiles participate in the battle. The info is then fed to Quickbattles and results are fed back to build a new front line, including forces brought from reserve.

I was just thinking the same thing. But of course we all know the Americans were illiterate, so it wouldn't do them any good.

I don't know that for a fact, but logically it would be part of his training/intelligence briefing. Edit: But hell, why waste the effort on testing and intelligence, they probably just told him "you'll figure it out through experience".

I disagree entirely.

Yes, like a listing in the game

It may be cumbersome, but you don't have to do it every time, only until you get the idea of what a given match up is like. Chance to kill was a good feature, agreed, but by the time you use it it may very well be too late, it doesn't help to do tactical planning. As far as JPzIV, the setup screen in the AAR says it's late, and according to Wikipedia (lol) the late 48's had 80 mm of frontal armor, which is what I'm betting it is.

Well thanks, hopefully I can Alt-tab out of the game to use that. I was just using that as the most recent example, the gun type would be another. Funny that all those hits from the Shermans at close range didn't kill it though if the armor is that thin. That's exactly the point, you need to know the rough chances to kill something, or to be killed by them, to make an informed decision, and right now I don't see how the new display gives you that.

The new armor chart is useless since it doesn't tell you against what specific gun the ratings are given. Short 75, long 75, long 50? Looks like I'm going have to use the chart in the CMBB guide I have, I need to know the armor thickness of the JPzIV in the AAR, and I don't have it memorized.

Grogs aren't the only ones who play CM, casual players won't play it regardless, but beginners have to start somewhere. In CMSF, the granularity was much larger, it's pretty easy to figure out M1's capability compared to Bradley. With with all the variation of equipment in WW2 knowing the exact match ups of different version/ammo combos at a given range becomes crucial. A beginner is unlikely to apreciate the difference between a Sherman75 and 76, or a T34/76 vs 85. He's probably going to think any Sherman sucks and the T34 is the greatest tank ever because the History channel said so.

You'd have to lose a lot of battles before you figure that out on your own. Imagine trying to figure out the difference between a 75mm and 76mm without any solid numbers to go on. CMx1 tables were a perfect way to communicate the capabilities of arms and armor against each other. If a gun goes from orange to yellow, what the hell does it mean in practical terms?

Every business with employees has an Employer Identification Number IRS tracks them with. Generally the only things a private company has to report is tax related information, but that's all strictly confidential.

Being clutter is just a question of which messages are important enough to display. Also "unit destroyed" messages could be highlighted in red. It would certainly save some visual scouring of the map if a message log was available.

That was necessary to defeat the fascists comrade.

It would be useless to have an East front game if we can't see burning Russian wheat fields, to illustrate the bestiality of the fascist invader!

Are 76mm and 85mm AA above reversed?

Hyperthreading won't do a thing if sofware is single-threaded. Multi-threaded software will still run fine on a single core, but the amount of work to get it there is huge and is much better used elsewhere, for stuff people actually care about. Edit: Multi-core is very advantageous to single tasking if and only if that task is multi-threaded, for example if LOS checks are in a different thread from AI.