Wengart
-
Posts
431 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wengart
-
-
Wouldn't jumping into a crater reduce your chance of being hit because you are now below the level of the ground?
Assuming of course that you are not leaving a trench or some other prepared position for the shell hole.
-
the statement "...the tank busting p51 have arrived...", was the biggest disappointment i had with the movie.
I just wonder if that quote is that terrible. I mean for an infantrymen during the second world war I could see this being a quite believable statement.
-
I can run it on Ultra around 40-50 fps. But I have a GTX 470, 8 gigs of DDR3 ram, and an I7 3 ghz processor. Although I was expecting to be getting over 60 out of it.
-
I think this shows we are generally all in a age bracket that we found WWII as entertainment. It was in the shows we watched, our fathers had served in that war, those around us from the generation before had stories and so forth. I think many of us started long ago in the hobby and you see us still in it today. Yes we pick up others from other age brackets. But the poll reflects the large number that has followed through all of the phases of developement and change
Interestingly enough out of 22 people I'm the only one under 21 and the only one who started with CM:SF.
-
I thought the number of people starting with CM:SF would have been higher.
-
-
-
-
-
Green Man Gaming currently has Red Orchestra 2/Heroes of Stalingrad reduced by 35%. The digital Deluxe edition becomes 33$ and the standard becomes 27$.
Both activate on Steam with all Steam bonuses and afaik no regional cutting.
PM me for details and the 20% off vouchers.
-
I have some good memories of Mare Nostrum but unfortunately the maps were of a spotty quality which combined with the setting really hurt it.
As for RO:HOS you can buy the original Red Orchestra off Steam for 10$ and then get RO:HOS for 10$ off.
Also there is a pacific expansion coming out for RO:HOS some months after it's released and a Vietnam mod called In Country currently being worked on.
-
It would be nice if the squad selected someone to shoot at the TC. Rather than having the whole squad open up.
I don't really have an issue with buttoning TCs, but it's done in such a way that it invariably reveals the position of the troops, and if your opponent has HE chuckers or artillery that spells disaster.
-
Tanks may model armor now. I know in a few mods they do, not sure if that got introduced in OA though.
-
A delay command would also be nice. No reason the player shouldn't be able to push the fire time of a barrage up a few minutes/.
-
heh heh, funny, but bound to get somebody's hackles up.
"Mr Charles have a da fish. The seabass is a very very nice." "I'd like the lobster." No? No one a fan of the Thin Man movies?
Jon's point (and one I humbly agree with) is there are a lot of options in the game. The ability to apply tactics to resolve a situation is what the game encourages. Yeah it can take some time and odds are some helpful suggestions from other folks (thanks Michael, I like that sniper team idea) will help increase one's learning curve. Instead there are innumerable threads to get the AI to take over more and more of those choices. This isn't to say all are bad (I'd love an armored covered arc for my AT assets), but the place to start is to ask what is possible instead of just throwing one's hands in the air and saying, "I know what I want to have happen, why can't the AI do it"? Granted that doesn't help the Computer apply those tactics, but how much programming time are folks expecting BFC to have to develop the AI?
I personally do make the effort to force the opposing TCs to button up. I have seen what it does to my own ability to observe and have seen the AI use it to good effect to prevent my Shermans from giving good fire support.
My point was if your going to bother replying in a vague unhelpful way don't reply at all. If you do decide to reply, reply in a way that is helpful and clear to the other party.
I'm not saying that there needs to be a "hold fire" command or anything. I'm saying tell them to use a cover arc.
Besides there's a difference between having the AI take care of tedious micromanagement for you and having it "play the game for you". Most, if not all, of the threads on AI I've seen are of the former.
-
So? There's a lot of things not in the manual, including a recipe for a really delicious fish pie.
You have a brain between your ears. You know what effect you want to achieve. You know - or should be able to figure out - what the various orders already extant do. The next step is simply using and combining the available orders in creative ways to acheive the effect you want. There are, what ... 20-30 odd separate orders? The combinatorial options there are quite staggering. Use you head. Solve your problems. That's the point of the game, surely?
Or, you can continue to demand that BFC 'fix' the AI so it solves your problems for you, and plays the game for you too.
If your going to bother posting instead of being unhelpful and generally annoying by saying yes there is. You could explain to them how to do it.
That is already in the game.Not helpful ^
You can use a short cover arc to prevent your unit from firing.
helpful^
Alternatively you could just not post a reply.
-
Playing Real-time doesn't solve his problem in a satisfactory manner. Hell that shouldn't even be brought up as a "solution".
-
The hide command will do it iirc, unless you give a cover arc. Otherwise a short cover arc, will do the same without the negative spotting attributes.
-
That's why I said depending on location
But yea, fortifications are quite expensive and in general hard to place. Currently the only one I find really worth taking is the TRP.
-
Depending on the location an M-kill is just as good as a destroyed tank.
-
They probably won't, slow is just a movement type and is a somewhat crude replacement for the true hunt command. Although your tank will move slowly it will not stop to engage targets.
-
We are looking into this as there may be some tweaks needed. The overall concept of the behavior is, however, sound. Some early tests shows in one situation 100% buttoning of tanks within a few seconds, 33% chance of causing a TC casualty. That was at "point blank" range for the tanks, but about 150m or so from the infantry.
Let's just keep in mind that at 500m an unbuttoned TC with binoculars can do a LOT of damage to infantry. A lot. The infantry TacAI doesn't try to engage unbuttoned tanks reliably until about 350m, which is getting close to the tank being practically on top of the infantry. If you haven't started to engage a tank by that range you have to wonder about what would be going through your little infantry's minds
Realistically there should come a time when a tank is so close that merely pointing it's gun in the direction of an infantry unit should have a chance of causing it to Panic and run for the rear. But that would be extremely hard to pull off realistically (i.e. without gamey abuses and unrealistic results on balance). Therefore, part of the issue here is that infantry in real life wouldn't stick around to either fire at the tank or get butchered by it.
Steve
I think you may want to look into troops in concealed positions specifically, if possible. They are often not under threat from the tank until after they begin to fire.
-
Landing on the beaches of Omaha was also suicide. Going into the Adrennes forest as part of the 101st was suicide. Men still did it. See my point about modern perspectives.
If you want them to hide, tell them to hide.
Also you really seem to be struggling with the concept that they are better off engaging a tank approaching their position that sitting still doing nothing. Covered Arcs solve your other problem of infantry engaging too early. It's tactical suicide to have defenders in exposed positions anyway, so that is YOUR mistake and not a game flaw. Like I said in my earlier post, when defending, put infantry in keyholed positions or reverse slope positions. If three tanks can shoot at your infantry YOU have done something terribly wrong.
I'm not even talking about perspective. I'm talking about verifiable in-game results.
Men in concealed cover (Bocage and houses predominately) open up on tanks that pose no threat to them, until they begin to fire. Sure if the troops are in an open field, and a tank rolls up on them shooting is probably an okay idea. However, for troops in concealed positions it is not the "better" decision for them to make.
I'm also assuming you don't play many scenarios that take place in thick bocage. When you have a field 100-150 M wide maybe 50-100 long its not unusual for a platoon of tanks to roll in with supporting infantry following behind. The bocage itself is, for the most part, proof from direct HE fire, the real issue is revealing your position to indirect fire. In these cases I want my infantry to engage enemy infantry, but not the exposed TCs who will not spot them. Giving them a short cover arc does nothing to help me.
I'm also really glad your speaking for "us". I too have played CM:SF, for two years in fact, and am familiar with the modern battlefield as represented in CM:SF.Those of us who have played CMSF against tanks with modern optics, fire control systems, etc have learnt to deal with enemy armour to a degree of lethality well beyond CMBN. We don't set up our infantry in the tops of buildings or at the tops of hills. We don't set up our infantry without covered arcs or hide orders. Learn, Adapt.To be completely clear. I am not talking about men in exposed positions. I'm talking about men in concealed position that often offer good amounts of cover. I am emphatically not talking about troops on the "tops of buildings or at the tops of hills"
Right now I could put a hedgerow under observation, roll a unbuttoned tank into the field, wait for them to try to shoot Mr. TC, spot the defenders, and proceed to destroy them with indirect fire.
-
Here's something to try when this happens:
Lets say your squad is behind a hedgerow and a Panther is in the open 100M from your position and your doggies open up on it. First of all you should have a bazooka and a 100m shot is worth taking because you might immobilize or even damage the gun or better yet make the crew dismount.
After firing for 30 seconds to a minute, split off your AT team if you have one, and disengage 1 action spot behind the bocage, this will cause the Panther to lose sight of your squad. Now move the squad in one direction Parallel to the headgerow (25M-50M) and your AT team in the opposite direction but maybe a little farther so he can get a flank shot on the Panther.
Now have your squad move back up to the bocage and engage the Panther, Give the AT team a slight pause so that the squad can start firing and distract the Panther. Now move the AT team up to the bocage and if you've timed it correctly you may have a decent flank shot with your AT team.
If this doesn't work rinse and repeat but keep changing positions so the Panther has to take time to reacquire the target. Remeber your doggies are squishy but they are more mobile than the kitty.
If your in this position and you have no AT assets then run like heck and curse the scenario maker for making a mission where your faced with armor but have no AT assets. you can even send him a PM and tell him what you think of his scenario.
If its a QB and you forgot to purchase any AT assets then you have no one to blame but yourself ...
Okay I guess that about covers it.
I've never had this issue while playing as the Americans. Probably because their usually well equipped and the Germans have a scarcity of armor. This is a much larger issue when you're trying to do a defense in depth and your only credible AT assets are two PAK40s (Busting the Bocage).
And to be clear I'm not talking about any specific tactical situation.
Steam
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
In lieu of a proper game lobby you could easily create a Steam group where you could organize games.
Actually here it is.
Took me all of 3 minutes.