A Canadian Cat

As much as I would like to see more content I really hope the do *not* do that. Last thing we need is a fractured and forked community with fantasy weapons running around (perhaps that speaks to my fear of silly things being created rather than a justifiable fear).

LOL yeah but you are getting your licks in that is for sure.

Is there going to be a sub forum there? I do not see one now... Edit to say: OK I"m a dolt and do not ready enough. The thing that says General Discussion is the General Discussion for Combat Operations - just like it says right there above it.

Dang it - I just watched the turn. The amazing thing is that is pretty much the last place I saw that AT gun way back when it was being brought up. What the heck is it doing there? It is a totally insane place to use to defend the town. I expected it to be keyholed between some buildings not hiding behind them. Crap took the risk and lost a tank. Another one is at risk. Not a good moment.

LOL - oops. Yeah I have no idea how I came to that conclusion reading it again it was pretty clear what you were asking. I really don't know but you might find it difficult to operate in the woods or towns with out some infantry to keep an eye on your blind spots.

Is it gamey - beats me but I would be happy with that US force. The 3 155 batteries and the UAV could mean up to 9 burning AFV's right there - once your Tunguska is dealt with. Making an infantry light force come to me with Javelins is not a bad place to be.

Yeah, that sucked. The current Storm in the east completed round 1 and has games going on in round 2 and 3 simultaneously so we are getting better at managing this stuff.

I just had a look at Kick Starter - yes, you can. When you log in you can select the projects you are / have backed. Once you are on the CO page you will see your backing level and near it a button "Manage". If you click that you can change your pledge level.

Thanks, actually time is running out But that's OK I think I am making real traction...

OK, got it - mind you how was I supposed to know you knew more than I do about Open GL At any rate what I really meant was to point out that unlike many games that just get faster when you have a better graphics card CM needs more CPU power too add zip because the LOS system, ballistics tracking etc is CPU bound. In addition the game is single threaded so getting a faster CPU is more important than getting one with multiple cores. You have inside knowledge of how the rendering is done while I have come to realize that this game has a lot of raw processing going on in the background hence our different perspectives, I guess. Interesting, thank you. Humm, humm, mind you if Nvida's implementation matches better to CM is it really CM that has the issue? Not really an important question since that is not likely to change much in the near future and since it just makes choosing Nvida to play CM stronger. One might not like it but there it is. Well on that we agree - it is the only game I play daily as well. While my machine is primarily for my photo hobby certain choices were made to accommodate CM - Nvida being one of them.

Excellent - glad to help. I would up vote you but I'm out for the day - it has been a good day

I do remember - I thought you were talking about this particular on going battle. But I take it you are reminding us of future fun.

Ah are you looking ahead? Or commenting on my write up. Cause the thought that you saw the next turn and another AT gun showed up is scaring me big time.

??? what ??? Just not sure what you mean by that in this context.

Well, wasting your time - perhaps but the developers *do* read these forums and many suggestions. They just don't respond to every single request. You might not like it but I would rather they work on the game. They have no shortage of good ideas to improve things so even if they miss one or two of your brilliant ideas it will not really hurt the over all progress That is not a half bad idea. I'll try that out. I have to admit I am half worried I'll forget and end up with infantry running off willy nilly - but the hunt idea would help with that. Here is what I do: 1) select the asset I want to use for area fire - the one that cannot see the enemy contact. 2) click on nothing to deselect it and move the camera along a path from that unit towards the target area so you can comfortably see the area 3) press F12 (which selects the last unit that was selected) and press V (to flip the camera around 180 because F12 will swing the camera to face the selected unit) 4) click on nothing again - do *not* change the camera position at all 5) look at where the contact icon is - maybe even put the mouse cursor on it 6) press F12 and V again (that will put the camera back exactly where it was before but now with the unit you want selected and your mouse cursor will be over top of the thing you want to shoot at) 7) press T and area target the place you want It sounds harder than it is I just broke it down step by step. This is something I do every game, multiple times.

Thanks. Yeah I am taking a slight risk pushing around the edge so fast with out securing more buildings, and as you saw I did get punished a bit. The pay off of being able to partially cut of retreat should be worth it. Mind you if I have two burning wrecks in a few minutes I'll feel different. Those buildings near the tanks are getting a fair amount of the lead treatment so I believe the risk is low enough to take. Time will tell if I made a good call or not. Loosing two Bren gunners last turn is going to cause my problems with house clearing though.

So, I am going to chime in here with my observation from a current battle in one of @Kohlenklau's umpired campaigns. The additional challenge and enjoyment I am getting from playing in this operational game based campaign has surprised even me (AAR is on going here: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120243-allied-aar-cmpzc-campaign-the-road-to-eindhoven-dommelen-battle-hex-1-6/). I find my self considering the condition of my company of infantry and tanks much more than normal (I usually play in a way that I care for my troops but this has upped it a notch). I find my self thinking well if this was just a single game for victory points I might "go for it" and be a bit reckless a few times. But in the context provided by the operational layer I know I must work to maintain my force's integrity. Not just because my battalion CO will be upset but just because of the overall operational success. Like I was saying I have really enjoyed the added context. The amount of work that @Kohlenklau (and others) has put into creating the environment is non trivial. If we had an operational layer that had some integration with CM it would be possible for people to play this kind of game without an umpire (sorry man, I am trying to put you out of business here )*. I think that would be really really great. I think a lot of you would find even more enjoyment form CM. * I actually think it would allow @Kohlenklau to do his umpire job even better and offer more scope to a campaign while at the same time many many more CM players could enjoy this feeling of playing inside a greater context because there are only so many umpires around.

Nice Electric Light Orchestra! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system In a nut shell it was developed to help rate chess players and is used for lots of other games too. It allows the comparison of performance between players who might have never actually played against each other but play against others in a pool of players.

I don't really agree with this part. Sure, you need a good graphics card and if you buy AMD you are hampering your self a bit (my assessment is that this is due to ATI's unwillingness to spend time on their Open GL drivers and their quality control issues rather than anything BFC is doing). But if I had to choose between a Nvida 760 with a 4Ghz i7 processor vs a 780 and a 3Ghz i5 processor I would take the faster processor and the slightly lessor graphics card. Unlike many games out there the CPU is doing some heavy lifting in CM and to help the game load turns and calculate the turns faster more CPU power is beneficial. I currently have a Nvida 760 with an i5 3.4Ghz processor and have no problems running it with the best quality graphics settings at 1080p.

I agree whole heatedly here.

Let me start by saying you might not like everything you are about read in my post. I assure you I am not being glib or trying to offend. If I have done a poor job of my diplomacy please be forgiving I am really just trying to help. If this discussion can be productive and reasonable I'll stay involved and add more but if not I'll take no offense and move on to some other thread. This I totally disagree with. Well OK maybe not totally - QBs can be a bit "he who buys the right stuff wins" I play mostly scenarios where that factor is some what mitigated. I find that using good tactics is on average more important than the actual gear you are using. Obviously if you picked straight light infantry and you opponent has a lot of armour you are going to have a bad day. Play scenarios - scenario designers carefully avoid choosing forces that are totally out of whack. OK even that is a generalization cause they sometimes do that for effect. So, the US gear does have the advantage. I am glad you acknowledge that. The thing is so much of modern combat is whom ever gets the first hit wins. What leads to getting the first hit - first to spot. So, if you have one vehicle that can spot and acquire the target in N seconds and another that takes N+2 seconds guess which one is going to win most of those fire fights on equal footing. It does not matter a damn if that second vehicle is better and faster than 90% of all the other vehicles on the battle field it still is not as fast as the other guy in this example. So, if we really do have Russian vehicle taking minutes to spot stuff in the open the yeah we probably have a problem. Someone can test for that and see what is up. If someone runs good tests and finds a problem it will be fixed. Now back to the problem at hand: as the Russian player you need to find ways to negate that N+2 seconds disadvantage. Usually that means using the terrain to mask your approach and then get two of your assess against one of theirs (or more but it is tough enough usually to get two to one). Then you can turn that N into N+N if there are two targets for the enemy to deal with and your N+2 guys can get a shot off. Plus if you can get advantage from that terrain you might even do better than that. This is where range comes into play because with lots of vehicles one hit is enough but against and M1 they can shrug off hits easier than anything else (not that other tanks cannot take a hit once in a while but the M1 can take more punishment more often) so as the Russian tank commander if you are only going to get one hit then it needs to kill. That means closing to under 1000m under 800 is better. Your T90s are just as toast if they get hit at 1500m as they are if the get hit at 800m but your chances of killing an M1 are way better at 800m than they are at 1500m or 2000m. So summary, use terrain and maneuver to close to under 1000m and attack with two of your vehicles against one of theirs. All is not lost at long range though the Khrizantema is actually pretty damn good at messing with M1s. They need a good hull down position with cover and distance but their ability to fire a salvo is very handy. In First clash my Khrizantema's scored several kills at long range. Having some tanks in the same area as a Khrizantema can mean that you can cause all kinds of problems for M1s even at rage. Right, I am not expert but some people that are have assessed the combat effectiveness of that system at a certain level. They did that based on what evidence the could get (note I mean evidence not marketing materials). They did the same thing for the US gear. Both have been modelled as they believe the to work in real life. This is not an exact science but real, significant effort has been made. Again totally outside my area of expertise so I cannot asses it personally. So, if you think it is not correct BFC have a history of listening to new evidence or adjusting their interpretation of it when presented with a compelling case. But I should warn you hyperbole and marketing claims do not impress them. This can be hard but you, and everyone else, really has to separate their personal "my nation is the best" feelings from actual evidence or performance. And before some one says "but the US gear is overly powerful" I'll just say my observation is that those with the expertise *did* put their "my nation is best" feelings on the back burner. Another example: the assessment has been made that the US infantry really can call in support assets and the Russian infantry cannot. This is again totally outside my area of expertise but again if the reality is different and it can be show as different you will get traction. One thing I will add is do not mistake connection via comms to the battery as equating can call in a support mission. If the NCO on the radio does not have the training to call and direct that support it really does not matter if he can talk to the battery commander or not. So the assessment about who can call is not just about who has the right radio. I think you are getting into "I'm frustrated and therefore every thing is broken" territory here. I just do not see a massive difference in how well body armour protects infantry. I have had many times where I blasted away at some building only to have the Russian's inside totally nail my guys a few moments later. I get it you seem frustrated my simple advice is don't just call it all sucky and go further down the rabbit hole. A huge factor in this game is you have perfect knowledge of how much damage your guys are being dealt but very little on how much punishment they are dealing back. Just because some exchange looks lopsided does not mean it is. Anyway if you are pissed annoyed about things then every little thing seems to go against you. I just thing this one is just you being frustrated - please do not take offense - none is intended, we all experience that. This I am unclear on. I see lots of Russian sections with radio coms to their platoon leader.

I have some competence in playing the game but no real training in tactics - just discussions with my father and what I have learned from other players who do have training. That includes @slysniper now too. Much appreciated - I have a feeling I am going to get a lesson in our latest game too.

Plus, there should probably be a discussion about should gunners even be using the lazer at 300m ranges. Especially if they know the other guy will just wheel around on them if the do.

My handling of forests has certainly evolved. Seeing some work done to create forests with one tree per tile I was floored. No more three and four trees per tile as standard for me (not saying none but not standard). It was a real eye opener for me recently when I was creating a forest and intentionally created a thinned out area - less than 50% light forest and lots of empty tiles with never more than one tree per tile for the 50% plus a few more. Then I went into the 3D preview and discovered I could not tell the difference between my thinned out area and the main forest from just 50m away. Wow, back to the editor to take out even more trees. Having said that don't knock forests too much. They are challenging but it sure is satisfying to finally succeed in clearing one. I have nearly totally infantry only game going right now in CMRT and the fight is in the woods. It is a real slog but I am finally starting to dislodge those Russian SMG squads. Very costly but it has been fun.

Minute 16-15: The artillery keeps falling – but hurts no one at all. The AT gun in the woods is silent and taking fire. The Defenders in the village have started popping up and firing – my men fire back. In the town there are defenders in the church but they have also hurt no one and are about to feel some HE. 3 section on the left has just reached the door of their goal. Figure 127 Return fire Figure 128 Just about there Minute 15: Orders No new orders on the right (still firing on the village and the AT gun) and centre (still hiding from artillery). On my left though I bring up the tanks to finish off the enemy in the church and am set to swing behind that far left hand house to see the open ground behind the town. Hopefully there is no AT gun sitting there in the woods. Figure 129 Flank Figure 130 Supporting tanks Minute 15-14: The only place with much happening is on my left in the town. In the middle the artillery continues to fall and on the left I fear to move without knowing what the status of that AT Gun in the woods is. Back where the action is my risky move to bypass several house so that the tanks can get a view of any retreat happening ran into trouble – someone in the bypassed house. My men pay the price. Thankfully only one casualty results because the enemy displace quickly due to some supporting fire. But still I hope the risk pays off when the tanks get a view of the open space behind the town. Figure 131 How NOT to do a building entry Figure 132 Supporting fire Minute 14: Orders As the turn ended one tank spotted that loaded HT. Orders are simple get it and be in a position to fire on anything else that tries to leave the town. Figure 133 Target HT Minute 14-13: The centre and right are in the same boat still as the last few minutes. Over on the left the lead tank scores pay dirt. One HT with occupants burning and members of what looks like an HQ unit of some kind taken out (first casualty had a radio). There is resistance in the town though. I lost two infantry in the street behind – both Bren gunners too. Figure 134 Score Figure 135 Resistance Minute 13: Orders Orders again are straight forward, get more guns on the space behind the town and move house to house to get an even better view. Meanwhile deal with the resistance that I already have found. Figure 136 Continue flanking