A Canadian Cat
-
Posts
16,501 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Posts posted by A Canadian Cat
-
-
That's already in. IIRC, you press SHIFT+ESC to pause the screen without the big PAUSED showing up in the middle.
I just tried it SHIFT+ESC is the magic key stroke. That is just awesome. I have been taking movies and then taking screen grabs from them to avoid the paused message on screen.
Thanks for the tip.
-
NI can hear Paul Mccartney singing from about 5 miles away! It's the Olympic 2012 opening ceremony and despite being in North London I can see the lights and hear the show.
Doesn't happen every day.
Actually I don't think that was Sir Paul singing - the crowd sang most of it:D
Note: We thoroughly enjoyed the ceremony at our house - including the parts that Paul sang.
-
Point taken, but what I don't understand is why can troops be rallied in the real world, but not in our sim world?
They will come back from being in a Shaken or Panic state. In CM2 guys that are broken are not useless just fragile. I forget the names in CM1 but when you could not give orders to your squads and your guys ran around out of control are now Shaken and Panic. Recovering from those states (aka rallying) works better when your men are under command. In fact I often see teams Shaken during a turn end up rallying before the turn is over - more often if they are under command. Guys who panic take much longer to rally if they run away from command. In fact I have repositioned HQs just to go get squads that ran off. Once they are in command again they often rally pretty quickly.
-
I hate to harp on the (perceived) shortcomings of the game, but once again we see a moving tank spot the stationary tank first ( presumably put there specifically to overwatch that road
) Note that @BigDork pointed out that the Sherman was Stationary when it spotted the PzIV. I was wondering what AAR you were reading when you wrote that:)
Also note that the on the move firing issue is well known by Battle Front and they have stated previously that it is a limitation that we need to live with for a while. There is non trivial work for them to do to make it work better. Read http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98346 Specifically post 25 http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1290189&postcount=25 I have seen more threads before but that sums it up.
<snip>If moving tanks and units have an inherent advantage, shouldn't the tank rush be the most viable tactic in CMBN? I played a lot of Starcraft & Starcraft 2 and perfected the zerg rush in my peak. I still can't get the tank rush to work in CMBN.Which is a good thing:)
-
...(the test thing about CM2 is no "borg" spotting after all).
I meant to say "the *best* thing about..."
I don't know about Basic training, but is it possible to play PBEM in Scenario author test mode? Since it has no fog of war at all it might be worth trying. Good to get to know how the game works while actually seeing what's going on. I'm not sure what else it affects other than FoW.No, Scenario test skill level is not available for PBEM. I verified what I am seeing using a single player against the AI. I never see ? contact icons. Is this a bug?
-
Is that right? A friend of mine who is just starting out with CM2 (he gave up the last time over frustration with spotting) has agreed to try again. He surprised me by sending me a turn and we stared playing but there are no ? spotting icons. It all just feels odd and wrong. I am defending so at first I did not notice. I got solid contacts on his guys and opened up. He complained that his guys were getting killed without knowing where from. I was surprised! I figured he should have sound contacts at least. Now I am seeing movement of his guys but when the leave my LOS there is no ? contact icon. By now there should be lots and lots of ? icons. Confused, I fired up a game against the AI using Basic Training. Sure enough no ? icons - ever. Is this to be expected? The manual only says that all enemy units that are spotted are spotted by everyone.
BTW I would never have selected Basic Training skill level (the test thing about CM2 is no "borg" spotting after all).
-
Splitting Squads Into Teams
I keep doing it, but it seldom bears any fruit. Believe I have one bazooka kill. The teams seem to have no fire discipline, even when I try to impose it, so the net result is really long range inaccurate shots at ACs which instantly and accurately reply, wrecking the bazooka team.
You know I don't split squads as much any more. I do it when I need to such as putting teams on different floors of a building for example. Or when I want to scout or keep the bazooka team from lighting up the fields 200m away. Much of the time they are together. It makes herding the cats much easier.
Restoring MoraleMy men just seem to disintegrate and are useless the rest of the game. Have no idea how to rally them.
I have never seen morale get restored. Doesn't happen. The best thing you can do is keep your guys in C&C - they take less of a morale hit when they get shaken that way. If your guys get Rattled they will still fight pretty well but they are getting close to being broken - make damn sure any rattled teams are in command. Once they are broken don't discard them - sometimes you have no choice. They will provide fire support and behave OK if they are not taking any enemy fire. So, if you keep them behind the guys in better shape and be patient with them running away lots you can get some extra bullets down range that will help your other teams make head way.
Command & ControlHow I miss the CMx1 black and red lines! Even in relatively static defense, it's all but impossible to keep critical systems, such as 60mm mortars, in command. Not fun to have a mortar sidelined (with the other one dead) when the Germans infantry comes roaring in, with tanks, ACs, and SPGs in support. Recall a C&C analysis someone did for the game, but can't find it. Do you have a link?
Yeah, this is a challenge. Hopefully someone will find that link for you - I remember reading a few helpful threads on the matter. I usually put my self in the teams shoes and think would I be able to hear the boss in the house if I am standing over here? Big help I know - but after a while I think you will find you can get pretty good at it. And once your guys are in place the next turn you can tweak the HQ position and a team or two and get everyone all sorted. Yes, this is a bit of overhead.
ArtilleryStill finding my legs in terms of the best way to do things, but can I run an effective shoot! Target Linear is the answer to my prayers, but I wish you didn't have to be able to see the whole impact zone in order to use it. Still, a huge improvement over not having it. I have similar gripes over the Target Circular restrictions and wish we could designate a concentration box for fires from FA and mortars, through which the shells would march back and forth. Wish we could also register guns on the fly, as was done in reality.
I am using Target Linear more and more - short ones feel down right elliptical even. But you do *not* need to have visibility to the whole line just the end points. But a word of caution spotting rounds could fall anywhere along the line so it is not recommended to have no visibility for large portions of the line. But if your spotter cannot see the ground for most of the line but if they can see the explosions from spotting rounds you are good to go.
For example if you have a line that goes through a town and you can see the end points but there are buildings blocking most of the line - this is not going to work well because the buildings will block a view of the explosions.
But if your end points are along a bocage line but you cannot see the ground for even large parts of the line your spotter can see explosions over the bocage and you will be just fine - ish.
-
I am running an nvidia 9800GT 512MB and run CMBN at max on all settings, with shaders, and it's smooth as silk. The single largest frame rate killer is the victory locations. When I turn those off, I gain like 30 FPS.
Interesting. I never considered that the VL locations as making a difference like that. Any one else noticed - since I cannot try until tonight:)
-
I still have NO idea why anybody thinks Avatar was anti-military since there was NO military in there. Corporate mercenaries only. And the critics who called it anti-American failed to point out how America was involved in the film at all. Unless America is a corporation, I guess.
Indeed it was a take on a long line of sic fi that hinges on a dsytopian future were corporations have taken so much power that corporations have their own armies and do what corporations want.
Wait did I say "future"...
-
Again, the back story is to explain why there is a fight in the first place.
So, it is a good thing you are thinking about a back story - cause I'm not
It's no different than if we made a game that had 17 Tigers in Sicily engaging in mortal combat with M1A2 Abrams. Something needs to be there to explain how it is that this conflict is happening at all, not so much why Tigers and Abrams are involved.That would be soooo cool - wait no, it would not. That would be boring.
-
Nato vs Warsaw pact 1980ish. I'm probably in the minority but always put it out there anyways.
When I heard that BFC were doing a Shock force 2 I was hoping for just that time frame. Back in high school (in the 80s) I started playing Assault with my father (hex based war game set in the 80s). At the time he was a former mechanized infantry officer then working in HQ so right up his ally. He spent a good part of his military career getting ready for a hot war in Europe that, thankfully, never came.
-
Personally, I would like a Cold war gone hot game set in the late 70's to mid eighties, but if BF want to make it more modern than any reasonable story will do.
That was my first desire to. But if BFC want to do modern - I'll give it a try.
Jamers Macaroon had to invent the ludicrous 'unobtanium' just so that he could make his anti-military, pro indigenous culture, extravaganza.Entertaining movie. I still giggle when I hear them say 'unobtanium' - it is just silly.
For all I care it could be a surprise assault by a Russian spearhead, in Azmakitupistan, to sieze critical yoghurt supplies, after a dreadfull case of yoghurt weevil struck the Donbas region (historically, producers of the finest grade of yoghurt). Nato intervene, bribed by Greek threats of pulling out of the Euro and the economic collapse that would ensue. The Greeks see an opportunity to corner the market in premium yogurts and resurrect their collapsing economy and so want to stop the Russians. Sensible, no, plausible, no, but I'll accept any threadbare tosh just to get rounds down range, PGM's dropped, ATGM's flying and sabots saboting!LOL Brilliant spin on the back story. But won't BFC need to include dead cows for that to work.
Ooops sorry did I just ask for dead cows:D
-
<snip>CMFI, for example, boasts only 17 Tiger tanks on the Island (more or less). But you don't need to have vast tank armies to play a CM-scale Tiger vs Sherman scenario.
So true. We don't even need a grand back story it could even just be a Nato Brigade group in country doing training when all hell breaks loose. There would still be plenty of CM sized scenarios to work with. Excellent point @MikeyD. One I had not thought of - mind you I also have not relay paid any thought to any back story at all really:D
-
The primary purpose of Triggers is to allow the designer the ability to have specific AI actions dependent on circumstantial factors (friendly and/or enemy). Triggers, on their own, doesn't directly change how the AI behaves at the operational level. For example, you can have the left pincer of an attack wait until the right pincer gets into place before advancing. Easily done. But you can't also instruct the left pincer to withdraw and come to the aid of the right pincer if it gets crushed. It's an either or type thing.
Excellent - that is the kind of AI plan I want to face. And eventually program myself; but lets face it first we all want to fight one made using it:D
What we need to do is combine Triggers with Alternate Plans. And that means a lot more coding and...Time - which ran out:) Still what you did get done looks good and valuable. I look forward to working with it.
-
I think the stars only pop up in QBs, don't they? And there, the VLs are assigned values and the stars reflect them. For scenarios, you're quite right.
I looked it up the scenario I played that used stars was "Chance Encounter 2.0 CMBN". It was confusing.
-
You could fire up a scenario vs the AI on a map with multiple starred objs and declare a ceasefire. Then check out the values on the battle summary screen.
The trouble with doing that is it spoils the scenario since it will also reveal all your opponent's forces. The most fun I have had playing this game was playing a good scenario double blind (i.e. neither player had played the scenario before).
-
Yes. Definitely. The evidence of this is already seen in Version 2.0 since we put in a few improvements already, specifically more AI Groups and Copying AI Plans. We actually had a precursor to "Triggers" coded and in the game for Version 2.0, but had to yank it because we found it couldn't work without being tied into other things we hadn't planned on touching this time around. Not wasted time, though, since that work is necessary for Triggers when we get to them more comprehensively./QUOTE]
I really appreciate that work you put into the editor (and I have not even tried it yet). I am excited to see what your "precursor to 'Triggers'" will look like. Very cool to catch a glimpse of what you are up to. Thanks for sharing
Can what you are coding be used to create an AI that will react to how the human's attack plays out?
-
LOL I estimate mine as follows
Pre CMBN - 100% solo vs AI (CMSF)
Post CMBN- 80% PBEM, 20% solo VS AI (when I'm waiting on turns).
I have always been more like 95% PBEM and 5% vs the AI (I have too many games on the go and therefore I have very few moments where I am waiting for turns
) -
This is an interesting thing for us. With CMx1 the threshold for using the Editor was low. It wasn't a very friendly editor, but because the game's terrain and parameters were relatively simplistic a lot of people found they could make things with it. With CMx2 the nature of the game itself is more complex when it comes to making scenarios. Therefore, the bar is significantly higher in terms of who feels they are capable of using it.
<snip>
CMx1 to CMx2 is much the same way. The bar has gone up, the number of people making scenarios has necessarily gone down. There is no way around this and we don't see that being a problem. The reason is the people who do make scenarios for CMx2 are really good at it, turning out excellent scenarios and campaigns. As many have commented here, that really was never the case with CMx1. Quality vs. Quantity situation.
Yep, I agree. I tried but just could not get over that bar. I had all these grand plans to create scenarios - even had several ideas and tried to execute two of them. But *I* just could not get past the PITA aspects of the editor and gave up. No low quality scenarios from me:)
That being said, we realize that CMx2 Editor has some procedural PITA aspects that are difficult to deal with. Which is why we made several major Editor improvements to Version 2.0. Testers making stuff for Italy are really happy with the changes. More are planned for the future.And those changes have me jazzed up again to try it. This time I am going to start small and see where it takes me. With the biggest road block I faced removed (no map overlay to help create realistic contours) I am ready to try again. We will see if I can get over the bar this time:-)
-
People who play WEGO think they're playing the game in the most realistic manner while others playing in Real Time think they're getting the more realistic experience. I play RT because I KNOW I'm getting the most enjoyable experience for me. Perhaps it's not to your taste but it's the best for ME! Really, who cares as long as you're enjoying yourself.
LOL that is pretty much says it all. My RT play is limited but I have tried it. Here is my take on the difference:
RT does put a more realistic time pressure on commanders. The trouble is that since we have to play the role of Battalion commander, company commanders, platoon commanders and NCOs the time pressure is actually more then it should be. I have only played RT at the platoon level for infantry or the company level for armor and there are too many roes to play even then.
WEGO elevates some of the time pressure but since you have so many roles to play you need that time.
I like playing RT for small battles and only against the AI. My real problem is I cannot count on even a solid hour to play. I get bibs and bobs here an there so the only way for me to play is via PBEM which means WEGO for me.
-
Good point! In ASL, the player has the option to react, whereas in CMx1 and even moreso x2, they may not. <snip>
There is definitely an "unforgiving minute" feeling in WeGo. I think mid-scenario savable TCP/IP WeGo is a must.
<snip>
That is a definite bonus of WeGO, one I often forget about in during gameplay. I usually wind up anxious to see what happens next.
This touches on one of the things that I love about this game - you are in the roll of battalion commander down to the squad leader as you give your orders but you never control an individual. That means that when the action starts you have to trust that your men will do their best to do what you asked. This is the way I think of it: the platoon commander gave the orders to coordinate the assault across the street. The NCOs took that order and ordered their teams to lay down suppressing fire and stagger their break into the open and cross the street.
During that order phase you played the role of the platoon commander and his three squad leaders to set up that assault, but once the action starts you are just the company commander in the next block hearing the shooting and the radio reports about what is happening. That for me is one of the best parts of this game. Yes, as a gamer sitting in our chairs we could envision that rifle man doing a better job or running across the street or be braver and hold his ground or what ever. Forget it I don't want to take that level of control. I want to be the Platoon commander that has to deal with the fact that his guys, on this day, are freaked out and are not going to run out into the open. I want to figure out another way to get my platoon across the street.
I never played ASL until after playing CMAK and CMBB (nostalgia game night for a couple of my friends - guess what we agreed we liked CM better). And I did play a scenario translated form ASL to CMBB and it sucked. The map was very flat and boring. It was like playing on a billiard table. That experience plus games on some of the poorer maps have shown me that the quality of the map is really really important for a good game experience.
I came from a miniature war gaming background and the big trouble was always spotting. If you think that ambushes are hard in CM they are nearly impossible in miniature gaming without an umpire and extra over head to manage who spots whom. Later I played Assault (another hex game based on modern era) but the same problem of spotting exists there too. Similarly with ASL. None of the solutions were very satisfying - someone or both always knew too much.
I for one am very pleased that you guys looked at the task and decided not to just let the computer manage the rules overhead of ASL but instead looked at the problem with fresh eyes and let the computer manage what you thought it should manage.
When I started playing CMAK and BB the spotting was sooo much better. Even the "Borg" spotting behavior was light years ahead of any other spotting solution I had worked with.
-
I have a tendency when driving through the country side, or hiking it for that matter, to constantly be looking at terrain for good defensive positions and offensive avenues of attack relative to some piece of terrain, or the road itself.
I do a similar thing: looking at each field and getting a sense of where the natural depressions and rises are and how you would go about getting across. I have noticed that very few fields are billiard tables and that no two are exactly the same.
-
<snip>I also had a very harsh lesson taught me by another opponent. Buildings are great reverse slope deployment positions. Huh you say? Position your troops against the back wall of the building. They are almost impossible to spot. Your opponent can pound the heck out of the building all they want, but when they enter it they are pretty much dead meat. Took me quite a few bodies to realize I wasn't going to take the position by entering the building.
I was wondering how to get your guys to stand at the back wall and face out too. I see that JohnS told us how later (stand outside looking in). Very clever I would not have thought of that. Looking forward to trying that out. Actually I am playing Sticking it out right now - could come in handy once the fighting gets into the village.
Last thing, know when to split. If you know the ambush is compromised or if you have already sprung an ambush from there, it is time to leave. Hopefully you have picked a position that has a retreat route for your troops. If done well the enemy is going to have to assume that position is occupied costing them additional time.Oh that is sooooooo hard. I cannot count the number of times I have stayed too long. I keep listening to the voice that says "that went really well, why pull back, stay there and keep hurting them". Gotta stop listening to that voice.
-
I am not so sure about that. I think that is an often used convention but there is nothing enforcing that. It could just be objective 1 and objective 2 witch is a convention I have also seen. In fact the scenario designer can make it what ever they like such as "North bridge" or "Town".
It is best to read the scenario briefing it should be clear what the values are. If this is a Quick Battle then the only way to be clear is to open the map in the editor and look at the objective values directly.
) 
)
No ? spotting icons in Basic Training???
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Oh I totally agree and that's what I told my opponent at first. It was not until solid contacts disappeared and were replaced by nothing at all that I became suspicious. I have tested this from both sides and on basic training skill level there are not ? contact icons.