A Canadian Cat
-
Posts
16,525 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Posts posted by A Canadian Cat
-
-
You should consider asking this question here on the CM Normandy Maps and Mods forum.
-
Agreed I am impressed. On top of that I see that you are driving the game UI which is even more impressive. I would really like to learn how you are doing that. What kind of a script are you running and how are you reading the screen information?
Does the tool extract each squad's casualty break down as well as its combat victories?
-
<snip>oh-look-it's-this-one-again<snip>
May I recomend this set of 25 QB maps:
http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1429
Having them certainly reduces repeats.
-
<snip>I've seen casualties to each and every position in the tanks I've had blown up. You don't see 'crew hit' text when your opponents tanks take hits, but you will, if you look carefully, little 'red cross' icons for when crew have become casualty.
Agreed, I have a game going right now where a Sherman turned a corner and found two Marders side on. The Sherman took out the first one but then was distracted momentarily by near by infantry and did not get the first shot on the second one. A round hit the Sherman and the tank was OK and the crew were not panicked and I wondered why it did not return fire and died moments later. Turns out the first hit killed the gunner - I had text notification turn off and did not notice the first time I viewed the scene.
Zook rounds and 37mm rounds did not have strong behind-armour effects. Skirts aren't really there to stop HEAT rounds, so the 'not hitting skirts' thing isn't very relevant.<snip>Yep, in another game - against the AI, I had a scout unit surprise a Stug III. The AC put five or seven rounds (I don't remember) of 37mm on target as the Stug was rotating only to die once the 75mm gun got a bead on them.
-
<snip>I had become too accustomed to the less-than-stellar performance of first generation rocket launchers in CM:BN.<snip>
LOL it reminds me of something my Dad said. He was an infantry officer in the 60s and speaking of the older AT weapons (at the time I was into WW2 table top model war gaming) he referred to them as "placebo weapons" - not effective at all and mean only to give infantry the *feeling* that they could deal with a tank.
-
I believe it's Alt+P (show all paths)
Note that all the movement paths are shown when any unit is selected. If none of your units are selected then the paths disappear.
-
Hi, when I load up the html file, some of the colums are all squashed up and unreadable, what did i miss ? cheers
That's the way the HTML is setup - the table fills the screen and other than a few fixed sized columns it sizes the remaining columns with the available space give the size of the browser window. The HTML looks good on a wide screen monitor with the browser maximized.
-
Sounds great but I cannot find the post by Moon nor the videos on YouTube. Care to share a pointer?
Ok I'm blind it is posted here:
http://www.battlefront.com/community/announcement.php?f=124&a=460
I spend all my time reading threads and often don't look at the announcements very frequently. My bad.
-
I see Moon has beaten me to it and has already posted about the series just uploaded to youtube.
Sounds great but I cannot find the post by Moon nor the videos on YouTube. Care to share a pointer?
-
The summary as mentioned by some other helpful posters is that there are two types of bocage than can not be crossed.
Plus a hedge which can be crossed.
The lower type gets confused as hedge and I think will continue to cause confusion and this sort of discussion.I too was confused in one of my early games too and started a thread about that confusion. I agree that the low bocage does not look imposing enough and now in game I look closely at any low bocage or hedges to be sure I know what it *really* is. I am pretty good at telling the difference in game - now.
I think a real positive outcome of such discussions is to enable the UI to give feedback straight away when a unit can not follow the action path plotted, especially for WEGO.That would be a god send. I can see how it would be hard to accomplish in a performant manner. To do it you would have to perform the Tac AI path finding algorithm for each placed way point. An alternative would be to give the "can't go here" cursor symbol when hovering over bocage.
So, right now if you try to set a way point for a vehicle that they cannot travel in, for example heavy woods, you get a "can't go here" cursor. The same one you see for infantry when you try to get them to mount a tank:). Or when you try to drive your jeep into a building. But you don't get that cursor when you hover over bocage. I realize why - it has to do with reporting if the selected unit can occupy the action square. I would just like it if the "can't go here" cursor were also able to check features in the action square as you hover over them.
If the "can't go here" cursor were shown when hovering over bocage then this problem would go away. OK, some of us would probably still make the mistake at least once:) but at least we would have the tools available to check if we were asking the vehicle to do something possible or insane.
-
I love the unpredictability of this behavior and I think it's entirely realistic.<snip>
+1 to what Broadsword56 said. I would suggest that perhaps AFVs are too happy to stay in dangerous areas. I am thinking of an QB I have going right now. Three out of four of my AFVs remain. Two of them have taken hits and are doing the reverse out of danger trick when they encounter dangerous enemy elements. One though is happy as a clam sitting in the bocage pounding the other side of the field (thank goodness for that:-). Sounds OK except their infantry screen is basically completely gone. There are a few remnants around but that tank in the bocage line has one solider still fighting beside the tank. I am not sure how many tank commanders in RL would have stayed and fought in those conditions with no infantry around.
Goes back to something I said on another thread we are pressing our virtual troops much further than RL commanders would normally. I know there are exceptional circumstances that require desperate measures etc. I just think that when your troops and tanks get to the state where they don't want to advance any more; they are telling you something: It is time to go, to pull back, to live to fight again another day.
I personally would like to play more campaigns for this very reason. Suddenly force preservation becomes a real concern. But alas without PBEM support for campaigns that will not be happening any time soon. Although a friend of mine and I are cooking up a scheme to support it using several scenarios that we manually tweak after each battle. If we finish the planning and make it happen I'll let you all know hot it goes. But don't hold your breath - because you might die:)
-
IRL perhaps the whole unit would have retreated off the board.
Perhaps, backing off and living to fight another day is not something us game commanders are very good at:)
I do like how troops respond to combat situations, how it starts to get harder and harder to get troops to do what you want. I am not sure if it *is* right but it *feels* right.
-
BFC please give us the Courtmartial button
LOL there certainly have been times where I wanted that command.
-
<snip>Also I am not sure that Tanks when going to Rattled should just retreat and not fire... Surely one shot before pulling back? Rattled for tanks is in effect a death knell as they do not engage other tanks.
Has anyone else seen that?
I have a recent experience where a group of rattled Shermans (three) were hunting a stug. This was in a highly built up area with lots of alleyways and restricted LOS. There was a shrek team floating around too. Shortly after the stug took out one of the Shermans another turned a corner and found itself less than 100m *behind* the stug. I was horrified to see that instead of taking it out it started reversing.
Lucky for me that was towards the end of the turn and I was able to cancel the reverse around the corner and the pop smoke orders. I gave the tank a target order and the next turn they fired and took out the stug with one shot.
So, this is in line with what was mentioned before: Rattled is not useless but they are skittish and self preservation is top of their to do list. In my case I was able to cancel their scaredy cat plans and give them a better option. In your case that will be difficult because when they get up to the bocage they will see the thing that scares them and reverse. Once they reverse they will not be able to fire at the other tank. I would suspect it will be harder to give them an alternative to running away.
-
In an all armor QB against the AI my lead Sherman of B company hit a mine. The big question now is what is the rest of the company going to do? There are a lot of tanks behind him that need to get down that road some how. I am not sure what to do next. I can feel the rest of the company hearing over the net about the lead tank hitting a mine and just freezing for a moment.
PS is there a way to turn off the "Replay Phase..." and "Paused..." text messages?
-
<snip>As with anything however there is always some kind of way to reply. One option I tried recently with a fair amount of success is displacing frequently. If I had a unit that I was going to release from a covered arc to fire I will give them a pause for maybe 30 seconds and then have them displace, move to another position and either be able to fire from there or just try and set up unnoticed. If a unit had fired on the previous turn I immediately have them displace. Basically the idea is to play whack-a-mole. Don't give the mortars a stationary target. If done well you can even drain your opponents ammo supply while minimizing the impact. You could also set up an ambush.<snip>
Now that sounds like good advice. I am in the middle of a second game against one opponent who is aces at making use of his mortars. I need a strategy to deal with them - sounds like I have one to try now. My first attempt was to get more armor and that helped but I have several Stugs who are short a crew member and my infantry are almost gone - in large part due to his expert use of mortars.
-
Interesting discussion. I have not tried this but is it possible to create several parameter objectives at different levels? For example create a scenario where you get points for damaging your enemy thusly:
Enemy > 20% --> 50 points
Enemy > 35% --> 100 points
Enemy > 50% --> 50 points
Enemy > 60% --> 50 points
There are 250 points available for enemy casualties and the more damage you do the more of those points you get. It would be interesting to see if would work.
I am only just beginning to design a scenario but the one thing I want to incorporate into my first scenario is force preservation where each side gets points for keeping their own casualties low. The thing I have noticed when playing QBs is the tendency for players to push and push and push to the last man trying to get a toe on the objective. I cannot help but feel that in real life the assault would have been abandoned much earlier to regroup and try again another day. I am hoping to to have a scenario where if you don't capture all the territory objectives you are better off stopping after securing one or two than pressing on to try and get them all at the cost of heavy casualties.
-
Can CMBN ran in window mode? If so how? Thanks.
I have not been able to find a way to run the game in its own window. I believe that it is not possible. The closest I have seen is on my dual monitor machine. I can have the game up on the main monitor and still see the regular contents of the other screen. However this is far from true windowing play. If I mouse over something on the other screen and click the game goes to the background and the main window's contents come forward again too.
-
I don't think there is anything as sophisticated as denial-through-LOS or denial-through-possible-fire going on in CMBN (or CMx2).
Simple proof in the following pictures:
German rifle platoon occupying a house in an occupy VL, with a US tank battalion and one pioneer platoon just outside the VP ....
Those pictures are brilliant. I laughed out loud.
-
There are 8 VLs in 2 columns (which may or may not be different for each side)
<snip>
Am I correct in my interpretation of this that the VLs are not necessarily the same between the two sides? I realize that many scenarios there are a few VLs and both sides are trying to capture them. But is it possible for one side to have eight VLs to capture and the other side only two? In this case each side has the same number of VLs to capture and that is just because the scenario is designed that way not because it is required that both sides have the same VLs.
-
checked the recon implementation a bit. built a battle with a similar setup as in Panzer Marsch's 1st battle (11/7/44, 00:50, Cool, Wet, Clear).
OP1 from across the road 20-30m.
OP2 flanking across one single bocage 50-60m.
Sounds interesting. I am having trouble picturing what you mean. I am assuming you built a scenario. If so could you share the scenario file?
-
I have not had a corrupted file so far. But I have had the .ema file not save issue. I am pretty sure that I have not seen it happen with the 1.01 version only the 1.0 version (I still have two games going using 1.0). It happened to me this morning and the file size was 3 488Kb. I don't think files size is the issue.
-
<snip>creating a H2H campaign<snip>
A H2H campaign would be brilliant.
I would really like to play such a thing. It might be difficult since I believe that right now you cannot play a campaign via PBEM and that is certainly how I would have to play it. So, I will need to wish that PBEM be extended to include campaigns in the next while as well. 
-
Brilliant - thanks. I appreciate the effort to show what each of these buildings look like I also really like your helpful comments on where to use examples of these buildings. That part is something you cannot get from playing around in the editor.
I would really like to play such a thing. It might be difficult since I believe that right now you cannot play a campaign via PBEM and that is certainly how I would have to play it. So, I will need to wish that PBEM be extended to include campaigns in the next while as well. 
Question: Map View
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
You can use the right mouse click and drag to change the camera angle to straight down your self. Then you can use the mouse scroll wheel to move the camera up and down to see more or less of the map.
Or
You can press the 7 key (the one above the y and u keys - not the number pad 7) and then use the mouse scroll wheel to move the camera higher to see the whole map.