Lee_Vincent
-
Posts
114 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Lee_Vincent
-
-
What Lee said...is almost exactly my experience, except I can add S&T's (or was it SPI's?) Blitzkrieg from 1972, and it is the best WW2 sim/game experience for my money.
Strategy and Tactics, SPI! Old School
-
Well, I have been wargaming since 1975, from sandtables and paper mache terrain with 1/72 models, 1/300 models, Panzer Blitz, Panzer Leader, SL, ASL, Apple 2, Amiga, CMBO/BB/AK...
CMBN is the best WW2 tactical sim/game experience there is or has been.
-
So if my Sherman is trying to cross a narrow gap in the LOS of a Panther and I give it a FAST order, it shouldn't just move at maximum speed across the gap, but instead stop in the gap, take a shot at the Panther, and then move on?
-
Agreed, the old HUNT command was more useful. It is annoying in CMBN to constantly have to go round checking all units that were using hunt, got a brief LOS to an enemy unit and then stopped, especially in WEGO where they may be wasting almost an entire turn with no new orders.
-
We've looked into hacking "firing at short halts" into CM:BN and the results were not good.
I think you should persist. If problems arise from your initial hack, then you do more hacks to fix those problems, and so on. Eventually the 'problem-hack-problem' cycle will either settle into a steady state or spin wildly out of control and compromise your entire codebase. No doubt it has something to do with Chaos Theory.
I reckon its worth a shot to fix the problem
-
Most definitely I would guess, although not uniformly distributed but according to some probability distribution. If done well, it would give you the same variation as in real life. So although you end up with a number that is influenced by random variables, it is not the same as "picking a random number".
I see, so generating a variation in the projectile path from dispersion by using a random number(s) as (some of) the input(s) to an algorithm that models a probability distribution is not in fact generating a random number, but a number influenced by random variables. I guess you could spin it that way, sorta
-
No. I won't go into the details of the modeling involved, but your understanding is incorrect. The number of variables that go into engaging a target of any kind is... very large. Steve has hinted at only the barest fringes of the model used.
Surely some elements are random, such as variation in projectile path from dispersion?
-
Seems an odd design decision to use the same sound files for different weapons.
-
I'm just waiting to field Soviet PPsh-41 SMG battalions.
-
What? Ouch! That's like confiscating one of your arms. Or both of them even.
-
I had a Sherman taken out by a faust, from which the crew bailed and took up position around the tank. A German squad about 10m in a house away un-hid and started shooting at the crew - end result, 1 crewman KIA, routed German squad with 3 KIA.
Had a similar result with a German squad slow moving forward in forest encountering a 3 crew in a house, the squad was shot to pieces.
The German squads were regular in both cases.
Since these are not typical, and there is an acknowledged issue, not a big problem, but aside from any other factors I do question the effectivenes of pistols as used by crewmen against targets in substantial cover, any morale factors aside.
-
Wall of text.. my head exploded.
Wow. If you think that is a text wall, I guess you have never read an actual book or anything.
The Dirty Bush War
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
You should publish these small scenarios, I'm sure many people like the smaller ones.