Collingwood

Sure. PM me a link to download the latest beta of CMRT and I'll get cracking!

I don't blame you, given the unfortunate cross-thread pollination that has happened in the past.

Yeah, that was because Chris accidentally tried to get the sniper to mount a tank when he clicked near the water.

Yes, thanks Chris. So good seeing live action. Hit decals are really good, and the maps are beautiful.

Yes, a CMSF would be fabulous. It's surprising how well the game holds up these days, I still enjoy playing it. Getting the v3 features into it - well, what a great time to be a wargamer these days.

RepsolCBR nailed it. Both nations suffered under monstrous regimes. At least for Germany, their regime died with the war. I am a bit of a Russophile too, I've read a lot of Russian literature and 20th century history. Everything about Russia/USSR is on such a large scale - the greatness of their Art, their Culture, and their tragedy.

Given enough resources I think yes, AI could do an "acceptable" job. Acceptable enough that you would be able to handle the critical points of the battle yourself while leaving the AI to hold down other spots. I only say this because of the Command Ops AI, which is mighty impressive. Reading their forum it seems most of the debug work is to do with the AI. Of course this is because there is so little to worry about with graphics among other things. Aside from the TOE and scenario design, future versions have a lot of effort to put into doctrine, which translates as "making the AI behave how that unit/command would have in WW2". If we could kidnap Dave O'Connor and enslave him in the CM dungeon for a few years...

Seconded. 10 chars.

Ah, Panzerblitz. We thought it was a good game until people started exploiting the rules about cover in treed hexes, by hopping around the map via green. After that it was known as "Panzerbush"

Bil, I can't tell you how much I enjoyed your screenshot of the ISU-122. Tankoviy Desantniki, totally new armor - the best CM porn in years.

To add confusion to that, I recall the Soviets sometimes re-created units after total or near total loss, using the same number/title. So yes, units could be back in action - but only in name. Mind you the Soviets weren't the only ones to do this. It's also possible units are genuinely wiped out, but are mis-identified in German accounts. Overstating enemy losses happened in other arms and theatres - for example ubootwaffe claimed sinkings were often very far from reality.

I agree. Especially considering that Stalin had the cream of their officers killed during the 30s. Their leadership and therefore strategic doctrine started from a very low base - there was a lot to improve on. The Soviet army 1944 was almost unrecogniseable from the one of 1941, yet the 1941 version is the image most people think of when they think Russian front. Readers here excepted of course.

And speaking of feedback (different thread I know) I have thoroughly enjoyed every one of your scenarios Combatintman.

On the other hand, I went for an evening walk through a nice nightlife street in Montreal last year. I was amazed at the number of people smoking. Early next morning walking down the same strip you literally could not take one step without stepping on a cigarette butt. I wondered why, until I noticed the price of cigarettes in a depanneur (convenience store). They were something like 6 or 7 bucks a pack. Here in Australia they're $20 last time I heard. And a different sin - donuts. I would soon look like a blob if I lived in Canada, donuts are about 1/3 the price I have to pay here.

Mmm, Pint + Poutine. Heaven.

That's pretty funny, because I think I follow a very similar loop. With the arrival of triggers I hope I'm going to have some fun making my own scenarios instead now. I had given up before, the AI is too hamstrung - but triggers might make things just a bit more interesting - especially later on when they've evolved further.

A mass surrender of troops to a single officer would indeed be impressive if it happened earlier in the war. May 6th 1945 though... surrenders were happening everywhere. Still, no doubt it took some guts to pull off.

Maybe Jock is saying that if someone only gets a few hours free at times which aren't regular or predictable, that would be frustrating for their opponent. Opponent thinks "why am I waiting 3 weeks for a move?" H2H probably works best when move exchanges are regular. It's the issue of coordinating spare time with others when you have little. Much like my motorcycle riding - I like exploring and camping at remote places, usually the desert. There are other riders that like doing this too, but finding one who gets the same amount of time off, on the same dates, means I usually end up going solo.

I have read "Life and Fate" (as well as other Grossman books), and there is a saying that you don't so much read it as go through an experience. It does have scenes in Stalingrad and main characters are involved in the battle, but there is also civilian work life, domestic life, relationships... it is a wonderful work of literature and definitely worth a read - if you like Literature with a capital L. A writer at war - Vasily Grossman with the Red Army 1941-1945 is great too. Regardless of authenticity arguments, "The Forgotten Soldier" is a great book. I couldn't put it down. I agree with what others here say about the readability of Glantz. If you want to design historically accurate operational or strategic battles on the eastern front then he's definitely worth investing in. For me Glantz is more for reference, less for reading. I have read several of his works, some of them simply numbed me with a seemingly endless roll call of unit names and locations. There is no shortage of course of German viewpoints of the EF, and despite the excuse making by the author I really enjoyed von Manstein's "Lost Victories", it really gives you an idea of how traumatic it must have been at the divisional and higher level, trying to plug the flood. Like a dyke with more holes than you have fingers. And for the very bitter end, a couple that haven't been mentioned yet are by Tony le Tissier - "Slaughter at Halbe - the destruction of hitler's 9th army" and "The Battle of Berlin 1945". There have been many many excellent East front history books in the last few years, we're a bit spoilt for choice these days.

Exciting times ahead

Yes, with triggers currently not allowing branching or nesting, if then/else conditions, I don't expect them to allow me to program up a tactical genius opponent. I have been thinking more along the lines that they might allow a kind of enhanced overall command order for a defence, compared to pre trigger scenarios relying simply on time. Much as a higher HQ presents a plan with broad strokes - establish holding forces here, respond to an attack on that point with this action, etc. Naturally with triggers being in an early stage of development I don't know if some of my ideas will be possible until I've actually tried them out. As I said to Steve in a different post, any triggers are better than none It would be interesting if one could set off an AI vs AI "battle of the plans" for playtesting a scenario.

Thanks for this info Mikey, I was going to ask about whether triggers can be separated into categories this way. It wouldn't make sense for (say) your armor ambush to be triggered by a recon squad. I really can't wait to get my hands on triggers!

I can imagine such a program might be called "head to head helper"... and it could use drop-box. Just kidding - search these forums for H2HH

My memory on this is a little hazy, but IIRC Steel Panthers had an (optional) command system. It was basic and effective and worked like this: before units could move, they had to be assigned one or more command objectives marked on the map by their hq/leader. They could move toward that objective without straying too far from the direct path (unless routed or panicked). Alterations to the command objective could be made each turn, or every few turns depending on the quality of leadership. Better command = more objectives can be assigned and altered, poor command = less objectives and longer waits to alter objectives. This worked fairly well, in that it meant forces with good leadership with more command "points" were flexible with plan alterations and could react to changing circumstances during the battle - whereas the alternative was slow to react, inflexible and cumbersome maneuvering. The first time I used it I found it frustrating and limiting, but once I understood what was being attempted by the system I enjoyed it.

Perhaps that's where a random map generator could be useful - to provide a starting point, a basic map which is then finished off by hand.