Glubokii Boy
-
Posts
1,984 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Glubokii Boy
-
-
35 minutes ago, The Steppenwulf said:
Agreed. I think proper reinforced buildings (and some applicable house models to depict it) have been requested by some members of the community for a good few many years since now. It's especially relevant given the Berlin module, but the Soviets implemented strongholds when they were on the defensive in the war also.
Atleast they have improved the staying power of troops inside buildings...
Things like HE- and flamethrowers will be more important now to rout troops out of biildings.
Thats a small step forward... as is the improved pathfinding in and out of buildings that will release with the module i belive.
Additional improvements to urban fighting would be most welcome for sure but I think that BornGinger is right here...
1 hour ago, BornGinger said:Proper house to house fighting with different rooms on each floor and basements where the troops can fight is probably something for CM3 if that engine ever will arrive.
-
I would also go for CMRT...
The basegame has some good content and there are several very high quality scenarios and campaigns made by the community ready for download.
If you buy it now you can enjoy this basegame and the downloadable content while you wait for the Fire and Rubble module to be released.
This module will give you the most recently designed scenarios and campaigns...Stuff that fully takes advantage of the latest gameengine updates and the improved skill and experience of th scenario designers.
The CMBN bundle will give you lots and lots of content...but remember that many of these scenarios and campaigns were made years ago...The gameengine has evolved quite a bit since these were made. They don't take advantage of recent updates made to the scenario editor. I'm not saying that the content is bad...because it is not...but if you want to experience combat mission from its finest right away....Go for CMRT and then add the F&R module to that ones it is released in a few weeks.
The F&R module will show of the game at its best
-
Watch these videos on YOUTUBE...and you will get the entire playlist for each....
-
Besides the CM tutorial manual...these tutorials and guides tends to be usful for a beginner
https://battledrill.blogspot.com/2013/08/combat-mission-tactical-problems-cmtp.html
-
27 minutes ago, Zloba said:
Do the full games really have only engine manual shipped with them?
Aleast when i bought the games (at release) they came with the game engine manual as well as a short manual describing the new units that came with that particular game.
Pretty much everything you need to know is covered in the game engine manual.
-
19 minutes ago, MikeyD said:
On map artillery will fire on a painted-on 'fire' target zone while that order is active, lets say from 15:00 to 16:30 for example. In the past I've linked the order to triggers. The enemy wanders onto a trigger zone, on-map mortars starts dropping rounds onto their target zone.
Yes...this is the feature i would like to see expanded on...to include off-map assets and the ability to chose between smoke and HE.
It will give the scenariodesigners the controll they need to program some decent AI artillery activity.
And the fact that the designers gets controll of the AI artillery does not have to mean that every AI artiillery barrage in every scenario has to be perfect...
Via the use of triggerzones and the actuall locations of the areafire target zones the designer can mix good with bad AI firemissions as he sees fit.
-
I have also veen reading quite alot this last year...and the more you read...the more intresting it gets
...
I'm currently reading a series of books by...
Valeriy Zamulin
Covering the battle of Kursk.
All I can say is WOW !!!
I'm totaly blow away by the quality of these books...they are amazing...the best books i have read so far...the research, his level of knowlede and his ability to 'share' it is outstanding.
I have currently read:
- Battle of Kursk, controversial and neglected aspects
- The forgotten battles of the Kursk sailent, 7th guards armys stand against army detachment Kent
I have also ordered:
- Demolishing the myth, the tankbattle at Prokhorovka
It shall recieve it the next week...and will dive straight in
I belive that he is currently working on two more books covering the planning and preparations for the campaign...
Those will also end up in my 'library' ones released.
-
40 minutes ago, RepsolCBR said:
If you can't rely on your target zones being fired on it makes it somewhat difficult to plan the whole thing
And this relates to the initial barrage. It does not really get any better after this barrage has been conducted. On the contrary...now you as the designer have no controll over how the AI will conduct its indirect support...not where...and not when...
Oooh, maybe some... via the use of reinforcements and TRPs. But this will be even more random...and maybe.
And since the AI seems to have no coordination between ground movement and artillery things are likely to turn out messy...
If an AI FO ot HQ units decides to call for support it will do so without regard for the overall situation it seems...simply because that Hq/FO sees some juicy targets...
What the AI infantry are doing seems to be of little concern...
Consequently...the AI groundunits will folliw its scripted movement path regarles of friendly artillery falling in the path of itd intendent target....and the FO/hq will not cancel that barrage even when it becomes obvious that it will fall on friendly troops...
This is less then ideal
Compare this with having very high controll over how the AI conducts its artillery via triggers, areafire and such...resulting in well timed, well targeted barrages with no/ limited friendly casualties...the ability to deliver smoke on the desired locations at the desired times...
If a was an AI trooper i sure would prefer the later
-
28 minutes ago, benpark said:
My comment was about the assault command and the AI.
Ahhh...ok, sorry !
-
8 minutes ago, benpark said:
Scenario Author Mode will illuminate any movement patterns, and their results- use Turn-Based, and run it through to see everything in detail, as many times as needed.
Look at the movement lines for the color codes. This gives an idea of what the designer can expect, and also gives an idea of when exhaustion might kick in, etc.
Ones again...that is not the problem
The problem is this...
If you have multiple target locations specified for your initial barrage and you have multiple artillery units tasked with this barrage.
You have very limited controll of how this barrage will be conducted. Sometimes all locations will be targeted equally by one battery...the next time you play THE SAME scenario some areas might not get targeted at all and some might get targeted by multiple batteries...the next time you play THE SAME scenario...yet another version of this barrage will be conducted.
If you can't rely on your target zones being fired on it makes it somewhat difficult to plan the whole thing
-
3 minutes ago, Combatintman said:
Set the guns to have less ammunition then. If you need arty for stuff going on later add extra batteries as reinforcements.
I think the point is the unpredictabillity !
If multiple assets are asigned to the initial barrage and the designer has no/limited controll of wich target location wich asset will fire at and for how long...
It will be pretty difficult to coordinate this with ground movement...
Especially as things play out differently each time you play the same scenario...
-
36 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
Yup, that's why you have my (& I suspect, our) total support.....Outta likes, owe you one.
Thanks
41 minutes ago, Macisle said:Yup. I still have PTSD from all the hours of getting the opening AI attack orchestrated
Been there, done that...
-
These last post by Macisle and Sgt squarehead mirrors my experience exactelly...
And is the very reason for my request of improved handling of the AI artillery...
14 minutes ago, Macisle said:I can see the benefits of variation, but from the designer's perspective, it's a PITA. It produces a need for wasteful testing time. A much better system would be for the designer to have total control, but the option to add his own, chosen variations, like with different AI Plans.
This !!!
-
16 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
I'm testing a scenario at the moment that uses a single on-map mortar for a first turn AI 'Support Target' order, before exiting the team a couple of turns later.....For some reason the mortar refuses to fire about 30% of the time and I have NO idea why.
That's wiered
...
If you have multiple assets and multiple targets there are some sort of randomness involved with who shoots at what...sometimes certain areas will see no fire at all...but the next time they will.
But if you only have one asset and one target...that really shouldn't be the case...but it kind of sounds like it...If they do fire two times out of three but not the third time...
???
-
1 hour ago, BornGinger said:
But maybe one of the FOs had requested heavier artillery to shoot on that area which made me believe that the ctrl +c area order caused this.
Yes...that is probably what happened.
-
23 minutes ago, RepsolCBR said:
It will further give you a feel for how FOG works in the game...what you will be able to see of the enemy and when.
That should be FOW (fog or war)...
-
What i would suggest when starting out...
Learn the ins and outs of setting up QB battles. Here you can quickly pick your desired forces as well as the terrain (map) to fight on.
You can start as small as you like and for learning purposes i suggest that you pick both your own and the AI forces...remember you don't have to use all the points avaliable to 'purchase' units...
If you want to...you can pick a single platoon on your side and a single squad on the enemy side....to start with.
Use these QB battles to try out any units you like to experiment with...and gradually increase the side of both forces.
I would further suggest to play these QB 'traning battles' both vs the AI and also HOTSEAT against youself. Playing hotseat against youself will allow you to see what effekt various weapons have against various targets at various distances and in various terrains.
It will further give you a feel for how FOG works in the game...what you will be able to see of the enemy and when.
Among other things I find these QB battles very quick and easy to set up to test how the various tanks stacks up vs eachother...
What kind of suppretion...and killingpower will the various weapons have...
What can i expect from the artillery of various calliber against various targets..
And welcome to the game...I belive you will become 'stuck' here...
-
1 hour ago, BornGinger said:
When using the Ctrl + C-key command and paint an area, the AI use both the on-map and off-map artillery for support.
Did they all target the painted area ? How big was that area ? Did they start to fire at the same time ? Were the off-map assets also mortars or other assets ?
Normally to take part in an areafire order the unit will need to be part of an AI group...wich off-map assets currently can't be.
Did the AI on its own decide to target the same area that had been.painted...at the same time ? That would be an intresting find...
But it would still not allow for the choise of smoke or HE and would not allow for the same degree of controll that the above suggedtion by Macisle.
-
3 hours ago, Macisle said:
One way to work things based on the current system might be through enhanced AI Area Fire in combination with 32+ AI Groups. First, add additional options to AI Area Fire that allow the designer to choose round type, intensity level, and building level in the case of direct fire. Then, allow the designer to assign any type of arty asset, including off-map to an AI Group. Then, the designer could set up whatever arty support he wanted and structure it to support other AI Orders. That could work a treat and would be built off current functionality.
Yes. Add more AI groups and allow off-map assets to be asigned to AI groups combined with an option for smoke or HE seems to be the simplest way to me to...
A complete remake of how AI artillety works will probably be a task for CM3 but doing ut the way you describe will work just fine...and would add alot...
With the added benefit of getting more AI groups for other use as well...
-
3 hours ago, benpark said:
The AI will use it for smoke and softening up (if it is on the attack)
Yes...but that's limited to the initial barrage at the very beginning of the scenario...isn't it ? What about mid scenario or late scenario ?
Atleast when it comes to standard scenarios the designer is only allowed to specify the turn one bombardment as far as I know.
And even this has some issiues imo...
If the AI force includes several artillery units that is supposed to target multiple location it will do so in a rather random way in my experiene.
That would not neccesarely be such a big deal if it did it in the same way each time atleast...but it does not !
The first time you play the scenario area 1, 2 and 3 out of five will be targeted...for example...the next time you play THE SAME scenario area 2, 4 and 5 might be targeted instead...and the next time area 1, 3 and 4...
There seems to be some kind of random function here with multiple targetzones and multiple firering assets...
This randomness makes scenariodesign a bit more complicated then what it needs to be imo...
-
55 minutes ago, Freyberg said:
The AI seems very good at using artillery...
Like most of the AIs shortcommings...they are most noticeable when the AI is attacking.
Yes...you can give the AI a number of FOs and TRPs to improve things somewhat but things are still fairly random and unintuetive (from a scenario design standpoint).
Even with spotters and TRPs the AI artillerysupport many times prove to be equally as dangerous to it's own troops as it is to the enemy...the finer aspects of timing is simply not there...
the combination of scripting the movement of the AI groups and the free use of the artillery by the AI is difficult to time and get right with an attacking AI...
After V.4 the designer can help the AI to get these timing correct to some degree using on-map mortars, triggers, the game clock and areafire...but these options are currently limited to on-map mortars...and HE only...
Imagine if we could have simular possibilities with offboard assets...AND SMOKE !
...the AI would be able to fully support its actions with the desired level of HE and SMOKE...with far less risk of fratiside...
Indirect support would be...on time...and on target...coordinated with the movement of the AI troops...atleast to the degree deemed suitable by the designer...opposed to the currently somewhat random...and dangerous situation.
The challangelevel of the AI as an opponent would increase quite alot...
Wich could only be a good thing...
-
1 hour ago, Anonymous_Jonze said:
I don't even know if this is possible, but it would be great to see some sort of upgrade to the attacking AI in update 5.
Like finally granting the AI the full bennefit of artillery...
could we please have a function to add triggered/timed barrages with the ability to specify the specific shooting unit, intensity and duration of fire...simular to the ingame artillery interface maybe...to include HE or SMOKE..
The AIs inability to handle artillery is currently a serious shortcomming...and not fair
...especially the lack of well delivered smokescreens...
The V.4 on-map mortars are a great improvement...but still somewhat lacking.
-
18 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:
Rather sobering after all the end of the year hype, don't you think?
Yes
...
Especially the info on CM-5 made me happy indeed...and like many others i was about to post a...big thankyou !
But as things currently stand...I changed my mind slightelly...
I wll post A BIG !!! Thankyou ones the CM-5 update has actually been released...and we see what it entails...
And as it turned out...work on this update has not even begun yet...and it will not do so until FR has been finished by the sound of one of the later statements.
Hopefully it we be a fairly simple task to add some of the features already designed for the other version of CM...If not....ooohh well..........
And let me just say this...
I am NOT dissatisfied with CM !!!....I do understand that BFC is a small company...and I do understand that last couple of years has held quite a few challanges for BFC.
The truth of the matter is that NO !!! other computetgame has brought me so many hours of enjoyment as CM.....EVER !!!
But i'm sorry !!! I just can't jump on the wagon and shout out that everything is great....no matter what...I just can't.
Despite the fact that i"m fully aware of the fact that BFC and those people associated with the company are doing their best..
I wish i could but i'm afraid that I have become...a bit disatisfied
As for CMBS and CMFB...
I would be very supprised if not the majority of the people prefering those games are also quite....dissapointed...or perhaps even...dissatisfied right now.
Even LAST YEARS bone had the goal of RELEASING atleast one of those modules...that year !
This years bone....didn't even mention them...
That's not what I call progress...
I really hope that BFC gets things sorted...soon ! Because as things have been lately...I don't like that...sorry !
In the meantime i will continue to play CM...for many years to come...even if no further work is done to the current game...at all.
But what I want to do...is play CM Barbarossa and CM Case blue
-
27 minutes ago, Freyberg said:
I get that some people, a small vocal group of people, are disappointed.
How do you know that this group is small ?
Considdering that less then 40 people ever comments on this forum...
Welcome to 2021!
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
Check out the last page in Elvis AAR in the RT forum...