Odin
-
Posts
265 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Odin
-
-
I belive the biggest difference consists in terrain type.
In the game there's also terrain attrition that plays a big role when it comes to simulating the vehicle movements. When it comes to the real tanks you see in that video the stug moves on concrete while the panther on concrete and what appears to be a very dry land.
My two cents the ingame tanks are slowed in order to stress the terrain difficulties.
I agree that in boggy or muddy conditions it's unlikely a panther would turn as fast as it does in the real life example I've shown. However, a lot of the game is played in dry conditions and I think it fair to say that a assault gun commander would want to turn to face an enemy tank in less than 25 seconds even if it risked throwing a track in boggy conditions.
Instead to penalise players for pivioting armour on the spot in muddy conditions tanks should have a reasonably high chance of bogging - which I believe the game currently replicates effectively.
I wish I could find a video of WWII armour turning in really wet conditions but I can't at the moment. Here's another one showing a panther pivoting quickly in cross country terrain which I think is damper than the first video
-
I was just viewing the great Panther video which Destraex1 posted a link to, and it got me thinking about a minor gripe I've had with CM for some time now- tank pivot speeds are too slow IMO.
I've posted a link to a short Youtube video I've made showing the CM turning speed for two panthers and two stugs.
With each example I've turned the tanks 90 degrees. One on the spot and the other over a short move command.
I think both are too slow when you compare them to the real life examples shown later in the video. But I feel this is especially the case when turning on the spot.
I clocked the following CM pivot speeds:
25 seconds when turning on the spot and 11 seconds when on the move
By comparison I clock the real life Panther pivoting at 3 seconds when turning on the spot and the stug at 9-10 seconds (and I think the stug driver was taking it easy).
I know turning speeds in real life depend on the terrain conditions. But I do think tanks turn too slowly when not moving in CM. This is especially a disadvantage for assault guns. If they get flanked you can write off half a turn before they can turn 90 degrees to face the enemy. In battle conditions when life or death could depend on how fast a tank could turn to face an enemy tank or AT gun I think CMs 25 seconds is just too long.
Either way I still love the game, and I've only posted this minor gripe because I wanted to see if others feel the same way, and whether it is something Battlefront has looked at or is looking at?
-
Awesome, I particularly like the panther
-
Great AAR chaps. It had me gripped all the way through. Is there any chance of sneaking another AAR in whilst we wait for the release of RT?
-
How about more German halftracks eg sdkfz 7 etc without the AA guns. Also more artillery pieces. I know they're not practical but they could be used in scenarios where rear lines are getting over run.
-
PS for finding opponents check out 'The Blitz' and 'The Few Good Men'. You can either join a ladder or post threads on either website searching for a game. Otherwise PM me if you'd like one.
For tutorials check out The Armchair Generals tutorials on YouTube. They are superbly made and very informative
-
I am new to this company, so I don't know their track record. I am very interested in getting started with a Combat Mission game, though. I would really appreciate any advice on what game to get first to start learning and enjoying? I am leaning towards Normandy. How is it nowadays with all the updates? Does it have a good tutorial? Is it using the latest game engine and graphics, decals, UI, etc?
If you have a 'theatre' of preference I would go with that. In terms of community produced content CMBN definitely edges it ( including an awesome campaign called Devils Descent) .
Multpilayer is also worth trying (at least that's what keeps me playing). For that I would recommend a brilliant app called Head to Head Helper (H2HH) which removes all the admin for playing turned based multiplayer games.
-
I think it's surrender time for Elvis. Great AAR though, it's had me gripped all the way through.
Any chance of organising another while we're waiting for RT's release?
-
Subscribed.
Looking forward to checking out your videos Togi.
-
Nice video Venici. I've got to disagree with you about the 37mm flak. Its shells bounced off your Cromwell's armour but penetrated the Stuart which in my opinion is historically accurate - the 37mm flak was deisgned to penetrate light armour after all.
As for identifying a couple of tanks in the woods - well you were pounding a wall 50 yards in front of the flak, which is hardly inconspicuous activity!
Hope the encounter doesn't put you off the game.
-
Repsol I know what you mean about the background gunfire. In most instances I recorded the naration separately, partly so so I could lower the game volume, but there are a number of clips where I either forgot to lower the game volume or I should lowered further. Those MG42 teams must have needed earplugs.
Kuderian, I'd be up for RT pbem.
Glad you both enjoyed the AAR.
-
Hi chaps,
just completed this video AAR capturing the highlights from my PBEM game playing Boys Against Men as the Germans.
Enjoy!
-
Nice shooting Elvis, I'm was a little surprised to see the hetzer's 75mm punch through the ISU-122's frontal armour. Does anyone know how the hetzer's gun compares with that of the Stug or PzIV?
-
It's great to hear the story behind Battlefront and the determination and vision Steve and Charles showed to get Combat Mission up and running. I remember when I first played CM and thinking this was the game I always wanted to play since I was a kid and heard my granddad's old war stories. I've never been disappointed since.
-
Now, moving the armor forward is much more of a bold move.
I think it depends on the quality of the lines of sight you can obtain from your tanks' present location. If they can't effect the battle and will leave your infantry unsupported against enemy armour then I'd say advance.
The other thing worth mentioning is that it'll be risky reposition your hetzers, if enemy armour gets a good visual on the cluster of buildings they're currently hidden behind. In this kind of scenario there's a strong possibility that the hetzers are going to expose their flanks when leaving their cover, which is likely to lead to their demise before they can get a shot off.
The third option would be to leave your panther (if it can obtain a good overwatch position from the building complex) to cover your SPGs' advance and going hunting with the hetzers!
That's just my two pennies worth anyway.
-
PS Chris are you planning on making any more vids before RT's release?
-
Great job Chris, I'm getting ever more excited about the release of RT.
-
Steve that's great to hear, thanks for it so incorporating so quickly. I'm looking forward to assaulting some buildings. Does this mean I get a free copy?
-
I am hoping for a module showing the fighting in Hungary (Battle of Debrecen, Siege of Budapest, Operation Konrad, Operation Spring Awakening) with new Waffen-SS and Hungarian units. The fighting was much less one-sided than in other late war theatres and both sides conducted offensive operations.
That would make for a great module
-
I think 15 second increments would be great; I don't see much need for finer control than this. Even better if the options extend beyond 1 minute -- say, 15 second increments up to 2 full minutes. The reason I see this as useful is that this would let you "set it and forget it" (to borrow a phrase from an infamous infomercial).
I'm with you there Yankee Dog, on many an occasion I've laid down suppression fire on a building from numerous units, only to forget to cancel one or two them. giving a player up to 2 minutes would make life easier. I also agree with your suggestions about time increments, 5 seconds of suppression fire would be of little use.
Womble, I think your suggestion for waypoint targeting would be a good addition. But if modifying the length of of the target briefly command is a relatively straight forward addition (note I have no understanding of the intricacies of programming) I would love to see it included in 3.0.
-
With the release of Red Thunder seemingly imminent, I have a quick request regarding a modification to the 'target briefly' command. I think its inclusion in 2.0 was well merited, but I can't help but wonder if it could be improved through the following simple tweak:
At the moment it can be used to target for 15 seconds, but why not modify the command to replicate the 'pause' command, giving players the option to target a unit or area for 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45, 60, 75, or 90 seconds?
I most frequently use the target briefly command to target an area before assaulting it with infantry. However, I often find during turn based play that I want an area to be targeted for longer than 15 seconds either because I want to delay my infantry's advance or because its likely to take them 30 seconds+ to reach the area.
Likewise I may want a tank to target a unit or area for longer than 15 seconds, but still don't want the tank to use up a whole turn to fire at the location, because I fear enemy armour may appear to towards the end of the turn.
Including the above tweak, or something similar, would resolve these tactical dilemmas.
I did a search of the forum to see if someone else had already asked this question and couldn't find a related post, but I apologise if somebody has already put it out there. Likewise, if I've just been an idiot and not realised the option to stretch the 'target briefly' timing already exists, then please let me know!
Otherwise I'd love to hear other posters'/Battlefront's opinions.
Cheers
Odin
-
Hey Bil Hardenberger,
What software did you use to draw those awesome AOA arrows?
I second that. Do you know if can be used in videos? It would be a big improvement on the arrows I used for the last video AAR I produced.
-
Looking forward to this one. Great work Battlefront
-
The other thing about Combat Mission recorder, from my understanding it only records statistics for units contained on the map at the close play. This may cause problems if a unit has exited as it wouldn't take their casualties into account. Although if anyone knows differently, I'd love to hear.
Do tank pivot speeds need quickening up?
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
As Skwabie says there just seems to be one standard turning value for all armour in CM. Even if each vehicle's pivot speed could not be modeled, would it be worth considering slashing the time it takes all tanks to pivot on the spot? I think you could cut a 90 degree on the spot pivot to 10-11 seconds for all armour in the game and it would not be too quick for the vast majority, if not all, tank types. If you could offer different pivot times for different terrain types/conditions all the better, but if not I think a basic cut would still be more realistic than the present turn times.