Gekkibi
-
Posts
38 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Gekkibi
-
-
Units who have <?> icons are more likely to spot that particular enemy. This has nothing to do with AI, purely with spotting rules. Spotting rules apply the same to the player as the computer.
A human can react to the <?>, while the computer will not, since the AI in CMBN is scripted.
I think he meant that do the spotting sharing apply to AI as well. If an AI unit spots my unit, can other AI units spot my unit more easily. SWAG say yes, but we can't be certain unless someone says "yes, because I programmed it so".
-
I rethought this and in real life your statement certainly makes sense but does the computer defensive AI make use of C2 spotting info? When you are playing against the computer and attacking does C2 afford the computer AI the same advantages and limitations that it affords the human player? I think that its important to know this because it influences the set up of a computer AI defense in the construction of a scenario. I've tried to find this info in the manual but haven't been able to.
You made a very good question. I'm afraid we need an extensive testing or an answer from the programmers. The manual is way too vague. It only explains the basic commands and gives tiny amount of background of the vehicles. Especially the whole concept of C2 was really confusing when I started to play CM:SF (What do I gain if I maintain C2 link? Can differnet formations share C2? What are te penalties of lost C2? Can another unit take place of critical part of the C2 tree if HQ unit is destroyed? How about if the HQ is out of C2? If so, does it have to be XO / 2IC team, or can it be a regular squad? And so on).
-
I'm curious, have you ever commanded a tank in combat? I confess I haven't, but I've read a lot of stuff written by and about guys who have. And what they have to say is that it is an extremely busy job, especially after the lead starts flying. What they and the infantry accompanying them agree on is that it was really hard for the grunts to get the attention of the guys in the iron boxes and to convey useful information once they had it. It happened, but it was often hard work and it might not happen right away.
Michael
No, I didn't serve in armoured brigade, and even if I did I wouldn't have seen any actual combat. I know it's not the same thing but I have been TC in virtual battles and know that engagements can be pretty hectic (especially if we're playing WW2 mod). Still, I have always tried to maintain situational awareness, especially if friendly infantry is closeby. Time to time they have shouted to me if I'm unbuttoned. Arma 2 + invasion 44 mod rocks.
-
Oddly, in my testing it made no difference if the tank was buttoned or not.
I realized the same when I tested it earlier today. It would be better if they could share spotting if they have visual or sound contact (not including radios) with eachother. A simple "waving arms" + "points a direction" would give the TC necessary information where to look.
-
Isn't it a bad idea tactically to line up your units right next to each other, though, bar thinks like ammo teams?
Naaw, it's called "handicap" when your opponent can wipe your entire force with one well placed artillery barrage.
-
It's been a while since I tested this, so it would be nice to have some verification
It seems the tanks haven't been close enough. You must be more or less in adjacent grid before they share the spotting info.
-
I believe any unit if close enough will share info, regardless of the entities they belong to. You can check it out by having two units (from separate formations) close to each other, but only one of them having eyes on a target. The other should get a <?> given time.
Haven't seen this happen in action. I'm all about tanks (you could call me a virtual tanker), and it frustrates me when a tank knows nothing about enemy positions even when a nearby squad of grunts are engaging enemy positions.
Maybe I should do a little field test and verify this...
-
Does an anti tank gun crew make use of enemy tank positional info that it gets from C2. For instance a tank is with in effective range of an anti tank gun but the gun crew hasn't spotted it yet. Will the gun crew look more carefully in the indicated direction and possibly spot the tank where as without the C2 info they probably would not have spotted the tank? Or am I dreaming again?
What would you do if you would be the gunner and someone says that there's a tank hidden behind a bush across the field, but you haven't seen it with your own eyes? You would try to spot it of course, because now you know where to look at.
In other words, it helps them to spot the enemy tank.
-
Right now in the editor a single gun or tank etc can be attached to a battalion or independent company and they are included in the chain of command. It would be good if a company of medium or heavy antitank guns or any other independent company could be attached to a battalion in the same way.
Yup, that's what I said in an earlier post. It would be great if we could create our own C2 trees, or to add new branches to already existing tree. This would make kampfgruppe Engel campaign much better.
-
Not too odd in WW II. In fact, unless special arrangements had been made and/or the two units have worked together before, it was fairly typical.
Michael
I agree with you, but lets not make this too complicated.
Example: If an infantry squad spots an enemy tank on a ridge line I bet they would use some form of verbal- or handsignals to communicate with a friendly tank parked just 5 feet away from the squad. At least this kind of spotting sharing should be possible in CM:BN.
Edit: Other example would be Kampfgruppe Engel campaign (a small strikeforce consisting of some infantry platoons, tanks, engineers and so on). The engineers must have some kind of grudge against infantry platoons, because they sure are not talking to each other.
-
It's not such a big problem for mission makers in CM:BN because you can include some key units / vehicles directly into already existing hierarchy. However, it's a huge problem (at least in my opinion) in CM:SF where luxuries such as individual MBT's or scouts (ya, really useful scouts they are...) are outside of normal C2. So at least it's one step in the right direction.
I hope this is changed in future games. Example: It's odd that an attached tank platoon don't communicate with an infantry company...
-
a) What attachment?
I tried the editor, and I don't see anything new there... -
1) Start a battle
2) Save
3) Ceasefire
4) Look where the enemy units are
5) Load
6) ???
7) Profit
PS. Extremely forbidden!
-
I had to test that "simulator" myself.
Oh... My...
The UI is truly a unique one! And not in a good way! The next time someone nags about the UI in CM I'm SO going to use this as a reference.
Edit: If you think they did a piss poor job on purpose then I dare you to try it yourself!
-
Why be so modest..?
-
RTFM
IIRC:
1) COPY Normandyb100A.brz from data folder to mod tools / rezexplode / input and execute the exe located in rezexplode folder.
2) Done.
-
Urban dictionary's definition of "Gekki":
- "An alternate identity for the Invisible Ceiling Cat who is often not amused". Check.
- "For someone who is very very very rude". Check.
- "a boy born of peruvian parent which has antlers and a problem ridding himself of his virginal burden". Ch- wait, what?
That last one shocks almost everyone who asks what does my nick mean, and I ask them to check urban dictionary...
-
This combo beats every other solution.
Haven't used H2HH myself, but it was pretty easy when my opponent sent the file through SSH directly to my save game folder... Can't get much easier than that.
-
what is PBEM? and im not a fan of the email thing
I just said it, "Play By E-mail".
Don't let the word "e-mail" fool you. I have used skype, ftp and ssh for sending the file (not even once have I used e-mail). Besides, who really wants to sit and wait for the opponent to make his micromanagement?
-
Use PBEM, or "Play By E-mail". You make your turn, press the big red button and then send the created save game file to your opponent by using e-mail, skype, etc. Repeat until you either achieve a decisive victory or a crushing defeat, or something in between.
-
I hope I'm not too late. Here are my 0.02€:
1. How important is the strategic map image?
- If a campaign, pretty important. I'd like to know the overall progress of the campaign.
- If a battle, not very important. I can always read the current situation.
2. How important is the operational map image?
- Always very important. Sure, I can always close the briefing and check the actual battlescape, but usually it's better if I first familiarize myself with a simple 2D map while reading the briefing.
3. For the tactical map, do you prefer a 2D style or a 3D in-game screen-shot type?
- 2D, no exceptions! Tactical map should also show available artillery assets, incoming reinforcements, known enemy locations and objectives. What I don't like when the tactical map shows me what I should do or what the AI will/might do.
In a nutshell: 2D map containing objectives, intel, own troops and available assets. Nothing more. In my opinion 3D maps are pointless because you can only show limited area of the battlefield, and you can always look a 3D view of the battlefield by exiting the briefing.
4. For the briefing text, what are turn-offs? Like perhaps too much wordiness or trying to tell you what to do?
- Commander's intent is always a welcome addition, but it shouldn't be exactly what the player should do.
5. What about the image you see as you first scroll through the scenarios? Is that important to set the mood or just indicate what side you might be fighting on?
- To be honest I usually pick the scenario just by looking at the pictures...
-
Hitler.
< / thread >
-
i do split my squads up just some maps you dont have lots of room to spread out. also can you even move at guns? when i try they say packing up but never actually move i have let them sit there a few min waiting for them to move but nothing happens
It takes time to limber the gun. From few minutes (infantry guns, small calibre ATG's) to half a battle (88, for example).
-
If there for example is a 3 story building, wouldnt the 2nd floor be the safest one to occupy during an artillery barrage? The shrapnel from nearby ground detonations shouldnt be able to come through the windows of the 2nd floor and hit the guys prone on the floor (except some richochets, maybe) and the 3rd floor will protect them from direct hits. I have no empirical data, but to me, it feels like i take less casualties on the second floor of a three story building than on the lowest one when there are artillery shells incoming.
Not sure if this is simulated in CM games, but makes sense. However, I haven't noticed this has a huge effect, as long as you're not on the top floor (or in case of Shock Force, on the roof!).
I tried the editor, and I don't see anything new there...
Vehicle crew grafic anomaly?
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Thank you! I have had the gymnastics-mod (
) installed for some time, and I found the old thread when I was searching for a fix, but I wasn't sure whether anything posted there would help or not because the thread was 99% trolling. 
Finally I can use self-propelled guns! \o/