Ultradave
-
Posts
3,805 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
Posts posted by Ultradave
-
-
Yes, it works fine for me. With new installations sometimes there is a very significant lag in opening, and you need to right click and select "Open" in order to bypass the Mac OS malware check, but that doesn't sound like the issue you are having.
Dave -
None on my tanks that I can see. I must say I missed the shotgun blasts. I know what they look like from Stuart's.
Every tank is armed with a mix of HE and AP, with a couple of them having just a few rounds of APCR (APDS or Sabot to us non-Russians).
I do have a hefty number of MG teams, and the tanks have been making liberal use of theirs, what with all those ersatz soldiers running around. But the canister animation is pretty distinctive.
Dave -
1 hour ago, Vacillator said:
which if you're not careful could cancel the CF.
This is VERY easy to do accidentally. Not that I've ever done that
-
6 hours ago, Erwin said:
You are confusing tanks with HT's. You are correct that it is not possible to switch tanks crews. One should however, be able to mount any inf units into an uncrewed 251/1 and they should crew it. Not sure why this is controversial.
Re GeorgeMC's point, the FO was KIA in the previous mission. Therefore he should not have been returned at all. IIRC someplace reading that if an FO is returned it is functional. There is no point returning a unit that is useless in a game whether a vehicle that cannot be crewed or a unit that cannot function.
If I had experienced the above is in the many campaigns I have played over the years, I would have reported them. Since I don't recall ever being faced with similar problems b4, am increasingly convinced that there are bugs in the campaign system that have been introduced via updates.
FO died. George explained the premise. You have a rifleman remaining. Use him as a scout. PL or CoCdrs will have to CFF from now on. Them's the breaks, but not a bug.
Dave
-
19 hours ago, Erwin said:
You guys do understand I am talking about subsequent missions of a campaign where the FO got KIA? Not sure I believe that in RL a FO couldn't be replaced in the hours/days between missions.
Yes.
There are never enough FOs to go around. In WW2 or today. In the 70s and 80s we never, not once, were full up to our TOE. And this was the 82d. You'd think if anyone would be, it would have been us. So the replacement FO would have to come from another unit nearby. In many cases the subsequent mission follows almost directly after the previous one. Yes, you may get some replacements or may not. But it makes it harder to get specialists, as opposed to cross attaching a reinforcing company from next door, for example.
Maybe they could be replaced, maybe not. It's pretty annoying to permanently lose a someone like that, no doubt. An FO is not the only guy on the battlefield that can CFF. He does it better, but someone just has to fill in.
Dave
-
Probably assumes his radio did with him. The assistant/RTO in an FO team would normally also be trained to call for fire, but if the FO's radio got shot to pieces, well, ....
Protect your FO's. That's where the firepower is. (I may, of course, be biased).
Dave
-
7 minutes ago, billbindc said:
We will be voting on funding this war...or it's near aftermath...in November of 2024 and it will correctly be defined as the most important decision we have made as a global power since the early Cold War. Ukraine will be on the ballot and it's quite likely to be the decisive factor.
The only positive of this is that while there is a vocal "anti" minority in the House, the Senate seems to be in bi-partisan agreement that aide must continue.
Dave
-
2 hours ago, keas66 said:
Seems like most of America is too busy watching NFL games
NVM. Not worth it.
Dave
-
8 minutes ago, MSBoxer said:
Most of the general public has no idea what any single piece of legislation contains, unless some PR group representing even more money tells them what is in the bill and how they should feel about it.
And yet, EVERY SINGLE BILL in Congress, from the moment written, is available to every US Citizen (for that matter, anyone in the world unless some country blocks it), on Congress.gov, free to read, download, print, full text and summary, status, votes in committee and floor.
The fact that the general public has no idea is at least in part due to the general public making no effort at being informed. When presented with extreme claims of doom due to the potential passing of this or that bill by either party, or any news or social media post, the general public should go read the bill for themselves and find out.
Dave -
5 hours ago, PEB14 said:
Hi,
(The question below is a real-life TOE one, not a Combat Mission mechanics one.)
I'm starting a scenario as the US side. I've got a battalion(-) of rangers under my command. In D Company, there are two Scout Teams attached directly to Co HQ. I'm somewhat puzzled by the composition of these 3-men teams: 2 SMG and 1 sniper!
What is the rationale to mix in a Team a long-range sniper and two short-range SMG? And what is the rationale to put a sniper in a Scout unit?
To me, it looks as logical as to mix an AT gun and a mortar in an Artillery battery...
It shows they have binos and one of the SMG guys (at least) has them, so I'd say it's a scout/sniper team and the two SMG guys are spotters and protection for the guy with the sniper.
Keep in mind that Rangers, besides scaling the cliffs at D-Day, or operating as an elite infantry unit, are also well trained and used for small, covert, behind the lines actions, raids and ambushes. That team could come in very useful for say, eliminating a sentry post, while keeping the main body of Rangers back a bit and less prone to early discovery. Just one real-life example.
Dave
-
18 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
The answer is complicated, but it boils down to "it takes a lot of time to code and maintain this sort of game". This is normal for gamers. Very often the things you guys picture being "easy" might take a month, and the things you think are "hard" take a day.
This isn't unique to game software.
I just retired from a 38 year career in radiation shielding design. We use a mix of our own and commercial software. But even using commercial software, the incredibly detailed model of the submarine shielding is the key, and it takes a huge effort to make that model. Likewise, our home grown software has developed and evolved over decades to where it is today. Many times (always, really) shoehorning a new capability into this software ends up being MUCH more involved than we first expected. And we've been the recipients of the "It should be easy to add XYZ. Why is your estimate so high?" comments. Yeah, sure. We'll see.
I can sympathize with Steve on this.
Dave
-
I've been retired now for about a year and a half and I'm absolutely loving it. But I can't play CM all day. There are too many other things I'm really interested in. For example (not in order):
* I'm 66 and been a competitive runner since I was 18. Lymphoma took a bite out of that but I'm back at it again and feeling good. But at this age I'm much slower and need more rest after pushing myself.
* My model railroad
* Amateur radio
* Reading
* Piano
* Guitar
* Things my wife and I like to do together (she's retired and has her own interests too). This should really be higher up the list
* Other games (yes, there are others, haha)
You guys wait until you retire. You'll see. I mean, still not having time for everything is a good problem because now "everything" is only stuff you WANT to do. The good news is I won't be bored in retirement!
Dave
-
5 hours ago, Seminole said:
I do wish the US had taken Putin's bait for some kind of UN registered treaty on Ukrainian neutrality (akin to post-WW2 Austria).
Oh, please. Russia violated the very agreement they signed to guarantee Ukraine's security. You think that Putin seriously meant that? You used the correct word - "bait"
Dave
-
I think you guys are using Russia and Russians two different ways. One very literal, the other general and encompassing. Might be more of a language/usage issue than an actual disagreement?
Dave
-
Article in The Times this morning speculating about a hard-line overthrow of Putin. But the interesting part after all here speculation about factions is the last paragraph, which maybe they should have expanded on a bit more.
There's a paywall (I subscribe), but I think you get a certain number of free views? If not I'll see if I can figure something out.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pro-war-ultra-patriots-may-overthrow-president-putin-djd8j32gw
Dave
-
On 1/31/2023 at 11:19 AM, coachjohn said:
The matrix site only llist the windows version. Can i buy from matrix and use the mac version like on the battlefront site. (I have a matrix anniversary coupon - significant savings)
Also if not - does it run on parallels
I am a Mac user and beta testers. There will not be Mac versions on Matrix/Slitherene unfortunately. No tournaments or PBEM++ for Macs. But that is consistent with any other games as well.
As for Parallels, YES, it will run. Will you like it? Possibly. I have a 2018 MacBook pro and using that I can run any scenario at Best resolution just fine. I've tried to use Parallels for Cold War during the PBEM++ addition and even with Between Two Farhbahns, performance was extremely poor. Jerky, halting movement, slow graphics redraw, for instance when you move the camera forward and farther scenery renders more detail - very slow and halting. Overall it was an unsatisfying experience. I run many other games and scientific computationally intensive software using Parallels, but CM just has poor performance.
One caveat. My MacBook is a few years old. It's possible that on a new M1 or M2 its might do better. Also, mine does not have a separate GPU. That's a problem for CM in Windows, but it's not for a Mac, same processor. If you have a higher end Mac with a GPU, it will most likely work ok.
Hope that helps you.
Dave
-
1 hour ago, Chibot Mk IX said:
a Campaign tree will definitely help us . I usually check this website http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com but they haven't update it for a long time.
So how do I continue the campaign to achieve a victory ? Don't hit ceasefire and continue the battle to the last minute?
at least for now, when I hit cease fire , it gives me a minor victory in mission 5a
thx
Go back to a previous save before you hit ceasefire and go from there. You'll redo some amount but you'll be able to keep going.
Dave
-
2 hours ago, Vacillator said:
Okay, @Ultradave and I have reached the end of Cat and Mouse at turn 118 (Cease Fire pressed on both sides). We had no issues with saving etc. but perhaps we were lucky.
Anyway, it really was a great game and thanks are due to @George MC.
I'll second that. George's scenarios all have a couple things in common. Great, interesting maps, and surprises. This was H2H and we didn't *exactly* follow the brief on either side, but it was a lot of fun. I'll wager playing German against the AI, you'd be hit with a few things you didn't expect. That's just the way he makes them.
Dave
-
15 hours ago, PEB14 said:
Well, it looks like the modern era titles are getting far more popular than WW2 ones. A matter of gamers' age, I would bet.
And current events possibly.
-
Turn 87 now (so about 44 minutes of game time) and nary a glitch. Some burning tanks though.
Dave
-
US campaign 1982 you'll have some. Kriegsburg later years ('81, '82) will I believe. I think there are some in the last couple scenarios of the US 1979 campaign too if I remember correctly.
But really to get the real feel of Cold War conflict you want to experience life with M113s. Helps realize why we didn't want to fight a full out war
Dave
-
16 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:
From yonks ago.
https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/thefgmforum/threads/combat-mission-memes.21185/
Still one of my favourites.
Also known as "Recon by Death"
-
On 1/10/2023 at 5:12 AM, BarendJanNL said:
- Most important: update on the handling of artillery in game, for FOs to be able to call for artillery even when no line of sight,
This is one of my pet requests. I would like the ability to call fire on a map coordinate, and if there is no line of sight, then it's a FFE mission and while it will hit the grid location accurately (after all, the FO and the FDC are using the same map, so the rounds should hit what he asked for), the effects will be unknown to the friendly side since there is no LOS. That's fine. It mimics reality. No need to get fancy with entering coordinates. The current FO call line works fine, just that inside the game a different behavior is used if there is no LOS from FO to target. This would allow firing on a tentative contact, for example, you know the enemy is expected to have armor, and you get a couple of sound contact behind a treeline or just over a rise, where you can't see.
Doesn't need to be TRPs. TRPs main advantage is faster response time. For TRPs the battery FDC will have already calculated firing data, and needs only to send it to the guns.
Dave
-
How close to the target did Soviet motor rifle squads dismount?
in Combat Mission Cold War
Posted
Well, that's not true. At CMCW scope battlefield size, direct radiation effects would be as much of a factor as blast and heat. Those troops in buildings that weren't flattened would still be subject to direct radiation. That was the whole idea of "neutron bombs", right? If you were in a trench or a decent reverse slope you'd be somewhat protected from that, but everyone else - not so lucky. And non "neutron bomb" weapons might leave tank crews ok, -ish. Remember that "neutron bombs" were properly termed enhance radiation weapons. More direct radiation than "normal" fission weapons, but "normal" ones still pack a large direct radiation punch.
I think you are thinking of fallout and contamination.
Dave