Bud Backer

Wow! No, @Bulletpoint, I’ve never seen those before. I can see how they would be annoying. Mind you as someone who makes videos I can tell you that YouTube’s compression algorithm does not always show things properly. Both the good and the bad. In another forum we’ve had a devil of a time showing the developer some graphical I ssues that simply do not show in the video but are not the workings of our imaginations! Now, don’t take that to mean I don’t believe you or that I’m minimizing your experience. I do believe you. I’m just stating the above because people do need to know that video compression can have undesired consequences, and cannot be relied on to show things as they are seen in game. That can lead to the confusing situation where a complaint is dismissed because in game it’s not visible. Not saying that is the case here, I realize you pointed to that to show something you’ve seen in game. A screenshot at the computer’s screen resolution is more likely to retain fidelity. To be truthful, the most annoying thing I experience is that the snow is too gray at times.

That is so bizarre. My MacBook is from 2012, and max settings are no problem. Usually my frame rate is over 30 on a busy map which for me is fine in this game. Much lower and I do notice it, though less so than in some simulations where constant fluid motion makes anything much lower than 60 FPS irritating to me. Moving about the map in CM is fluid and rapid. So much so I have to fuss about because I keep slipping past what I wanted to see. My windows PC is a gaming laptop, but not the highest end. Again, same thing as my MacBook.

It’s really frustrating how different systems show different performance issues, or lack of them. I have no stuttering, swirling patterns or flickering shadows. I’m able to run the game with all graphical options maxed out, and I assume you can too. My only “problem” is that really really huge maps like Cassino or the master maps take 20 seconds to load in the editor. I tried this on both Windows 10 and Mac OS Catalina. It’s something that I see mentioned on forums for just about any game I play. Someone (sometimes me) has graphical performance that diverges from what many others can achieve and it’s very difficult to resolve. I hear your pain.

I have every one of that series. Possibly the best historical fiction I think I ever read.

Have a look at these alternatives for some variety. Not saying they are authoritative, but I don’t think they are crap either. Cassino - Fred Majdalany The Gothic Line - Douglas Orgill At War on the Gothic Line - Christian Jennings War In Italy - Richard Lamb Imperial War Museum Book of the War in Italy - Field Marshal Lord Carver The Long Road Home - Fred Cederburg Hell and High Water - Lance Goddard

Even the most recent game in the Combat Mission family will, if you pair with a friend, offer you thousands of hours of fun, if you are willing to use your imagination a bit to come up with what you wish to try to simulate. The quick battle generator in these games has kept me and a friend busy since 2012.

In my experience the actual spotting distance is for far shorter than the potential indicated by the blue line. Thanks for the info.

Distances are in metres? I have a hard time imagining 170m visibility in thick fog. Am I reading this wrong?

“Never mind the cookwares, Tony. I think geophys is pointing to a temple here.”

Thanks! I wish I could claim to have stopped him cold. I think he’s probing and hoping to get me to reveal my defences. The real fight isn’t close to beginning, IMO.

Thanks! I wish I could claim to have stopped him cold. I think he’s probing and hoping to get me to reveal my defences. The real fight isn’t close to beginning, IMO.

@AlessandroW - you’re very welcome. Based on my experience, I would recommend if played HTH that the German player not use the last reinforcement that arrives. With that I think it leaves the battle more in the hands of the players and not skewed by the design.

I’ve heavily edited my last two posts above so if you read them earlier you may want to check and see if you’ve missed new content.

If you remember, Ian had men near the decoy bunker on the ridge. I suspected they might be artillery observers. At the very least they were some scouting element, and I was going to have my mortar team hit them but they withdrew before I could even fire. I’m not sure what spooked them, but I have Kurt’s split 3rd squad in the woods on my side of the ridge and the team that lost a man and then went up the ridge toward that decoy bunker may get me a view of what is going on. What surprises me is that I don’t have almost any contacts near the decoy bunker. My 105 barrage was supposed to catch a lot of enemy troops there and instead I killed one of my own men because the shifting of fire took too long. In any case, my spotter in the village, despite Ian’s bombardment, can see a few tanks and infantry and a lot, really a lot of contacts, in the woods on the ridge more toward the map edge where his Sherman was destroyed by the 88. You can see below my new 105mm orders. It seems to me he is hoping to flank the hamlet, and take it without interference from my forces in the town. The inset shows the team from 3rd squad that will crawl forward to the edge of the woods to see if I can confirm my conclusion. As a final way to make him bleed infantry I have another spotter in the village with LOS to the back side of the ridge and he will direct 81mm mortar fire where I can’t get the 105s to land. With luck, I may catch him there and even the odds somewhat... The village itself has lost the 88 ammo bunker, which was empty, and is under continual fire from a smaller number of tanks (I think my 120mm barrage may have made him nervous to have so much exposed there). The fire has cost me 3 men, if I’m not misremembering, and some buildings have sustained heavy damage but how I’ve moved people now, the fire is ineffectual. My overall losses are about 5 men. I can’t know what the 120mm fire on the forces near the village did but given some armour was withdrawn, I assume it was at least somewhat effective. Perhaps Ian has lost two squads or with luck, a full platoon. He’s lost two Sherman 105s, and a bit more infantry on the ridge itself. All this is nice, but I know he hasn’t brought his full capability to bear.

All right, time for another behind the curtain view of what is going on and what I hope to do about it. The mortar and 88 fire on the crew and accompanying infantry that maybe was next to the Sherman the 88 killed gets clobbered. There were more crosses at various points but this was quite satisfying:

I was able to finally get things running. Sorry, guys for the delay. This is why we beta test, however, so you don’t get stuck like I did. Comics a-coming!

I think it’s worthwhile, since the subject of balance has been brought up, to look at the discussion in this thread: Particular attention should be given to @ASL Veteran’s lengthy Post in that thread. Balance is so subjective, and highly dependent on players doing what the designer intended. Unexpected or innovate methods and approaches can upset that. If it was me, I’d be looking at what appears interesting and plausible, as balance is within reason, impossible to attain. Having said that, I have played head to head in several, and one that stands out as challenging for both players is A Muddy Affair

Not just you.

Indeed. Thankfully they don’t carry many. Thank you! Thank you for commenting,

That is true though in the past it didn’t stop people from adding to the thread - and I don’t mind at all that they do. I haven’t forgotten. The men near the wrecked bunker on the ridge likely could see the tower, but until something bigger comes along to shoot at it I won’t worry. Tell that to the Sherman crew..

Sure thing, links are in my signature but here it is specifically: