Jump to content

Freyberg

Members
  • Content Count

    869
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Freyberg last won the day on January 3

Freyberg had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Freyberg

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Both of those features would make a big difference - agreed!
  2. I just ran a very simple test 5 times. You're right. Enemy trigger objectives are ignored, and the touch objective disappeared. Such disappointed...
  3. I'm not calling you a liar, but are you sure about that...? I don't use them very often (sheer laziness), but I could swear that the times I have tried they have worked. I wonder if the terrain objectives that get converted to 'occupy' are just the 'touch' objectives (even then, I'm sure these have worked in some of the QB maps that come with the games, but I may be remembering Scenarios - I've never played with touch objectives myself). The way I've done it is to set a very wide time range for the event and make use of the trigger, so that both the trigger and the timing are activat
  4. There are lots of little random oddities, dice rolls so to speak, that make the game what it is, that make the pixel-troops more unpredictable - it makes the game more exciting, realistic and fun.
  5. I used to do that, but I don't find it necessary with the current version of CM
  6. That's an odd little bug - it happens in the WWII titles too
  7. In fairness, close assault on an unsupported tank shouldn't be hard. I don't believe it was in RL.
  8. Yeah, those 57mm AP shells really fly - great penetration. They don't always do enough damage for a kill, but they're lethal often enough.
  9. Certainly it is less likely to deflect than a high velocity projectile, but the jet still has to penetrate a certain width of steel, which can vary depending on the angle it strikes at. Plus, as a general observation, shaped charges are dependent on the energy and dimensions of the explosive - and I think the Tiger I was right at the upper limit against which the 60mm bazooka round could be expected to have any effect.
  10. An extremely minor feature I would love, would be a menu item for supply trucks, to alter the mix of what they have on board. For example with Commonwealth, I often don't need 9mm (many nations don't use it); and I would love to able to buy more 2" mortar rounds (I often buy carrier platoons just for the ammo); 3" mortar rounds would be amazing (though obviously, you'd need to make it expensive); in urban maps, the option for extra .45 cal would come in handy; .50 cal wouldn't hurt (although plenty of vehicles store it); and I agree with those who've asked in the past for the option to be
  11. I do something similar. I'll set up a single zone, with no orders just 'setup', covering the whole defender setup zone, set to 'ambush 1000m', so the AI can put AT guns wherever it wants (clever placement of AT guns is what it does best). Most of the time it works - but sometimes the AT guns (or some of them) end up 'limbered', trundling along slowly like sitting ducks.
  12. One thing that annoys me a little with AI plans in QBs is that sometimes (not always) the AI seems to choose inappropriate groups for a weapon type - the most annoying one being a group with movement otrders for AT guns. When I set up an AI plan, I usually have one (or two, on a larger map with more groups) completely static AI group for things like AT guns, but the AI doesn't always select it.
  13. I think the editor is a great tool, I'm slowly becoming more skilled at using the AI, which can work very well on defence and in limited counterattacks, and I would also like to see the AI and its interface improved. However, while I don't object to the suggestions made, my wishes are completely different. A lot of these suggestions seem to be asking for more micromanaging, when I would like to see less. It's probably some time away, and I'm not at all displeased with the AI as it currently works, but I would like to see the day when you could just define one or two broad attacks (li
×
×
  • Create New...