Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bulletpoint last won the day on December 10 2020

Bulletpoint had the most liked content!


About Bulletpoint

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:


  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

5,109 profile views
  1. No, the game AI isn't that advanced. If you make the vehicle immobilised from the beginning, the crew acts normal apart from that they can't move. I don't even think it affects morale if the tank gets immobilised during the battle. Only if crewmembers (or their buddies in other tanks) get killed.
  2. In the editor, you can choose the vehicle to be immobilised.
  3. I don't know if you already saw this, but here is a comparison between the two tanks. It comes to the conclusion that they are roughly equal, and it cites an old British study that comes to the same conclusion. So the question remains: Why is the Panzer IV so much more expensive in points than the Sherman?
  4. I think they should just take another year or two to work on this in their own sweet time. No need to rush.
  5. Surrendering troops keep yelling "Pull back!" "Get out of here!" etc. They should instead shout "we surrender, don't shoot". The right sound files are already in the game but only played once the surrender actually takes effect.
  6. It's difficult to do this in the game, because while tanks generally drive in a direct line from A to B, infantry tend to move more in an L-shape where they stray out to one side and then turn and move towards the destination. This happens more and more the longer the infantry waypoint is.
  7. I agree with you, but I think they hide these details on purpose, to make it unclear what is a bug and what is a feature. A lot of people have a very good imagination when it comes to explain away weird events in this game.
  8. I know you didn't make the game, and I'm not saying this to have a bitter argument, but just to muse a bit on the topic. I think the game was intended to be quite competitive, since there are unit costs, objectives, victory points for winning and losing, etc. It's just that the competitive aspect wasn't very well done or thought out. Chess is super competitive too, but you can cheat if your opponent turns his back for a moment. Or just bash over your opponent's pieces and declare victory (like doing a turn 1 rocket attack in CM). There's a middle ground between "not competitive"
  9. My point was mostly about the LMG version of the MG42. The HMG version is more capable. Sounds like your approach to the mission is good though. Just be aware that at 600m against enemies in a blockhouse, you need a very heavy volume of fire to suppress them.
  10. I'm not arguing against the use of TRPs in reality or in the game. I'm saying they are too cheap in the game, compared to their effect.
  11. Well you won't be doing any Tiger II matches in CMBN any time soon.. at least not before they fix the bug that makes it unavailable in quick battles Just give in and agree with me, you know you want to And yes, unless there's modular buildings for cover, infantry is toast because of TRPs.
  12. My anecdotal experience suggests the opposite. It sounds dangerous, but unless you're extremely close, it's unlikely to do much damage, if any at all. The only times I see it being really effective is house to house fighting where it just can't physically miss, and where the large bullet output means a high chance to get lucky with the dice roll to kill an enemy soldier in cover.
  13. If it's not designed to be competitive, what's the point in having a price cost for the units at all? Just make all units free and let the players decide what they can use. Surely, but this essentially means infantry is much less viable than they should be. I personally prefer infantry tactics, so I like using an infantry force with a few AFVs in support. But when both players have such cheap TRPs, it means I have to choose an armour force with a few throwaway infantry units just for spotting and sitting on objectives. The attacker will have to do the same thing: load up on t
  • Create New...