Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Bulletpoint

  1. Listen to that Swedish prude.. Systembolaget not open yet? As for the original question, go for the setting you think is more interesting.
  2. But then a few minutes later, they will return. Advance, some get shot, they flee, they rally and go back... This continues until the end result is the same - massive casualty rates.
  3. They would have kept coming no matter what. Broken troops can still be ordered to move forward. That's also why you see the crew of tanks you knocked out keep trying to attack you.
  4. Because the scenario designer gave them an order to run towards your position.
  5. I agree. Another way to do it would be to give the player a victory time bonus of X points if he can take an objective within a set number of turns. Then after that turn, each turn will erode the victory time bonus until it's all gone.
  6. Isn't that basically just saying that as long as you have a massive force advantage, things generally go well? I don't think real MGs are only dangerous when you have half a dozen focused on one target...
  7. Forgot one of the most important reasons why we see higher casualties: Foxholes and trenches offer very little protection, and they only work when the player manually issues a "hide" command. This command can only be given once every 60 seconds, and if troops are already shaken, they won't accept the command. In real life, if you're in a foxhole, you can duck down in less than a second and you don't need to wait for an order to do so. Proposed solution: Troops placed on a square with foxholes should get the protection all the time, no matter if they are "hiding" or not. This would al
  8. This is true, but then again, it means you can't really use any viable defensive positions. Unless the map is really big, I'm thinking you end up having to deploy all your infantry out in the middle of fields, which is pretty useless and not what happened in the real war. And if the map is indeed really big, both players will have way more points, so more TRPs.
  9. At least CM gets it right. Graviteam Tactics, a game that prides it self on extreme realism, does... not. That's when I reach for my calming chamomile tea.
  10. Talking about quick battles against human opponents of course
  11. I also spent most of my CM years playing scenarios, where TRPs are rare and prized assets, so it's only now I realise they are so cheap in quick battles. This changes a lot for me, because I prefer playing infantry based defence. I think cheap TRPs change the dynamics of the game and basically make it a game of artillery and tanks. I used to think there was this cool dynamic where you had to choose how to use your arty. Preplanned strikes are instant, surprising, can hit any place on the map, and can do airburst. The downside being that you have to be clever enough to guess where your opp
  12. Thanks for clearing this up. It seems I remembered things wrong. I always definitely believed they were 150 points each, and for that reason I never really used them... Thought they were an expensive luxury.
  13. This reminds me of one of my pet peeves: How multiple rocket launchers in most games have the rockets leave a trail of smoke along their whole flight. As we see in this video, they only make a smoke trail in the first part of the trajectory. And yes, I realise I should probably care about some more important things...
  14. Has it always been that price? I could swear they used to be 150 points each. So they were a costly investment.
  15. In CMFB and CMBN, I just noticed that Target Reference Points now cost 30 points apiece. As far as I remember, they used to cost 150 points each. Am I remembering things wrong, or have they been made cheaper in the latest patch. If so, is this intentional?
  16. CMFB has that too, as it takes place in both autumn and winter. Graphics change from showing coloured autumn leaves to showing trees with no leaves. But does that actually affect spotting and concealment?
  17. Seems not to be a new German tank... but a modification of the British Challenger tank?
  18. I don't have CMFI. I'm just wondering if seasons have any effect on vegetation concealment at all.
  19. One thing I'm wondering about is whether trees and hedges offer less concealment in CMFB since it's winter and the leaves should have fallen off? It doesn't seem there's less concealment though. But I haven't tested it.
  20. It's not my bug report. I just think it deserves to be looked at in a proper way instead of handwaving it away with "APHE". Sure, we know what APHE is. It's not more deadly than HE from the same gun. If it were, there would be no reason to have a HE round in the first place.
  21. Maybe you or some other guy affiliated with BFC should actually take a look at the original bug report? It was made by the top guy on the FGM ladder ranking, and tested by one of the most thorough testers, so I think they have a clue what they are talking about. Yet the only response from BFC or beta testers has basically been the sound of crickets. It's like you guys have completely lost any ambition to fix and improve these games.
  22. Yes, I'm wondering if they made a mistake and switched around the blast values for some of the guns, so that the AP works like the HE and vice versa.
  23. This is actually a real issue that has been tested and posted about before. Some AP rounds seem to be much more powerful against infantry than they should be.
  • Create New...