Artkin
-
Posts
3,425 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by Artkin
-
-
I use it along fencelines
-
On 5/23/2024 at 8:37 AM, Thomm said:
Interesting article about the decline of interest in strategy games (found on the Grogheads forum).
Riiiiight, and what do these bone heads consider strategy? IGN is complete garbage and has been that way forever.
"Capes, a gritty turn-based strategy role-playing game about villains ruling the streets"
-
looks like it was fleeing the bazooka team
-
Completely agree. The icons are super annoying and cause a ton of lag. They spam areas that your units already have LOS to. They have to go especially since they block your clicks ... i.e. old icons littering a roadway.
-
14 hours ago, Fenris said:
It's being called the blyatmobile, saying under the turtle shell armour it's all EW equipment. A new type of AFV is born?
Similarly, something that looks like a bat-sub being developed
As cool as it is to see whats being developed...
Can these guys stop taking pictures of everything? What ever happened to secrecy?
-
My first step would be to change the hotkeys file to something comfortable
-
Yeah the schizophrenic running around when artillery drops needs to stop. It's fantasy.
-
20 minutes ago, Bannon said:
Since BS has been more or less retired, I'm hoping for another modern like NATO vs Russia or Korea 2025. I'd also like a Cold War expansion updating to the late 80's and other seasons especially Winter.
+1 Except I hope it's not drone spam because that wouldnt be fun at all.
China + NK VS USA, Japan, SK would be incredible.
-
7 minutes ago, PEB14 said:
Considering all these missing components, why put a house rule forbidding to area fire on a position where the player knows there is an enemy? In RL, the firing tank or squad would get the information, because some runner from a nearby squad would relay it, especially to a tank! In CM I shall move an entire team to reliably convey the information to a nearby tank, while only ONE runner would do the job. I personally don't and just shoot. Is it THAT unrealistic? I don't think so.
That's not whats being talked about.
Many players are not comprehending what's being said despite numerous explanations. Maybe they just have limited PBEM experience and are naive.
If you have an infantry team get into a fight with another infantry team, and you use your tank 1km away to snipe that enemy team the very next turn - this is completely unrealistic and sets CM on a lower bar than armored brigade for realism... which is already a really low bar.
Or if you use a tank with destroyed optics to area target the enemy's locations. Even if the commander is turned out.
I'll make it perfectly clear: Just let your troops do the targetting. A hard rule has to be set because people can't control themselves and turn every game into a pride match.
The inability of CM's infantry to perform suppressing fire is partly because of the veterancy system which is also completely out of proportion with reality. Conscripts and even greens will perform much more realistically and wont disengage the millisecond the enemy dies/disappears from view.
-
32 minutes ago, Jackal2100 said:
1. I don't "abuse" CM. Don't accuse me of something that is untrue.
2. How the game is "meant" to be played? I didn't know there was a right and wrong way to play a game, other than by the rules you set up with your opponent beforehand and those imposed by the engine itself.
It wasn't directed at you. Don't play like a cheeseball in general.
But what's funny is that you did abuse this mechanic against me in the PBEM we are currently playing. So yeah, you abuse it.
Your opponent could buy all javelin teams and wipe the field of your troops, or he could buy a balanced force and have a decent game with you. Be decent unless your opponent is indecent.
-
4 hours ago, Jackal2100 said:
If your vehicle sees gunfire coming from a bush, you should be able to shoot at it even if you can't see the gun itself. To assume that vehicles should just stand still and get shot without response is kind of ridiculous.
I'd advise you to watch combat footage and see just how blind modern day equipment is. Vehicles are not able to see muzzle flashes like a human eye can.
CM already has a mechanic if a vehicle spots an enemy. The turret will turn and the entire vehicle will rotate toward the threat IF it gets a partial, a sound, or a full contact. Or even if it gets hit and can determine where the gunfire is coming from.
That's not even what I'm talking about.
I never said that "Vehicles should just stand still and get shot without response".
Don't put words in my mouth. Don't abuse CM's interface like a cheese ball either. It's not how the game is meant to be played.
-
13 minutes ago, A Canadian Cat - was IanL said:
I know it is common for us to call them sound contacts but they are not all sound contacts. They are unclear or unestablished contacts. Sound is one way but just spotting something but not being sure what it is exactly is also depicted by the same symbol.
Sure but the vehicle in question usually isnt getting the partial spot. And it makes no difference to a player who plays this way.
-
4 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:
And I'm trying to explain that it would be the greater of two evils. By a very wide margin.
My PBEMs still represent a very small sample size. So whether unrealistic uses outnumber realistic uses or not, I can't say. But what I can say, with an extremely high degree of confidence, is that the game (in all modes) would be far less realistic without it. How often has your lack of use of the target command been unrealistic?
Not very unrealistic. Also my opponents have no problems with the rule. I also rarely play with regulars or higher veterancies who instantly stop shooting the millesecond enemies die.. especially in houses/buildings.
-
4 minutes ago, Jackal2100 said:
Do you consider sound contacts a good enough spot for area fire? If I see an atgm fired from a position and hear the crew there, but don't see the crew itself, would you consider it wrong to fire at the area? I would imagine the area fire would be quite logical.
No lol in no universe is a running vehicle getting an accurate sound location and pinpointong the exact location of the enemy. Similarly c2 is no excuse for this unless youre playing CMBS as the Americans who have a battle managment system in their vehicles.
Area fire would be fine if people use it logically. You can maybe determine the angle of the fire within a certain few degrees but thats only one of three axises covered. You also have distance and height. Over a long distance that shootet could be absolutely anywhere.
If the vehicle had a spot, they would engage the target. It's that simple. Otherwise you might as well go play Wargame or Armored Brigade.
-
1 minute ago, Centurian52 said:
It's not perfect. But you are overstating the problem (you can only issue orders once a minute in H2H play, and units still need to have a line of fire in order to use the target command), and ever worse problems would be created if you removed it.
To give an example of how much worse it would be without the 'target' command, in one of my battles in which I'm defending hedgerow country I sprung a couple of nasty ambushes against my opponent. I had my pixeltruppen hiding with short target arcs until his scouts were nearly at my end of the field, and then opened fire. Afterwards I repositioned my teams (which I think must have looked like I was abandoning the hedgerow to him), had them resume hiding with short target arcs, and I was able to repeat the ambush on the next group of soldiers to cross. If there was no area target command I would be able to repeat this tactic again and again with complete impunity. There would be absolutely nothing my opponent could do about it. You can't possibly tell me that that would be more realistic than my opponent firing into my hedgerows with everything he's got, spots or no spots (which he has very wisely, and very realistically, started to do)?
As I said it's the lesser of two evils imo. The exploit I mentioned is applicable in almost every situation whereas your example is very limited in scope (Thickly hedgerowed maps). You similarly can't possibly tell me that the area target command is more often used realistically in PBEM than not.
In just about every PBEM experience I've had people use it to laser target my infantry teams with vehicles that have no buisness in that engagement.
-
35 minutes ago, Ultradave said:
Well, I have to disagree with this and @Artkin. What you describe is *exactly* what I'd do in real life.
But, hey, make any rules you want in agreement with your opponent.
Taking away that capability, to me, would remove a perfectly valid tactic. I'd do that even without the TOW firing from the woods. Ooh, look, treeline ahead. Blast it with whatever we've got to keep their heads down, while I have maneuver elements close in. Is it really that much different than putting a smoke screen in front of the treeline even if you haven't spotted anything? Pretty much accomplishes the same thing.
DaveIt's not possible in real life lol.
Tanks instantly sniping infantry the second an infantryman sees them 1km away? A t-72 sniping the exact position your hidden atgm is in?
Lol, come on man. It defies reality and puts CM on a worse level than armored brigade.
-
14 minutes ago, Ultradave said:
Can you explain more? I don't get this one. If you are on offense, you would call fire along a treeline, hammer a village you plan to assault, etc. On defense you'd target areas where the enemy could be assembling for an assault. Can't hit a whole patch of woods because you can't get a LOS to the middle of it. I suppose you could target the open in front of the woods and overlap into it.
I see nothing wrong with targeting an open area the enemy has to cross to attack you with everything I've got, and hoping that that timing of the FFE works with the enemy crossing that area. Catching enemy in the open with artillery is a goal, not something that should be eliminated.
Maybe I'm missing your point or objection (certainly possible - it's early, I'm wet from walking the dogs and need coffee
)
Dave
It's raining here too, same area as you.
Brille already explained it but yeah using your tanks to kill things without seeing them.
For instance you have a tank with red optics, but you still use it to area target known infantry locatioms across the map. I'm sure you can imagine other situations where this is abused.
Theres no way to allow area fire but prevent people from snipinging infantry this way, so a hard rule - removing the feature for MP- would be the way to go.
It's the lesser of two evils.
-
Dont area target your enemies infantry with vehicles that dont have a spot.
Remove the area target command for MP.
-
Top road had two waypoints, bottom only one. It's not even close! Keep in mind the vehicles on the top are keeping their speed so the difference is larger than the pictures show (Except for the last vehicles in the last picture). I used CMPE because the vehicles have very fast movement speeds.
-
I just checked it, big difference for me. Vehicles which are approaching a single waypoint corner seem to slow down more first.
-
I never place waypoints directly on road corners, only before and after them.
IMO the units drive smoother around corners this way, and dont lose as much speed.
-
19 minutes ago, Brille said:
Well the way I understand it is that Combat Mission is abstract in a lot of situations. So a simple line from A to B might be not just that simple or the terrain is not as flat as it is depicted ingame.
So fields or even roads may have bumps and rocks in them, sometimes a slope or a pitch here and there. On a driven out dirt road you can have 2 tracks on the sides with a high middle strip. An inexperienced driver may dig the belly of their vehicle on that strip, while an experienced driver would know how to position his vehicle to not get it immobilized. Those little adjustments of the vehicle/tanks position you don´t have in CM. It is just an abstraction.
I understand and have already mentioned the deviations in tiles that arent visibly represented. In a wheat field this should be almost impossible to distinguish. In a grass field this should be exceedingly obvious.
Even experienced tank crew have found themselves surprised in combat conditions... i.e. excerpts from Cairus' Tigers In The Mud.
This is why I set my crews to lower veterancies, so they perform closer to what I've read. Tanks are definitely hard to see out of, and I dont think being highly experienced makes that big of a difference insided an armored box with little windows.
-
22 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:
Well you say that, but my talent allowed me get out main skidder stuck in a hayfield just driving to the woods. The other driver immediately came over and said the ground in the center is always softer after a rain storm so have to skirt the woodline to avoid getting stuck. You would not know that without some experience.
I'm not saying there's no problem, but I frequent the Steel Beast forums as a player. There are dozens of former and active tanks commanders and drivers. They all talk about getting stuck and throwing tracks.
The steel beasts players are probably using vehicles that have completely different tracks too. An abrams/leopard 2 tracks are flat padded and are better for road surfaces. These tanks have more aggressive treads which are better for offroading - including t-90a's tracks. Also the ground conditions were set to very dry. The center of CM fields are not going to be more wet than the exterior.
-
10 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:
In RL, in Steel Beasts, and in CM, inexperienced drivers should bog at higher rates that veteran drivers. I used to drive skidders, tractors, and bulldozers in the woods of Maine. I guy driving a skidder a few years compared to me with a month of experience is a world of difference in speed and knowledge of where not to drive a skidder.
Notice how I didnt post a screenshot of a forested area.
You wouldnt even be able to distinguish divets or holes in a wheatfield/tall grass like this.
Riiiiight, and what do these bone heads consider strategy? IGN is complete garbage and has been that way forever.
Combat Mission Shock Force 2 - Invitational Grand Tournament
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
We're off to a slow start but we'll get it done