Jump to content

RMM

Members
  • Posts

    353
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by RMM

  1. 4 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

    Playing this against a competent PBEM opponent will show exactly why the Soviets appreciated the Germans wasting so many men and so much material on ill advised attacks instead of forcing them to crack prepared defenses in good terrain consistently.

    It wouldn't have changed the end result, but it would have slowed things considerably.

    And Martin is a very competent player!

  2. 9 hours ago, Vacillator said:

    You mean to bump it 😉?

    I haven't played it but just had a look, you should be fine once you get to the 'flood plain' 🫣.

    Are you playing the original?  I seem to have a Redux version as well, more GE reinforcements but it says play as Axis vs AI while the original mentions H2H.

    It's the redux. It does say at the end playable as H2H. Don't really know what 'bump it' means, but with something this, apparently intractable, am always curious as to what people might suggest, not in terms of move or attack here, but in terms of tactics and overall strategy. Always looking to learn. This thing just seems to leave the GE as mostly helpless targets on a range however. Short of a blind, headlong charge anyway, which I just

  3. Am curious if anyone would be willing to provide insights on the GE tactics that should be employed with this scenario, because I've been PBEM'g this scenario, and I have to say it seems to want to just force the GE into simply ordering a blind, headlong charge, across an obvious killing zone, re-creating a 20th century version of the Charge of The Light Brigade! The GE can't spot, can't area fire where suspected targets are due to repeated 'no aim point', and to top it all off, are often beaten to the punch in long-range gunnery. Plus the terrain is purposely setup to prevent them from working their way through the various woods to get into good, covered firing positions! So what else is left?

    This thing seems to do more to simply highlight problems with the spotting algorithm than anything else! The RU just sit behind grainfields and/or hull down and just enjoy their fish-in-a-barrel target practice. To top it all off, the GE aren't allowed the obvious arty prep any such attack would require IRL. Every advantage is given to the RU, and the GE player is just left re-arranging targets on the range! Am I missing something? 

    (Russian) guns to the right. Guns to the left. Guns to the front and on they rode, into the valley of death! With equally dumb results.

    Am genuinely looking for constructive suggestions rather than just 'player problem' suggestions!

  4. 1 hour ago, Erwin said:

    My recollection is that if you order TARGET FIRE at the desired location you are blasting into, the unit will use grenades.  

    However, the BLAST itself will suppress anyone on the other side for a few seconds at least - so the same effect. 

    My SOP (since engineers with charges are valuable and I don't want them to get into combat when there are less valuable inf units available) is to place a FAST MOVE waypoint for the eng back to the original starting point immediately after the BLAST waypoint.  

    In this way the unit BLASTS the wall which suppresses any enemy there for a few seconds enabling the engineers to enter and immediately run out to safety.  I always place an inf unit at the same waypoint that the engineers started from and it is that inf which can fire into the room if there are any enemy there.  

    This tactic also neutralizes a tactic used by cunning designers (and players) who place the enemy not IN the room, but on the other side of a far wall. The way this tactic works is that your eng BLASTS into the room that is empty.  But, enemy units behind a (2nd) wall on the far side of the room are unaffected.   So, in this tactic, the enemy are able to mow down any friendly unit that stays in the room after the BLAST.  

    However, since the SMOKE from the BLAST obscures visibility for a few seconds, that gives your eng unit time to run back the way they came before the enemy can see and shoot them.

    Hope that explanation makes sense...

    Have used this tactic too.

  5. On 1/6/2024 at 8:00 AM, arprince31 said:

    Apologies, I'm coming to this wish list late, I don't know if it's already been covered in the 38 pages of wishes (Santa has it easy!), or if it's something that can already be done and I haven't seen it. It's really great that there are pretty much 360 degrees of view movement, turn/move left/right, elevate/descend, look up/down etc.

    Apparently, in CM1, there was a 180 degree option. In many of these forums, it seems like there were a number of things in CM1 that should be brought back.

  6. 17 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

    Fair enough. 

    I'm not sure about Second Front - I gave it a try but the graphic side of it is not to my liking.  CM gets a lot of criticism for graphics but it is more to my taste than Second Front.

    More importantly though my friend, I think I was supposed to be suggesting a new PBEM?

    Indeed, you were :)

    Yeh, I think 2nd Front purposely kept the graphics to a minimum to focus on game play and keep some sens of a board game.

  7. 26 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

    To be fair I think Peter was unwell for quite some time and maybe lost the 'urge' when he got back.  But I now what you mean.

    I was enjoying that game when I very belatedly found CM.  I haven't played it since.

    Oh, for sure; from what I could glean in the forums, he almost died of a stroke! I could only enjoy it in its smallest scenarios however, because anything bigger just completely bogged down after a number of turns. One would end up waiting a minute (literally!) for a unit to move! Plus there's was no real multiplayer. Pity, since it really was a solid effort at eASL; however now, there's 2nd Front which is eASL in everything but looks and without the bugs of TotH

  8. 4 minutes ago, CarlXII said:

    I'm honestly not so sure anymore...Like i mentioned in another post...I never thought this would happen...but it has !

    I have grown tired of CM 😒...

    there are so many things that could be improved. Including many, many things  that could be improved quite easily and still we see...

    NOTHING !

    Imo BFC are currently living on OLD merits only. Their performance in recent years have not been stellar in any way and

    their communications are all but non existant so their grade will be far below avarage.

    A massive engine 5 upgrade or the annoncement of CM3 may very well spark some entusiasm for the game again for me...other than that...oohh well...

    I don't think such sentiments should be taken lightly. For those who are familiar, TotH garnered a lot of initial interest, but then the one developer of that refused to do anything more, and ... well, there's a lot of ex-TotH over here now!

  9. The arguement that this simulates the crew abandoning the ordinance in an orderly fashion (ie. having the presence of mind to destroy it while under fire of a level that is forcing them away from it in the first place) doesn't really make sense; it's at odds with what's actually happening - in the game, that act of 'abandonment' is one of the crew breaking and, essentially running away, being driven off by enemy fire. So, it doesn't stand to reason to then ascribe a willful and calculated action as their last act before completely breaking and running away! Abandonment is a deliberate act, but that's not what's happening in the game, so @Silentkilarz is right. This one of the rare, truly dumb facets of the current engine that takes away from reality and leaves the game wanting.

  10. On 12/19/2023 at 8:36 AM, Erwin said:

    I find what works well is to order a BLAST plus an immediate FAST move back the way the breaching team entered.  The explosion creates smoke and shock that gives the breach team a few seconds before they would be targeted by any enemy. 

    Yes, I have seen this work, but it's still unnerving to have them run in, and it's completely unnecessary. Just blow a hole in the wall!

  11. 5 hours ago, Vacillator said:

    Sorry my friend, work's Christmas Skittles got in the way.  And if anyone should read this and have no idea what I'm talking about, think bowling in a rustic but charming Somerset pub, with 9 pins and rather basic decor on the alley.  But of course RMM, you will probably know it from your time in Somerset many moons ago...

    Oh yes :) 

  12. 18 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

    Actually I have more Veteran than Crack, with a few Regular thrown as well.  But your point may be correct anyway.

    Interesting. I'm not at all a fan of the Crack setting; it seems to be far too, unrealistically advantageous, but in this case, it does seem like setting the Airborne to that could make a good balance adjustment. Next turn, such as it is back to ya!

  13. On 12/5/2023 at 12:21 PM, Vacillator said:

    Particularly as I don't believe the thread is actually monitored or acted upon in any way by BFC. 

    I would be happy to find out I'm wrong about that, but until I do I think this thread is just a sounding off place where users air their thoughts to each other on improvements.  There are similar 'bug' threads in the various forums.

    Sorry to hear this might be an issue

  14. On 11/23/2023 at 5:22 PM, Vacillator said:

    Hmmm tell that to @RMM.  Copied in out of fairness, but he now knows anyway that my reinforcements have arrived 🫣.

    Very ruefully yes. The jeep has some extra ammo but not much. I wouldn't say that this is completely unwinnable by the Airborne, but it's a tough one to say the least. I think a lot depends on whether the GE armour can be taken out. I lost the ATG pretty early on despite repositioning it out of immediate LoS of the GE, but the Airborne player has to think in terms of hiding and waiting for the GE to enter kill-zones for both infantry and armour. Also, the GE seem to be set to 'Crack' level which has much better (I would argue too much better) accuracy, because I seem to have lost a lot of the longer range firefights. I also think the 81mm needs to be used right up front to immediately take out as much of the GE Truppen as possible while in their initial setup and movement zones. We haven't quite finished yet, but I'm told that this achieved at least some of the desired results :)

  15. @Andrew Kulin You also touch on something else that really bad in the current C2 process, which is that local units, certainly HQ units, cannot advise adjacent indirect fire units of targets they can see but the ordinance cannot! This even includes a mortar's own HQ unit! Even that HQ has to go all the way up through the C2 chain to order get an indirect fire mission (along with the attendant delay) from their own subordinates!

  16. 4 hours ago, Cirrus said:

    Back for this game for long time with engine 4. I am pure ”hobbyist” gamer for these type of games.

    Now trying to play CMBN ”Panzer Marsch!” Campaign and scenario ”Le Dezert” I believe. I do not think I can finish it. Try to make vechiles move rationally in narrow roads just make my head explode.

    I really wish for and miss simple order I could give as army transportation NCO back in the day: ”Follow that vehicle”

    Oh mercy. Can we give, like two thumbs up and fireworks!

  17. On 4/23/2023 at 3:39 AM, PEB14 said:

    It seems that mortars and MG get automatically deployed, at least in some of the games, is there a way to forbid their deployment?

    To add to Artkin's reply, I think the RU, wheeled MG's are also permanently, automatically deployed as soon as the infantry stops moving which is unfortunate, but this also raises the issue of the game allowing infantry to dump SW's

  18. Well, I've had some, albeit limited success. This should be stating the obvious, but just in case - the mortar has to be undeployed for them to operate as more regular infantry. On a similar sidenote, I've also found that MG teams will not buddy aid unless the MG is, also undeployed.

  19. On 3/17/2023 at 9:15 AM, ViperAssassin26 said:

    I just started using hunt. of course waiting until the enemies been suppressed. For example in the training scenario I go uphill to get closer to the building. then use the other half of the squad to surpress the enemy while the first team enters the far left building. then I lift fire

    Exactly how it's done in RL

  20. On 3/17/2023 at 7:26 AM, Jace11 said:

    suppression of infantry (or wounding) in front of friendly tanks and IFVs when they fire their main gun. This is exactly the kind of thing real world soldiers and vehicles have to worry about, but is ignored by CM despite it having systems to replicate its effects.

    Actually thought I'd seen it do this, but that may be more as a result of the explosion close by. It does reflect friendly casualties if affected by the hit, but perhaps not because of the actual shot(?)

×
×
  • Create New...