Sgt Schultz Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Our friends at BFC have worked hard and given us much. Doubled our groups, made road-making easier, so many things. Even if they never add a thing from this list, I will still buy and enjoy their products. That isn't going to stop me from writing to Santa Charles though. ------------------------------ Dear Santa, I have been a very(ok, semi-) good boy this year and I would like ... in no particluar order... 1. Ammo crates. Takes up four(4) slots in a trailer, bunker or vehicle and cannot be placed anywhere else. Holds varying amounts of ammo for support weapons, depending on caliber. Four rounds of 150mm German IG ammo, with ammo count trending upward from there by caliber size. Not everyone plays a 30 minute battle, and we need more ammo. 2. Ammo trailers. Holds up to two or maybe three ammo crates. Can be towed anywhere and dropped off. Which leads us to... 3. Exterior 'ACQUIRE". Stop making us jump inside to grab ammo. Same or adjacent action spot should be fine. 4. Prime Movers. "TOW" command to remove immobilized and knocked out tanks, or remove debris/obstacles, as well as tow guns and carry ammo. 5. DEPLOYED Bailey Bridges in the editor. Not even hard to do. Take the tracks off a RR bridge, and alter some girders... done. I would rather place a Bailey section next to a destroyed bridge, then leave a bridge in place that would most likely have been taken out by either the Air Forces or the Germans themselves. 6. Fix the Ammo Bearers for QBs, so that they have some ammo to carry. 7. Fix the ammo sharing so Bearer ammo is used FIRST. 8. Here is a pie-in-the-sky one... "Wire for Demo" command for bridges and structures. Can only be done during setup phase and requires ALL the charges of a Pioneer Platoon. Only a member of that platoon can select the "detonate" command at any time thereafter, as long as he is within two action spots of the wired structure. What I wouldn't give to drop a few tanks in a river, or drop a building on some troops. The youtube videos, and asscociated tears, would be worth it. The Ost Front is coming, and we need this function for our Soviets. I would pony up an extra five bucks per copy for this. 9. Concrete bunkers that do not catch on fire when hit by an 81mm round. It is not the fire I take issue with, it is the ease with which the bunkers are destroyed. CM1 small stone house is better than CM2 concrete bunkers. Just move a decimal point or something for the roof, and ship it with a patch. 10. Flat-roofed structures. Every roof in Europe has a 8/12 to 12/12 pitch? I cannot bury my buildings properly without flat roofs. 11. Diagonal Terrain edge tiles. Stair-step treelines and field edges seem a bit 1990 at times without proper dressing-up. 12. Zook/shrek use inside buildings, with auto-suppression of any units inside. Fire a zook, we all get Pinned. Put a dice roll for a yellow-base casualty in there to make it interesting. Bleeding ears and backblast burns would count. That covers the 12 days. Thanks for the great battles, and looking forward to more, Schultzie - 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Belenko Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Excellent requests. Especially all the ammo related items. #10 Huh? Bury buildings? Why? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 9. Concrete bunkers that do not catch on fire when hit by an 81mm round. It is not the fire I take issue with, it is the ease with which the bunkers are destroyed. CM1 small stone house is better than CM2 concrete bunkers. Just move a decimal point or something for the roof, and ship it with a patch. Love it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Excellent requests. Especially all the ammo related items. #10 Huh? Bury buildings? Why? To make underground shelters that will actually stand up to a fair degree of incoming HE. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 He's just on his work placement in Lapland. You might want to repost here 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Great list! I agree with all those except 3. It is not realistic to simulate handing out all that ammo by just being one action square away and hitting aquire. The way it is now (having to board the vehicle) at least it takes a minute or two to get the ammo aquired and that is closer to the real time it would take. So I want to change 3 to FIX THE MACHINEGUNS/SUPPRESSION FOR THE LOVE OF BABY JESUS! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Great list! I agree with all those except 3. It is not realistic to simulate handing out all that ammo by just being one action square away and hitting aquire. The way it is now (having to board the vehicle) at least it takes a minute or two to get the ammo aquired and that is closer to the real time it would take. No reason you couldn't put an "acquire" timer on, same as "packing up" (and how deploying crew-served weapons is meant to be). Cos in RT, it is night instant, with just the mount and dismount time slowing you down. So I want to change 3 to FIX THE MACHINEGUNS/SUPPRESSION FOR THE LOVE OF BABY JESUS! That''s a good one. I'll add Deployment times The barbed wire bug QB setup SNAFUs Indirect assets getting put in limbo if the observer is killed Wandering crew members Wasteful SMGs Pistol fire overaccuracy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 a minor thing: -once a tank has found the non-moving target (it has hit it with main gun), why still use MG fire to same target? Like if your target is another tank, shouldn't a tank use just its main gun because that is what is going to have effect, not MG. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 a minor thing: -once a tank has found the non-moving target (it has hit it with main gun), why still use MG fire to same target? Like if your target is another tank, shouldn't a tank use just its main gun because that is what is going to have effect, not MG. Does the coax not have a ranging function? Is it really a problem with the amount of MG ammo tanks carry? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 a minor thing: -once a tank has found the non-moving target (it has hit it with main gun), why still use MG fire to same target? Like if your target is another tank, shouldn't a tank use just its main gun because that is what is going to have effect, not MG. Well I would want to hose down a tank all I could for at least three reasons. 1. All that lead will damage the tanks minor systems (optics, ect....) 2. It alerts other friendly tanks what you have spotted and directs thier eyes on target. 3. I imagine it would be a little nerve-racking for the target to hear the constant plinking of MG fire on thier tank. Anything to make them a little less steady is good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Does the coax not have a ranging function? Is it really a problem with the amount of MG ammo tanks carry? My thinking goes: once you get a hit with the main gun, but are not sure if the other tank is still destroyed, you try to get the NEXT main gun hit ASAP. No extra coaxing, because IF the other tank hits you next, it may be game over for you. I do understand they use the MG for ranging first. But once the range is correct because you managed to hit with the main gun, why use MG still? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 My thinking goes: once you get a hit with the main gun, but are not sure if the other tank is still destroyed, you try to get the NEXT main gun hit ASAP. No extra coaxing, because IF the other tank hits you next, it may be game over for you. I do understand they use the MG for ranging first. But once the range is correct because you managed to hit with the main gun, why use MG still? Firing the coax to make sure (and all the other things Lanzfeld said) doesn't get in the way of the loader shoving a new shell into the breech. Why not fire the MG? You have hundreds or thousands of rounds of ammo for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Firing the coax to make sure (and all the other things Lanzfeld said) doesn't get in the way of the loader shoving a new shell into the breech. Why not fire the MG? You have hundreds or thousands of rounds of ammo for it. What do you still need to make sure? You're firing a static target which you have already hit. The gun is pointing at exactly the right place. I don't see how using the MG at this point would make main gun firing any more accurate or quicker. If you compare this to how arty works in CM games - first they shoot the spotting rounds and then fire for effect. They are not correcting the fire all the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Firing the coax to make sure (and all the other things Lanzfeld said) doesn't get in the way of the loader shoving a new shell into the breech. Why not fire the MG? You have hundreds or thousands of rounds of ammo for it. Oh maybe for the simple reason that if you have managed to get a shot off without the enemy knowing where you are at, its time to stop firing MG so that he does not spot you by the mg rounds and returns fire because of it. many a story of tankers being hit and not knowing where it came from. when you fire a MG its becomes easy to track where you are at. It is a choose as to if it matters or not in the situation. Not sure how they have the game programmed to do it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 What do you still need to make sure? One thing that I can think of is that if the other crew starts to bail out, you already have lead in the air. Kill (or at least wound) those f---ers! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Michael Emrys: I do understand it in that situation. But not when you think the other tank might be just slightly damaged. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 I guess I was talking to myself SlowMotion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Lanzfeld: I'd like to hear opinions from real tankers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simast Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 7. Fix the ammo sharing so Bearer ammo is used FIRST. Yes please, this is important. I would love to redeploy my ammo bearer teams when they are done with ammo supply (especially when you are on defense and need all the extra men). As of right now they are always stuck with the mortar/AT teams. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Yeah SlowMotion...because Only a real tanker could possibly know the answers. Back on topic...and an instant 180 degree arc key combo like in CMBB PLEASE!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 +1 to the 180 degree arc. It is essential for having vehicular turrets pointing in a certain direction as they move. It's a real PITA to have to do 20+ 180 degree arcs for a company on the move (in addition to having to do all the waypoints individually as well!). These two items are the most time-consuming and non-entertaining aspects of CM2 which mitigates against large scenarios being as playable/fun as they could be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Balboa Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 back on topic...and an instant 180 degree arc key combo like in CMBB PLEASE!!! Creating a 180 degree arc command and assigning it to a button would not be a huge coding issue I suspect. However it does become an issue when you have to integrate it into the existing UI. The UI needs to provide a means for the novice user to play the game without having to read a manual. Simply creating a new command and assigning it to a button would insure that veterans and experienced players would know about it but newer players would not. This was one of the problems that CMBB had as feature creep kicked in and it's a very real issue that CMx2 faces as it continues to mature. Perhaps a player customizable command toolbar would help in this regard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 +1 to the 180 degree arc. It is essential for having vehicular turrets pointing in a certain direction as they move. It's a real PITA to have to do 20+ 180 degree arcs for a company on the move The group selection function allows you to assign multiple cover arcs, if you want all the units looking the in the same direction, the 180 degree arc function would only allow you to create a single symmetrical arc a lot quicker. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockinHarry Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 To make underground shelters that will actually stand up to a fair degree of incoming HE. Maybe sounds like a backstep, but I´d consider it more easily implemented by "caching" units in abstracted underground shelters instead. Imagine it a variation of CMBB sewer movement, where the sewer is the basement/dugout and the movements is just entering/exiting... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Schultz Posted December 6, 2012 Author Share Posted December 6, 2012 Maybe sounds like a backstep, but I´d consider it more easily implemented by "caching" units in abstracted underground shelters instead. Imagine it a variation of CMBB sewer movement, where the sewer is the basement/dugout and the movements is just entering/exiting... That is an excellent idea. If they could code a 1 meter below-grade-level fortification, that would be just fine. It could show as a 1 meter mound that matches the dimensions of said item after setup, and/or be invisible to the enemy... like minefields or TRPs. Underground/covered trenches, that can be stitched together just like our current ones. ---- 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.