Vark Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Where is your Frontal Aviation when you need it? A good burst of 23mm would rattle those fascist tin cans, that's for sure. I think ISU-122's would be fine, as long as they have good hull down positions, the variable spotting gives them the vital seconds they need to fire and relocate. Caught in the open, they'd suffer badly though. Then again that 122mm is going to mess up buildings fast, nerfed or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMac Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Ooo! It looks like in a couple of turns I'm going to need to sit down with some popcorn before reading these threads Steve It's Ok, Steve...As long as you sneak in the 'SMG Reduced Accuracy Patch' before then, all will be ok :-) Joe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpeakEasy Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 This game looks so good. The Russians and the terrain as well as every other nuance are superbly done. I can't wait to get my hands on a copy of CMRT. It's been my dream to get a next generation CMBB for years. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vencini Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Ooo! It looks like in a couple of turns I'm going to need to sit down with some popcorn before reading these threads Steve You sir! Back immediately to work! http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/198/2zu9.jpg' alt='2zu9.jpg'> Good week end all! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aragorn2002 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 This game looks so good. The Russians and the terrain as well as every other nuance are superbly done. I can't wait to get my hands on a copy of CMRT. It's been my dream to get a next generation CMBB for years. We all share your dream. I've tried to go back to CMBB several times, because of missing the eastern front, but after CMBN it just wasn't the same anymore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pnzrldr Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Lets imagine this thread, coupled with the new TCP/Wego option, portrayed on Twitch like ChrisND's latest movie. How about head-to-head games, with tactics and analysis, but on video rather than over weeks on the forum? Not that I don't love the well thought out AARs, but these new capabilities do engage my very American desire for instant gratification. I don't WANT to wait to see this armor duel play out! I can have my popcorn microwaved in 3.5 minutes - bring it on! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Anton Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I hope Juju is aware that he has a lot of work to do with the UI :-)) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted February 21, 2014 Author Share Posted February 21, 2014 The second Hetzer actually finally stopped a little in front of the Panther-Hetzer duo... ...pretty little thing isn't it? This is my plan of engagement (Photoshop composite): Bassically I want them to approach slightly staggered, the ISU on the left will pause for 10 seconds to allow the second ISU to pull closer into position.. then it will (1) Move forward to the spot that is furthest in the woods and still allows a possible spot on the piece of ground these enemy panzers are sitting on... (2) it will pause for 30 seconds.. hopefully get a spot and fire, but then (3) reverse to the start of the previous waypoint. The second ISU will do the same onece it reaches its Hunt location. Note that both tanks have tight covered arcs (armor) for both the start of the Hunt move, and the start of the reverse move and they are angled so they will not have to rotate their hulls if a spot occurs while they are hunting forward. One SMG team (with a spot on all three panzers) is staying in place to assist with spotting. I apologize, my OT-34 (with 4th Company) did not get into position to enable them to shoot some flame.. next turn perhaps. Meanwhile back at 5th Company I have grown weary of the enemy units in the field sniping at my units so have decided to chase them away or eliminate them... while the majority of the company bypasses this area, 1st platoon (with some assistance from other units) are maneuvering against the enemy teams located where the T34 area fire is indicated... in the hedge lined field I have started to lay some suppression fire while a couple SMG teams maneuver to assault and a mortar sets up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pnzrldr Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Wow, that newly textured Hetzer really is gorgeous. Been looking at the 'naked' unskinned one for too long. Pretty durn nice terrain backdrop too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Bil, two questions: 1- Your Soviet squads appear rather spread out. BF says they put strictures on Russian command flexibility, i.e. severe penalties for being out of visual range. Is this a concern? 2- You appear to favor Quick when advancing your AFVs rather than Fast. Is this due to spotting considerations? Great stuff, by the way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I apologize, my OT-34 (with 4th Company) did not get into position to enable them to shoot some flame.. next turn perhaps. Tease..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted February 21, 2014 Author Share Posted February 21, 2014 Bil, two questions: 1- Your Soviet squads appear rather spread out. BF says they put strictures on Russian command flexibility, i.e. severe penalties for being out of visual range. Is this a concern? I think the icons in these views are a tad misleading.. I am in fact trying to keep my infantry platoons in tighter formations so the platoon HQ can respond if any of the teams gets into trouble... out of C2 from teh Platoon HQ can lead to some brittle units if they take casualties. This is far different than I would handle my forces if they were German, US, or CW... then I would have no problems with spreading them out more and putting some of my teams out on a limb. But these Soviet platoons need to maintain some cohesion to maintain good order. 2- You appear to favor Quick when advancing your AFVs rather than Fast. Is this due to spotting considerations? Great stuff, by the way. Thanks... yeah Quick when moving into position... usually I would then Hunt forward (if going into a Hulldown position) but in a case like this where I don't want their movement to get interrupted, and when I want them to withdraw I am moving forward on Move, which should still allow them to spot better than fast or quick. We'll see how it works out. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I think many people underestimate using plain old MOVE. It definitely spots better than FAST, or QUICK, and seems the most flexible in AI reaction. I like how often once contact is made they switch to QUICK on their own so you get the better spotting then speed bump when it is needed. I use it the same way when I want better spotting without the possible stopping of HUNT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Bassically I want them to approach slightly staggered, the ISU on the left will pause for 10 seconds to allow the second ISU to pull closer into position.. then it will (1) Move forward to the spot that is furthest in the woods and still allows a possible spot on the piece of ground these enemy panzers are sitting on... (2) it will pause for 30 seconds.. hopefully get a spot and fire, but then (3) reverse to the start of the previous waypoint. The second ISU will do the same onece it reaches its Hunt location. Note that both tanks have tight covered arcs (armor) for both the start of the Hunt move, and the start of the reverse move and they are angled so they will not have to rotate their hulls if a spot occurs while they are hunting forward. My bold. Wait if you use a hunt move forward and they spot something they will cancel the rest of your moves and never reverse back. Or did I misinterpret have something? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 Sorry Ian. I was going to Hunt and changed it to Move, my edits failed to eliminate all the old text. Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Fusselpulli Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 What about slow? I often use slow in this situation if I want to have a prepared tank moving forward while I don´t what to stop it at contact. Is this a good idea or should I use some other moving routine along this challange? Are tanks also more difficult to spot (noise and visual) if they drive slow? I often do this if I don´t want to make some sound contacts for cover. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew H. Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I also often use Slow when I move tanks through the woods because I'm afraid of bogging. I know that's not likely to be a problem with T-34s, but I'm not sure about the 122's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I think many people underestimate using plain old MOVE. It definitely spots better than FAST, or QUICK, and seems the most flexible in AI reaction. I like how often once contact is made they switch to QUICK on their own so you get the better spotting then speed bump when it is needed. I use it the same way when I want better spotting without the possible stopping of HUNT. This has been my practice too for a year or so for exactly the reasons you outline. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Michael Emrys, Tut! Tut! this is obviously an incorrect understanding of "speed bump." The cognoscenti here understand the true meaning of the term is "whatever's in the way of the ISU-122." Whether Elvis winds up becoming one is presently an open question! All, Appreciate the comments from several here on optimal movement methods for armor. Had always used Hunt myself for final stages of movement in imminent contact situation, but I now know this approach, while seemingly appropriate, has real and potentially casualty intensive issues. I've faced this tank distraction problem clear back to CMBO. I'm trying to fight the armor war, but the AI sees infantry, loses its mind, goes after the infantry and ignores the enemy tank, which then kills me. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Michael Emrys, Tut! Tut! this is obviously an incorrect understanding of "speed bump." I noted that as well but chose not to comment on it. I am sure that what Vinnart was trying to say was something along the lines of "bump the speed up", which is a clumsy way to express the thought. So he chose the wording he did which left him open to misunderstanding. 'Speed bump' in modern colloquial English has the very specific connotation of something intended to reduce speed, not what Vinnart meant at all, I am confident. But I digress... Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Michael Emrys, I understood the intended message, but it was too much fun to pass up. That said, I narrowly avoided multiple semantic gaffes in the thread on the article about the history of BFC. Still, tough to top a doozie I saw in a book I'm laboriously reading. "One much prefers to be thought a fool than be thought a nave." Don't know about you, but I have zero interest in being part of a church's architecture! And Bil marches and grinds on, providing us with insightful running commentary and fabulous AFV screenshots. Meanwhile, I think Elvis has shown both teeth and an appetite to use them. So far, it's been a nip here, a nip there. Will he last long enough to make a proper bite? In any event, rabid or not, Bil clearly plans to put him down. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Emrys got it. “Bump up the speed” when needed is how I mean it, and thought most would understand it that way in relation to the rest of the comment. I would say I use “Move” more with infantry though, but sometimes with armor when I want more speed than slow without the risk of stopping in certain situations. I haven’t done a “shoot-n-scoot” in a while, but I think Ian may be right in HUNT canceling the reverse order upon contact ruining the tactic. If that is the case, and Bil’s armor feels threatened perhaps they will reverse on their own. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Elvis has packed this ad-hoc platoon into a tight grouping.. note the Hetzer coming up behind is moving and obviously is intending to come up on the other side of the Panther... so that should simplify targeting. Bill, when you say this is it because the SU guns have a shorter arc to cover targeting one unit to the next or does it have to do with the LOS. In other words does a tighter covered arc give you greater spotting capability? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 Ted, two things.. I want them to focus on armor only.. if an infantry team ran across their path I do not want them to engage it, but look for armor. Also, and some may have different experiences, but I find that a focused target arc like this really helps with spotting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I recall that Charles said that the target arc increases spotting ONLY in that it adjusts the spotter to directly face the area that has the arc. You spot best when you are directly facing the area you want to spot in. That is the only spotting benefit to arcs. Has this changed? 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.