Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 621
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well.. all I know is my reply which you quoted was tongue in cheek.. can't say the same for yours.  I for one feel extremely lucky that the CMx2 series exists in as many forms as it does. B

The only thing worse than 1940s Nazis is a present day Nazi. One might argue the populace 80 years ago were naïf about just what sort of monsters they were supporting. You can't make that argument now

So the British Ministry of Defense is subsidizing me playing w my toy soliders & tanks?  And all I have to do for this is wait a little longer for the new release?  I am considering this a win for

Posted Images

5 hours ago, Sequoia said:

I can understand the desire to include them, but unless one provides documentation that a certain vehicle was operational in combat in the time frame of the family, Battlefront just won't do it. I recall in CMAK there was a vehicle type (I think it was a Pz III with a 37mm gun) that was removed in a patch because it was determined it never operated in North Africa. It was later reintroduced in a further patch when some one produced evidence it was. I don't know if the vehicles you mention qualify or not though I'm guessing the Protze does.

I doubt any more than a handful of PzKpfw IIIs were around for Bagration so they didn't appear in Red Thunder.  By that time they were being sent back to be converted to StuG IIIs.  I think our best bet to get the earlier stuff is in a Vehicle Pack - I fear they will start with CMx3 before they ever get around to Kursk or Barbarossa.  I hope I am wrong. but I'm not getting any younger either!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

To get back to the summer of '42 we would need (I think) the following:

For Germany:  IIF, 38(t), IIIJ, IIIL, IIIN, IVE, IV F/2 

For Soviet Union:  T-26, T-40, T-60, BT-7, KV-1A, KV-1C, KV-II, T-34(41)

That's 15 total, I skipped some of the intermediate models that were not functionally different from the ones I listed.  The base models for the III, IV and T-34 are already done.  Seems pretty easy, based on my total lack of experience with this!  How much effort went into the CMBN Vehicle Pack?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm linking one of @JasonC 's amazing posts of Soviet Doctrine for 3 reasons:

1) Could scenario designers please take his analysis and recommendations under consideration for Fire and Rubble? He intelligently points out force compositions and plans that would make scenarios more true to life.

2) If possible, could the existing scenarios for RT be revised so that force match-ups and plans are more true to his recommendations?

I think many scenarios are good, but scenario OOBs sometimes rely on organic battalion assets without regimental formations supporting. This makes Soviet forces weaker in both the offensive and defensive than they would be. I can't fault scenario designers for not considering this because in pretty much every other CM title, a battalion is a battalion and a battalion would be expected to have enough organic assets to conduct missions.

To wit, assignment of regimental support would go a long way to bolstering lethargic Soviet infantry battalions. I had no idea how many mortars or machine guns were available for fire support, or how divisional and regimental support would be passed down to support battalions. The 2 AT guns in a Soviet battalion make much more sense when regimental and divisional batteries would be deployed as well. The support of snipers, MGs, mortars and AT rifles from higher eschelons to a rifle company fits in with the mission the company is assigned in the  scenario, and would reasonably be part of the planning process, even for a hasty attack.

3) Can someone explain how best to employ the battalion machine gun company? I've poured over WWII Infantry Fire Support Tactics and get the general idea of how Soviet fire support worked, but I'm not sure if I am supposed to concentate the company to have 9 MGs firing on the same area or disperse the platoons for 3 guns supporting each company on the attack or defending a strong point on the defense.

Edited by DougPhresh
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DougPhresh said:

2) If possible, could the existing scenarios for RT be revised so that force match-ups and plans are more true to his recommendations?

I can't speak for the other suggestions but I can confirm that we won't be redoing any of the original CMRT battles. However, anyone that wants to can open them up in the editor and do it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Red Thunder's issue to me was mainly that it didn't have all that many scenarios and campaigns for its price tag, this module will mostly fix that though. The other big issue is the change made to the air support mechanics which prevents players from exerting any control over their support even though Red Army staff did in fact, influence the position and conduct of air strikes. At the very least control of air strikes should be allowed in the planning phase...

One other thing, I've also read JasonC's posts and I think his chief source was Steven Zaloga's Companion to the Red Army Handbook or just "Red Army Handbook". It's actually very detailed and informative and if you plan on designing scenarios and campaigns for the Red Army it's a must read. 

 

Edited by SimpleSimon
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

Red Thunder's issue to me was mainly that it didn't have all that many scenarios and campaigns for its price tag, this module will mostly fix that though. The other big issue is the change made to the air support mechanics which prevents players from exerting any control over their support even though Red Army staff did in fact, influence the position and conduct of air strikes. At the very least control of air strikes should be allowed in the planning phase...

 

+1 to adding the ability to control air strikes during the setup phase. As things stand, I generally don't use air assets in CMRT as either player or designer because you never know when they are going to show up and the risk of attacking friendlies is so high. So, the feature is essentially useless. The only scenario I managed to get them in successfully was a vs-AI-only battle where the player had lots of time before he got any armor, a big map, lots of buildings to put his troops in, and the air assets were friendly Stuka specialized AT -- so they wouldn't attack his own infantry.

I'd love to add air to my current project for CMRT, but it's simply too risky unless it can be controlled -- at least during setup.

It seems to me the only real use for the current system would be to have some kind of attrition phase for a campaign, where the player's units would have to make it across a map and exit with enemy air in the skies -- but no assets on the ground, other than a hidden FO. But even then, the air might never show up.

Seems a shame to waste the feature. Setup phase control (with a guaranteed arrival time) would make it usable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It cannot be over-stressed what a huge production bottleneck CMFI Rome to Victory was for a long time. That beast is finally behind us and now 'stuff' is happening quickly. CMRT Fire and Rubble may be a huge module with new forces, new regions, new seasons and all of downtown Berlin but from a production standpoint it easy pickin's. No nine separate nations with esoteric TO&E force structures that change from month to month like in R2V. And nobody's wearing short pants. ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

Red Thunder's issue to me was mainly that it didn't have all that many scenarios and campaigns for its price tag, this module will mostly fix that though. The other big issue is the change made to the air support mechanics which prevents players from exerting any control over their support even though Red Army staff did in fact, influence the position and conduct of air strikes. At the very least control of air strikes should be allowed in the planning phase...

One other thing, I've also read JasonC's posts and I think his chief source was Steven Zaloga's Companion to the Red Army Handbook or just "Red Army Handbook". It's actually very detailed and informative and if you plan on designing scenarios and campaigns for the Red Army it's a must read. 

 

$2.99 at Amazon on Kindle.  https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M3MOAWE/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, MikeyD said:

And nobody's wearing short pants.

I had to read that a second time - my brain read "And nobody's wearing pants" and I was imagining you, Steve and the testers so tired from CMFI R2V that we were just not bothering with pants any more. After all there is no office to go to so we *could* get away with it.

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, MikeyD said:

It cannot be over-stressed what a huge production bottleneck CMFI Rome to Victory was for a long time. That beast is finally behind us and now 'stuff' is happening quickly. CMRT Fire and Rubble may be a huge module with new forces, new regions, new seasons and all of downtown Berlin but from a production standpoint it easy pickin's. No nine separate nations with esoteric TO&E force structures that change from month to month like in R2V. And nobody's wearing short pants. ^_^

Music to my ears.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2020 at 6:05 PM, danfrodo said:

"He who defends everything defends nothing"

"Software developer who delivers everything delivers nothing"

So as we bombard BF with requests for every conceivable WW2 participant, vehicle, weapon, uniform, OOB, etc, let us remember that

I agree. I think most of us sense that BF is our only and probably last chance to get the quality games we want. That makes some of us greedy and impatient, including myself. But I agree.

The thought of a future without BF makes me shiver. It really does. Let's hope they will stay around for a long, long time.

Edited by Aragorn2002
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've been a little late on this post and anything re CMRT is welcome.  But for me once again late war battles that are depicted in the book "SPEARHEAD"  which features M-26 Pershing, which I can't get enough of, maybe because of the gritty film of the Cologne tank duel.  In the book the battles continued with the M-26 in the lead most of the time while the ubiquitous M-4's get smoked again and again.  I know that the M-26 was too little too late, but I still think that it made it's mark in the war.  Yeah what if we started Normandy with M-26 replacing the M-4.  I guess we can what if this because we can.  But what if...Oh man what if.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...