Recommended game for starting "small" and to gradually progress?

[Erwin]

When you say 2 scouts, you mean two scout units, or a two man scout team?  Of course two units will get out of LOS. But, I can't ever recall a single team spreading out its component men the way you describe.

[sPA505]

Came to CM in 2018 with CMBN, so many exciting hours in front of the screen. Even away from the screen i often think about the respective tactical problems. I'm from germany, here there are three or four good combat mission-youtubers, a small wargaming community. Very instructive, as is Bil Hardenberger's blog. You won't regret the investment if you've already had fun with the demos. Yesterday i bought cmfb. finally. playing time since then: 9 hours. Gotta go then too, cmfb is waiting. Have fun.

[chuckdyke]

On 1/16/2021 at 4:04 AM, Erwin said:

When you say 2 scouts, you mean two scout units, or a two man scout team?  Of course two units will get out of LOS. But, I can't ever recall a single team spreading out its component men the way you describe.

A 2 men scout team, yes they spread out. About 50 meters apart I will post it when it happens again. 

[Erwin]

Ok, I think I know what you mean.  The two guys can open up quite a gap between them.  It's similar to how a lightly wounded guy will trail his comrades by many meters if moving a long distance.  Good to have someone noticing details like that.  Thanks.

[chuckdyke]

Yep, that is it if you're not careful in a long game they can disappear altogether. 

[KGBoy]

I remember CM1 where you could not plot LOS by waypoints. The AI had a dead eye for LOS and was a much more challenging opponent back then for that very reason. These maps are 2D and figuring what is more HI or more LO than another spot is near impossible by merely eyeballing it. LOS waypoints is a very nice addition but should it be used on IRON settings? It would seem the most 'gamey' aspect of all. Perhaps elevation mapping is next?

Also, CM1 allowed troop transport by tank -- very disappointed to lose that! 

[Erwin]

48 minutes ago, KGBoy said:

LOS waypoints is a very nice addition but should it be used on IRON settings?

Using wayponts for LOS determination is very hit or miss.  Thus can be very frustrating when one spends many turns SLOW moving a unit to what seems like an ideal location only to find out that the unit can't see what the waypoint indicated that it would be able to.  But, if you think about it,  it's probably more realistic that a waypoint LOS may be misleading.

IIRC troops can ride on tanks in the other WW2 titles, just not in CMBN.

[Zloba]

1 hour ago, KGBoy said:

LOS waypoints is a very nice addition but should it be used on IRON settings? It would seem the most 'gamey' aspect of all.

I was recently playing the Tank Section Attack scenario (made by @Bil Hardenberger) and i was trying to move by a concealed route from an enemy AT gun. After setting a waypoint and checking the LoS from there i confidentely left one tank on that position. It took about 30 seconds to take a deadly shell from the AT gun and my tank was gone.

During my last mission of the Devon - Basic Training i was moving one Infantry squad concealed by trees from an enemy HMG position. At some point for no reason the MG just opened up fire through a very thick foliage of the trees. I checked those angles multiple times and there was no way the AI's MG could spot anything behind those trees. Yet i read some posts about turning off trees being gamey ...

If you enjoy making games harder for you, be my guest (sometimes in other games i do it also). But we're all playing the same GAME in the end and i think calling a playstyle or using a feature of the game itself "gamey" is a bit over the top. Everyone likes to play their games in their own way and there's nothing more "gamey" than trying to simulate something real .. there will always be something, that makes it "gamey" one way or another 

Oh BTW. I'm playing on Iron difficulty settings

Edited January 29, 2021 by Zloba

[Vacillator]

8 minutes ago, Zloba said:

Yet i read some posts about turning off trees being gamey

I don't think it makes any difference to the AI, it just means you don't see the trees so you have better visibility of everything.

And Iron here as well, I kind of like it that way, but I did like more info on the enemy in other settings .

Edited January 29, 2021 by Vacilllator

[Bil Hardenberger]

1 hour ago, KGBoy said:

LOS waypoints is a very nice addition but should it be used on IRON settings? It would seem the most 'gamey' aspect of all. Perhaps elevation mapping is next?

The problem with any game, is that you do not have the luxury of being on the ground and checking it with your own eyes. 

The only way to ensure a unit will position itself correctly, whether that be hulldown, or in full defilade (or whatever) is to use the LOS tool from a waypoint.  It is a tool, nothing more, and it is also just an approximation.  Actual visibility from that spot may or may not be what you expect due to the different height of units and other factors.. like the tactical AI placement of individual soldiers in a squad along a hedgerow, etc.

It's a tool, nothing more and is no more gamey than any other tool that is meant to aid the player and help them cope with the artificial world that CM inhabits.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Bil Hardenberger

[Vacillator]

44 minutes ago, Erwin said:

IIRC troops can ride on tanks in the other WW2 titles, just not in CMBN.

Yes, in RT and FB.

[Zloba]

1 hour ago, Vacilllator said:

I don't think it makes any difference to the AI, it just means you don't see the trees so you have better visibility of everything.

I completely understand, i just don't see a reason to not use it, when the AI will see over the foliage no matter if you use it or not. You are putting yourself in a disadvantage as the camera feature doesn't let you "see" everything correctly from the pixeltruppen's PoV, which is a bit of an annoying problem in the woods. So i wouldn't call turning off trees or checking LoS from a waypoint  "gamey" in the first place. Like Bil said, we don't have "eyes" on the actuall ground, like the units would have IRL.

But i also understand if someone likes to get immersed and just tries to do it like he would IRL. That's also completely OK. I just don't like to see calling game features "gamey" as it doesn't make too much sense to me

[Vacillator]

15 minutes ago, Zloba said:

i just don't see a reason to not use it

Totally agree, in some situations you really can't see enough to even move your units effectivley.  Use it and don't care what some might say .

By the way @Bil Hardenberger's advice is very good, as always -thanks Bil.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Vacilllator

[BornGinger]

3 hours ago, Zloba said:

I checked those angles multiple times and there was no way the AI's MG could spot anything behind those trees. Yet i read some posts about turning off trees being gamey

The AI's or Player's troops being able to see through a dense forest, or in some cases even - through a dense forest and over a field after which there are some woods and the corner of a building and further on through some lonely trees and bushes where there is a single enemy soldier having a **** in the tall grass - is part of the magic eye the CM-games make you annoyed over but you learn to live with.

When it comes to "turning off trees being gamey", you don't need to take that seriously. Those who claim that it's gamey only want to try to force their way of playing the game on other people. Turning off trees can be helpful to see what is in the forests and help to figure out where the mortar fire will land.

Edited January 29, 2021 by BornGinger

[Erwin]

2 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

When it comes to "turning off trees being gamey", you don't need to take that seriously. Those who claim that it's gamey only want to try to feel special and do that by forcing their low self esteem on other people.

It's practically impossible to order units thru dense woods without turning off trees, or only having tree trunks visible (the way I play in woods) cos one cannot see anything - especially with some of the xnt tree/terrain mods that are available.

Regarding LOS thru woods, the AI has a huge advantage as it can find that one pixel-wide gap that will allow it to shoot thru tens of meters of dense trees and kill your unit when you can eyeball the location all you like and you will never see any gap.  However, this works to the human player's advantage as your tactical AI can do the same vs your enemy.  So, it's a wash - but yes, this game is NOT WYSIWYG despite repeated claims.

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

18 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Regarding LOS thru woods, the AI has a huge advantage as it can find that one pixel-wide gap that will allow it to shoot thru tens of meters of dense trees and kill your unit when you can eyeball the location all you like and you will never see any gap.

This is a misconception.....Your own units use exactly the same targetting AI, unless you are directly giving them Target orders.  Left to their own devices they are equally capable of find 'one pixel gaps'.

Edited January 29, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[BornGinger]

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Your own units use exactly the same targetting AI...  Left to their own devices they are equally capable of find 'one pixel gaps'.

My example above with a dense forest and woods and the corner of a house and single trees and bushes are from what my pixeltruppen managed to see through in Final Blitzkrieg and also in the Black Sea demo. The strange thing with the situation in Final Blitzkrieg is that I also had a German SPW 250/9 reconnaissance halftrack wich was unbuttoned and with a clear view of the same area without any trees blocking. But although I left the halftrack standing there for three turns the crew still couldn't see that lonesome enemy team while the squad behind a dense forest could see through everything which should have blocked their view.

Edited January 30, 2021 by BornGinger

[Sgt.Squarehead]

It get's even crazier in the modern games.....I've had Syrian tanks turning their turrets to track enemy vehicles within 200m, then suddenly loosing sight of them, in the open, in daylight. 

That just shouldn't happen, even a humble T-54 is more than able to track a moving target and lay the gun onto it.

Edited January 30, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[chuckdyke]

Advantages of playing on Iron. Before you press the 'Red Button' you select a unit, and you see what the unit can see. An AFV in WW2 not much. You see for example that you can approach an AFV with a tank hunter party within 50 meters. Your infantry can see an AFV but the AFV can't see the Grunt on the ground. Spotting Veterans and above are the best spotters not my words but @Josey Wales he has an excellent article on the subject. People with binoculars, sorry once you look through them you lose situational awareness the same with Snipers. That is my findings as a bird photographer. You need the range before the camera locks in and the bird is in focus. Outside the peripheral you're legally blind, the only way I can explain that Artillery Spotters rarely get a direct contact icon. They can plot a fire mission accurately by just using the Contact Icon. That is my findings playing the game Edge of Darkness in SF2. With AFV's I let them engage after they receive strong contact icons from nearby infantry. They need to be unbuttoned inside close contact with an infantry unit C2 preferably in place with the spotter. Spotter-C2-Infantry Contact-AFV. 

[chuckdyke]

8 hours ago, KGBoy said:

I remember CM1 where you could not plot LOS by waypoints. The AI had a dead eye for LOS and was a much more challenging opponent back then for that very reason. These maps are 2D and figuring what is more HI or more LO than another spot is near impossible by merely eyeballing it. LOS waypoints is a very nice addition but should it be used on IRON settings? It would seem the most 'gamey' aspect of all. Perhaps elevation mapping is next?

Also, CM1 allowed troop transport by tank -- very disappointed to lose that! 

Iron means you must spot your own units too other from that no difference of playing on Elite. (Squads may lose individuals too). Waypoints as LOS it gives you an idea but don't expect you can plot an LOF once you arrive at the 'Waypoint'. To get an LOF you need a strong Contact Icon then you may end up with a LOF on a fully identified enemy. That's my personal experience by playing on 'Iron'. LOS and LOF are different. Something I picked up on forums. A large cover arc gives you a quick idea of elevations in the terrain. Maintaining C2 is more important on Iron. What is gamey involve your PC as if it were a C3. Example TRP infantry unit can spot the TRP from nearby. The artillery observer is fine in the cellar of the local church. Without a C2 the -2 for leadership and -2 for motivation conscript can thanks to you contact our artillery observer to call a bombardement at the right time. It is a spoiler for Nedforce in Battle for Normandy. I did it but made sure I had a C2 working. But you can do it without a C2. You have Snipers in the beginning of the game outside C2 contact who could be used in that fashion. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by chuckdyke
spelling

[Erwin]

16 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

This is a misconception.....Your own units use exactly the same targetting AI, unless you are directly giving them Target orders.  Left to their own devices they are equally capable of find 'one pixel gaps'.

No it is not a misconception.  It helps if one actually read what was said before making a response:  "However, this works to the human player's advantage as your tactical AI can do the same vs your enemy."

The AI will invariably find that one pixel wide gap thru dense forests.  It works for both you and your enemy.  But the human player will never be able to see that gap no matter how much time one spends eye-balling.

Edited January 30, 2021 by Erwin

[chuckdyke]

Even on Iron when you deselect all units you do 'Borg Spotting'. The AI-has a spotting algorithm. To hack it is very hopeless. The best you can do is use it through the TacAI when you plot your moves. Basically fire at identified icons or strong contact icons. Through Borgspotting we can plot a 155mm barrage on an MG position. Annoying he pops up when your assault tries to overrrun the position. 

[chuckdyke]

Back to basics: Page 42 of CM Engine Manual. Then it considers Experience motivation, and the list goes on and on. Schoolboy spots headquarters in the Netherlands (A Bridge too Far). The British dismisses it, the boy had something like -2 leadership and a +1 for motivation. I think the engine however frustrating mimics this very well.

Ref: CM Engine Manual 42.

 One of the center pieces of the new CMx2 game engine is the concept of “relative spotting”, where a number of game elements - from command & control, to skill levels, to individual unit abilities - all come together. A typical battlefield is full of chaos by its very nature: combatants worldwide call this chaos the “Fog of War”, where no two soldiers “see” the same thing. To simulate this, CMx2 employs complex calculations and a unique spotting concept which only shows the player what his currently selected unit can see. Spotting is computed for each unit individually and is not only based on actual lines of sight, but includes many other factors such as: what the spotter and target are doing (facing does matter!), the equipment they have available (scopes, binoculars etc.), skill levels, visibility based on climatic effects and the time of day, even sounds (units can “hear” nearby enemies!) and so forth. Enemy units that are not seen by any of your troops are not shown on the map. This includes muzzle flame, smoke, dust, and other effects directly attached to enemy unit behavior - these are also not shown unless the unit itself is already spotted by at least one friendly soldier. But even when an enemy is spotted by one of your units, that information does not pass immediately to other friendly units; instead, it is transmitted using the usual Command & Control channels and is subject to the same restrictions. Note: Relative Spotting is turned off for Basic Training

Edited January 31, 2021 by chuckdyke
spelling

[Erwin]

2 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Spotting is computed for each unit individually and is not only based on actual lines of sight, but includes many other factors such as: what the spotter and target are doing

In addition, it seems that spotting is calculated for each man in a unit.  Hence the common phenomenon where the 3rd ammo loader can see and target an enemy, but the gunner cannot - so the player can plot a target line thinking that the crew weapon can fire at the target...   but it doesn't.  Probably the same happens when one has a sniper or AT team with what appears to be a clear LOS to the target, but the main weapon (sniper rifle or AT weapon) will not shoot at the target.

[chuckdyke]

5 minutes ago, Erwin said:

In addition, it seems that spotting is calculated for each man in a unit.  Hence the common phenomenon where the 3rd ammo loader can see and target an enemy, but the gunner cannot - so the player can plot a target line thinking that the crew weapon can fire at the target...   but it doesn't.  Probably the same happens when one has a sniper or AT team with what appears to be a clear LOS to the target, but the main weapon (sniper rifle or AT weapon) will not shoot at the target.

We can never eliminate it, but the Borg Spotting we I am sure all do to a is the culprit in my opinion. That's what we see between turns or when we have deselected all units. We are dealing here with a complex algorithm. It makes sense we have a guy with binoculars, another with a sniperscope and two with the naked eye. The two with the naked eye spot better if the guys with the optical aid don't know what they look for. Here is where experience comes in select veteran and above for spotting. That's according to @Josey Wales who made a video about the subject.