Current drawbacks of CM4.0

[Bozowans]

3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I don't think there's any cover bonus at all.

Hmm I thought I remember reading that there was one way back in the day, but perhaps I'm wrong. 

Anyway I do like the peeking feature and I would rather it be in the game than without. I just wish we had more control of it somehow.

[Vanir Ausf B]

1 hour ago, Bozowans said:

Hmm I thought I remember reading that there was one way back in the day, but perhaps I'm wrong.

There is one. But it's not enough to protect against 60 seconds of sustained fire, so it's rarely of much consequence.

[AnnRayTac15]

15 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes. The whole idea of peeking around a corner is that you only expose a very small part of your body. But in CM, "peeking" means walking out into the street in full view.

LoL, very correct, i can only say lots of people who are very clear about the peek, they know this is a waste and trash, but pretend that everything is fine and alright

there was a man who said "peek is the function that the players want to", he might try to say " you wanted the peek function, now you don't want the peek function"

 

improving the drawbacks of the systems is a benefit for all players, i don't really know why they contribute all this weird drawbacks to the players

[AnnRayTac15]

---------------

Edited November 19, 2021 by AnnRayTac15

[AnnRayTac15]

13 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

The largest single problem with the CM games is one entirely typical to wargaming in general-broken scoring and context mechanics creating ridiculous situations and then penalizing the player for making reasonable decisions. Chief of which is low or basically zero penalty for own-force casualties and excessive value placed on terrain or flavor text captures. Phase lines are about the only reasonable system in the game for doing this. Requiring the player to put his force on a 100x100m capture demonstrates a shockingly limited knowledge and experience of war and what things actually matter at the given level of play. 

I basically have zero interest in playing against AI or computer opponents anymore because the need for work arounds toward the AI's limitations and passive conduct requires the scenario to be designed for those problems. So I just extract the campaign files, hotseat, and use cards from a game like Memoir 44 to contextualize or abstract the opponent's overall actions which I then execute or interpret as if I was the commander of the opposing side. Preferring that much to "you didn't capture Houfallize in time -50 points to Gryffindor" 

indeed

[chuckdyke]

13 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

100x100m

I agree with this. Should be kept off map and on call in a similar way as we do with artillery. 

[chuckdyke]

I tested peeking around corners from the hide position. You will be spotted at the same time you spot the enemy while you spot the enemy approaching a long way off from inside the house. 

[MikeyD]

I've joked before if your grand tactical plan relies on the enemy being blind, slow, and bad shots you're probably going to lose the battle. The main complaint here seems to be the enemy in these circumstances is not blind enough. the enemy is not slow enough, and the enemy are not bad shots. If you're close enough to the enemy that a soldier at a building corner can be hosed down by a smg you're already in trouble.

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, MikeyD said:

If you're close enough to the enemy that a soldier at a building corner can be hosed down by a smg you're already in trouble.

Test it? It is a way to find out anything with this game. If you hide on the top floor you spot much better than by peeking around the corner. But not much good if you get HE lopped in your position. I found there was no advantage by peeking around a corner. The peeking on 'Hide' unit spotted a four men team approaching on the road at exactly the same time as it was spotted.