Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Update to the Update!!! CMHQ! Updated even more!

Guest Madmatt

By Guest Madmatt
in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Madmatt

Guest Madmatt

Posted
Posted

Thats right! I needed to find out whether or not planes could be shot down so I built a scenario with 9 Flak capable vehicles and (gulp) 25 thats right TWENTY FIVE rolleyes.gif fixed flak guns of various types against 5 waves of four fighter each. Well I proved something alright! Check CMHQ for more details! eek.gif

Madmatt out! cool.gif

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

combathq.thegamers.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bullethead Senior Member

Bullethead

Posted
Posted

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Thats right! I needed to find out whether or not planes could be shot down so I built a scenario with 9 Flak capable vehicles and (gulp) 25 thats right TWENTY FIVE fixed flak guns of various types against 5 waves of four fighter each.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hehehe, that exploding jabo looks just like my F-80 over Wonju Supply Dump. You sure that's not a shot from MiG Alley? :razz:

I note in the shot shows a number of (dead?) 88s and similar big bore flak. How'd they do? And what's that greenish thing in the foreground that's shooting?

You know, you put a "teaser" up on page 2 with the firing vierling. Dammit man, that whole SITE is a teaser smile.gif. I read, "... so I built a scenario ... " AARRRGGGHHH!!!! mad.gif (resumes chainsmoking, paces to decanter, fumblingly pours another whiskey, continues pacing furiously)

-Bullethead

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Capt_Manieri

Guest Capt_Manieri

Posted
Posted

(Captain Manieri takes a drag off Bullethead's cigarette and decides to go on a hunger strike until CM comes out)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fionn Senior Member

Fionn

Posted
Posted

Well, I've seen the end-tally from this scenario since Matt sent it to me with the Subject heading

"For you Buddy.."

And the body " I got um for you Pal." wink.gif

Let's just say the von Kelly's Panther has been avenged many, many times over wink.gif.. It seems AAA, when concentrated, is highly effective.

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

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Madmatt

Guest Madmatt

Posted
Posted

Truth be known that scenario was VERY fixed to shoot down planes. I mean 34 triple A assets in that small of a map and I made ALL the ground units Crack or Elite I belive. You wouldn't believe how quickly these guys could aquire planes! Some times at over 1500 meters away they were already tracking an incoming plane!

Just to be fair I modified the scenario to have American ground units with German planes and the results were quite different, I will talk on this much more in the coming days though! tongue.gif

You guys are going to be amazed at how quick and easy something like this can be set up, of course I let the computer create the map for me, but BTS have got a sweet editor and the power is only limited to what YOU want to do...I can say this cause I am an idiot and I figured it out pretty quickly! wink.gif Well with a little help from Fionn, Bill, umm some guy I met on the street...

Madmatt

p.s. oh the green thing is nothing! YOU HEAR ME NOTHING AT ALL AND DON'T EVER MENTION IT AGAIN! biggrin.gif umm actually I think it was a 37mm flak gun but I can't remember now.

It's green cause it's jealous of the quad 20mm next to it! tongue.gif

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

combathq.thegamers.net

[This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 01-06-2000).]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lee Senior Member

Lee

Posted
Posted

Madmatt: I don't understand something, you mention in

the air attack section that the player will not have the

ability to specify what kind of fighter-bomber will be

included in a scenario that he designs. I thought Steve

said awhile back that when playing pre-made scenarios or

campaigns that the player would have no control over

what sort of aircraft he might get for support or over

what kind of loadout they would have. And I agree that

a batallion CO in WWII wouldn't have any say in the

specifics of this. But I thought Steve also said that

when designing your own scenario that the player would

have full control over what units to place in the battle,

including getting to specify what type of plane/s would

be in the battle. Even though planes can't be seen, I

think it's important that the scenario designer get to

place whatever kind of tactical air support he wants

there to be in the battle. The player might want to

bring in an aircraft that has a particularly heavy punch

or perhaps one that doesn't carry a lot of external

ordnance and thus will be restricted to strafing more

than other aircraft would, etc.

I think the decision for this sort of thing should be

left up to the scenario designer. There's no good reason

to prevent a designer from picking aircraft types that

he wants to be a part of a particular battle. He should

be able to craft and shape the battle into what he

wants it to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Madmatt

Guest Madmatt

Posted
Posted

Well I certainly am in no position to speak for Steve but I don't remember him saying that the Designer would have that level of control.

As it stands, what I said is how it is...Anything more than that (why, where, whatfor) will have to come from BTS. cool.gif

Hmm, actually I do have one more thing to add and it is in regards to your last comment. As a scenario designer (well ok, sure I suck but it's still fun to mess around! wink.gif) I don't feel limited in the least by not specifying the type of things you mentioned.

The designer still has control over when and to some extent where the planes will arrive and if the basic design of the scenario is sound, then not being able to specify exact plane loadout really becomes rather trivial IMO.

Madmatt out...

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

If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ!

combathq.thegamers.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lee Senior Member

Lee

Posted
Posted

While I agree that it's not a huge deal, I do think it is

important. If a scenario designer wants to give one side

in an engagement air support, but wants to tailor the

threat level that that air aupport represents to suit a

particular battle he's crafting, I think he should have

that option.

In one battle he may want to give the Germans a significant

advantage in armored forces but give the other side a

fully loaded P-47 that is going to show up shortly after

the 5th turn. In another battle he may have forces that

are equally matched on the ground and want the U.S.

side to have some air cover, but only enough to represent

a very modest threat and so only give them a P-51 with

no external stores, just guns.

It's this kind of flexibility that the designer should

have. And I can't think of any good reason to not

give it to him. smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fionn Senior Member

Fionn

Posted
Posted

LOL that's nothing compared to Matt's "20 fighters in one mission" extravaganza..

I played it and there were so many bombs dropped in one turn that I had 2 planeloads of rockets coming down in one shot in the same time as 2 planeloads as bombs detonated.

MY German road column was in a world of hurt then wink.gif

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

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...