Guest Madmatt Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 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. Well I proved something alright! Check CMHQ for more details! Madmatt out! ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! combathq.thegamers.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 HOLY UPDATE MADMATTMAN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullethead Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 <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 . I read, "... so I built a scenario ... " AARRRGGGHHH!!!! (resumes chainsmoking, paces to decanter, fumblingly pours another whiskey, continues pacing furiously) -Bullethead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Capt_Manieri Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 (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 More sharing options...
Fionn Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 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." Let's just say the von Kelly's Panther has been avenged many, many times over .. 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 More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Captain Manieri takes a drag off Bullethead's cigarette...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Are you old enough to smoke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 Great shots, Madmatt! Simply great. Now I gotta go back and play Ramelle again. This kind of thing is contagious... ------------------ Wild Bill Wild Bill's Raiders Director of Scenario Design, The Gamers Net billw@thegamers.net http://wbr.thegamers.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted January 6, 2000 Share Posted January 6, 2000 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! 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! 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! 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! ------------------ 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 More sharing options...
Guest Capt_Manieri Posted January 7, 2000 Share Posted January 7, 2000 Old enough to smoke? Yep. I'm 16. Old enough to buy smokes?.....nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted January 7, 2000 Share Posted January 7, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Old enough to smoke? Yep. I'm 16. Old enough to buy smokes?.....nope.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ah, I stand corrected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted January 7, 2000 Share Posted January 7, 2000 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 More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted January 7, 2000 Share Posted January 7, 2000 see below... [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 01-07-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted January 7, 2000 Share Posted January 7, 2000 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. 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! ) 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 More sharing options...
Lee Posted January 7, 2000 Share Posted January 7, 2000 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT Posted January 8, 2000 Share Posted January 8, 2000 About airpower, I just had a thought when the Pacific CM is done. Imagine a close air support mission and a B25 Mitchell armed with 12 .50HMGs and a 75mm cannon in the nose arrives on scene. WOW!! MikeT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted January 8, 2000 Share Posted January 8, 2000 MikeT, BTS has said there most probably won't be a Pacific CM. Additionally, specific plane types aren't modeled now, and probably won't be in future. So much more to do with CPU and video power. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted January 8, 2000 Share Posted January 8, 2000 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 ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted January 8, 2000 Share Posted January 8, 2000 What can I say? I like big PRODUCTION NUMBERS!!! Madmatt out... ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! combathq.thegamers.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts