Puff the Magic Dragon Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 Will we have this: - in CM:BO we start a QB always with full ammo. IMO this is unrealistic. Will CMBB take care of insufficient supply? Ammo, moral and general troops efficiency (low food, medicine) are influenced. - the general status of the equipment is another issue. Most equipment was not in best conditions. Will CM:BB take care of this? The weapon efficiency for example is influenced. - The CM:BO battlefields are always fresh and new at the beginning (maybe except a few burning buildings/trees). Would be nice to have craters, ruins, wrecks etcetera. All this will of course only influence the starting parameters of a battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 7, 2001 Share Posted November 7, 2001 From what I have seen the QB generator will not change much. There are many more pressing realism problems with Quickbattles than the ones you listed. And on the other hand, players will cry bloody murder if the Panther they just bought for high points is immobilized at the start of the game. [ 11-07-2001: Message edited by: redwolf ]</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puff the Magic Dragon Posted November 8, 2001 Author Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: And on the other hand, players will cry bloddy murder if the Panther they just bought for high points is immobilized at the start of the game.<hr></blockquote> I was more thinking about a lower gun accuracy, fewer shoots per turn, higher chance of duds (will they be modeled this time?) because of bad ammo etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diceman Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 CM already can do most of what you're asking for - through the scenario editer, but not via quick battles. A QB is a different beast from a scenario. A QB is a fast and efficient way to generate a field for player vs player competition. The things you are asking for would be inapropriate most of the time for this purpose. On the other hand, if you want to create a historical situation, the scenario editor gives you many tools to do that, including damaged or burning building, low ammo, and unit moral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Puff the Magic Dragon: I was more thinking about a lower gun accuracy, fewer shoots per turn, higher chance of duds (will they be modeled this time?) because of bad ammo etc<hr></blockquote> Don't get me started on this. I want so many random modifiers in CMBO quickbattles (or even scenarios), I don't know where to start. OK, first of all, random armour quality for the low-quality armour tanks. Most of the other stuff will make many people very unhappy in Quickbattles, the bitching towards BTS and the fraction between the players is probably not worth the realism benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf: [QB]From what I have seen the QB generator will not change much. [QB]<hr></blockquote> And you would be WRONG! Actually there are probably more changes and additions to the QB module right now than anywhere else. so on you! And yes you can now change the default ammo loadout ammounts per side based on a % from 10% to full ammo IRRC. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGMB Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 Sir, IRRC? What is that? "I Require Repated Correction?" Glad to here that the QB generator will under go changes, as I currently never use.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogadai Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 What might be better than just a general "immobilised" for that Panther you just purchased could be an "immobolisation" which disappears at some random point during the battle, to represent the Panther being US at the start and it becoming serviceable at some point, after its been repaired (ie had fuel/ammo supplied, had that engine repaired, etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai: What might be better than just a general "immobilised" for that Panther you just purchased could be an "immobolisation" which disappears at some random point during the battle, to represent the Panther being US at the start and it becoming serviceable at some point, after its been repaired (ie had fuel/ammo supplied, had that engine repaired, etc).<hr></blockquote> Wait a minute! You're trying to sell us on repairs being done on a tank in the middle of a shooting battle? Have I got that right? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogadai Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 Do you have a problem with that, Michael? I know of several cases in North Africa where it occurred. One where a RAEME craftsman was awarded an MM for using oxy-acetelyne cutting equipment in the middle of the battle to cut free a Mathilda II tank turret which had become jammed by a hit in the ring. However, I was referring more to minor repairs/resupply which might be occurring as the fighting rolls towards the tank in question, rather than necessarily the sort of thing which you normally wouldn't want to happen if it was an ideal world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai: Do you have a problem with that, Michael?<hr></blockquote> Yes! Once more you seem to want to generalize from exceptional occurrences and declare them to be the norm. The norm was to try to haul a damaged tank out of the fighting if possible in order to work on it in relative safety. Skilled maintainence men were not to be risked needlessly. If a tank could not be immediately recovered, its best bet was to play dead and hope not to attract undue enemy attention, which having a repair crew swarming over it would certainly have done! Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 Michael emrys wrote: If a tank could not be immediately recovered, its best bet was to play dead and hope not to attract undue enemy attention, which having a repair crew swarming over it would certainly have done! One practical example of that: On night between 25-26 June 1944, apparently just before a Finnish counter attack to Leitimojärvi really started, one Finnish Stug (Ps.531-25) was positioned inside an edge of a forest. The crew saw an ISU-152 on the field and took it as destroyed. However, then they noticed that a small group of Soviets went to the vehicle and started putting its tracks back on. Few AP and HE shells later the recovery crew was dispersed and ISU in flames. [The vehicle had been immobilized by a track hit by another Stug in the morning before. And we can be pretty certain that it was in this case a real ISU instead of a misidentified SU-76 (that are curiously missing from Finnish reports even though many of them were present) since it had shrug off more than one direct hit before immobilization.] - Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted November 8, 2001 Share Posted November 8, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai: I know of several cases in North Africa where it occurred. One where a RAEME craftsman was awarded an MM for using oxy-acetelyne cutting equipment in the middle of the battle to cut free a Mathilda II tank turret which had become jammed by a hit in the ring.<hr></blockquote> Must have been a regular occurence, if he got an MM for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts