Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 It seems that the max arty/air allotment that you can select in the game is 875 (unlimited force mix with 5000 point game). However, the rules provide for allotments of up to 5000 (large battle multiplier). Even without the multiplier, you can roll 1000 pts. This seems to artificially inflate the Provisional Force Size and result in the player losing those unavailable points while the AI has them to spend. Should I just limit the arty/air points to 875 if I roll more than that when computing the provisional force size? Thanks, Dr. Rosenrosen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Olesen Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 If I set up a 5000 point assault (by me) then I get 3010 points for artillery/air. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 Originally posted by Robert Olesen: If I set up a 5000 point assault (by me) then I get 3010 points for artillery/air. Ah. I was looking at MEs. Thanks for pointing that out! I guess I'll just have to win by superior skills instead of numbers. Dr. Rosenrosen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Olesen Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen: I guess I'll just have to win by superior skills instead of numbers.Wel, then BCR provides a good training ground 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk-vfa201 Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen: Since it seems that command settings can be done in the editor and retained when those troops are imported in a QB, it would be nice if there could be some consistency and even ways to improve on an HQs characteristics. It seems like a natural extension of tracking the experience of that unit. Perhaps there could be some conditions (such as a certain number of kills for the entire platoon or company) that would guarantee an improvement in abilities, as well as opportunities to roll and get improvement through luck. Any thoughts? Dr. Rosenrosen [/QB]That sounds reasonable to do. One could add a rule so that the capabilities might improve as well if the HQ experience is upgraded. Probably only in exceptional cases as those bonuses are more on the inherent qualities of the character that can be better indeed with time, but a CO or HW without those characteristics I doubt has any great chance of developing. I would favor though some 10% ~15% good luck chance of getting bonuses upgraded as well. WIth Editor would be indeed possible and add to the realism. Good idea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasyCo Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 Coming Soon! Very soon. AAR for BCR! My new site will have Seahawk against the Ruskies...of course. Probably tonite! Over, EasyCo [ March 19, 2003, 11:38 AM: Message edited by: EasyCo ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk-vfa201 Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 Originally posted by EasyCo: Coming Soon! Very soon. AAR for BCR! My new site will have Seahawk against the Ruskies...of course. Probably tonite! Over, EasyCo :eek: Looks like you all are going appreciate/hate my literary vein in describing my BCR campaign. I am doomed!!!! EasyCo showed me his idea and since I like write down my impressions from the field, why not... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasyCo Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 Looks like you all are going appreciate/hate my literary vein in describing my BCR campaign. I am doomed!!!! We like your "literary vein"!! hehe.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasyCo Posted March 19, 2003 Share Posted March 19, 2003 It's here! Hopefully you'll like it. Seahawk was very patient all that e-mail back and forth. And theres more! Ill be better than before. The same for Seahawk too. It will be fun to see that Kiev battle. Over, EasyCo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaTyR Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Hi ! First of all, I´ve been watching the development of BCR for a time now, but only recently got myself around to try it. I had some difficulties at first, but after reading the rules a couple of times, I soon got the hang of it. Then I got to thinking: everybodys been reporting huge successes early in the campaign, but I´ve had a world of trouble. I´ve been getting nowhere to say it bluntly. And don´t get me wrong, although I´ve played against the AI and human opponents plenty of times, I do not consider myself to be a great player, but still, I was baffled by my lack of progress. One thing sprang to mind from my last defeat: I had set the enemy ammo at 10%, as the die roll told me to, but I still received A LOT of fire from units that I´ve been pouring fire on for turns. I got to testing and found out something strange: although I´d set the ammo at 10%, the russkies still had 100% ammo (clearly seen inspecting spotters and support weapons). Tested a bit more and saw no change in ammo for either side eventhough the preference had been set at the beginning (toyed with years, force mix, battle type etc. no change). Now to my question(s): have I done something wrong ? Is there some other setting that needs to be changed in order to alter the ammo amounts (don´t think so, been playing since the launch) ? Does it simply not work in QBs (according to the manual it does) ? (For clarification: I have the US version of the game, with US 1.01 patch [pbem games in progress, and yes, I know the files work on 1.02, but for fairness I use the same version as my opponents when we started the battle], my pre-battle prefs here , anything wrong with them ?) Have I broken my CMBB ? Should I re-install/patch (1.02)/pray ? Anybody else stumbled on to something like this ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Ammo settings for the AI when playing QBs was a bug that got fixed by patch 1.02, that's the only way you'll get reduced ammo for the Soviets, it will work for the human player though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk-vfa201 Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Originally posted by SaTyR: Hi ! [...] I got to testing and found out something strange: although I´d set the ammo at 10%, the russkies still had 100% ammo (clearly seen inspecting spotters and support weapons). Tested a bit more and saw no change in ammo for either side eventhough the preference had been set at the beginning (toyed with years, force mix, battle type etc. no change). On Mac seems to be working correctly, even when in the Editor (what I use to setup each battle): I definitely have seen an increase of return fire on my troops from early stages to now (I am on the 13th o September). Looks like PC version does not take into account any Ammo level. I strongly suggest you move to 1.0.2: should fix the problem for PCs on the QB (but reportedly not on the Editor) [ March 20, 2003, 08:07 AM: Message edited by: Seahawk-vfa201 ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSulo Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Seahawk-vfa201, are you SURE the "change ammo loadout in the scenario editor and import map into QB and get the correct ammo" works on your Mac? With version v1.0.2? So if you add a platoon in the scenario editor, change ammo to 1, save scenario, start a QB, set ammo to Full, import your scenario with troops, your platoon still has 1 in ammo? Sorry for asking again, just want to be sure. If it DOES work on Mac and not PC, that's a first in CM's history (afaik), and SHOULD "force" BFC to fix the PC version for us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaTyR Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Thanks, I was going crazy over this. Got to inform my opponents that I´m moving on to 1.02 and suggest they do too. Still can´t believe how, as a faithful reader of this forum, could I miss the "ammo bug"... Maybe I´ve been playing too much ? Tonight I´ll start a new BCR campaign with 1.02, cheers ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk-vfa201 Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Originally posted by SuperSulo: Seahawk-vfa201, are you SURE the "change ammo loadout in the scenario editor and import map into QB and get the correct ammo" works on your Mac? With version v1.0.2? So if you add a platoon in the scenario editor, change ammo to 1, save scenario, start a QB, set ammo to Full, import your scenario with troops, your platoon still has 1 in ammo? Sorry for asking again, just want to be sure. If it DOES work on Mac and not PC, that's a first in CM's history (afaik), and SHOULD "force" BFC to fix the PC version for us. Am at work now I will do the test you asked. But for sure if on the editor I set my units at less than FULL they do not show a full green bar as ammo level when I start the battle. :-{ I'll do more detailed tests later and report. [ March 20, 2003, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: Seahawk-vfa201 ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgtabell Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 I have played through 5-6 battles, 4 with the current rule set. My question/comment is about Allied/Axis Counterattack situations. First, I realize one can change the rules, adapt to make fit, etc...so take this with a grain of salt due to my inexperience and the possibility that I am playing late at night! It would seem to me that the Task Force composition should be the same? (I realize that to make the game fun, it is cool to change up). Did I miss something on this one? If and attached unit is destroyed, my assumption is that it is not reinforced, (or under Allied Counter Attack situations?) Why the limitation on the 3 units for Attached units? (I know, I know, if I don't like it I can change it), but was wondering if it was a game balance thingie? On a lighter note,,,holy cow am I learning alot about capabilities. Thanks for everyone's efforts! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Just finished my 5000 pt ME. My group inflicted 1402 casualties and only sustained 29! My mom is so proud. Is there any way to see casualty stats for planes? One of my planes dropped some bombs right in their main assault force. Ugly! Question: I have an attached 81mm FO. In the Favor sheet, it lists casualty benchmarks that need to be reached for different units to get extra favor (such as 12+ for a squad). It doesn't list FOs, just mortars. My FO got 46 casualties. Is that enough for extra favor? What are the thresholds for different calibers of FO? It seems that the Favor sheet is heavily weighted in terms of equipment. Since my enemy was infantry only, my favor wasn't very high despite my total victory (only 39 ). I just didn't have any tanks, etc. to knock out! Dr. Rosenrosen [ March 20, 2003, 02:26 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Rosenrosen ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 One other question: I lost one of my battle group tanks in my battle, but then rolled for immediate axis assault. Based on the rules, it sounds like I can use my tank in the next battle as long as I can find enough guys to replace the crew completely. Is this correct? Or is the fact that the tank is knocked out taken into account at all? Thanks, Dr. Rosenrosen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Olesen Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 The rules do not take account of lost equipment. It Ãs miracoluosly (sp?) replaced. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen: Is there any way to see casualty stats for planes? One of my planes dropped some bombs right in their main assault force. Ugly! Only by elimination. Make note of all the casualties caused by your ground units, whatever is left was from your air support. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk-vfa201 Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Originally posted by SuperSulo: Seahawk-vfa201, are you SURE the So if you add a platoon in the scenario editor, change ammo to 1, save scenario, start a QB, set ammo to Full, import your scenario with troops, your platoon still has 1 in ammo? Sorry for asking again, You were right to ask. The QB level drives. units follow what I put in the QB: if FULL then everybody is full. The ammo level is what I put in the QB, not what I set in the Editor. So the patch only fixes the ammo level as per QB not as per the Editor. It's % is forgotten in favor of QB setting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSulo Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen: Question: I have an attached 81mm FO. In the Favor sheet, it lists casualty benchmarks that need to be reached for different units to get extra favor (such as 12+ for a squad). It doesn't list FOs, just mortars. My FO got 46 casualties. Is that enough for extra favor? What are the thresholds for different calibers of FO? I think you ment the Battle Group sheet, not Favor sheet... You are "not allowed" to have FO's as attached units. I guess that's why there aren't any "casualty benchmarks" for them. Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen: It seems that the Favor sheet is heavily weighted in terms of equipment. Since my enemy was infantry only, my favor wasn't very high despite my total victory (only 39 ). I just didn't have any tanks, etc. to knock out! Dr. Rosenrosen Yeah, tell me about it... In my personal rules I added "favor for infantry casualties", +5/50 enemy, -10/50 friendly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSulo Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 Originally posted by Seahawk-vfa201: You were right to ask. The QB level drives. units follow what I put in the QB: if FULL then everybody is full. The ammo level is what I put in the QB, not what I set in the Editor. So the patch only fixes the ammo level as per QB not as per the Editor. It's % is forgotten in favor of QB setting. Ah ok. Hmmm on PC it even ignore the QB setting, giving all imported troops always full ammo. Is it the same on Mac? IE: Set ammo to 1 in editor, set ammo to 50% in QB, then in game it has full ammo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rosenrosen Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Originally posted by SuperSulo: You are "not allowed" to have FO's as attached units. I guess that's why there aren't any "casualty benchmarks" for them. Not allowed??!! I thought only armor was forbidden. Where is that rule listed? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawk-vfa201 Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Originally posted by SuperSulo: Unfortunately yes. If I verify the map before using it in the QB then the correct ammo level is shown. When imported only additional units have the correct %, imported are back to full. Oh well, it seems I really wanetd to believe the editor was working. I understand the makes for an advantage but so far I have been lucky: my ammo never went below 90%. Certainly, in case I should get something like 60 or lower then fighting the battle with 100% for the KampfGruppe would not be *that* correct. Still, without using the editor the experience is practically random for the various squads as some could play as Veteran as well when - especially in the beginning - I had most of my units as green after the first casulaties. They are getting back to Reg little by little. I'd say it is more difficult to play with a green fully ammoed squad then a Veteran at 60% So even with this *unrealistic* issue tracking down the experience seems more important to me (unless maybe extreme low %) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.