What does Squad Leader do better than CM?

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Brent Pollock:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ron:

Scrounging - in CM

Eh? In what form? Maybe I'm not thinking right...

Michael </font>

[Carl Puppchen]

Wasn't scrounging somewhat modeled by the fact that you go to "low" ammo and don't run out entirely? I think scrounging in ASL was for pulling MG's off dead vehicles but I could be wrong. Need to find my old manual

Someone mentioned flexible victory conditions - we do have a bit of that in CMAK in that some units might exit for points, and you have dynamic flags, but I instantly remembered the "take 3 stone buildings" or also some sort of loss limit on forces, although this can be modified in CMAK too.

[Ron]

Well I took 'Scrounging' to mean when a squad/team runs out of ammo (low) yet can keep on firing until the battle ends, albeit not as frequently, as well as the fact that when a squad takes casualties usually someone will pick up the best weapon available. A lot of this stuff is under the hood in CM and not displayed obviously. Steve/BFC has explained the design rationale and what it encompasses numerous times.

Ron

[General Bolt]

I do know one thing CM does better than SL. If you bump the table, you can still keep playing CM.

[GJK]

Originally posted by Ron:

Well, ASL has a much bigger manual and way more counters to go along with the way more and bigger headaches involved in playing!

A lot of what GJK said as better in ASL is false and misleading:

properly handles routed/broken units - in CM

So when broken units leave good cover to rout into open ground in the LOS of the enemy, that's better? That is a common complaint with CM.

support weapon (SW) breakdown and repair - in CM

How so? How often has an ATG broken down in CM and then was successfully repaired? An ATR? Others? All you get is a jammed MG.

dismantled weapons - in CM

You can dismantle and then reassemble MG's and mortars in CM? On which page in the manual do I find reference to that?

Fanaticism - in CM

My bad on this one - yes, CM has fanatic troops, and I agree that not knowing which ones are fanatic in CM is good. Otherwise, they are handled identically.

Ambushing in close combat - in CM

Again, how so? If you hide squads in bldgs or sometimes woods, and set a tiny CA, yes, you'll get an ambush every time. In ASL, same conditions, it's random - and sometimes those lying in wait get ambushed.

AFV overrun - in CM

AFV's can overrun infantry in CM? Which patch fixed that?

Tunnels - in CM(sewers)

I said tunnels. ASL has both sewers and tunnels (and caves for that matter).

Orchards - in CM

CM groups orchards with scattered trees. ASL has both. ASL also has partial orchards to allow for pretty little tree lined roads - a single row of trees. Can't do that in CM.

AFV MG/MA targeting (different targets for each) - in CM

Actually both games will handle that. Can't fire multi-turret weapons at different targets though. And if your MA poops out, so do all the MG's. Can't figure that one out.

Scrounging - in CM

So squads can scrounge wrecked AFV's and such in CM eh? I want this uber-CM that you play!

Jitter fire (at night) - in CM

I'll give you this one. If you throw in sound contacts, I give you this point. You get straying in ASL though.

But hey, CM is still my favorite. It's much easier to drag a box around all my units, give the "move to contact" command and then let the computer do all the work. I'm lazy in that regard.

[GJK]

Originally posted by General Colt:

I do know one thing CM does better than SL. If you bump the table, you can still keep playing CM.

So you play ASL on the computer instead of with counters and mapboards. Play with someone on the other side of the planet and have a room full of people watching you if you like. See VASL.

Though you can pbem ASL with VASL, I do prefer CM. Much more so.

[GJK]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Paul AU:

AFV ?overrun? of some sort should be added. A 45 ton tank rolling towards you shouldn?t elicit, ?oh, good, now I can use my grenade bundle?; it should illicit, ?holy, shi? get me outta here!?

According to whom? German infantry, at least, were generally well trained for dealing with tanks on their own (out of necessity).

Running a tank over a squad is not a simple thing - button up, and drive in circles squashing ten men? I don't think so... </font>

[dalem]

Ahhhhhhhhh...

ASL-speak.

-dale

[JonS]

Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

dismantled weapons - in CM

You can dismantle and then reassemble MG's and mortars in CM? On which page in the manual do I find reference to that?</font>

[GJK]

Originally posted by JonS:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

dismantled weapons - in CM

You can dismantle and then reassemble MG's and mortars in CM? On which page in the manual do I find reference to that?</font>

[Andrew H.]

Originally posted by JonS:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

dismantled weapons - in CM

You can dismantle and then reassemble MG's and mortars in CM? On which page in the manual do I find reference to that?</font>

[Holman]

GJK:

CM groups orchards with scattered trees. ASL has both. ASL also has partial orchards to allow for pretty little tree lined roads - a single row of trees. Can't do that in CM.

Doesn't a one-tile-wide "road in scattered trees" simulate this well enough? How does ASL do it differently?

[GJK]

Originally posted by Martyr:

GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> CM groups orchards with scattered trees. ASL has both. ASL also has partial orchards to allow for pretty little tree lined roads - a single row of trees. Can't do that in CM.

Doesn't a one-tile-wide "road in scattered trees" simulate this well enough? How does ASL do it differently? </font>

[GJK]

Originally posted by Lord Peter:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JonS:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

dismantled weapons - in CM

You can dismantle and then reassemble MG's and mortars in CM? On which page in the manual do I find reference to that?</font>

[Carl Puppchen]

GLK - did you see that Dean Wormer died? Might want to put an RIP for him in your signature

[GJK]

Originally posted by Carl Puppchen:

GLK - did you see that Dean Wormer died? Might want to put an RIP for him in your signature

I did hear about that, and did put a response in the the thread started in the GDF.

[Ron]

I hear what you are saying GJK though IMO the abstract modelling of certain features, and in the case of CM, features not stated implicitly but still there, make it better. I can't argue fine points with you over ASL because to be honest I haven't played it for over 10 years now. What I said earlier about the bigger manual, more counters and bigger headaches re ASL are in fact my memories of it - I much prefered SL through COD simply because they weren't as "complicated" due to numerous/detailed/ambiguous rules. CM has its fair share of warts and teeth gnashing also don't get me wrong!

Ron

[GJK]

Originally posted by Ron:

I hear what you are saying GJK though IMO the abstract modelling of certain features, and in the case of CM, features not stated implicitly but still there, make it better. I can't argue fine points with you over ASL because to be honest I haven't played it for over 10 years now. What I said earlier about the bigger manual, more counters and bigger headaches re ASL are in fact my memories of it - I much prefered SL through COD simply because they weren't as "complicated" due to numerous/detailed/ambiguous rules. CM has its fair share of warts and teeth gnashing also don't get me wrong!

Ron

I enjoy both games - my two favorite game systems. I grew up with SL/COI/COD/GI and tried to get into ASL years ago when it was first released. With a lack of opponents and a steep learning curve, I soon put it aside. With the release of the ASLSK, I recently found ASL again, and now with VASL, I can play others at any time via computer. It's still a complex game, but learning by playing with those more knowledgeable than me has lessened that curve.

Each "system" has it's finer points. CM started as a "computer ASL" but after a falling out with Hasbro (or whomever) it grew beyond that (and is still growing). It's modeled after ASL, but is a different breed of animal.

I play both with equal enthusiasm. I can't say one is better than the other or does some things better than the other. There's comparisons that can be made, but you can't match them up head to head faithfully.

SL and then ASL has been around for 26 and 20 years respectively and there's still material being republished and originally published for ASL. It's a great system but with flaws. As far as computer games go, specifically strategy wargames, CM has had a great run and is continuing to develop. I personally think there's room for both systems.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Ron:

Well I took 'Scrounging' to mean when a squad/team runs out of ammo (low) yet can keep on firing until the battle ends, albeit not as frequently, as well as the fact that when a squad takes casualties usually someone will pick up the best weapon available.

Yeah, okay, that makes sense. I should have thought of that on my own. Thanks.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JonS:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

dismantled weapons - in CM

You can dismantle and then reassemble MG's and mortars in CM? On which page in the manual do I find reference to that?</font>

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by GJK:

CM started as a "computer ASL" but after a falling out with Hasbro (or whomever)...

Avalon Hill. It was before Hasbro entered the picture.

SL and then ASL has been around for 26 and 20 years respectively...

I think almost 28 years for SL.

Michael

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by GJK:

CM started as a "computer ASL" but after a falling out with Hasbro (or whomever)...

Avalon Hill. It was before Hasbro entered the picture.

SL and then ASL has been around for 26 and 20 years respectively...

I think almost 28 years for SL.

Michael </font>

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Originally posted by GLK

7.11 FP: The FP base for an OVR is one FP for an unarmored vehicle, two FP for an AFV, or four FP for an AFV whose MA is manned and functioning and is not a MG, FT, MTR, ATR or IFE-capable. The FP base is modified by adding to it the tripled (TPBF) and halved (Bounding First Fire) FP of all manned and functioning MG/IFE armament on the vehicle [EXC: RMG do not add to OVR FP]. CE armored halftrack (only) Passengers can add one-half (and the Passengers/Riders of other vehicles can add one-fourth) of their printed FP to an OVR, but this too is subject to TPBF. All FT FP is added normally with no TPBF/halving adjustment. The total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR (in addition to any halving vs a concealed target; A12.13), but combat results vs Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP. The halving of FP for Motion/Non-Stopped Fire does not apply to OVR FP

Although this paragraph is surely doctored to make it look worse than it really is in the manual (surely?), here is the quintessential reason why ASL is inferior to the Combat Mission series....the bleedin need to be a rules lawyer who knows all the acronyms as if they were a seperate well studied language.

Regards

Jim R.

[Noba]

Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann:

Originally posted by GLK

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />7.11 FP: The FP base for an OVR is one FP for an unarmored vehicle, two FP for an AFV, or four FP for an AFV whose MA is manned and functioning and is not a MG, FT, MTR, ATR or IFE-capable. The FP base is modified by adding to it the tripled (TPBF) and halved (Bounding First Fire) FP of all manned and functioning MG/IFE armament on the vehicle [EXC: RMG do not add to OVR FP]. CE armored halftrack (only) Passengers can add one-half (and the Passengers/Riders of other vehicles can add one-fourth) of their printed FP to an OVR, but this too is subject to TPBF. All FT FP is added normally with no TPBF/halving adjustment. The total FP of an OVR is halved if the vehicle becomes Immobile or destroyed before it can resolve its OVR (in addition to any halving vs a concealed target; A12.13), but combat results vs Passengers/Riders after an OVR declaration do not affect the OVR FP. The halving of FP for Motion/Non-Stopped Fire does not apply to OVR FP

Although this paragraph is surely doctored to make it look worse than it really is in the manual (surely?), here is the quintessential reason why ASL is inferior to the Combat Mission series....the bleedin need to be a rules lawyer who knows all the acronyms as if they were a seperate well studied language.

Regards

Jim R. </font>

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Nope, never played it. I drew the line at Squad Leader & Cross of Iron before getting too frustrated by the need for a refresher course in the rules every month.

Regards

Jim R.