Jump to content

demo review at SimHQ.co


Recommended Posts

http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/previews/cmbbdemo/

Their only two bad comments were some stability problems and the changes to the views. But their overall impression was:

For a demo, the CMBB release provides something for both new players and Combat Mission veterans. New gamers will get a good look at this unique and widely-enjoyed twist on the traditional wargame. More experienced players will appreciate the attention to detail that was continued from the first game, and students of the Eastern Front or the war on the ground in WWII will appreciate this look at the battle, weapons, and tactics provided. But don't take our word for it....download it yourself and take a look. From the initial Quick Take on the demo, it's definitely worth the wait.

MikeT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there's writing for CM grogs and writing for the general public. It's two different things.

There's a CMBB review coming out in the Sept. issue of small armor enthusiast pub "AFV News" out of Canada. Written totally for novices so there's no mention of altered commands, altered penetration tables, or improved mg supression but it DOES display an appropriate amount of enthusiasm for the game and appreciation for the historical accuracy. A grog wouldn't like the review probably, but I bet it'll get readers to visit to Battlefront website to check the game out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although the reviewer had obviously played CMBO before, the following two statements show how little:

Sneak (Infantry) - combines the "crawl" and "sneak" commands of CMBO, which I never could differentiate anyway

Cover armor (AT guns / teams and AFVs only) - same as above, but forces the unit to only select armored targets, except when a more immediate threat is seen. This helps to correct a common issue in CMBO, when a tank would focus on a non-threatening infantry unit which was closer to it, but ignore a larger vehicle threat located farther away.

First off, the sneak command was very different than the crawl command. The crawl was a very slow prone movement, where sneak was a faster(at least 2-3 times faster) movement in a standing or crouching position. The sneak command also grants the unit of any Stealth bonus that it's HQ unit has.

Second, the Cover Armor command was specifially designed so you could create an ambush on armor only units, which helps correct the CMBO problem of placing an ambush marker for you AT gun, only to have an ememy infantry trip it and give away your AT gun's hiding place. The arc also fixes the 300m limit imposed on AT gun ambushes. The Cover Armor command will not solve the problem of "when a tank would focus on a non-threatening infantry unit which was closer to it, but ignore a larger vehicle threat located farther away", which wasn't really an issue.

They should have had me write the review ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Cover Armor command will not solve the problem of "when a tank would focus on a non-threatening infantry unit which was closer to it, but ignore a larger vehicle threat located farther away", which wasn't really an issue.
err..I could take issue with that issue being a non-issue smile.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, went back and checked it out again, and the covered arc commands DO fix this problem..I just ran across a situation where I had a PvIV that let a MG team just pick up and walk from about 10 meters away from the panzer because I wanted the tank to focus solely on the AT traps.

Excellent!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by mch:

Actually, went back and checked it out again, and the covered arc commands DO fix this problem..I just ran across a situation where I had a PvIV that let a MG team just pick up and walk from about 10 meters away from the panzer because I wanted the tank to focus solely on the AT traps.

The reviewer was describing something different. He said that the new Cover Arc Command fixes the problem of a tank firing at an infantry unit while an enemy armored unit emerges somewhere else. The tank ignoring the new armored threat. This, to my knowledge has never been a problem in CMBO. Tanks and AT guns will always target an armored unit over an infantry unit once they "see" the new armored threat, it may take a few to many seconds to "see" the new armored threat due to being buttoned and its relative direction to the new armored threat. There are small exeptions to this rule but this has never been a problem or a debated issue.

You, however, are describing a PzIV using the Cover Armor command. i.e., in an ambush mode. Your tank is ignoring the infantry and waiting for armor to appear in the trap(arc). Which is the exact purpose of the command.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by mch:

Actually, went back and checked it out again, and the covered arc commands DO fix this problem..I just ran across a situation where I had a PvIV that let a MG team just pick up and walk from about 10 meters away from the panzer because I wanted the tank to focus solely on the AT traps.

Excellent!

Interesting...did your tank not fire any weapons at all? From a realistic standpoint, I should think that any sane tank crew would at least fire the bow MG, if the strolling enemy MG crew was within the bow MG's firing arc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:

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

Actually, went back and checked it out again, and the covered arc commands DO fix this problem..I just ran across a situation where I had a PvIV that let a MG team just pick up and walk from about 10 meters away from the panzer because I wanted the tank to focus solely on the AT traps.

Excellent!

Interesting...did your tank not fire any weapons at all? From a realistic standpoint, I should think that any sane tank crew would at least fire the bow MG, if the strolling enemy MG crew was within the bow MG's firing arc.</font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silvio:

It would have engaged it, had the MG team not been off to the side of the tank..So, you're right.It just wasn't inside the arc.

Pak:

You're right too..'covered' is technically

different than a 'problem fix' as it's described in the review, however..No points off for using it as such. I suppose it was a problem to some more than others..I saw alot of folks using it as

a sort of 'cheat' in QB's..they'd get an elite squad and split it, and charge it at a nearby tank, and while the tank was hosing it down, and chasing it with the turret, Up pops the enemy armor..knock-knock, AP round! end of the tank...

Trying to select it to target the tank wouldn't work, because the infantry was close, and, the turret turn time meant you were as good as dead, anyways.

And just in general, Tanks would get real creative targeting ideas from time to time, and they still do. The other day, I lost a PzIII to a rear turret hit from a 45mm while it was turning to engage an ATR, both in plain LOS. Covered arc commands really nip that in the bud, quick.

And...I like it!

[ September 05, 2002, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: mch ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, THAT wasn't so bad. I was expecting to get roasted a lot worse from this group. :D

Any possible errors, including the ones that you guys are debating about arcs and such, were mine, not Tom's.

To answer the questions, yes, I've played CMBO...quite a lot actually, since it hasn't come off my hard drive since I installed it...but there's so much to cover in such a little "quick take" article that I knew we (I) were bound to leave stuff out and not get descriptions of some things down to the grognard level of accuracy this group demands. Still, hopefully some non-regulars saw it and will give the game a whirl when they might not have before. I could have done better, I admit.

Thanks for the comments either way! BTW, Pak40, you (or anyone, really) are always more than welcome to feel us out for an article about tactics, commands, etc.....I'd love to see it! Can't promise we'll use everything, but I'm open to outsiders writing stuff. Email me at the address below.

[ September 05, 2002, 10:42 PM: Message edited by: Spoons - SimHQ ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friendly discussion aside, Spoons, we're glossing over the important on the arcs question:

That people hear that the tank targeting was 'fixed'! I was surprised by Pak40's response to this, because outside of the CM community, it's the complaint most often heard about CM, in my experience.

That highly contraversial line undoubtedly made customers, So, good job!

I didn't see any problems with the review, here.

[ September 05, 2002, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: mch ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoons, i thought it was quite well done. I think there is no point writting a review for forum members to read. A review for the unintiated is what is needed and whats was given.

Well done mate.

PS although you should have mentioned lack of shockwaves as a bad point :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pak40:

Tanks and AT guns will always target an armored unit over an infantry unit once they "see" the new armored threat,

not correct. I have lost a churchil to a stug <100m away I was exchanging rounds with when he charged my churchil with a squad of men, the churchil stopped firing on the stug to fire at the squad, i lost my churchil to a side shot after it turned to face the charging squad :mad:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...