Jump to content

Foxholes seem to be really really broken


Recommended Posts

Most of the patch desiderata, namely; more potent MGs, stouter defence works, more resistant buildings and, arguably, tanks not firing on the run, etc, are going to seriously imbalance existing scenarios and some QBs in favour of the defending side. Everyone realizes this, right?

In some cases this is true, but those of you familiar with the MASSIVE changes in CM:SF, between v1.01 and v1.31, have found that it generally doesn't rise to that level. The primary reason is that the application of tactics is still the most important element of the game. What we did see in CM:SF was a lot less "that doesn't seem right" results as the game engine matured. Especially after EOLS was added in v1.06.

The number of basic changes to CM:BN over time will be far lower than with CM:SF. So I don't think there's much reason to be concerned about tossing the balance out the window.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Enhanced Line Of Sight. In the initial release version of CMSF, LOS "pre-checks" from Action Square to Action Square were done from only one height, which led to all sorts of spotting wierdness. So they added ELOS, which does the pre-checks from multiple heights (at least 4, maybe 5). This vastly improved things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The patch that screwed up older missions was the v1.11 patch which introduced the AI 'Bug-out' behaviour. Prior to that, the AI pretty much stayed in its positions and fought there until it died. Afterwards, it would run away which was both good and 'bad'. Good because you could clear the AI out of buildings more easily and bad because they would sometimes bug out into building locations deeper within the objective and could be really nasty when you encountered them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enhanced Line Of Sight. In the initial release version of CMSF, LOS "pre-checks" from Action Square to Action Square were done from only one height, which led to all sorts of spotting wierdness. So they added ELOS, which does the pre-checks from multiple heights (at least 4, maybe 5). This vastly improved things.

Thanks for the explanation YankeeDog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right. The game probably needs a defence boost in certain details. Just saying...

The 3:1 maxim may be true or a leftover mechanism from the boardgame era. Of course, the higher the marginal odds the greater the predictability. Fact is, no battle was ever designed by any military staff to be 'interesting' in the CM sense. An interesting battle results from miscalculations and unexpected events.

3:1 is a military maxim...but I'm not sure what it really means or whether it was ever correct. I mean, 3:1 what? Men? Artillery? Tanks? Divisions? Platoons?

It's too general to be meaningful...and I'm not sure it was meaningful in WWII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...