SelfLoadingRifle Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 I have been playing Combat Mission in its various forms ever since CMBO came out, so I think it is safe to say that I am a long-term fan. While I rate CMN as currently the best WW2 company/battalion level simulation available to the public there a few niggles remail that I would like Battlefront to sort out. My wish list is as follows. 1) Tanks to only be able to fire while stationary. 2) The 'hunt' facility for tanks to be restored. 3) Barbed wire should be crossable by infantry, but VERY SLOWLY. Currently it has a similar effect to an un-climbable wall or bocage, less of course the offering of cover. Historically, wire was (and still is) not much more than an inconvenience unless covered by fire. Driving a tank over and flattening it was one solution. Another might be the adding of bangalore torpedoes to the game. Perhaps demo charges could double for them though. 4) Engineers (and possibly infantry) should be able to clear minefields. Battlefront will surely need to think hard about this one, certainly before the first CM2 Eastern Front game is released. The mine was one of the most significant weapons deployed at the battle of Kursk, and for any scenarios on that particular battle to be included all mine related simulation will certainly need to be spot-on. 5) The protection offered by buildings to infantry needs to be reviewed. Ancient structures with thick walls should offer significantly better protection than more modern construction. Currently only churches seem to offer reasonable protection. Everything else seems to be a bullet-trap. 6) Destroyed armour should offer protection to any vehicle or footslogger (exploding munitions excepted) using it as cover. The process of getting knocked out shouldn't transform a tank into bacofoil in simulation any more than it does in real-life. 7) Snipers (or more accurately sharpshooters as they are depicted in CMN AND CMSF) need looking at. Currently sharpshooters are simulated, snipers ARE NOT. 8) I'm not so sure of my ground on this one, but my gut feeling is that indirect fire and off-map artillery needs reviewing. In my day (the 1980's) battalion assets such as mortars were available to the Platoon Commander, and I believe the same would have applied in WW2. My feeling is that anything bigger in CMN ie assigned at brigade or divisional level should only be available to one FOO dedicated to the battery in question (or ship in the case of naval support.) I have an artillery related question of my own to ask here. If a FOO is WIA'd (incapacitated) or KIA'd, provided his radio is still intact, should a member of his team be able to continue with the fire-mission, albeit at a reduced level of efficiency? If there are any ex or serving gunners on this forum who could give an informed answer, I would be very grateful for a reply;) CMN is a great product, and I have every confidence that Battlefront will continue to improve it. SLR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Tanks to only be able to fire while stationary. Disagree. That is too severe a penalty. They should be able to fire, but with much reduced accuracy. This penalty should extend for several seconds after it halts for non-stabilized guns as well. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Engineers (and possibly infantry) should be able to clear minefields. Keep in mind that clearing mines is a very slow process. Even marking them is slow. Depending on how extensive and dense a minefield is, clearing a path through it in the time of a CM battle might not be possible. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SelfLoadingRifle Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 Disagree. That is too severe a penalty. They should be able to fire, but with much reduced accuracy. This penalty should extend for several seconds after it halts for non-stabilized guns as well. Michael Are there any tankies out there who could comment? SLR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MG TOW Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Are there any tankies out there who could comment? SLR For what its worth, I participated in combined arms exercises, and Balkan deployments with cougar AVGP squadrons as an infanteer. The Cougar uses a 76mm L23A1 low velocity main gun same as the Scorpion. The tankers I teamed with explained the gun and optics were similar to a Sherman, maybe they were generalizing a bit for the pongo heating his hand near their exaust pipe. A gunner I new very well said they had to stop and fire once a target was a acquired. I never inquired as to what would happen if they fired on the move, sorry, not the expert opinion we were hoping for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1311118#post1311118 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpabrams Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 7) Snipers (or more accurately sharpshooters as they are depicted in CMN AND CMSF) need looking at. Currently sharpshooters are simulated, snipers ARE NOT. SLR Snipers? Mostlly an over representation created by the Military Channel and countless books and movies on the topic. Snipers, Snipers and more Snipers is a non-starter in CM:BN. Sharpshooters are modelled just right in CM:BN. Snipers have recieved an absurd amount of publicity in relation to their actual effectivenesss, especially when related to WWII. Don't believe the hype. For every nifty story about some cold blooded killer with a a scoped rifle stopping an entire company are a thousand tales of rifleman doing the same with a rifle and a hand full of grenades. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 3) Barbed wire should be crossable by infantry, but VERY SLOWLY. Currently it has a similar effect to an un-climbable wall or bocage, less of course the offering of cover. Historically, wire was (and still is) not much more than an inconvenience unless covered by fire. Driving a tank over and flattening it was one solution. Another might be the adding of bangalore torpedoes to the game. Perhaps demo charges could double for them though. SLR You can blow up barbed wire with demo charges in the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Barbed wire ...bangalore torpedoes to the game. Perhaps demo charges could double for them though. They already do. 4) Engineers (and possibly infantry) should be able to clear minefields. Maybe BFC have it wrong, but they averr that actual minefield clearance takes too long to be covered in a CMBN scenario. I'd add that anyone actually clearing mines is going to be extremely vulnerable to enemy fire, with low-to-zero situational awareness and less ability to fight back. Actual mine clearance is something that is best dealt with 'off-camera', not in the tactical environment simulated in the game. No matter what front you're dealing with. 5) The protection offered by buildings to infantry needs to be reviewed....Currently only churches seem to offer reasonable protection. Everything else seems to be a bullet-trap. This is a misapprehension. There is at least one type of non-church building that offers apparently near complete immunity to small arms fire to troops within it. What needs to be made more clear is which building types are and are not capable of withstanding various calibres of impact. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 8) I'm not so sure of my ground on this one, but my gut feeling is that indirect fire and off-map artillery needs reviewing. In my day (the 1980's) battalion assets such as mortars were available to the Platoon Commander, and I believe the same would have applied in WW2. My feeling is that anything bigger in CMN ie assigned at brigade or divisional level should only be available to one FOO dedicated to the battery in question (or ship in the case of naval support.) Each U.S. Infantry Regiment had a company of 105mm Howitzers. PG regiments had similar gun companies or 120mm mortars. These assets were certainly available to the platoons but had to travel up the chain of command, and I think that is modeled well in CMBN even though I often complain about the amount of time time it takes to call in artillery. I think the U.S. has the advantage here with the handie-talkie radios dished out to platoon leaders and a more liberal supply of ammo that might be granted to the lowly lt. CMN is a great product, and I have every confidence that Battlefront will continue to improve it. Cheers to that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I have a tiny wish. I wish that when you click on a fortification and hit "tab" it would take you to the fortification, just like it does with a unit. GaJ 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.