|
Nenonen posted:We are the grognards, we despise fun. If only you could play Italy versus Greece in the mountains, then you could truly understand the joy that was an Italian ally to the Germans in WW2. I don't necessarily disagree with that thought, but Italians in WW2. So would rather go with the Hungarians or Romanians. Precisely because fighting WW2 with WW1 equipment seems so lopsided. I guess you are doing Social Republic versus Kingdom though.
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
So the idea of lots of personal and political decisions in Decisive Campaign Barbarossa is really interesting to me. How deep is the system? I mean if took an average turn how much is piece moving and how much is personal and political choices? The system seems like something I've always wanted to see in a war game and besides stuff like the theater options in TOAW and stuff on Case Blue it's never really been done before.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
One game is Italy versus Italy, which should be relatively even handed. dkotzl is currently testing my flanks, not yet sure if it's just a scout patrol or if he really is mad enough to try to encircle me. In the historical scenario I should be receiving German Fallschirmjäger reinforcements for a counter attack... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fustian
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
gfanikf posted:So the idea of lots of personal and political decisions in Decisive Campaign Barbarossa is really interesting to me. How deep is the system? I mean if took an average turn how much is piece moving and how much is personal and political choices? The system seems like something I've always wanted to see in a war game and besides stuff like the theater options in TOAW and stuff on Case Blue it's never really been done before. I always run out of PP even when I try to invest efficiently, so I feel like I can make no choices end game. Also, the incessant railroad decisions--even after I've already made them once.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
COMANO has the most infuriating RNG. Yeah, sure, let the Soviets make 4 30% shots in a row and cap it off with a 10% defensive roll while my guys miss 6 50% shots in a row. "The Sidewinder has a 85% kill ratio in combat" my rear end. Is there a better way to fight Flankers with F-16As that doesn't include offering up one pair of planes as live bait while sneaking in the other pair around the flank?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Thanks! So the moral of the story is I have a couple options: 1-2. That will work PS. Correct PPS. Lunge for the third port, or cut off its rail link even if you can't hit the port directly. If the port is out of supply, then Leningrad is out of supply too. There's also a thing where if the mud hits and the port is in dire enough straights, Leningrad becomes at least beachhead supply. I wouldn't advise trying to assault Leningrad directly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
gfanikf posted:So the idea of lots of personal and political decisions in Decisive Campaign Barbarossa is really interesting to me. How deep is the system? I mean if took an average turn how much is piece moving and how much is personal and political choices? The system seems like something I've always wanted to see in a war game and besides stuff like the theater options in TOAW and stuff on Case Blue it's never really been done before. Germans make 5-10 decisions a turn, Soviets generally make none. You use pp and/or influence to make choices. Influence is used for combat or supply bonuses, bad relations causes penalties so pissing off the train nazi is a great way to lose. Pp is also used for combat cards, supply drops etc. Most decisions involve trains, trucks, fuel or politics. Logistics decisions you trade pp for infrastructure, fuel decisions you use your influence and pp to steal fuel from other services or open up new sources. Political decisions are generally you spend pp to get influence or lose influence but don't spend pp. You also spend a lot of thought and pp moving your supply bases closer to the front. Bases far behind means very little supply makes it to the spearhead but while the base is moving (2 turns or so) almost no supply gets sent up. It's also expensive to move so you need to try to keep the system balanced so you're not completely out of fuel when you have a chance for exploitation . A full turn takes like 10-20 minutes, decisions take maybe 2 minutes, 5 if you need to really think about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:If only you could play Italy versus Greece in the mountains, then you could truly understand the joy that was an Italian ally to the Germans in WW2. Unfortunately, for Combat Mission, we're at the whim of the devs. Personally, I would love to see them amalgamate everything together so we could see Red Thunder + Fortress Italy stuff where we get to see things that also happened, with Russia vs Italy. Or maybe US/UK vs Russians as a sort of Operation Unthinkable-style campaign/scenario. Alas... 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Unfortunately, for Combat Mission, we're at the whim of the devs. I literally can't wait to give them money for the next combat mission set during the final days . So glad they are going back to world war II but dammit they need to connect these games together.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
Abongination posted:I literally can't wait to give them money for the next combat mission set during the final days Someone really needs to get in contact with them and say: "Hey! You've got a cool product that obviously targets a very niche market. If you wanted to have something even better, you should invest some $$$ in bringing everything into one program. Hell, you have everything working in the same engine so it's basically the same. Ok, now that that's done, start marketing stuff as DLC. Sure, some people may be confused or hate the "idea" of DLC but we'd all be lying if we didn't agree that expansions are DLC for all intents and purposes. This would make your games way more user-friendly in at least 2 ways I can recite off the top of my head. 1. No more complicated registration systems. This eliminates customer support bloat and ill feelings towards your company. 2. Brings everything together to make it much easier to find others to fight, and allows more interchangeability between the various modules. "
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 13:35
|
|
|
Had to leave my work pc. So you effectively make your program much more efficient and effective. Doing the "single program, multiple DLC" route also helps bring you to the 2010's and increases your marletability on online stores. Maybe even one headed by a company called Valve. Hell, I wonder how many people own Graviteam Tactics on Steam. There has to be people who bought it who aren't grognards or heavily into that type of game that you could readily sell to. Ye they'd rather claim otherwise, reveal no evidence of research and stay lodged in an outdated business model.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 13:42
|
|
|
These are the same devs that can't code an option for full screen windowed, practically requires a third party program for their main multiplayer experience (CM Helper), and crashes if you alt-tab at the wrong time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
koolaidconvoy posted:These are the same devs that can't code an option for full screen windowed, practically requires a third party program for their main multiplayer experience (CM Helper), and crashes if you alt-tab at the wrong time. I thought they just chose not to because "lol what's the point of full screen windowed? its the same as full screen!" All while  'ing hard
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
It could be way worse guys. I take it none of you played Panzer Command Ostfront?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:It could be way worse guys. I take it none of you played Panzer Command Ostfront? I have. It taught me how fun it must have been for Panzer IIs and IIIs to face down KVs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
In real life all the panzer 2 has to do is drive away for half a mile and the kv will break down trying to follow it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Question for all you C:MANO guys out there. I'm doing the air operations training mission and I handle the air-to-air segment just fine, however when it comes to the SEAD aspect, I seem to be doing something wrong. I have jammer aircraft jamming I think, and when I order my SEAD aircraft to attack they never fire their shrikes and they overfly the target and drop bombs, or at least try before they get shot down. How do I get my SEAD aircraft to like, actually SEAD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:One game is Italy versus Italy, which should be relatively even handed. dkotzl is currently testing my flanks, not yet sure if it's just a scout patrol or if he really is mad enough to try to encircle me. God drat you! My garbage MG tanks will be avenged ten-fold!
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Question for all you C:MANO guys out there. With early SEAD missiles, the target needs to be emitting. Its risky no matter what, it seems. If the SAM chooses not to turn on and aim at sometime, it wont be a valid target for the Shrikes
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:With early SEAD missiles, the target needs to be emitting. Its risky no matter what, it seems. If the SAM chooses not to turn on and aim at sometime, it wont be a valid target for the Shrikes So do you have a strategy for engaging cold SAM sites (defended by AAA) without standoff weapons?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
Use terrain masking on approach behind mountains as much as possible. Attack from multiple directions at once to overwhelm the defenses. Make sure your jammers are lined up along the same axis as your incoming aircraft (i.e. they work best when right behind your attackers and pointed right at the SAM site). Practically speaking, you can get better result by micromanaging your aircraft a bit. For example, make sure they are beaming the incoming missile - it gives a modifier on missile evasion if it comes from the side instead of ahead/behind. You can also often turn and run if you evade immeidately.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
pthighs posted:Use terrain masking on approach behind mountains as much as possible. Attack from multiple directions at once to overwhelm the defenses. Make sure your jammers are lined up along the same axis as your incoming aircraft (i.e. they work best when right behind your attackers and pointed right at the SAM site). Oh so this game has got a lot more to consider than I thought. So I should apply realistic air combat tactics to this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
I know the stuff I wrote is modeled. There are simplifications of course - the units don't really move in three dimensions. Although each unit and weapon has a height that affects sensor radius and fuel consumption, everything moves in a single plane as far as hit calculations. Dogfights are really just two planes turning in circles, there's no energy management or anything like that. The AI has strong limits in what it can do. Also keep in mind that 70's SAMs are fairly dodge-able. You may need to send in a Guinea Pig to get them to fire, but that Guinea Pig has a decent chance of living.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 04:12
|
|
|
If you are running the latest RCs for 1.10 you also need to one pass haul rear end because AAA guns get better at shooting you down the longer they have to target you. This also applies to naval gunnery too, much more deadly now. The effects are based on weapon generation so ships in the 1950s will still be shooting poorly compared to ships in the 2010s. To get the steam RC 1.10 you can use the Steam client, on your games library, right-click on CMANO and open the properties dialog. Click on the "Betas" tab: From the dropdown, select the "beta - Public Beta" option. This should queue up the download for the updated files. http://imgur.com/oFwIXzm
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
pthighs posted:I know the stuff I wrote is modeled. Oh yea Wild Weasel is the only way I deal with SAMs before the employment of the AGM-88. How do you get them to stand-off so they don't fly over target though? Or do evasive maneuvers? Do I just set abrupt waypoints? I assumed all combat maneuvers/evasion etc... were handled by the AI pilot of the aircraft. Phi230 fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Feb 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:If you are running the latest RCs for 1.10 you also need to one pass haul rear end because AAA guns get better at shooting you down the longer they have to target you. This also applies to naval gunnery too, much more deadly now. The effects are based on weapon generation so ships in the 1950s will still be shooting poorly compared to ships in the 2010s. A grognard developer using steam beta builds? It's like that moment in Jurassic Park when the raptors learn to open doors.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
We're also the first matrix / slitherine game to use the steam workshop.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:We're also the first matrix / slitherine game to use the steam workshop. If only Battlefront were this progressive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:I have jammer aircraft jamming I think, and when I order my SEAD aircraft to attack they never fire their shrikes and they overfly the target and drop bombs, or at least try before they get shot down. How do I get my SEAD aircraft to like, actually SEAD. For the jammers to be jamming, they need to be pointing at the radar to be jammed. I normally split the jammers into a couple of flights with AWACS running in parallel. When one jamming plane turns around, the other commences jamming. The icon will show 'jamming', btw. If it doesn't, check emCon. It's been a while, but I ran that scenario a bunch of times and would still lose a couple of bombers to man portable SAMs. Generally I park the anti-radiation bombers on a suppression patrol, and use the straight snake to kill radars and runways. Phi230 posted:So do you have a strategy for engaging cold SAM sites (defended by AAA) without standoff weapons? If you know they're there, glidebomb their asses. Paveways are standoff. pthighs posted:There are simplifications of course - the units don't really move in three dimensions. Although each unit and weapon has a height that affects sensor radius and fuel consumption, everything moves in a single plane as far as hit calculations. Dogfights are really just two planes turning in circles, there's no energy management or anything like that. The AI has strong limits in what it can do. How does line of sight work, then? Just an abstraction that if you're positioned 'behind' a hill, you're masked? I haven't really played with that in any serious fashion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:We're also the first matrix / slitherine game to use the steam workshop. How much of that is your doing?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Hav posted:How does line of sight work, then? Just an abstraction that if you're positioned 'behind' a hill, you're masked? Presumably unit height and terrain height is taken into account when calculating sensor line of sight, but not when calculating weapon impact?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
How the hell does that work? AAA that aren't active (radar guided and thus a radiating target for anti-radiation weapons) are practically worthless against fix winged targets in modern warfare. Just look at the numbers of sorties flown against the AAA kills in Serbia, Gulf War 1, Gulf War 2, and Afghanistan. I'm confused why they would be a credible weapon system without radar in any game, let alone so good of a weapon special in-game tactics need to be followed to circumvent them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Grog takes Stalingrad in Unity of Command in two turns. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWI6ALmWR5Q&feature=player_embedded
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
Riso posted:Grog takes Stalingrad in Unity of Command in two turns. Is he playing against a human?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Nope, good luck getting a human to restart enough times to let you get the right weather/combat rolls to pull that off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:How much of that is your doing? 90% Steam's API is *irksome*. In fact fixing up some last minute bugs in it for 1.10 at this very moment..
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:90% I meant more along the lines of convincing the developers that it's no longer 2004 and the time of zipped mappacks/modpacks is coming to an end. Also how is the UI rework for dumb civilians coming along, was very confused when my planes wouldn't fire missiles because "target is not in weapon's DLZ". Once I looked up what a DLZ is (Dynamic Launch Zone, i.e. the area in which a missile is physically able to reach the target accounting for relative velocities, vectors and poo poo), it became clear, but seriously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
plz do not datalink my MANPADS with your DLZ
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Question for those of you with CM FI+GL and CM RT: Which do you prefer, and why? Obviously theater and timeline plays a big part in it but is it the only difference? I remember someone mentioning that Red Thunder has much larger maps + unit totals and can be overwhelming.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Question for those of you with CM FI+GL and CM RT: Which do you prefer, and why? It seems like the CMx2 games have had a trend towards fewer but larger maps/missions as time goes on. In Red Thunder for example, the main German campaign mission #1 starts out with an entire battalion of combined arms panzergrenadiers. And it seems like a lot of the premade scenarios are pretty large scale. Fortress Italy on the other hand seems to offer more variety and is less daunting in some ways; the US campaign starts out with maybe a company or so of troops with a few Stewarts thrown in for fun. Plus it has the hilariously poor Italian formations with their WW1 era weapons and terrible tanks for added variety and challenge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 08:10
|
|