CM Red Thunder page is up

[Redirected]

Overall the thing that keeps me going is that a whole lot of the problematic areas in the code keep getting better and better. I am not aware of anything that has been made worse. Offhand I can't think of anything since 2007.

I have seen T34 with tank riders turn 180 degrees and face away from a threat area.  Made shooting the tank riders off very easy.

[Bletchley_Geek]

Not sure if this is 'News', but I saw that Tanks, like the infantry FOW change, are not always identified in the panel?  In this one case two Soviet AFV are 'seen' (spotted), and when I click one, I get the info in the panel...T34/85 etc...but I clicked the other (it was 1500 meters away), and no info is shown.  But one only has to eyeball it close up and it was a T34/85 also.  If it had a generic 'tank' model, that would have been cool.  I don't recall seeing this before.

Not news since Gustav Line. You still can figure out certain things by looking closely at the 3d models and take your own conclusions from the uniforms/gear you see the pixeltruppen carrying. Similar thing for tanks. Not sure if there's also some intentional misleading going on: I think AFV sound contacts tend to be rated initially as 'possible Heavy Tanks' quite often.

A feature that got added because of the on-going discussion on the Bil vs. Green As Jade AARs, if I recall correctly.

[RyanE]

I think it got added because because it has been discussed since CMSF's initial release that BFC's FOW in CM1 was a pretty big differentiater.  It didn't make it in as feature until Gustav, but it had been requested a lot.

[Bletchley_Geek]

This might be indeed an example of correlation not implying causation. Details are hazy, but I do distinctly recall a comment along the lines of "now Charles understood what you guys were complaining about and was easy to do, so here you go"or similar.

[RyanE]

The hazy comment I remember from Steve back in 2007 was about how difficult and over-rated CM1's FOW was.  But times and opinions change.

[MengJiao]

2) I mostly play my own scenarios ... which are small, but which are working very well with the improved TAc AI (ie the Germans defend themselves very well)

What does detract from posting those scenarios into the Repository? If anything, the more examples are available of 'sophisticated' AI plans, the easier would be for possible scenario designers to learn how to use better the AI tools available with the editor.

  Just to give a better idea of how crudely I construct scenarios -- the current "question" is:  What does it take to overrun a German infantry force of roughly company size in moderately good defensive terrain?  One simply takes a Quick battle map (these have objectives and deployment areas in them already), loads up and deploys the German force with some spicy elements like 88s and lots of other flak and a smattering of tanks (assumed to be in or around a workshop, which fits with the picture of a small defensive force collecting near a small supply and repair facility far behind the main lines) and then tries out various Russian forces on it (with the Germans as AI).  So far:

1) German Security Company versus about half of a Russian Cavalry Regiment -- Nope-- the Russians don't do so well
2) Part of a Russian motorized Battalion versus part of a German motorized Bn -- Nope -- the Russians don't do so well
3) Meeting engagement (same forces as above) -- Russians do extraordinarily well despite being out-gunned in the mortar and artillery area
4) Meeting Engagement (some Russian Tanks and more Nashorns) -- Nashorns and 88s stopped the Russian attack pretty fast
5) Metting Engagement (Lots of Heavy Russian assault guns versus Security Company at the Old Swimming Hole) -- Germans blown out of the water very fast

So...very crude...and I'm sorry, but that's the crudity of it all

[Redwolf]

I have seen T34 with tank riders turn 180 degrees and face away from a threat area.  Made shooting the tank riders off very easy.

Yes I thought I mentioned that. There are still significant instances where orders issued to your units against your wishes are harming the unit, and IMHO in unrealistic manners. Exposing the thinner armor is one item. Another one is ruining hit chances by moving while aiming is going on (and I bet that the model for zeroing in on a target is still using a full reset on any movement). Moving toward the enemy, not away, that sort of thing.

If they have to keep this code in and are unwilling to outright delete it I think it would be a huge improvement to only ever instruct the code to move the unit away from the threat in reverse. That would solve the issue of showing the thinner armor and it would keep the unit in good shape for firing back after you regain control.

On the bright side, many tanks now turn much faster. Having measured whether it is realistic yet.

[RyanE]

2) I mostly play my own scenarios ... which are small, but which are working very well with the improved TAc AI (ie the Germans defend themselves very well)

What does detract from posting those scenarios into the Repository? If anything, the more examples are available of 'sophisticated' AI plans, the easier would be for possible scenario designers to learn how to use better the AI tools available with the editor.

  Just to give a better idea of how crudely I construct scenarios -- the current "question" is:  What does it take to overrun a German infantry force of roughly company size in moderately good defensive terrain?  One simply takes a Quick battle map (these have objectives and deployment areas in them already), loads up and deploys the German force with some spicy elements like 88s and lots of other flak and a smattering of tanks (assumed to be in or around a workshop, which fits with the picture of a small defensive force collecting near a small supply and repair facility far behind the main lines) and then tries out various Russian forces on it (with the Germans as AI).  So far:

1) German Security Company versus about half of a Russian Cavalry Regiment -- Nope-- the Russians don't do so well
2) Part of a Russian motorized Battalion versus part of a German motorized Bn -- Nope -- the Russians don't do so well
3) Meeting engagement (same forces as above) -- Russians do extraordinarily well despite being out-gunned in the mortar and artillery area
4) Meeting Engagement (some Russian Tanks and more Nashorns) -- Nashorns and 88s stopped the Russian attack pretty fast
5) Metting Engagement (Lots of Heavy Russian assault guns versus Security Company at the Old Swimming Hole) -- Germans blown out of the water very fast

So...very crude...and I'm sorry, but that's the crudity of it all

Don't feel bad, I do the same thing.  I probably build a scenario a week, just to sandbox stuff.  But they are so crude, I don't want to deal with people asking about them online.  I tend to build something, get my question answered and move on quickly.  I also tend to build a lot of hotseat scenarios to see how the AI reacts or to make sure something happens and certain way.

[MengJiao]

I probably build a scenario a week, just to sandbox stuff.  But they are so crude, I don't want to deal with people asking about them online.  I tend to build something, get my question answered and move on quickly.  I also tend to build a lot of hotseat scenarios to see how the AI reacts or to make sure something happens and certain way.

  Exactly.  I kind of want to see the inputs and outputs when I first start on a game.  This is especially true with CMXX games.  I can still remember how frustrated I was with CMSF until I started building scenarios to see how things worked in detail under controlled constitions.

   Eventually I will play some of the better-constructed scenarios and even (maybe) elaborate some of my own, but the quick battles make such excellent sandboxes to start with that I cannot resist some very cude play.

[Elvis]

Warning.....not official word...just my assumption. ....


I believe the idea behind the 2 manuals is that one is specific to the game and the other the engine changes. The second manual can then be used when 3.0 becomes available for CMBN and CMFI.

Again, not gospel but I'm pretty sure I'm right.

I wrote this a couple of days ago but I guess I didn't hit post. Oh well...hitting post anyway because it had taken me so long to type on my dead sexy phone.

[Redirected]

I just went through the manuals and the morale states still do not spell out things like 'nervous', 'rattled', 'cautious'...???  While one could fathom a  guess what the effects of these are, why hasn't this been updated?

As an example, I had a Soviet squad walk through a minefield.  The only effect was 'nervous' and they walked on after leaving two guys on the ground.  So, if another two guys step on mines; do they become 'cautious'? It would be great if the person that designed this would explain the actual progress through the states and recovery effects etc.

I suppose that if they do get around to the 3.0 Upgrade product, they might Upgrade the manual. 

[Boggit]

It would be great if the person that designed this would explain the actual progress through the states and recovery effects etc.

I suppose that if they do get around to the 3.0 Upgrade product, they might Upgrade the manual.

It would be, but I get the clear impression that they are working flat out testing the software, and not getting around to spending as much time on documentation as they'd like. I suspect the best sort of places to look are the CM wiki, and similar.

[Bletchley_Geek]

  Just to give a better idea of how crudely I construct scenarios -- the current "question" is:  What does it take to overrun a German infantry force of roughly company size in moderately good defensive terrain?  One simply takes a Quick battle map (these have objectives and deployment areas in them already), loads up and deploys the German force with some spicy elements like 88s and lots of other flak and a smattering of tanks (assumed to be in or around a workshop, which fits with the picture of a small defensive force collecting near a small supply and repair facility far behind the main lines) and then tries out various Russian forces on it (with the Germans as AI).  So far:

1) German Security Company versus about half of a Russian Cavalry Regiment -- Nope-- the Russians don't do so well
2) Part of a Russian motorized Battalion versus part of a German motorized Bn -- Nope -- the Russians don't do so well
3) Meeting engagement (same forces as above) -- Russians do extraordinarily well despite being out-gunned in the mortar and artillery area
4) Meeting Engagement (some Russian Tanks and more Nashorns) -- Nashorns and 88s stopped the Russian attack pretty fast
5) Metting Engagement (Lots of Heavy Russian assault guns versus Security Company at the Old Swimming Hole) -- Germans blown out of the water very fast

So...very crude...and I'm sorry, but that's the crudity of it all

Well, I don't get what's "crude" in those situations you describe. If you cook it along with enough pseudo-historical fluff, you might have there some mightily worthy scenarios. I like a lot historical (or historically inspired) scenarios, but the totally made up stuff can be also very good (especially when some care is taken when selecting the terrain).

Anyways, these comments by you and RyanE kind of give me the impression that a substantial part of the CMx2 players do their own 'sandboxing' at home, and do not even bother with sharing their creations. Indeed, many of such creations won't work, but eventually some gold will be found :)

While I'm myself guilty as charged of not 'contributing' to the scenario depot, I do have a different relationship with the editor. Rather than 'an engagement idea' I start with a 'battlespace idea'. I was the kind of kid who loved maps, and that childhood fascination has found a way to express itself into making CMx2 maps. More so after having the - rather crude - capabilities to have an underlay to trace maps. Over the past year I've been working on an extensive mapping project, working out the approaches to Carentan. Being bocage and all, it's a quite interesting rolling hill country.  I spend considerable time making sure the map makes as much sense as the CMx2 editor capabilities allow: it's a bit like travelling without leaving home :) I find it hard to push myself to turn those maps into scenarios, though.

[MengJiao]

  Just to give a better idea of how crudely I construct scenarios -- the current "question" is:  What does it take to overrun a German infantry force of roughly company size in moderately good defensive terrain?  One simply takes a Quick battle map (these have objectives and deployment areas in them already), loads up and deploys the German force with some spicy elements like 88s and lots of other flak and a smattering of tanks (assumed to be in or around a workshop, which fits with the picture of a small defensive force collecting near a small supply and repair facility far behind the main lines) and then tries out various Russian forces on it (with the Germans as AI).  So far:

1) German Security Company versus about half of a Russian Cavalry Regiment -- Nope-- the Russians don't do so well
2) Part of a Russian motorized Battalion versus part of a German motorized Bn -- Nope -- the Russians don't do so well
3) Meeting engagement (same forces as above) -- Russians do extraordinarily well despite being out-gunned in the mortar and artillery area
4) Meeting Engagement (some Russian Tanks and more Nashorns) -- Nashorns and 88s stopped the Russian attack pretty fast
5) Metting Engagement (Lots of Heavy Russian assault guns versus Security Company at the Old Swimming Hole) -- Germans blown out of the water very fast

So...very crude...and I'm sorry, but that's the crudity of it all

Well, I don't get what's "crude" in those situations you describe. If you cook it along with enough pseudo-historical fluff, you might have there some mightily worthy scenarios. I like a lot historical (or historically inspired) scenarios, but the totally made up stuff can be also very good (especially when some care is taken when selecting the terrain).

Anyways, these comments by you and RyanE kind of give me the impression that a substantial part of the CMx2 players do their own 'sandboxing' at home, and do not even bother with sharing their creations. Indeed, many of such creations won't work, but eventually some gold will be found :)

While I'm myself guilty as charged of not 'contributing' to the scenario depot, I do have a different relationship with the editor. Rather than 'an engagement idea' I start with a 'battlespace idea'. I was the kind of kid who loved maps, and that childhood fascination has found a way to express itself into making CMx2 maps. More so after having the - rather crude - capabilities to have an underlay to trace maps. Over the past year I've been working on an extensive mapping project, working out the approaches to Carentan. Being bocage and all, it's a quite interesting rolling hill country.  I spend considerable time making sure the map makes as much sense as the CMx2 editor capabilities allow: it's a bit like travelling without leaving home :) I find it hard to push myself to turn those maps into scenarios, though.

For me, a big part of how I enjoy these games is the puzzles of not quite knowing what is going on.  So if I work on the maps at all, I'm going to have to introduce some randomness with AI plans and triggers.
The problem with larger scenarios or developing scenarios is that eventually I know far too much about what is going on.

[Elvis]

  Just to give a better idea of how crudely I construct scenarios -- the current "question" is:  What does it take to overrun a German infantry force of roughly company size in moderately good defensive terrain?  One simply takes a Quick battle map (these have objectives and deployment areas in them already), loads up and deploys the German force with some spicy elements like 88s and lots of other flak and a smattering of tanks (assumed to be in or around a workshop, which fits with the picture of a small defensive force collecting near a small supply and repair facility far behind the main lines) and then tries out various Russian forces on it (with the Germans as AI).  So far:

1) German Security Company versus about half of a Russian Cavalry Regiment -- Nope-- the Russians don't do so well
2) Part of a Russian motorized Battalion versus part of a German motorized Bn -- Nope -- the Russians don't do so well
3) Meeting engagement (same forces as above) -- Russians do extraordinarily well despite being out-gunned in the mortar and artillery area
4) Meeting Engagement (some Russian Tanks and more Nashorns) -- Nashorns and 88s stopped the Russian attack pretty fast
5) Metting Engagement (Lots of Heavy Russian assault guns versus Security Company at the Old Swimming Hole) -- Germans blown out of the water very fast

So...very crude...and I'm sorry, but that's the crudity of it all

Well, I don't get what's "crude" in those situations you describe. If you cook it along with enough pseudo-historical fluff, you might have there some mightily worthy scenarios. I like a lot historical (or historically inspired) scenarios, but the totally made up stuff can be also very good (especially when some care is taken when selecting the terrain).

Anyways, these comments by you and RyanE kind of give me the impression that a substantial part of the CMx2 players do their own 'sandboxing' at home, and do not even bother with sharing their creations. Indeed, many of such creations won't work, but eventually some gold will be found :)

While I'm myself guilty as charged of not 'contributing' to the scenario depot, I do have a different relationship with the editor. Rather than 'an engagement idea' I start with a 'battlespace idea'. I was the kind of kid who loved maps, and that childhood fascination has found a way to express itself into making CMx2 maps. More so after having the - rather crude - capabilities to have an underlay to trace maps. Over the past year I've been working on an extensive mapping project, working out the approaches to Carentan. Being bocage and all, it's a quite interesting rolling hill country.  I spend considerable time making sure the map makes as much sense as the CMx2 editor capabilities allow: it's a bit like travelling without leaving home :) I find it hard to push myself to turn those maps into scenarios, though.

Ya know...Some people post just maps in the Repository. ...without units or AI plans..,....not for nuttin. ....just saying.