Combat Mission 2 is almost here and I have a question for the group.

[Jared Ball 286]

With Combat Mission 2 just around the corner, I would like to ask you what are you most looking forward to in the new game?

For me I want to see how weather affects gameplay. I also want to see how the sewer system works.

[KG_Jag]

There is a great deal to look forward to. For me the #1 thing is being able to play four years on the Eastern Front with all the force changes over that time, not to mention the weather, terrain and the massive available battle sites. For example an armor battle in 1941 (you pick the place, Axis partner and season) should look and play a lot different than an armor battle in 1944 (you pick the place, Germany or Finland, and the season). This alone should be worth the price of admission. With CMBO we only got one year on the Western Front and fewer players, especially since the differences between the UK, Canadians and Poles was not great. Even the US forces had a great deal of similarity to the others. Now we get all the Axis countries and the Soviet Union (and maybe late war Allies).

[Jared Ball 286]

Im also interested in ski troops. I can try to live out my winter war fetish if only I pretend. Also the fact that animations look so good I want to see how the building fall apart, how fires spread, small things that pulls you into the game. Its a good escape from the real world that ASL or other table top games could ever do.

[KG_Leopard]

For me it's the rarity system, so we hopefully don't need further purchase rules, and the damage model.

I have lost several tank battles vs Major Tactic - selfevident only because of the stupid CMBO damage model! :mad:

[Fishotter]

What is it that isn't correct with the damage model in CMBO? I'm no expert, and to my untutored eye it seems pretty realistic as is. Of course, every game has it's limits, it must remain "playable" to be fun. CMBO suits my taste perfectly there as a good balance between realism and playability.

[KG_Leopard]

The probem of CMBO is that nearly each penetration is deadly, and it absolutly doesn't matter what weapon is used. The smaller the caliber and the greater the distance, the more unrealistic is this.

[Jared Ball 286]

Originally posted by Scipio
The probem of CMBO is that nearly each penetration is deadly, and it absolutly doesn't matter what weapon is used. The smaller the caliber and the greater the distance, the more unrealistic is this.

I know what you mean Scipio. But that is not going to happen now, at least what i saw in the demo. I was so upset when I opened up my Russian field guns and got good hits but those Pz-IV's kept comming. I opened up to early I think.

[Fishotter]

Yes, I see your point. It is probably not realistic for a 37mm AP shell to blast a Panther, especially from long distance. I haven't played so many games yet, particularly such with long distance tank duells, but according to the game-weapon-stats penetration capability declines quickly as the distance increases. So no problem on that account, I should think. As for penetration effects: Even in my only dozen games or so I have seen many penetrations without effect (or just armor flaking). And if a small calibre AP round does knockout a tank, consider this: Your tank crew hears a deafening crash, metal parts fly everywhere, and they have a hunch that more of that can be expected very soon. Result: They bail out pronto. I don't think they'd have the brazeness to bend down to the hole, measure it with a ruler and cry with relief "Don't worry, that was just a 37mm, it can't hurt us!" ;)

[MajorTaktik]

Originally posted by Scipio
For me it's the rarity system, so we hopefully don't need further purchase rules, and the damage model.

I have lost several tank battles vs Major Tactic - selfevident only because of the stupid CMBO damage model! :mad:

LOL!

I knew there had to be a reason for that, Pete! ;)

I hope the new damage model gives you a better chance! :) :) :)

See you on the Steppe with lot and lots of tanks!

Craig