Forums

Hi everyone, I have discovered three very odd things about the CS series in recent games, and I wanted to ask everyone their opinions of these things. I'll simply summarize the event/issue and make a quick observation. Keep in mind this is for the talonsoft version. Here goes...

1. In a campaign game I'm playing, one of my panthers saw a loaded sherman with an infantry platoon loaded onto it. The sherman was at a distance of 15 hexes, too far for AT fire, but close enough for a shot at the loaded infantry. So, I fired at the sherman with the panther, it went to the side "armor." The result was; SHERMAN reduced by one disrupted, infantry reduced by three disrupted.

Ok, how can this happen? My theory is, loading an infantry unit onto a tank effectively forces the program to change it into a soft target, as this is the only way the program will allow a shot to me made in the first place. Or is it something else entirely?

2. In a current game I'm playing, a spotted (by enemy tanks) infantry platoon was, well, spotting. I thought, I really need to try and protect this guy. So, I clicked the "dig in" icon. The infantry platoon immediately drew op-fire from several tanks nearby. This incident raises the very disturbing possibility that someone could toggle the dig-in command as a "cheap" way of soaking up op-fire.

Ok, the only thing I can think of on this one, is that pressing that button counts as an action, which in turn can trigger op-fire. Well then, why do enemies never fire on my engineers when they create smoke? I think this "op-fire when activating/deactivating entrench commands" thing needs to be seriously looked at, as in removed from the game. Or was it removed from the matrix version?

3. Last but not least. Same scenario as in the situation above. Here, there are two officers. One commands another. There are NO other units in the hex (confirmed). Because there are two officers, the computer will not allow you to get (as far as I can tell) the vastly improved "kill" chance if officers are alone. But wait! That's not my issue. It gets weirder...

The issue is; when ANY of my units take ONE shot at these guys, the computer says no effect TWICE (in the combat results window, I assume each result is for each officer), and takes away the number of action points that indicate the unit fired TWICE. What the hell? I now have a disrupted PzIVh nearby that because of this, will not be able to retreat (not enough AP's), and will likely be destroyed next turn. Having a single shot cost 70 action points is no fun. :mad:

Oof. A programming bug? This one is so bizarre I don't know where to start. :chin:

Please, gents, sound off!

John Given Wrote:1. In a campaign game I'm playing, one of my panthers saw a loaded sherman with an infantry platoon loaded onto it. The sherman was at a distance of 15 hexes, too far for AT fire, but close enough for a shot at the loaded infantry. So, I fired at the sherman with the panther, it went to the side "armor." The result was; SHERMAN reduced by one disrupted, infantry reduced by three disrupted.

Ok, how can this happen? My theory is, loading an infantry unit onto a tank effectively forces the program to change it into a soft target, as this is the only way the program will allow a shot to me made in the first place. Or is it something else entirely?

In this case you Panther fires BOTH at the Shermans (hard attack value) and the riding infanty (soft attack). Infantry riding on tanks have a low defense value so your result is common and not an issue.

Quote:2. In a current game I'm playing, a spotted (by enemy tanks) infantry platoon was, well, spotting. I thought, I really need to try and protect this guy. So, I clicked the "dig in" icon. The infantry platoon immediately drew op-fire from several tanks nearby. This incident raises the very disturbing possibility that someone could toggle the dig-in command as a "cheap" way of soaking up op-fire.

Ok, the only thing I can think of on this one, is that pressing that button counts as an action, which in turn can trigger op-fire. Well then, why do enemies never fire on my engineers when they create smoke? I think this "op-fire when activating/deactivating entrench commands" thing needs to be seriously looked at, as in removed from the game. Or was it removed from the matrix version?

Digging in and making smoke can trigger opp fire. I have seen both.

Remember Opp fire is so random that your results do not surprise me.

Quote:3. Last but not least. Same scenario as in the situation above. Here, there are two officers. One commands another. There are NO other units in the hex (confirmed). Because there are two officers, the computer will not allow you to get (as far as I can tell) the vastly improved "kill" chance if officers are alone. But wait! That's not my issue. It gets weirder...

The issue is; when ANY of my units take ONE shot at these guys, the computer says no effect TWICE (in the combat results window, I assume each result is for each officer), and takes away the number of action points that indicate the unit fired TWICE. What the hell? I now have a disrupted PzIVh nearby that because of this, will not be able to retreat (not enough AP's), and will likely be destroyed next turn. Having a single shot cost 70 action points is no fun. :mad:

Oof. A programming bug? This one is so bizarre I don't know where to start. :chin:

Yes, I have seen this one too. I have also seen its evil twin where you destroy both leaders and it only costs 35 AP.

I have just chalked this up to the bizarre.

It happens so rarely that I don't worry about it.

Thanx!

Hawk

Thanks so much for the replies Hawk, I was hoping that these things have happened to other folks. Wait, that didn't sound right.

Anyway, I agree, it is very rare. I don't have a tremendous number of games played, I felt I had played a decent number over the years (not compared to you though :bow: )

I would not quite agree though that being able to kill tanks BEYOND the nominal AT max range for the firing unit at greater ranges than normally allowed (because they are considered soft targets while loaded, according to your reply) is "not an issue." to me, it's a serious tactical consideration that I need to take into account.

I, like you, also feel that op-fire is not terribly important, as it's so unreliable (I don't use it much personally). However, the mere PROSPECT of being able to use the dig-in command by merely toggling the button over and over and over (at least till it gets disrupted) for the SOLE purpose of "using up" op-fire is a huge deal for many other players. Many of my opponents rely very heavily on op-fire, after all. And also, there are often large numbers of infantry-class units on the board, and limited numbers of tanks. The idea that someone could "soak up" op-fire by toggling that command, and after things quiet down, simply move up your tanks without fear of enemy op-fire.

I admit though, that I didn't actually try to toggle the command on and off repeatedly - I merely assumed the game would let me do so (since it doesn't take any action points to activate or deactivate the command). If it is otherwise, (i.e.; you can only turn digging in "off" or "on" ONCE a turn per unit) please let me know.

So basically...

1. if you load infantry on your tanks, you endanger the TANK as well as the passenger, and at greater ranges to boot, as the comp considers the tank a soft target.

2. Don't shoot at hexes that only contain (multiple) officers and no other units. It will take away a number of action points equal to two shots. I wonder what would have happened if there were three officers in the hex, and I had only enough action points for one or two shots? Perhaps it would have said "not enough AP's to fire or something...not sure on that one.

3. The "toggle dig-in button to use up enemy op-fire" really bothers me though. I think I'm going to make a personal ROE for myself and say that I won't do this, nor will I play anyone that does. I think that seeing my tanks suddenly start op-firing on enemy infantry-class units for no apparent reason, turn after turn, is a good indication that such may be occurring.

Again, thanks for the comments.