Lee

Vanir: Hehe, that is true, so I suppose it is a good sign that the hull down simulation is quite a bit improved now. =) Was there any follow-up discussion related to the optics quality issue? I hope everyone has a Blessed Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

Oh, I would have thought at least the unofficial version of the discussion among players of how the game plays after the fixes would have taken place in the regular forum, since there seemed to be a lot of interest. Any idea what the general opinion of the end result was? And by the way, a huge thanks to those who noticed this problem and ran tons of tests to show there was, in fact, something wrong, and to narrow it down so a better idea could be gotten as to where to look for the source of the problem(s) in the game. And thanks to Charles for taking the time and tracking down the offending parties in the game and terminating them with extreme prejudice. And also a thanks to Steve, who has had about a million technical discussions (often involving, shall we say, heated debates...) on various CM games since the series first came out, and is always eager to make it a better more accurate wargame to have fun with and learn from. BTS is always first class on game support, true fellow wargamers, couldn't ask for better. Also, I want to say it's nice to see such discussions. Reminds me of the early days of CM, where the forum was filled with threads discussing all sorts of fine details about WW2 tanks, infantry, guns, artillery and combat in general. Some of the most intelligent, educated, enthusiastic, interesting (and civil) talks one might hope for on the topic, and it's good to see more such things on the forum at this time.

I assume that this was tested after the initial fixes were put in place. Where might that thread be? Very curious as to the results, and thanks for any help.

Well, as long as any time I get a new computer, or upgrade the one I have, I can get additional keys with no problem if I need them to keep playing the game I own, the I guess that's not too bad. But I'd rather not have to bother BTS about it, just be able to play the game I own as much as I want regadless of how much I upgrade my computer. That's one of the reasons I like owning my own personal physical copy of my games.

I assume if I buy the full box version with the actual game DVD and manual of any CM game that I don't have to deal with activation codes, online activation or any of that? I can install and un-install the game as often as I like, change my pc's hardware all I want, etc., and as long as I type in the serial code that comes inside the game box when I re-install, the game will work with no problems and no need to ever contact BTS about key codes, correct?

Well, in addition to the sea port access, I think it's pretty obvious why Russia is doing this. They will take no chances on Ukraine joining Nato or the eu, and I can't blame them, that would put Nato bases more or less inside Russia, so to speak. And as far as the Ukraine itself, it is much to their long-term benefit to never be in the eu. Not that Putin's motivations are all necessarily altruistic, but the fact remains keeping those eu scum-in-suits out of the Ukraine is a huge win in the end for the Ukrainian people. And hopefully there won't be any more internal fighting there. There certainly won't be any large-scale fighting, with either European countries or us involved, but still, for BTS this timing is very convenient for the credibility of their scenario.

A certain amount of randomness is a good thing, because things aren't precisely predictable in combat, to say the least. But there is obviously something *very* wrong here. Being hull down should not only make it a lot harder to spot a tank in the first place, but much harder to hit it with the huge reduction in target area for the enemy's gunners. Plus if the hull down tank is up on a hill above the other tank, then you have the upward angle adding to the effective armor thickness of the hull down tank's turret armor. Bottom line; being hull down should be a big advantage for the hull down tank, both in terms of not being easily spotted and being hard for the enemy to hit. And if the hull down tank has high quality optics in the turret/periscopes, etc., that can help compensate, in terms of spotting, for any crew members in the hull who can't easily see to the front due to being in the hull down position (and hopefully CMBN simulates the important factor of optics quality).

The MP40 is more accurate than the Sten, and it has a smoothness that allows for finer control in skilled hands. The Sten has a choppiness to it's fire, by comparison. The Thompson has more of a punch, but it's not as easy to control.

poesel71: Who says that it's just Nazi propaganda that the communists wanted to take over and enslave countries in Europe? The German army vets from WW1 were fighting the communists in the streets between the world wars, as the communists were trying to take over Germany, as well, same as they did in Russia. Which was the basis of much where the whole Nazi movement got started in the first place. And they certainly tried it with Finland, not to mention forcibly took over control of eastern European countries, which they had no right to, after the war, so their intentions were plain and the threat was real. And we all know what the communists do when they take over a country... As for the German soldiers, they stated what they knew based on their experience, having lived it. I don't think anyone is claming that there were never ever any crimes committed, but that there were rules against it and punishments for it. And in the example stated, it was a violation of the rules of war for those out of uniform to be fighting, this would put you in a similar category as a spy, subject to lawful execution. The same as the Americans did to German spies if we caught them, we executed them, we didn't give them cookies and put them in jail, we killed them. The difference is that the Americans had the luxury of being isolated by the Atlantic ocean. If we had hostile people running about behind our front lines blowing up rail lines, shooting American soldiers on the roadside, etc., we would have been executing a lot of people (justifiably so), as well. And if you engage in fighting, killing soldiers, sabotage, espionage, etc. out of uniform, you are doing so knowing the risk that goes with it. The allies committed plenty of their own crimes, murdering defenseless German soldiers who had been captured. Watch the documentary, "In Desperate Battle - Normandy 1944". The soldiers who were there tell in their own words what Allied soldiers did to some captured German soldiers in multiple incidents even as early as at the Normandy beaches, right from the very beginning on the fighting in Europe. And in the cases cited, this was not in the heat of battle 15 secs after a nearby American or Brit soldier was killed or something like that, but in rather in cold blood. And as far as I know, there were no war crimes trials for those American or Brit soldiers who committed these crimes. They just got away with it. And I have to hand it to the guys that made that documentary, very rarely do you see such honest admissions of the crimes by the Allied soldiers against Germans ever allowed to be put into a publicly available documentary. I can't think of any other documentary that shows accounts like this in such detail. But that doesn't mean it was the official policy of the U.S. or British army to allow murdering of German soldiers. And, in fact, the soldiers in that documentary were sickened by the crimes they saw committed and did not in any way approve of it. So let's have fairness shown to the many decent and honorable soldiers on both sides, not just our side, and not pretend like our side didn't commit it's own grisly crimes, because we did. Anyhow, if you're interested in ww2 movies and such, there are some good ones out there. Das Boot being one of the best, as has been mentioned, and it's about u-boats, a rare topic for a movie.

Almost no war movies get made without anti-German propaganda in it, you always have at least 1 or 2 guys mentally agonized in some artificially forced way (I'm not talking about the usual stuff soldiers in every army feel in combat), or some soldiers behaving in some ultra-stereotypical caricature way. It's all quite silly and very tiresome. It would be great to have a good war movie with realistic depictions of soldiers on all sides. Enemy at the Gates is sort of a rare exception to this (although they are sure to show the Germans do at least one really harsh thing..), but at least they don't throw the usual political propaganda in there, so it's a breath of fresh air. And they show what evil bastards the communists really were to their own soldiers and people in general, also something rarely shown. You might not like the movie for other reasons, but it does have those qualities, which are hardly ever seen in a ww2 movie. As for what German soldiers were really like, and what motivated them to fight, in this video below some of them talk about the actual reasons they were fighting, in their own words and with clear and educated reasoning. These are the things never shown in ww2 movies, and usually not even in "documentaries". And considering the horrific blood bath of 20+ million murders the communists committed even against the Russians in their own country, it rings true as regards to their intentions.

It's good that they've been able to find and identify such a great tank ace. I'm surprised he's not being sent back to his family in Germany for burial. But I'm glad to see he's being buried with high honors. Rest easy, soldier.

Oh I agree, if they didn't use them in reality, then they shouldn't be included. I'm just wondering if it was fairly common in pratice for the teams in the field to bring an Mp40 with them, just in case they needed it, even if it wasn't a part of their official equipment list. Would be cool to seem some photos on that.

Does seem like there should be better cover provided by the shield than that.

Hmm, maybe Market Garden will wait for V3.0 of the CM engine? Perhaps to include some cool new features that will make for maximum detail and fun for this highly anticipated expansion. =)

It makes sense they would have an Mp40 with them in the panzerjager team for close fighting, if needed, and one would think it would be fairly normal for them to have it. So unless there is evidence showing they rarely had them, then it would be a good addition in the next patch. Even if it's not in the official TO&E for standard wehrmacht panzerjager teams to have them, are there photos and such showing they did in fact use them?

Any word if adjustments to the effectiveness of hmg's at range (or other small arms) are planned in the Gustav Line module? Would be nice to have that end up in CM:BN soon. =)

Yeah, I miss Fionn, too. He's a nice guy and very knowledgeable, and a lot of fun to have around. And an expert wargamer, as I found out in a CM battle we played.

Have to say the modeling and graphics in the Iron Front mod using ARMA 2's graphics engine are just amazing, wow. But, of course, if you tried to render that level of detail in a big battle like CM2 can handle, then your frame rate would sink like a stone. That's always the trade-off. But yeah, Arma 2 (also known as Operation Flashpoint 3 ) looks great, and it's the most realistic fps out there (that and Red Orchestra 2).

A completely accurate and unbiased video for sure... =P

This a great system. So in the future when v3.0 of the CM2 engine comes out (maybe a year from now or whatever), one only needs to get the v3.0 upgrade and CM:BN will be taken to v3.0. And I assume that automatically updates all the modules released for CM:BN to full v3.0 status (all the latest version 3.0 engine features, etc.)? Since a module is subordinate to the lead game in that particular family of the CM:WW2 wargame series.

Well, when Steve and Charles said the new Combat Mission engine would allow faster and easier building of new games and expansion packs, they weren't kidding! Way to go, BTS!

I can say that the MP40 can indeed be effective at 100 yards in skilled hands, much beyond that and it gets tricky. But trained soldiers would know better than to fire much at that distance. At 50-60 yards, it's quite dangerous. Inside that and it's gets utterly lethal. While the Thompson does hit harder, it would also be more difficult to aim and compensate for accurately when firing at 100 yards plus.

I can tell you that an MP40 uses up magazines at an amazing rate when firing heavily. So it's good to have large reserves of ammo. The fire is deadly accurate in skilled hands, though. A German squad armed with them can deliver huge amounts of fire on target. Perfect for fighting in a place like Normandy.

Thanks for the update, Moon.

Yeah, both the Thompson and MP40 are highly effective weapons at common combat ranges. And they excel at close quarters combat, such as is often seen in and around villages, towns and cities. I admire the Thompson's power and the MP40's handling and precision. And both of them look great. You wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of either of them.