sand digger

Don't know much about the subject matter of the first quoted post but my bet is it was the US artillery that inflicted the most casualties and caused the most disruption, their infantry etc were basically there to draw the Germans out even if that was not an official tactic. As for automatic German counterattacks, in a lot of situations it was a silly tactic, particularly against an experienced and capable opponent. Overwhelming artillery will win every day, that was shown in WW1.

Too many Murricans in it already, they are all the same anyway. Lets have some real variety, obviously Brit/Com.

Well I'm going to throw a tantrum and never shut up about it if release of the game is not delayed so a particular feature I want is included, bugger the rest of you

Not sure if that is the scenario I have in mind but it could be that you have not cleared all the Russian units. If thats the one I'm thinking of you have to methodically check every trench and bunker, some Russians will only reveal themselves when you get really close.

Intel 3.4 ghtz quad core works fine on mine, as does the G'force 7300GT graphics card. Gets a bit stuttery but only very occasionally, 1 gb ram may be the problem?

But thats the point. The only thing you have to go on is what you can see on a screen which is vastly inferior to a real life view so you are in this game relying completely on the graphics. This is particularly relevant when planning a move, you are relying completely on the graphics to estimate what your exposure and LOS will be once the move begins.

If they are the same S why give them different ID numbers? Its simple things like that create confusion, just like the colour changes of the LOS line. Those sorts of things are important to users, we rely on them, if the wheel is good then don't reinvent it.

Don't know if this is relevant and if my memory is accurate but the patch listed as for the Steam version only included a fix enabling a tank to fire at something the gun could hit even if it could not see it. I recall some problems I had in a similar situation, the gun would not lock onto the target when all the indications were that it should. I'm not convinced that the Steam patch is the same as the last Battlefront patch.

I was not criticising CMAK LOS as such but the graphic representation of the terrain, particularly the desert. Used to get eyestrain trying to work out the general lie of the land. Agree with you absolutely that the graphics should represent what affects the LOS, particularly when there is no other aid to evaluating terrain and visibility. Its crucial to the gameplay experience.

Ascertaining LOS has always been a problem with Kursk but one you could sort of get round because of the nature of the fighting and the terrain there. But here where use of cover and spotting is so crucial its shortcomings are apparently much more obvious. One solution would be to have a overall LOS viewer, click on any part of the map to see what parts of the map from that particular position are visible from a certain viewing height. LOS is a potential problem with any game of this type because the player does not have a real world view of the terrain, I recall that CMAK was pretty awful in this regard because of the poor ground representing graphics. To make up for this lack of a real world view a player needs compensating aids in addition to good terrain representing graphics. You particularly need them in order to plan and make movement decisions when advancing, thats a crucial part of the game. As it stands, the only thing I can suggest is to micro manage scouts and infantry well forward of the armour. How long they would last in that role is another question.

So do any of the humans have optical sights ie binoculars?

Micro managing is part of the game and may take some getting used to, it certainly requires patience much like that which would be required in a real life combat situation I'd imagine. What you can do is immediately fire comes your way is to hit 'pause' and work out a response, expecting the AI to do it for you is not the way this game plays. And if you think that the enemy has an unfair advantage then get into the habit of saving the game regularly so you can go back to the last save and have another go. It sounds like there are no cut and paste generic defensive earthworks used in Caen, maybe a straight answer will come my way sometime

Oh that Challenger, the current British tank is called Challenger too. Sorry to intrude, carry on.

OK I'll bite, what is a modern Challenger tank doing at Caen during WW2?

Yeh I'm interested too. In the screen shots I've seen there are none of those awful generic defensive works that our Xray eyes can see right into. Which will be a plus if so.

It seems relevant that some people are continually having a framerate problem whereas others are not. Unless my logic has failed that points to problems within the control of the individual player even if he has tried to find the cause and failed. My system is quite a modest one and not specifically specced for gaming yet it is only where there is a hell of a lot of action going on including aircraft strafing that it starts to stutter and will very occasionally crash. Which is why regularly saving the game is a good thing to do. My specs: Windows XP, Pentium RD 3.4 GHz, 1 gig RAM, G'force 7300 GT.

Will check that 1.3.3 update, can't recall it coming up so thanks for mentioning it T. Some good fixes in that list eg improved mortar default experience which I assume improves newb mortar accuracy, improved trench survival and being able to fire at unseen targets. See, 1C do listen EDIT: There is no 1.3.3 on my Auto Updater either, the latest available according to it is 1.3.1 which I recall was a bit of a mess to instal.

LOL at using the Battlefront forum to advise someone to buy elsewhere.

Can see what you are getting at SLR, another way to approach the situation though is to not reveal any map detail until it can be physically observed by your forces. By 'map detail' I mean any man made feature such as defensive works that would not ordinarily appear on a map. That would go part of the way to address your concern, it would make recce a more realistic part of the game too. I played CM and found managing the FOO a PITA a lot of the time. In CM it was often impossible to know at the outset what a FOO could observe once he reached a chosen spot due in part to the lack of a contour overlay. His loss simply due to bad luck could also drastically affect the outcome of a battle, there is enough of that sort of chance thing in games already without adding more.

Agree with most of what you say but FOO's add an unnecessary complication to any game, their survival is too crucial and is a distraction that adds nothing to the game play. On the camo nets, could not agree more. Plus the fixed and obvious defences are terrible and are the worst feature of the game, you can tell straight away what they are designed to protect eg tank or gun. Plus they are always in view even if none of your forces have LOS , ridiculous.

Only from the time when personal AT weapons improved is it necessary to combine infantry with armour in attack in this game. In urban areas it can work and infantry losses can be held down to a reasonable level using micromanagement, out in the open with good visibility it is pointless and only leads to infantry losses for no good gain. Basically in this game infantry should be used to hold captured ground only if significant losses are to be avoided.

Don't use your infantry to attack, use them to hold ground once it has been secured which can be done with a combination of artillery and vehicles. Once you work out how to play the game to win infantry are hardly needed at all which is a bit of a pity but they are just too vulnerable for anything much more than clearing trenches which have already been blasted by artillery and AFV's. Even then its best to micro manage them and use them in conjunction with a light AFV at least.

Excellent! Always like the way the crew from a hit AFV get out and then stand around, like, "WTF happened there gang, I'm confused"

Agree with Phil, in the campaigns the Russian fixed defensive works are mostly poorly placed and too easily identifiable. Plus they are fixed! Consequentially there is very little room for player input as to location of the defensive resources and the general defensive strategy. Lets just hope that in Caen if the defenses are fixed their location etc is historically accurate.

Seeing the other threads are full of chatter and tech head stuff, I'm starting this one for the simple minded players, like me. Yep I admit it Anyway, here are a few, some may already be in the pipeline, being a WW2 person I have not played CM since CMAK. * Realistic infantry behaviour when under fire. In CMAK, trying to get the infantry to rush those last few meters was a nightmare. When fired upon they invariably went to ground and wriggled around until shot. Run away or continue on to victory or death please, going to ground in the open a few meters from the enemy is nonsense. * Artillery effect on infantry, shock and awe if you like. Infantry should operate at a reduced efficiency during and immediately after being shelled, mortared, etc. This effect should linger for a time, gradually lifting, better troops will recover more quickly. So if you prepare your attack properly it should be rewarded for its overall effect, not just the immediate casualty result. * The ability to shell anywhere, you have limited ammo though. CMAK was unrealistic in that you could not shell an area unless someone could see it. You should be rewarded for the judicious use of limited ammo and that includes educated guesses as to where the enemy may be and being able to shell around an area you are about to attack to delay reinforcements, etc. This ability should go hand in hand with a realistic observation regime though, it would be nice to see whats ahead gradually unfold in detail as your observation ability improves in capacity and moves forward. * Simple command effects. This sort of incidential stuff can be really annoying and distracting if it has significant effects, and requires significant attention, on the performance of your forces. They should know what they have to do and get on and do it without higher attention anyway. Far as I'm concerned gameplay is everything, you need to be rewarded and punished as you play, surprise and variety is very important, if a player can develop a surefire attack or defence formula the game is ruined. And a equal emphasis on defending please, attacking is great but defending should be just as satisfying when you get something right. Comments? Suggestions?