jhmorneau

Well, those photos belong to the taxpayer. Putting them online and allowing everybody to browse them is the very purpose of librarians (and archivists) ;-) I find this collection invaluable because it depicts US society in the 1930's and beginning of the 1940's. Just have a look at the interactive map to find pictures taken near the place you live. For me, your money has been well spent, no doubt about that ;-)

Here's a new website that could interest some of you : http://photogrammar.yale.edu/ "Photogrammar is a web-based platform for organizing, searching, and visualizing the 170,000 photographs from 1935 to 1945 created by the United States Farm Security Administration and Office of War Information (FSA-OWI)." The treemap tool is especially interesting for you, grunts : http://photogrammar.yale.edu/labs/treemap/ Click on "War" (blue rectangle on bottom + right), then select subcategories (for example : "Special training functions", then "Infantry") until you reach the digitized photos. Look at this one : http://photogrammar.yale.edu/records/index.php?record=oem2002000609/PP "Corporal French L. Vineyard and squad standing at attention. All the men are members of Company M, 12th Infantry. Corporal Vineyard is wearing the new "pot type" of helmet. The other members of the squad are wearing the old or "basin type" of helmet. Arlington Cantonment, Arlington, Virginia" Priceless, don't you think ? Enjoy ! Cheers, JH

I wholly agree with the OP. Another solution would be to add squad # on the right hand side of the icons : Thus, for example, all teams from squad 1 would have in common an icon with one dot.

Yeah, this is highly confusing. When I started the game after patching it, my first thought was : "I must have done something wrong". After patching a second time and still seeing this v 2.20 on the opening screen, I decided to start a QB and check it out ingame. Bingo! And mind you, I've been buying CM games since CMAK. So what about newcomers (poor lads !!!) ;-)

Thank you for your feedback :-)

Speaking about Worldcat, look at that : http://www.worldcat.org/title/renault-ft-17nc1nc2tsf-renault-r3540-hotchkiss-h3539-french-tanks-in-the-polish-army/oclc/727610534&referer=brief_results Nice one, uh ? :-) If you click on the name of the series (Polish tracks & wheels) you'll get two more books : http://www.worldcat.org/search?qt=hotseries&q=se%3A%22Polish+tracks+%26+wheels%22

As a librarian, I always cringe when people use Amazon to find books on a given subject :mad:. To my mind, a library catalogue is the way to go. I'll try to explain why. First, go to Worldcat : http://www.worldcat.org/ then search "Poland 1939". You'll get 55.707 results. Not precise enough since I want books on the military campaign of 1939. Just browse the results and find one that is spot on : The German campaign in Poland (1939). Click on this title, then have a look at the "Subjects" section. There you'll find the keyword used to describe all documents centred on the polish military campaigns of WWII : World War, 1939-1945 -- Campaigns -- Poland. Just click on this subject. Result : 1.370 documents. All of them are potentially pertinent. For those who are in a hurry, here is the url for this search : http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=su%3AWorld+War%2C+1939-1945+Campaigns+Poland.&qt=hot_subject Now you can use the items in the left hand column to refine your search even more. In each document record you'll find a list of the libraries owning the document, as well as a links to booksellers (including Amazon...). In a nutshell : make a simple search, then browse the results until you find one which meets your need. Look at the keywords used to describe its content, then click on the most pertinent one and you should get a very decent list of documents that could interest you :cool:. Please let me know if I convinced you

Wow, that's an instant classic ! Congratulations, Sir ! Any chance that you could provide us with the lyrics of the german song ?

For me all started with CMAK in 2002. I bought it while in french Guyana and played it thoroughly with a high school friend of mine who was in the french Navy and by coincidence also stationed in Guyana. Then we bought CMBB to play around in the snow (it's refreshing when you live in Amazonia ;-) I've been hooked ever since and I've bought everything BF has released since, even CMSF even (though modern combat isn't my cup of tea). The only still missing on my shelf is CMRT... but I'll get it someday...

John, are you refering to the role playing game Paranoia ???? This was one of my all times favourites !

Another $15 on their way :-) Thank you for all your work !

+ 1 million (I mean: really!)

Very good news indeed ! I'm impressed by the way the constant improvement of the game gains momentum. It feels like BF has recently changed gear. Hmm, maybe this metaphor is too euro-oriented but I trust even people used to automatic gear can get the idea ;-)

As far as CMBN manual is concerned, p. 180 gives for PSW 222 and 223 the following value for armor : "Armor ............................... 5 - 14.5 mm" So: same vehicle, same armor, but different behaviour regarding incoming .50 cal MH rounds ? There must be an error here. Vanir, I had a look at Brinell Hardness Number in wikipedia and AFAIK one must be an engineer to understand it! Being a librarian I don't stand a chance ;-) Now, if you can tell me the BHN value of the PSW 222 / 2223 frontal armor I might be able to use it...

I ran some more tests with the PSW 222 which looks very similar to the PSW 223. According to Marco Bergman's Alternate Silhouettes v6 mod (XC version), the armor values are the same for the 2 models. Yet, I found out that the PSW 222 is systematically destroyed by 12.7 mm HMG fire under 250 m whereas the PSW 223 is immune to it. Does that mean that the PSW 223 is un up-armored version of PSW 222 ? Could someone from BF check this out please ? PS : Vanir, I can't decipher the chart you posted. What is the unit used to measure plate hardness ?

Yes I was using that fantastic mod too, but not the XC version with numbers. So I installed this XC version and had a look at the respective armor values for SPW 250 1 (easily destroyed by 12.7 mm HMG bullets) and PSW 223 (more or less immune to 12.7 mm HMG bullets). The result is puzzling : So according to this mod, PSW 223 comes with less armor than SPW 250/1 but is not destroyed by 12.7 mm bullets :confused:. I know that armor thickness is not the only parameter to take into account. There is also the orientation of the metal plates. Still, looking at the 2 vehicles I can't see why PSW 223 shrugs off the very same bullets which easily destroy the SPW 250/1. Any ideas ?

Been there myself more than once :-) I bet the problem came from the tree just in front of your Sherman. It must have blocked block LOS in one way or another. Some of the soldiers inside the tank had LOS to the incoming PIVs but the gunner could not. You'll notice that at the end of the turn, when targeting the PIV you get a grey LOS meaning a partial LOS. I wish that in this kind of situation IA would instruct the driver to move the tank a bit in order to clear the view of the gunner. I'm sure BF will find a way to do that in the future. Meanwhile we have to live with it...

I could never have guessed that PSW 223 were so resistant. As far as the user interface is concerned the frontal armor rating is the same color for PSW 223 and german HT (red bar = poor), isn't it ? This is a good example of the huge difference that exists between the basic information provided by the user interface and the amazingly detailed "under the hood" modelization of each vehicle ! One never ceases to learn by playing this game :-)

Still running tests now and then... I found out the german wheeled reco vehicle PSW 223 is totally immune to 12.7 mm HMG under 300 m ! It is definitely weird because in all my tests so far 12.7 mm HMG have destroyed every lightly armored german AFVs I've fed them ! Maybe there is something wrong with its armor ratings ? Regarding .30 cal MGs, it seems there is a max distance for engaging buttoned-up lightly armored AFVs. I find it really hard to bracket but it may lie between 240 and 270 m. Generally speaking, lightly armored german AFVs easily shrug off .30 cal bullets hitting their front (even the soldier manning its MG now benefits from a decent protection from frontal fire). Now, a sustained frontal shower of .30 bullets will cause suppression and subsequently force the driver to reverse, but the damage caused is very light and mostly affects the radio (not the running gear). HMGs are more effective at that because their ROF is much higher than MMGs and LMGs. Hope that helps !

Thanks to Baneman I had a go with his german MGs vs US Half-tracks test scenario. My findings are : 1/ Germans MGs will engage automatically HT with "open up" status. (that is, until the enemy soldier manning the MG is shot up. Then, behaviour switches to #2) 2/ German MGs will not automatically engage buttoned-up HT. 3/ When ordered to do so by the player, german MGs will engage buttoned-up HT until : a/ HT is destroyed or b/ HT is abandoned or all its crew is dead 3/ b/ is weird, because even if you want the MG to keep on firing at the dismounted HT... MG won't obey your order ! The german MG ceases fire the very instant the last soldier in the HT is shot. I find it strange because in real life how could the MG team know for sure that there is nobody left in the HT? 3 other minor findings : - The driver of the american HT is pretty immune from MG fire from the front. However he's dead meet the moment he decides to turn right or left as MG bullets will easily rip through the lateral doors - In german MG teams I did not see soldiers firing their rifles at HT at all, even if ordered to do so (they may fire if the HT is open up but I'm not 100% sure about that). - In Baneman's test scenario, there are a couple of small perpendicular stone walls on the side of the firing lanes. American HT drivers tend to park the HT behind them to get some cover. Aren't these pixeltroopers cute ?

Baneman, could you possibly share your hand made test scenario ? I'd like to run a few tests on my side but I would like to have a look at your designe before I start something new (I've never started the scenario builder !).

Thanks for your test, Baneman. I think you nailed it: I just finished playing a pbm QB where I had more than 15 american HTs and I ran into this obvious and upsetting "MG won't fire at enemy HT" problem. Most of the HT were equipped with .30 cal. MGs. The only one which scratched enemy HTs were armed with .50 cal MG. I had a couple of HG .50 cal teams though, and I'm pretty sure some of them ignored fire orders too, but their HT targets were just inside the max range of their weapon (around 1000 m). This makes me wonder if shooting distance triggers this behaviour as well for the .50 cal MGs.

I was wondering if I was the only player around grumbling about that : you can't order a MG to fire at a halftrack (let alone at a tank). Unless there is an enemy soldier manning the MG, they won't even open fire at the HT ! I understand the underlying logic (MG can't destroy a HT so it isn't worth trying), but as a player, I sometimes want some MG suppressive fire to be directed at enemy HT in order to shatter the soldiers inside and make the driver decide it's wise to reverse out of harm's way. As it is now, you can't do that. MG won't obey the order.... I wish there were a way to tell ou pixeltroopers : "We both know you won't kill it with your bullets alone, but trust the man in charge here and HOSE DOWN THAT S.O.B !"

I was wondering about the doability of LOS check lines being drawn from the selected waypoint instead of the current position of the unit (which is very confusing for novice players). Is there any feedback from Battlefront about that ?

Great read, thank you ! There seems to be a little typo in one sentence of the article : "This too is simple in principal, but difficult in practice." -> "This too is simple in principle..." ?