MarkEzra

Information you have shown for QB Maps is not accurate. I suggest you start with the base game, open up the Quick Battle Maps Folder and note the number of maps. Depending on what you are actually after, know this: There are always 3 types of attack maps: Assault, Attack, & Probe. So a single map will have 3 variations. Meeting engagement maps have no variations. To best count QB Maps simply start any kind of Attack style game, use"Human" for map selection and count the maps. Then start a Meeting engagement and do the same. You will then have the ACTUAL number of QB Maps. Once you have counted the Base game. Add each module. Do keep in mind that all QB Maps will always play for any module of the base game title. Good luck

LW Infantry arm/infantry have the traditional german army coal scuttle helmet with LW airborne wings markings. I believe this is correct. I am NOT a TOE uniform expert however. Airborne infantry wears the prized jump helmet.

will do... thanks

@ Waffelmann ...Not a Bug. The attached pics are from my copy of the game. I'd be interested to see pic from your QB LW TOE. It might be you have a corrupted install or use of fan made alterations in the game have created this art problem. Or perhaps my pics and yours don't match due to date/month. I used June 1944 for my pics.

@Macisle Thank you for posting and especially sending me a save file. First I gotta say... Glad the AI and me are giving your boys a good fight! Now that I have that out of my system here are results of my elevation review: As you can see your Axis units are the x in the red circle... elevation 21. Your Allied attackers are in several locations. But it appeared to me some pretty effective fire came from across the river Elevation 23. Behind your units the elevation increases to elevation 22. Your 2 units under fire attempted to evade. one ended up back in those foxholes. the other sought lower elevation tiles and died trying. But I think we can all agree retreating North was all uphill. I took a good look at that House. Why wouldn't they just go there? While it offers good cover and concealment, it's a long way to run over open ground while under accurate automatic weapons fire from higher ground. Those poor lads had three bad choices... and the dice got rolled. ON A SIDE NOTE: My beta testing job is to provide my observations with supporting documents. My job is not to provide my personal opinion... BUT if you would allow me a slip of the tongue here. I get what I'm seeing seems counter intuitive... but it just makes such good sense when I examined that map. I been testing war games for 20 years. Over that time I've learned that it's Never about who's right but What's right that matters. That's why player questions and feed back matters. Thank you.

AI pathing orders in this QB Map may be what you are seeing. What you need to know: All QB Attack/Defend Maps Have have two sets of defender AI orders for each Objective. One is Always stationary...no movement order The second always has a variable timed movement order and is the counter-attack force. I your game this MAY be what has happened. Why not send me a save file and see if this is the case. If it's the map I think it is and the location on the map I think it is, and the game time count is what I think it is.... well you get the picture. The AI unit's will follow their orders and move from Ambush/concealment positions and move towards objectives Almost always forward into the enemy. markDOTezra3591ATgmailDOTcom

This is an excellent thought. Had it happen to me recently in beta testing. A download was corrupted but playable. I didn't notice until I checked the unit selection. Bunch of misnamed units. I had to reinstall the game and then all was well.

For the record: I am playing the longest CMFB PBEM in history through every patch without trouble

The major thrust of my testing has been to clarify if bocage terrain tiles are creating unrealistic or unreasonable AI reaction when under fire. As best as I can see, bocage style QB maps work as intended. The Training scen is not my creation, but I have looked at that as well and feel confident in saying that it , too, works as intended. There are two areas of concern that I do not offer opinion: Further altering AI behavior and Player technique.

which becomes reasonable in the short run. I checked the elevation tiles: West of Bocage 16 meters to lower ground and concealment vs 32 meters of observable terrain East. Player input may well have led to a better outcome.

OK.. I will check that out. Results: I found no problems when setup left or very slightly left

@domfluff First... Thank you for posting the movement pics and caring enough about CM to question and seek to improve it's game play. I replicated your movement order and attached a save game file to watch the fireworks. I think you will agree a bit different than yours. Why this is so may well be, as the say in the Real Estate game, Location, location location. Please note my quick order goes up to but not through the passable Bocage tile. The Infantry avoids the hole and sets up on either side. The Save game file starts with the infantry reaching their setup. play the game for awhile and let me know what you find. Road block pic 2.bmp Roadblock Inf runs to open Bocage Tile.zip

@Wicky The German Units have no movement orders...just a setup/ambush 1000 meter order. What you are observing is only the setup phase. The AI has chosen to setup on the "wrong side" of the bocage. Check in the editor (AI) and you will see the yellow paint falls on both sides of the terrain tile. My understanding is: The AI generally makes it's setup placement based of which side IS the Defender setup side...in this case North, then, LOS, then concealment. You will note that the setup was near passable Bocage tile....less concealment... so perhaps LOS trumps all. But no movement to destruction. Not a bug. Just code

OK than we may make an assumption moving on that Bocage terrain is not, of itself, buggy. I have not looked at the Roadblock map but will do so. Your Road Block Pics very helpful. I did similar but will try that exactly and see what's happening. But won't happen until later tonight Thank You. I will keep your experience in mind.

OK than we may make an assumption moving on that Bocage terrain is not, of itself, buggy. I have not looked at the Roadblock map but will do so. Thank You. I will keep your experience in mind.

Attached is a Bocage Panic Test Map.zip Unzip and place in scenario game files. It is playable as either side. I suggest you first play as Allied Attacker on your normal game style (iron-basic...whatever). I will be interested in what your results are. Save files can be sent to me : markDOTezra3591ATgmailDOTcom 2019-Bocage Panic Test Map.zip

On the contrary: It helps point the beta tester in the right direction. What we think we know is 1. Not across the game platform but localized to CMBN 2. Activity often happens around Bocage. 3. Happens when the game is patched to 4.01 Beta testers continue to look at this.

Are you playing RT or WEGO?

I cannot speak for the AI...BUT...If a way point is set the unit will first attempt to follow that order. But when panic takes over it becomes a dice roll. I get what you are saying when your sense of the game is panic = rushing into the hands of the enemy. So I am looking at this carefully as I play. I just got an entire veteran sqd shattered by arty while attempting a flanking move through heavy forest. They ran to the rear and then to the direction of the original order (a right flank move which was more away than not)...only to be decimated by another arty volley. the vicissitudes of combat, certainly, but reasonable, yes? All my other forward attacks toward the town are currently going well (good overwatch and supporting fires) Let's see what happens after my own arty is completed and I assault the place with two fresh sqds

interesting point re something I no absolutely NOTHING about ...Real time play. I test and play in WEGO. For testing it allows me to save and demonstrate a problem. In play I love to rewind and review all that has transpired in a single minute of combat. Fortunately other testers will be able to speak on RT button actions. I can say this: when the player gives an order the AI does it's best to follow them. Morale, unit status, HQ contact and all the other aspects influence a units ability to follow those orders. When panic sets in the player has no further control of the unit. The results of the AI actions should have no baring on game play styles. Weather WEGO or RT the AI action will be the same. What we need to figure out is of often a less than realistic action and under what circumstances do they occur. For the record: I have played/tested many hours of WEGO 4.01 QB Battles using the 2019 Bocage maps. I really cannot say that I had any unreasonable, odd, or WTF moments when my troops were in panic mode. For example: Just last night, with the 2019 Moselle Village QB Map, I sent my US FO veteran +2 officer into lite woods tile via hunt/hide. They were spotted and fired on by 2 right and left forward enemy positions right after setting up an arty strike. They went from pinned to panic and that's when the fun began. Completely of my control they broke cover, and through hail of rifle and machine gun fire, dodged and weaved their way to a heavy woods tile and went to ground. And they were still able to maintain visual contact with the target! A few minutes later 81 mm rounds rained retribution upon their adversaries. But it's early in the game, and I play a reckless hand at times, so more will be revealed.

Well I will be looking at the maps as well. Terrain impacts the AI. Elevation tiles do, too. They can't be overlooked when evaluating a poor AI reaction when under fire. An AI controlled unit seeks near-by cover and concealment. It might be tall grass or a slight terrain depression. At the moment of reaction the AI won't always move away from fire, but under it. This is not to say that all is well and eat your broccoli... Beta testers will be looking at it all from more than just one angle. We are listening. We will be evaluating and we'll let you know. Thank you for posting. It's how things get fixed.

please provide the name of QB Map...if that's what is is...or scen. Either way I'd like to look at them for inconsistency.

@ PBEM Players with problems: Mac? PC? Both Mac? Both PC? May be important info for bug testing I tested a CMFB PBEM on my PC. All setup and game turns play as expected.

Very true. The AI is designed to have two variable timed groups for each VP Objective for Defend or Attack or Meeting Engagement. So if a Map has 3 Objectives the AI will Have 6 groups for each side. Now the fun begins: one AI Plan will always attack, defend, or meet with 2 groups per objective. The other AI Plans DO NOT stick to that plan (although each VP Objective will have coverage). When the AI is in charge of the orders slots it does its best to fill all of them with SOMETHING but can't always be counted to do so. At first blush this sounds bad, but often the AI will totally mess with the Human players mindset of what is or isn't an important objective. Players should always consider the AI has it's own tactical goals irregardless of the Human Player. Just like war. When the human controls the AI group orders (and pays attention to the movement, timing and placement settings) these QB Maps will give a good account for themselves.

I assume they are from the earlier batch that I did and posted for testers. Actually I did make a few changes besides the names but they shouldn't have been included. Ah well, QB's and I are always a work in progress.