George MC

The demo version - which is also the same version that shipped with CMBS i.e. it's one of the stock scenarios.

Good to hear its working as intended! The key to being successful in this is doing effective combat recce and making good use of the undulating terrain If you can unmask/spot enemy AT assets you can then neutralise them more effectively. Despite the name its a scenario to play cautiously, slowly and carefully. Good luck with your next playthrough. Cheery!

Possibly maybe...

Simple answer is terrain triggers are reliable in that the enemy triggers a response whilst unit order triggers are more prone to upset due to enemy action i.e. unit A gets KOd and therefore does not move. Depending on how you set-up the trigger your responding unit may or may not ever move subsequently. In RL you can mix and match but if you defo want an event to occur and it is within combat range then terrain triggers are generally a safer bet. That being said it does depend on the size of the AI unit e.g. a AI group consisting of five tanks is more robust than an AI unit consisting of one tank. In that case order triggers, even within enemy contact still have a good chance of working, even of the AI unit takes casualties (although then if they take too many casualties then the unit may lose morale and stall). There is a good section in the manual which discusses the relative pros and cons. It will all eventually come down to play testing as well which approach is appropriate for any given situation. Oh whatever you do, for your AI plan - keep it simple, like really simple. test it in scenario author mode then slowly start to develop its complexity.

No need to worry about weird spawning enemy. Nothing like that in this scenario.

Ah - looking forward to this Be interesting to see how this plays out H2H - should be very engaging FYI I did a huge amount of working this for CMSF2 with revamped map (slightly enlarged) and new AI plans based on triggers.

Sudden decapitation at the hands of an angry mob is an occupational hazard for a beta tester. Those who survive the first few days learn to run really fast and hide.

Nope - fluffy white cat with the pink bow. Think that was C3K was the pink poodle. Might be wrong though.

Manners borne from fine breeding and a slightly haughty hauteur And wine and beer, lot's of it. ;).

Cheers Erwin

Thanks @Aragorn2002

Hi @MOS:96B2P Good skills spot on analysis. The smoke columns are from a brace of SU-76s that tried to ambush the Panthers. They scored a few hits on the lead tank and actually killed the commander. The rest of the zug took out the assault guns. The image on the previous page shows one of the KOd SU-76s. Aye still noodling away at the campaign. I’m working on the branching missions. This mission is an alternate ‘history’ of an actual event. In the campaign if all going well you’d play the historical version. If not you’ll end up in this one. Which in play testing is just as engaging, I think. Campaigns are a bit of PITA to do though! Lot of moving parts and I’ve nowhere near the free time I used to have now. Still it’s progressing nicely. I think! Cheery!

Panzer grenadiers debussing to mop up some leftover Soviet infantry - after their accompanying Panthers pulverised them!

Panthers on the prowl

Are they on-map or off-map mortars?

I can take wee look at it if you like - if its a smallish set-up would have the time to check out?

Great to have you back buddy

We’ve been frying all sorts in Scotland fir years. Mars bars to pizza

Hi @DMS Another interesting post. Liking this discussion with these primary sources. Thats an interesting action. It would appear they ID the targets then unseen dug in the guns and then proceeded to take out the GermanMG posts by sniping them. Re how close is to close? Another poster mentioned AT positions which chimes with what I’ve read from Soviet first hand accounts (I Remember website being a good source). In the example you outline it does sound like they took the German MGs by surpass before they could respond effectively. I’m stil if the view that moving later got AT gins (or any AT gun) into position in LOG of any enemy unit is asking for trouble. Moving the gun would expose the crew way more than them crouching behind the shield I think. I’d still say if moving guns forward with infantry you’d have to be doing it with the enemy suppressed or under cover (smoke/terrain).

Its a wee teaser in and of itself!

Nice find! Would the guns in the above scheme not have been dug in and camouflaged? If they are that close to the Germans, and the Germans know they are there I'm pretty sure they'd be targets for mortar/arty fire? I'm not sure of the context though in the above scheme i.e. how they guns got to be where they are. AI said moving guns forward, at close range, in plain sight of an unsuppressed enemy is asking for trouble in-game and in RL I think. Whether MGs are there or not.

I know this was a tactic the Soviets used - hence why the Germans were very keen to counterattack as soon possible before the Soviets loaded the AO with PAK. But I'm sure they were not doing this in full sight of unsuppressed enemy MGs.Perhaps you need to rethink your tactics and try not to do it in full sight and 500m from an unsuppressed enemy? FYI in game I've successfully rolled AT guns into firing positions, both as player and in AI plans without the other player spotting them until they opened up. Did it under cover or with the enemy being heavily suppressed.

There are not any direct comms links between the different nationality units UNLESS you physically place a unit from one nationality next to the unit of another and all have radios and links to their higher-ups - in which case they will then share info.

I'm not sure I get the argument here. In the extract from Panzer Tactics, it suggests that 500m you won't KO the AT gun with MG fire so best to engage it with the main gun = better chance of KOing the AT gun. Yes? Your test proves that point because at best all you can hope to do is suppress the AT crew - which again given the size of the gun shield appears correct as at best only two people are right behind the shield - everyone else is either side with less protection (assuming the gun is not dug in). So MG fire above 500 m will, at best, suppress an AT gun (a suppressed AT gun is still potentially a threat - as I've found it to my cost in-game - they can quickly recover if the fire slackens and re-engage). So if 500m plus and if you want to KO an AT gun, then engage with the main gun firing HE. Perhaps I'm missing the point you are trying to make?