George MC

Next turn plot a reverse move for the Firefly with a 10 s delay (and get the other one out quick). This should give enough time for the next shot and get of the firing line. Compromise solution?

Been done for CMBNCW - Sergei plotted these points. It's on Google Earth.

Amen Bro

Hougoumont - although I won't stake money on it. I think the barn on the left should be larger...

Yup saw it but I see Steve has responded since I last looked at it. Good to know scenario design has RL uses such as saving me from torture or detention or both. No pressure to keep the standard up though!

Time scale for development will be way shorter than your prophecy Other stuff I can't say upon pain of death

Well, you're wrong.

And you know this how? :cool:

Target Vs Target light (Target light = MG only)

Stay frosty

It's all you OCD, get down in the weeds, manage each man control freaks that are the issue. Not the size of battle. Us slap happy, OOPs! there goes a platoon type of big picture guys - casualties no object find playing battalion sized battles easy.

Line em up and charge at the flag...err victory locations. Works everytime Only joking - what t'others said

As far as I am aware it was not 'fixed' as such. I think their morale status was tweaked BUT if playing longer games these guys have lot's of time to recover. I'm playing one scenario where there are lot's of Allied tanks - now lot's of dead ones. It's 2.5 hours long and I am now at the stage where my pistol wielding enemies are ambushing and taking out my panzergrenadiers in their SPW. It's fun to watch but not so fun to see your supporting infantry, who are meant to be mopping up, being taken down. I believe BFC are aware - there are several issues associated with this one. One is the accuracy of pistols (their ability to shoot is tied to their experience so crack tank crew also becomes crack pistol team). Their morale status also appears to improve over time hence they regain their morale and if AI controlled or player controlled are 'back in the game' and become light crack assault troops.

How do they know?

Why? Because someone puts forward a different viewpoint or interpretation of in-game events. I think discussion and debate is good and healthy. However in that process there are bound to be diverging opinions - that does not make an individual a 'fanboi' or 'naysayer'. It's an interesting topic for sure and I find it interesting and thought provoking to read about how others perceive in-game events with RL. I still keep in mind it's a game - a superb game but not perfect. Guess we are all looking for perfect and in that lays debate as to how best to achieve that nirvana!

Eh? :confused:

The AI group unit will face the direction of the next way point. Can be a bit of a pain but worth minding when plotting AI Plans.

Just think of all the ammo and other flammable 'bangy' stuff stored in an SPW as well...

Same reason you can't fire panzerfaust in a small room - back blast. Think of the mess in the back of a SPW. Bang! Look back - mince!

# Errmm...is not the sad part calculating the hours spent? I'm starting to lose the will to live with all this OCD ****e TBH.

In a word - no. You get points (assuming the designer has allocated em) for force preservation e.g. number of casualties, ammo expended etc. However you have to balance the points gained for looking after every last man and bullet against achieving the mission. Generally most designers will give you the bulk of points for taking your objectives e.g. taking terrain or killing the enemy or both. Invariably to do that you will have to put your wee pixeltruppen into harms way - and you'll lose some. The real challenge is taking all your objectives AND achieving any allocated 'preservation' points e.g. keeping casualties down to 10%, only expending 20% of your ammo etc etc. I must admit I tend to go all out to take the main objectives and just hope that good tactics will keep my casualties down to acceptable limits. As an aside and this is in no way meant as a personal criticism of you raising this issue, but it seems across the board (from how tanks, infantry etc perform, to how cover works etc) that players want to see detailed to the last very last detail. All seems a bit OCD to me Me? I just drive em forward until they blow up or blow something up. Far simpler and lot's of fun. Can't be really arsed with all this listing to the nth degree.

Main top tip - don't try to micro-manage the AI. Best to start with sweeping AI plans i.e. think of the AI groups (allocate em) as discrete units e.g. platoons, companies etc. I suspect you are trying too hard to micromanage what you want the AI in your plan to achieve. Down that road lays madness

Historically PAK were a real problem - especially 1943 onwards. Anyone pushing forward with tanks alone is asking for trouble - hence combined arms... Tanks bumping PAK could easily lose several of their number long before the PAK was a/ spotted b/ taken out. PAK could also be hard to take out - hence combined arms - bump PAK use HE and/or dismounted infantry to clear em. Can't help but think, reading the posts, the issue is players' tactics rather than game engine limitations.

Hi Guys Many thanks for the fine praise - very much appreciated I've been away the past few days and missed this. I'm please to see that the scenario has given so much enjoyemnt to players. He! I'm impressed t your performance in this Slysniper - you lived up to your name in that game by the sound of it! Cheery!

Neat mod - like the cannon fire etc. When you get down to Lev 1 when the rounds are being put down it's brilliant