George MC

I've just done a quick test with this - based on your image above. In open ground you can have the platoon HQ mounted up in the jeep. You have C2 to CO HQ and the dismounted squads have LOS and are in command (visual i.e. the small eye icon). Dismount the platoon HQ and leave him next to the jeep you have C2 with CO HQ and now all the dismounted squads have better comms with the platoon HQ - eye and voice. The second image you posted has a broken link so not sure what else you are doing. Based on what you have outlined I suspect that the disruption in C2 could be due to poor LOS once guys get into buildings i..e it's blocked. It's also hard to shout to people inside the same house never mind people indoors another house 16m away. Whatever is happening it looks to be due to the built up nature of the terrain? If you can repost your last image that may help to show exactly what you are trying to do and I can have a bash at setting itself up myself. Cheery! George

Hi Doug No worries mate Cheers for the response. Good effort. I'm playing it myself against the US (Soviet) AI. My aggressive attack posture has left me with a lot of burning Panzer IVs. Think I failed to use the ground effectively...

A wee bump for Mr Badgerdog

I sense anger.

A couple of guys have posted on the scenario comments that they are having issues getting this to work. Just to remind players you need to download the RAR file. Unzip the RAR file ( http://www.rarlab.com/download.htm ) it's free by the way and extract the scenario file. You then insert the scenario file into your game folder (Game Files/Scenarios) and fire the game up.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Audacity

Panzer I http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_I

Aplogies for the delayed response - been busy with work stuff... Possible spoilers # # # # # # # Guess main question is did you win? Did you both think it was fair i.e. force make-up etc. I think the Russkies have the harder job but they can whittle down the Germans and stay alive long enough to be of use when help arrives to counterattack.

Cool - thought you might have taken the Shermans?

Cheers buddy Glad ya liked it. What side you play, if you don't mind me asking?

Did you read the designer notes - the inclusion of engineers and Rhinos is explained in that? Anyways seeing as I've been out climbing today and in a very good mood I'll post the bit from the designer notes This scenario is based on the an operation involving new combined arms tactics developed by the US 1st Army’s 29th Infantry Division commanded by General Gerhardt. Although the date of this action was the 11th July and I’ve equipped some of the Shermans with the Culin Hedgerow* cutting device (Or Rhinos as they were known), it is worth stating that this device only became more common in 1st Army after the 14th July 1944. By having Rhino equipped Shermans in this scenario it allows you the player, using the engineer sections, to trial the tactics used by the 29th ID and then compare them to the ease of using the ‘Rhino’ equipped Shermans to punch through the bocage. See? Simples!

What size were the maps you playing on? Danger close for CAS was around 400 yards but I suspect friendly ground units would want way more than that distance between them and any enemy targets being engaged by rocket firing aircraft. Small maps just ain't big enough to allow this and if CAS was included then you would get howls of protest as players experienced 'Blue on Blue'. Another issue and which has been discussed is that arguably air support was more often used to harry enemy rear areas/supply lines etc rather than engage enemy front line troops. Although off course there are exceptions to this. I'm sure this debate will bubble up again

They are in the AI Plan in the box that is intially labelled 'normal' - set ambush. Works similar to target arcs except for the AI they create a target engage range that is circular i.e. 360 degrees around AI unit rather than a unique forcussed direction. You can also set the distance to either 75, 150, 300, 600 and 1000m.

Jeez mate. Yer such a drama queen.

No idea what map that is. If you are looking to check out how to create bocage or how to create AI Plans in bocage you could check out Busting The Bocage in the editor. You'll have it in your game or can download it from the repository.

What Gerry said I think the colours used for the set-up zones can be confusing as they are differant shades of red or blue. Depending on the background i.e. terrain colour, daylight, monitor settings etc it can be hard to differentiate between one shade of say red and another.

Not sure you are correct about CMX1 and holding positions. I lost a few flags to crews from KOd vehicles hiding in the undergrowth in CMX1 - buggers! Re the occupy objectives in CMBN. Some of this is donw to very large occupy objectives. This means unless you clear the objective of all enemy forces it still counts as contested. This has provoked some debate with one school of thought saying you need to clear, others saying well I had my Tiger sitting on it so surely that holds it. I think some of this can be down to the designer ensuring the size of the objectives (and scenario time) enables either the player to hold it easily or at least deny the enemy holding it; or give the player the time and assets to clear occupy objectives.

Several ways you can boundary fields without bocage. Here are some: raised banks (from stones that are shifted etc) another raised bank fences - various types from wooden to barbed wire. These won't show on the aerial image you posted. strip of rough ground - not ploughed etc. Guess you'd only leave this if no grazing animals are likely to get into the field. So in your scenario you could use any of the above. Leaving aside the obvious options you could just use a strip of say long grass, or long yellow grass or woods between each of your fields. Another option but perhaps not as aesthetic is to create berms using the elevation tool. Downside of this is your berms would be rather large (not like a small pile of stones). As a compromise what I've done is use sections of low bocage to represent an old boundary but rather than use continous sections just isolated bits with some small bushes. Then use a strip of rough ground to continue on the boundary. TBH it's worth just playing about in the editor. It is possible to create plausable fields without bocage - just need to experiment

He! He! You get what ya got soldier

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1194 Although orginally designed for CMSF the editor mechanics are pretty much the same. This will at least answer your questions above. It's actually pretty straightforward once you get into it - just takes time to put all the bits together. The other option is use an existing (small) scenario and reverse engineer it to see how it was put together.

Correctomnundo

Carbide Carbide is updated. You can grab it from HERE

Oops should take more care in reading. Just so I'm not off beam here you can't continue a started game with the new scenario file. You'd have to abart your existing game and start afressh. Alternatively just add 700 points to the US at the end of the game.

You can grab it here at the repository. Just been uploaded. This version is renamed differantly so it will not overwrite the original. Just download the above file, unzip it and shift the file into your scenarios folder in your CMBN game.