Sgt Joch

They are available in CMRT as a formation.

Hummels are available in all games as an on map asset. They are available as single vehincles in some of the other games, CMFI I believe. It is available as a formation in all games, including CMRT, so simple enough enough to buy the formation and delete what you don't need.

The artillery figures are misleading. One of the reasons why the Germans had a high inventory is because they produced a large number of shells in winter 1939-40 because they thought the war would be repeat of WW1. Once France fell, they had a huge inventory and cut way back on shell production. On numbers of guns and mortars the numbers I have for the Russians are: -June 41: 91,000 -December 41: 22,000 -November 42: 72,000 -June 43: 103,000 -June 44: 92,000 -January 45: 108,000 Numbers for Germans are: -November 42: 70,000 -January 45: 28,500 Germans lost most of their artillery in 44 when combat losses far outstripped production. Remember also that German figures are for all fronts. source: Walter Dunn, “Hitler’s Nemesis, The Red Army 1930-45”, 1994. The other issue is that Russian artillery doctrine was different and less flexible than the German, US or CW. The Russians required a lot of planning, so for major offensives they would group large numbers of guns in massive pre-planned barrages to blast holes in the German front, but in quiet sectors or in between offensives, were not able match the Germans for on the fly artillery calls, which are more typical for CM battles. When the 31st Guards division attacked in Bagration, June 44, it was supported by 254 guns: 92 x 76mm, 64 x 122mm, 36 x 120mm, 50 x 203mm and 12 x 280mm. Each gun would have had 100-150 shells available for the initial offensive. Dunn gives the example of a 10 day period in November 44 when all front were quiet, the Russians fired an average of 2 shells a day from 13,000 guns while the Germans fired an average of 9 shells a day from 4,800 guns which works out to 2x as many shells.

The issue with adding women is that all the soldier units are the same size so you only need one set of animations. To have a realistic woman model, you would need a smaller more feminine looking model which requires a new set of animations, uniforms and gear, so a lot more work. The other issue is that women did not generally serve in front line combat units in the WW2, Cold War or even Shock Force period (2008), so this is only really an issue for Blue forces in CMBS, women are not in combat units in Russia as far as I know. The simplest solution would be what other sims do and as Erwin mentioned, having women voices in air/artillery missions which only requires new voice files and could be added as a mod.

visible minorities are already in the game if you look carefully at US or NATO forces in CMSF, CMBS and CMCW. In CMCW, US forces are roughly one third african american.

The problem with determining in game RPG-7 accuracy is that the RL data is all over the map. It ranges from Russian claims that it was a garanteed 1-2 shot kill at 300 meters down to the U.S. Army estimates that in a typical battlefield situation 1st shot hit probability on a hulldown M-60 might be as low as 15%. Based on conflicting or missing data, BFC's approach is to make a best guess estimate. Based on the quick tests run by TheCapt, in game accuracy seems to be within the expected results.

deleted

so, according to this 1976 U.S. Army document, hit probability of a RPG-7 against a Hull down M-60 at 225 meters is as follows: - 1st shot 15% -2nd shot 30% /tardir/tiffs/a393159.tiff (dtic.mil) see pages 15-16. That more or less matches the test results by Capt.

The game does take into account shooters adjusting fire on subsequent shots, tanks do it all the time in game.

well if you want to be picky about it, "doors" are not the subject of this thread either...

Well, in the Aachen campaign, which I have partly slogged through, the Germans have weapons covering pretty much all the entrances and expected approaches, so trying to enter that way is usually expensive... OTOH, you have a lot of engineer units so you can blast through walls and make your own "doors" which is what I did.

Well, you are picking ONE outlier event which means it is worthless as an exercise in predicting game outcome. I have also seen instances where the same type of AT weapon scores a kill on the 1st hit, which is just as meaningless. If you really want to see if there is a problem, do what we do, setup a test scenario with 50-100 shooters trying to hit a stationary target at 225 meters, then come back with the results and we can see if the accuracy needs to be tweaked.

Agree with a lot of the comments. Been playing CM on and off since CMBB in 2002. I have often gone off for several months several times playing other games, other genres, other periods looking for the ultimate realistic wargame, but I always come back to CM which despite its fault is still the best overall simulation of tactical company/battalion level warfare.

I would call him Mr. President. He had his faults, but in retrospect was a much better POTUS than the current occupant who is turning out to be a senile wimp. p.s. - there is a reason why political comments are not allowed.

Best way to optimise FPS is to just use the BALANCED setting for model and texture. The game will then automatically optimise graphics based on the FPS, although in fact that only decides what level of LOD model to use. On BEST, you are forcing the game to always use the highest LOD model, while on BALANCED, you will switch to higher LOD models depending on the FPS. If you have a decent rig, units will pretty much always be at the highest LOD model when you zoom in on them, but you wont get the choppinees on large map/scenarios when you zoom out. I did a test over the weekend in a medium size scenario using the in game model setting and there was no perceptible difference between BALANCED and BEST when zoomed in and even when at a medium zoom at level 4, the difference was small, mostly in the LOD models used for trees.

Only infantry units can use the ACQUIRE command to replenish ammo. This is clearly stated in the game manual. As to why Tanks and AFVs cannot replenish ammo during a game, official reason is that this is typically outside the scope of CM. Normally tanks low on ammo would go to the rear and take new ammo which could take several hours.

There used to be a way to do it, although I have not tried in a long time. try: mouse wheel + CTRL that is the pitch setting.

Problem with threads like these is that people make assumptions about how infantry behave with a HUNT command without bothering to check how they actually do behave in the game. When this topic came out last year, I ran a series of tests to see if there was an issue. As far as I can tell, infantry on HUNT behaves in a realistic manner. This are the results I had posted: so, basically, infantry on HUNT will cancel the order and go prone in the following circumstances: 1. they spot an enemy unit; 2. they take a casualty; 3. their suppression meter goes up to the second bar, which can take as little 1-2 MG bursts coming close or 2-4 shots from a single shooter coming close. Tweaking the sensitivity to fire is always a balance, you don't want your troops to keep advancing when they are fired on, OTOH you don't want all your troops going prone because of some enemy fire in the general area. Again if anyone has a save game where you feel infantry is not behaving in a realistic manner, post it so we can take a look at it.

Obviously your tactics always have to be adapted to the terrain.

Personally, I rarely use HUNT for infantry outside of buildings, except in very specific situation. The troops are easier to spot and target on HUNT as you can see when you are playing the other side. I prefer to use a QUICK order over a short hop, 25-50 meters, with a HIDE order at the end, so they are up and into their new position in under 30 seconds. If any enemy unit fires on them, there is a very good chance they will miss and I have other units on overwatch to spot where the enemy fire comes from.

This very same topic came up last year and based on tests I did, troops will go prone within a few seconds of being fired on or as soon as 1-2 bursts come close by whether or not they take a casualty or spot an enemy, so it works fine on the whole.

There are some anomalies in the specialist teams in most games. BFC is aware. Note that FO team are available as formations for all branches.

Read a book on the battle of Hue, 1968 recently. Marines never went in through windows or outside doors since they assumed, usually correctly, that: 1) they were mined/booby-trapped; and 2) that enemy troops had weapons targeting the opening just waiting for someone to poke his head through. What they did is create their own "doors" by blasting through walls.

You don’t need Dropbox, it just makes sharing files easier. Using Dropbox started when CMSF1 came out, it had file sizes which were a lot bigger than CMx1 and email/Internet had lower limits back then. Both those problems have been solved over the past 15 years. You can send files as an email attachment, but with Dropbox, you just drag the outgoing email to the folder and your opponent automatically receives it. Dropbox also notifies you when a new file comes in. Of course, once PBEM+ is up and running, it will make things even easier.

One big advantage of CM is that it accommodates all sorts of play styles, single player, Real time MP, PBEM MP. I have been playing CM MP for close to 20 years and rarely had a bad experience or players disappearing. Human players provide a challenge and satisfaction that the AI never will. Nice thing about clubs like TFGM is that they organize campaigns and tournaments which provide a more immersive experience and different gameplay. Some games like First Person Shooters or Flight Sims work well in Real Time, but CM is well suited to PBEM WEGO. It gives you the time to properly plan your moves and accommodates your schedule and players in different time zones since there are CM players everywhere.