Pak40

I agree, the only thing that's revealed is the relative direction from which the round came but even that can be deceiving from a glancing blow. This is no more revealing than a real life crew knowing that a round impacted the front, right or left side of the tank.

So, the most popular board game ever with more sales than any other board game ever will NEVER appeal to the masses. Hmmmm. I may have to reassess what "popular" means.

Yes, that's already possible in the editor. The game time limit is set by the scenario designer.

We'll see the M-36 before we see the M-26 which will likely be included in a module for the Bulge game.

Ahh, I think I know the "unorthodox way" to do this. Simply supply the game with the first turn already spent. Obviously that means that the player will not have a setup, and it means that AI enemy will only have 1 plan, unless you supply different versions running different plans.

Not to my knowledge. Your best bet is to strongly suggest it in your briefing. Only for the AI can you paint a target area for their artillery assets.

I see your point but coding this could lead to other problems. For example, Squad 1 steps on a mine and stops immediately. Squad 2 is still 20 meters away - does it also stop immediately? If not, when? I suppose you could code it to stop within 1 AS of the mine square but maybe in reality the mine field is more than that 1 AS and Squad 2 might still end up on top of mines. If you code all units to stop immediately upon seeing the newly discovered mines you'll have units far away stopping for no reason. The game would have to track what units have seen the mines. If the mines are not marked by engineers then it's possibly subsequent units will not even know the mines are there because the original units that discovered them have moved on. I see now why they haven't coded this behavior, it'd be a TacAI nightmare.

Yea, but running through a mine field, IIRC, has a greater chance of exploding a mine. This is why we need the tip toe command - it will be similar to hunt but your men wont stop when they see an enemy unit.

Very good question. I think JoMc67 is correct but it would be a great enhancement to the simulation. I also think it would be very difficult thing to implement correctly, there are so many factors. For instance, a lone infantry platoon that suddenly sees 4 Panther tanks would certainly feel a little nervous. But a battalion of infantry with armor or lots of AT guns, not so much. Availability of cover will also play a part. Infantry caught in the open might suddenly freak out at the site of armor but vegetation and buildings provide a sense of survivability. Quality of troops would be an obvious factor as well.

Yes it's annoying, but it would be just as annoying when you want your guys to actually proceed through the minefield but they stop automatically because there are mines.

If all troops, regardless of the type of movement order, stopped when detecting a mine field then you could never get them out of a minefield. I think Hunt is the one command that should stop if a minefield is detected. Of course, it would be useless if any enemy are already visible to the unit performing the Hunt command. Perhaps we need an entirely new command called Tippy Toe?

Lt Bull, I would have taken that as a dig too if it were directed at me. Best to use a smiley if you mean it in jest (i.e. no harm intended) - internet has no means of showing intended tone unless you use a smiley.

I really wish they would allow heavy guns to switch ammo types. I've run into a similar issue using a 20mm halftrack against the British at Arnhem. While normally HE is preferred to take out infantry in "heavy" buildings, the 20mm HE is too weak to penetrate tougher stone buildings. This is one case where AP would be preferable to HE, IMO. Especially with a rapid fire gun.

I could vote for a few of these and they're no reason why they couldn't include several of these into one pack. The top picks would be: Amphibious craft Rangers/Commandos New Vehicles French Resistance Campaigns and maps However, It'd be hard to call it a Vehicle Pack when you've got campaigns, battles and maps - almost like a full module. Ost Conscripts forces and Free french can be simulated easy enough with current OOBs. **My biggest and most desired function is to be able to demo certain objectives such as a bridge, building or railroad track. They REALLY need this functionality.

outstanding, definitely will download them.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

I've had this happen at setup as well. But I'm also wondering if 'Target Light' order with mortars even works at 1200 meters? Target light should tell a mortar team to only use it's personal weapons, but obviously at 1200 meters this is quite out of range for carbines and rifles, especially since there is specific coding for mortar teams not to use their personal weapons except at close range.

reading the manual, it seems like there might be some other things at play here. Your tests are probably done in ideal circumstances but stress, C2, and an abstracted "matchup rating" all come into play in the heat of battle:

OK, good to know. Thanks, Ian.

Owners of the vehicle pack are on 3.12 and anyone without the vehicle pack is 3.11 (I think). Therefore you're incompatible. Hopefully this will one day be a thing of the past, according to the text from the ver 3 Master Installers:

My guess is that Piper cubs generally spotted for artillery well behind the front line and is therefore not really in the scope of a typical CM game. Also, the cubs only had communication with select arty units and generally wouldn't be much help in spotting ambushes in hedgerows because they didn't have comms with those front line ground units. It's certainly is an interesting possibility since it's done for Black Sea, but my guess is that it's such a rare occurrence that it's not worth spending the time coding.

The A-10 is being sent back to Europe because of the Ukraine crisis

I'm not sure if you saw this test I ran back in November. Snipers are very effective in "fire range" conditions but once some suppressive fire is put on them their accuracy goes way down. http://community.battlefront.com/topic/116316-suppression-test-results/

True, and I think the other major changes will be to the landscape, graphics and inclusion of snow.

Thanks, maybe someday I'll take you up on that. Right now I'm just going to try this project that's in my head. It's only loosely inspired by McDonald's book. It's been years since I read the book so I don't remember many details. Therefore all the battles for this campaign will not resemble his company's actual experiences. I just want it to be in the same vein, i.e. a week in the life of an infantry company on the front line. Jon, I absolutely agree. This is exactly what I'm trying to accomplish with my campaign: small unit actions with very attainable objectives with a narrative that will help the player feel a sense of closeness to his company men. It's not a major offensive campaign like the CM stock campaigns.