Pak40

In a campaign they're best kept in safe areas for future use to replenish ammo. I also use them for quick movement of an important team usually about half way through a battle when supporting troops need to be moved up closer to the front or shifted to an emergency spot. I never use them on the attack because they are just to brittle. And if any of you guys use them offensively or use them to flush out AT guns then you're gamey bastards.

Well, didn't BFC say they hoped to release modules every 6 months with the new CMx2 engine?

Oh, you mean that water can exist only on the lowest elevation. Sorry, for a second I thought you meant that it was a bug. It's not really broken, just a limitation in the current game. Hopefully they will change this by the time that the Bulge module is released. Have you tried a temporary fix? You could replace the marsh texture with your own water graphic and release it with any battle or campaign you design. It would kind of act as a fordable water tile.

Just curious, how is the water tile 'broken'?

The Americans had both AP shot and regular AP(APC, APBC etc (with bursting charge), but it was never referred to as APHE, which was my point. In any case, the APC tended to have better penetration against face hard plate which I think the Germans more than likely used in the majority of their tanks. AP shot had higher penetration values against homogeneous armor, but the advantage decreased at longer ranges. I'm not sure of the physics behind all of this, maybe someone else knows more detail.

I doubt the AI fires at foxholes. As far as I can tell they only fire at units they physically see. Oh, and some AI artillery missions are are planned by the designer which may make it seem as though the AI were targeting areas with foxholes.

Yea, I have to agree. In addition, any unit that takes the time to dig in will probably spend a little time dressing the holes and trenches with whatever natural camo is available.

Foxholes are excellent cover against all types of fire, especially artillery. You can test it yourself in the editor. Put 1 platoon in the open and 1 platoon with squads split in foxholes (or just cover their entire area in foxholes). They do give away possible positions. Therefore, it always wise to buy more foxholes than you need so that the enemy never knows exactly where your units are.

Yes, most rounds had a small bursting charge but they did use some solid shot rounds too.

Yea, but that's just called AP ammo, it's never called APHE.

Amizaur, I've never heard of a APHE shell. Where are you getting your information? In any case, I'm quite sure these shells are not in CMBN. I have seen a shell ricochet off of a tank and impact near two soldiers and actually kill them.

1:25,000 but they're still a killer find. Thanks for sharing!

It Never Snows in September is probably the best source of info on the German OOB. It has a few pictures taken from one of the members of a training unit in their MkIII tanks. I've also had this site bookmarked for a few years now: http://www.defendingarnhem.com/

Another book from a soldier's perspective, (BTW, I recommend all of Donald Burgett's books. He wrote 1 book for each operation that he participated in): http://www.amazon.com/The-Road-Arnhem-Screaming-Holland/dp/0440236339/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1336053198&sr=8-3

Some of them should have, especially on the south side of the bridge.

Honestly, that's not too bad for a gun. And with the current AT gun deployment bug you could just have the crew deploy immediately when it gets to the hedgerow.

Where are these two platoon HQs? IIRC, vehicles with radios will allow this. Are they themselves in C2 with their company HQ?

Right click, then bang head on keyboard in disgust as your men are wiped out by the enemy inside the house. But seriously, there's no way to get them to throw grenades. I don't think targeting will even increase the chances although it may focus their fire. I had an instance the other day where I had 6 brits attacking a house from a small hedgrow only about 2 action squares away. The last remaining German fled out the front door in full view of the brit squad, stopped, threw a grenade and killed 4 guys with one blast. Very frustrating to watch, but also one of those incredible moments heroism or dumb luck that happens every once in a while in CM games.

Well, this varies based on the terrain. IMO, bocage is the ideal terrain to shift a defense. Most bocage will block LOS from the attacker allowing the defender the secrecy necessary to shift a defense. Also, don't forget that triggers can be used for reserves too. A typical defense was to have two platoons up and one back in reserve. The reserve would be used to plug a hole where attack is focused. Without the ability to trigger, you would have to have the entire reserve spread thin to cover any possible hole.

I don't like the casualty triggers, at least not the type that Theater of War used. I just remember certain battles where a tank platoon would get wiped out and it would trigger instant reinforcements. It was predictable and unrealistic. Also, it led to bad habits for myself; I would intentionally kill off my last tank in order to trigger the reinforcements.

This goes back to the whole argument for adding triggers to help the AI shift defense or attack.

I agree with this method. Yes it takes a few seconds more; but, if you're in a hurry (i.e., under heavy fire) then you shouldn't be sprinting a full squad across a field anyway. Also, the Assault command works very well for spreading your squad out although it takes a long time for movement. But, if you're not into the whole micro management thing of splitting your squads up then this is the way to go.

1) I think we all would like to see this but I also think some serious changes would have to be made in order for this to work. As it is now the game does not track each weapon's temperature(to my knowledge). And, as you pointed out, some weapons have special ability to cool or change barrels. This would all have to be coded individually for each automatic weapon. Even more, the ammo for each squad is abstracted into a shared pool. If MG42s start spitting out a lot more ammo then you'll have entire squads running dry prematurely. The ammo tracking would have to be on an individual basis. 2) I think this is one of the biggest issues with the QB system. I hoped that it would have been improved in the CW updates but my hopes were dashed. But, I'd have to advise you that if QBs are the only way you play the game then you're really missing out. The AI plans in the QB missions are very basic at best. Game supplied battles and user made battles offer the best single player game play. Campaigns are just as good. 3) Would be nice but I think this is last thing on BF's list to improve. After all, it's nothing but eye candy. 4) I agree. 5) Minefields are 8x8m each. Of course, most designers will cluster a bunch of these to make a more comprehensive mine field. If you open up editor and play around with it you'll see learn some specifics about how things are placed on the map. 6) This is solely on the scenario designer, the one responsible for painting setup zones and developing AI plans (movement orders). All the tools are already in place for a scenario designer to do the things you ask.

Yea, I think this is a game balancing issue. Theoretically a supply jeep or truck could keep on board mortars in constant supply so long as battalion and regimental supplies are plentiful. But, I suppose they have to draw the line somewhere.

Since CMx2 engine was released, I've always wondered at the accuracy of a line artillery barrage. In your opinion, is it realistic for a mortar or 105mm battery to lay a line barrage with the kind of accuracy we're seeing in CMBN? It just seems like an awfully complicated thing to pull off.