Pak40

Low Bocage and Wire should be treated about the same as wire was treated in the CMx1 engine: should be passable by infantry with a large cost to speed. U.S. squads were issued wire cutters and all infantry are trained to deal with and infiltrate wire. There's no reason why it should be impassable to infantry. Low bocage should be treated the same way. It should be crossable by infantry at a cost to speed. Realistically I don't think there was a trained combat soldier that could not scale a 4' or 5' wall that shrubs on it. Think about what every soldier goes through in basic training: the obstacles they have to climb and navigate. Suddenly a 5' wall with shrubs pose as impassible - I highly doubt it.

**Spoilers** It's not a mission that's critical to win in the campaign. If you are able to spot enough enemy locations then you benefit from seeing where certain fortifications are located for next battle. If you gain enough points to "win" the battle then you get to play an "easier" version of 2nd mission. I was not able to get enough points to get the easier version. The 1st mission is very hard because you're ordered to probe enemy lines at night with just a few infantry and several vehicles, which in my opinion, is the exact wrong way to probe at night. You are given too few infantry to probe in force and the vehicles aren't exactly stealthy. Anyway, I think the campaign designers purposely made this a hard battle to win - so don't fret too much on it.

Yea, I can understand that but there are other ways to break down. I'm not sure if CMBN models mechanical breakdown though. My point is, if you're going to model non-combat breakdowns, then there should be an option to repair them. Also, you see pictures of tanks with spare tracks hanging on them all the time. What's the point of these if your tank crew can't fix it themselves in some cases?

I've had a couple of tanks on roads (two different scenarios) get immobilized by some mysterious reason. The first was a case where there was no enemy anywhere near the tank, there certainly there was no LOS. The tank simply just broke down on the road. While I'm fully aware that mechanical things sometimes break down, it's a bit hard to swallow losing a tank in the early stages of a battle that lasts an hour or more but having no way to repair the issue especially if said tank is safely in the rear of the map.

I was getting about 20-21 fps with my card before the patch. And to be honest, you don't really want to go any lower into the teens, you'll start to notice screen lag. I haven't tested the fps since. Things seem smoother but I think that's because they improved the WSAD navigation controls. You can use this site a as a basic benchmark to compare cards. My GTX 260M is somewhere in the middle.

My laptop is over a year old and it runs fine. CPU is an older core 2 duo, so any laptop with a modern i core should be fine. You'll need a good graphics engine, I have a Geforce GTX 260M in my laptop and CMBN runs smooth at the display's maximum 1440x900. Newer laptops with dedicated ATI or Nvidia engines in them should get the job done.

Man, the street view on Google really gives you a good idea of the surrounding countryside. It looks like the pictures are sharper than in the U.S.

Cool, does it look anything like this?

Simple thing to test. Recreate the scenario with only the three units involved so that all other variables are thrown out.

As rocketman said, you can't blast hedgehogs. They're stuck there for the duration of the battle. I think historically it took quite a bit more than just demo charges to clear them - usually they had a tracked vehicle tie chains around them and dragged them out of the way.

Yea, that's what I figured. It's just too damn tricky to have a time fuze with mortars. There are so many variables when you consider the fact that crews can use a variable number of charges on the mortar rounds. It will certainly effect the flight time of the round.

Gunner, I think it's the opposite. The heavy rounds could have delayed fuzes in order to penetrate ground/roof/or bunkers before exploding. I really don't see timed fuzes working for air bursts very well. You'd have to get it down to a millisecond accurate in order for them to explode the exact moment above the ground.

If I get some free time I will setup a map with some 60 and 81 mortars and test out varying wind speeds to see what kind of spread pattern happens. I'll also test out spreads of 100m direct fire missions vs spreads of fire missions over 300m

The US 81mm mortar had two HE rounds. One was much smaller and only had about 1.x lbs of explosive. The other had about 4 lbs of explosive. The smaller rounds I suppose were used for longer range, which isn't really an issue in this Normandy Bocage. When I get home later tonight I can look up the exact specs on the rounds in a book I have: The American Arsenal.

Absolutely. CMx1 setup zones and covered arcs were perfect (thick outline only). Why fix what ain't broken?

Never argued that it was either/or. It question of what assets you have to do the job. If you've played Road to Montbourg, then you know what I mean. You rarely are given armor assets. My main point is that on board mortars are far superior if used in the direct fire role, at least against the AI. A human opponent might render this tactic useless by unleashing all hell upon any mortar that is spotted on the battlefield... I know I would. So, it makes me wonder if the AI is only spotting the mortar units as a ? or if they can actually identify the unit as a mortar.

Also, don't forget to acquire the rocket ammo as well.

Yea, it's very possible the BFC actually modeled the wind effects on mortar rounds. Wind should definitely be a big factor. Most of my experience comes from the Road to Montebourg Campaign where the winds were light to very light, although if my historical memory serves me correct, there should have been some stormy days following the D-Day landings. Still, an experienced crew should be able to adjust for strong wind after the spotting rounds although the dispersal will probably be greater.

Well, I have yet to play a map with a 350m field of view. Most of my direct mortar fire has been in the 100-200m range, and often less than 100m with some of these bocage maps. In fact, I'm surprised how well it has been working for me - when I first started using the tactic I thought the AI would pound the mortar teams with small arms fire, but that hasn't been the case so long as I have other units giving suppressing fire. However, I can certainly see how the accuracy drops off a bit at a 350m range, especially with a 60mm. If you've played the Road to Montebourg Campaign you will need to employ this tactic. You will rarely have armor assets to help you. If there's one thing I've learned, it's to not give up on something just because it doesn't go right the first time. I wouldn't give this advice if it didn't work for me so well.

Trust me, it works well. I started out doing fire missions with my on board mortars. The wait time is unrealistic, even with the mortar right next to the spotting unit. So, I started moving my mortars up to where the spotting unit is located. Not only does this drastically reduce the amount of time to drop rounds on the target, but the accuracy is pin point (after the spotting rounds fall). You just need to wait for the spotting rounds, usually there are only two spotting rounds. This is modeled really well in the game: They fire a spotting round and wait for it to fall, then they adjust, then fire another spotting round. Usually after the second spotting round falls they will start plopping down round after round and they all fall within 10m of the specified target spot. You can even put the target spot just behind the hedgerow. 81mm mortars are devastating with this method. You can even do this under 100m distance. I have seen no evidence of this. Target arc always works for me. Hide works well too. Sometimes they will fire one or two more rounds after you give the cover arc, but they will stop.

Ruutana, I've got a laptop with a middle of the road core 2 duo and a GTX 260m video card (way slower than your 5750). I get 19-22 fps in most cases with AA on and high res settings. I find this fairly smooth even in real time. If you're getting slower fps then you might have an issue with your machine, drivers, customized video settings, or some combination of the three.

Mike, As a CMx1 vet, the two most valuable lessons that I've learned in CMBN so far are: 1. Split your squads. Especially split a 2 man scout unit to scout ahead of your main force. They will most likely be sacrificed but they will expose enemy units for your other units. Splitting squads also helps when assaulting or advancing across open ground. Instead of getting a single 12 man squad pinned, the enemy will have to split it's firepower against several "mini" squads. 2. On board mortars are the most important units on the battlefield. However, the must be used in a DIRECT fire role for maximum speed and effectiveness. 3 or 4 minute fire missions through a spotter is just too long to wait in many cases and also not as accurate. Instead, put your mortars on the hedgerow with direct LOS to enemy MGs, guns, and squads. Mortars should have some MGs or squads on the same line of hedgerow to help give them support (give the enemy something else to shoot at instead of chewing up your mortars). In the direct fire role, a mortar will usually start firing within 30 seconds and after 1-2 spotting rounds it will FFE with incredible accuracy. 10-15 rounds from a 60mm is usually enough to kill an entire MG or squad. Just watch your ammo count, the FFE is quick. Also, with the new patch the mortars will choose targets on their own as they see fit if you do not hide or give them a cover arc.

Dang, you're right. my bad.

This site has a lot of detail. The TOE was changed in August 44 but it still only had 2 squads per platoon. Not until Dec 44 were the tables officially changed to 3 squads per platoon yet the changes could not be adopted until March 45. also, these words about extra BARs:

I bet some vets from the 17th AB would argue that point.