Ron

Some off the cuff and ill-informed comments again on the spotting disparity - the LOS 'rules' are the same for both players, one player is simply better at working with it and the accompanying terrain. I think what's presented in this AAR is highlighting a skill mismatch between the two opponents. One orchestrates his moves several turns in advance, not fixed there's a difference, with a clearly defined goal; whereas the other plans on a turn by turn basis and moves by the seat of his pants with changing goal posts. Still interesting to watch though.

I'm in the camp that this is a pretty easy walkthrough for the Axis, CAS or not. In my case the CAS knocked out the Flakwagon and immobilized a Sturmpanzer - no handicap as it was positioned well initially to provide overwatch and bombardment of the objectives. I hid the infantry company for a few turns while the CAS did its thing to avoid uneeded heartache. It was basically target briefly every building and likely defensive location with the Sturmpanzers for most of the scenario. By the time the infantry began approaching the objectives, they had no difficulty cleaning up the dazed and shellshocked survivors. Game over, lots of fun though. Thanks.

dieseltaylor - ian.leslie has the right of it. It's one thing to know as a player what is there but if the unit you need doesn't then... As I recall, one of the complaints from CMx1 QBs was the attacker did not have enough points and generally Assaults were choosen - that may have just been the group I played with, don't know anymore as I haven't played those games for a long time. For CMBN/CMFI, I don't have a wealth of games under my belt either, but it has felt right thus far. I have been critical of the defense, yes, and more so again after seeing the M10 acting alone - lucky it didn't get nailed. I have been waiting for GAJ to make a major shift to his right flank, the evidence has been there for several turns now the left flank is quiet. Perhaps one criticism of the attack is I think Bil needs to push a little more on GAJ's left to prevent any shifting of those forces towards his main attack. Either way, I think some are underestimating the amount of firepower Bil will bring to bear once the final defense line becomes more apparent. It will not be pretty...

A couple observations re the spotting in the AAR - I agree with the earlier comment about the number of 'eyes' being vital, and as Bil is concentrated in his avenue of approach I'm not surprised he is picking things up more readily. Another item I have not seen mentioned is the importance of C2 in CM and the sharing of spotting information. From the available screenshots, several of GAJ's units are/were out of C2. On top of that, it appears GAJ has two higher HQs - the 2nd Battalion and a Tank Destroyer Battalion. I am not an expert on how that interrelates in CM but it may have a huge impact on the dissemination of spotting info. I am in total disagreement with some of the comments on the difficulty of defense. From my experience, I don't think 'defense' in CM is inherently harder at all or the ratio of QB points puts it at a disadvantage. Referencing this AAR, I'm not getting any impression of integration of the defense, whether combined arms or use of terrain. Individual units are repeatedly being offered up piecemeal only to be then destroyed for little gain. This negates the main overriding advantage of being on the defense and simply fuels a runaway train, doesn't slow it down.

Agreed and tall grass or not, let's not forget the size of this thing at over 5' high.

I'm not buying it. This was an opportunity for the defender to create a many-on-one situation. GAJ already has a mortar and mg covering the back side of the left tit. Extrapolate further and imagine if they were accompanied by some form of AT asset to cover a reverse slope barrier screen with select TRP locations. Instead of firing blindly the mortar could be acting together with the other assets to have a true combined arms kill zone.

Covering the barriers with fire does not mean having to have men physically present at the barriers. This is WWII afterall

Armchair General Helmet firmly in place - No doubt the presence of the barriers 'sold' the Tits to Bil and perhaps that is all to GAJ's intention and he is content with that. However, I don't think the name of the game is increasing the number of shell casings expended by your opponent. Likely a similar effect would have been achieved not putting anything there at all, as Bil, or any reasoning opponent, would have conducted the attack as if it was defended anyways. I think it is a given the attacker needs to secure this terrain before advancing and the defender had the opportunity imo to really make him pay for it. As an example, why not deploy the barriers on the reverse slope covered by a MG, Mortar, AT gun/bazooka and TRPs? I just think defending this position was too good a chance to throw away. Time will tell.

Textbook example by Bil on how to assault a position, classic. I don't think he has identified which side of the ridge road he will advance along, likely waiting for intel from the forward kubelwagens. He's got to be wondering now what GAJ has in store for him though I'm sure he will take it in stride and respond accordingly. I'm a little surprised at GAJ's deployment on the Tits and feel it is a wasted opportunity. It appears the barriers were not covered by fire which is no barrier at all and points just thrown away. He does have token forces covering the Tit's reverse slope. However, these units won't last long once exposed and it remains to be seen the exchange they can garner. Now he has opened up blindly with the forward Mortar hoping for something. I think he would have been better served with a minimum of a light AT gun, MG, Mortars, Barriers and TRPs acting in concert to cover the backside. That way he could have provided a more substantial obstacle as well as put a more substantial hurt on the attacker. While the first objective was a little anti climatic, I think things will begin livening up shortly.

I really like Bil's force selection; a lot of MG and Arty firesupport. He is light on infantry as he noted, but to be honest I don't think he will need them. The SturmPanzer IVs can pound anything and are pretty impervious to whatever the US can throw at them; the TDs or even PzIVs can provide AT cover. The HTs are fragile but can provide a lot of long range suppression. Of course it goes without saying Bil's analysis is tops, envious even I like the Ranger Coy pick fron GAJ, though I am not so sure on the HMG bunkers or 76mm AT guns. I would have been more inclined with a few more and smaller AT guns myself, and dropped the bunkers for something else - namely some TRPs. More the puzzling because GAJ selected them last game so fully knows their advantages. He correctly identified the L/R Tit features as key terrain, knowing Bil will need to secure it before advancing and it appears he will make him fight for it. Obvious or not, it would still be an ideal place to setup TRPs and sacrificial ambushes for a few nasty surprises. Really looking forward to this match.

Since a few are vocal against the War Movie Lighting already, I will raise my voice for. I can't say I will use it until I have the game either, but it is a new feature and would like to continue seeing it showcased where possible.

Yep, I think flexibility is Bil's overriding advantage here, whatever he ends up calling it in the end. Based on the previous AAR GAJ not so much, being easily/fairly early thrown off the rails and lost thereafter. Beneficial to GAJ this time though, and likely more suited to his temperment, is being on the defensive. That said, the bisected map favours the attacker and if Bil concentrates on one side to then dislocate the other, I think GAJ will be lost again. My $.02 Canadian.

Polling here may not get impartial responses. Occasionally and before CM, I have put some time into other WWII tactical games(I'm thinking Steel Panthers, CloseCombat, GI Combat, Panzer Command, Achtung Panzer) However, while some aspects are unique they never really come close to the tactical depth that Combat Mission offers and now with CMx2, it not even really a fair comparison anymore as they are not in the same category. So for me hands down it is CMx2. I saw someone else mentioned Sid Meier's Gettsburg, now that was a fun game though light on the realism side. For more realism I would recommend the Scourge of War Civil War games. Another game ahead of its time was Myth by Bungie, very tense and fun.

I am reposting the above for the comprehension challenged types, emphasis mine. After rereading the terms of sale, I agree that if any assumption is to be made, then it is that after the 365 days expired and you lost your game, you would be required to repurchase, period. The assumption that you would be able to redownload in perpetuity is wishful thinking to put it mildly, really more like clueless. igbee - I call troll because the OP and now "brian-fair-service" with zero history of activity in the community suddenly show up with their trick pony show. Go figure.

Well said c3k, I would just add troll to complete the profile. I want to thank the OP also for a good laugh. It is incredibly amusing to see such a pathetic, incompetent creature. Generally the first instinct is to help the feeble, but in this case I think it is best to just let them sink.

Hey Ithikial - First, thanks for making the time and effort to post these videos. The videos are a little longer when unedited, but it is very interesting to me to see how others think and plan, and use their forces. I really like the muted terrain mods - who is the author? The 'feel' instantly reminded me of DD's, or was it Magua's?, terrain from CMBO. I have just started the third part and see you have finally begun to move up some important assets! Looking forward to watching the rest of the series.

Well I think MikeyD has a valid point also. It is a game with limitations, sometimes it doesn't do what you expect. Once known, you adjust. I do find it interesting someone would expect the game AI to be smarter than them.

I don't speak your language, nor do I want to, but in English you don't have a clue as what you are talking about.

Lol - you should try rereading Phil and Steve's comments above. They are just a little more intimate with the condition of CMFI than yourself.

We? - As in you and Lewis? That 'other forum' is the veritable ghost town with about as much action as a senior's home after 9pm. I can partly understand your confusion if your opinion is formed from tete-a-tete's with him. Though from your other postings you seem generally confused overall anyways, ie 'how to' install a patch. You give the impression that CMBN-CMFI is rather borked and BFC dropped the ball on the UI, TacAI behavior, simulation modelling etc etc etc. In fact you state again you 'weren't too thrilled with the demo'. Yet we are to believe you would buy it anyways if it were priced $10 cheaper?? (ack the nefarious $10 raises its head again and tips the balance!) I question your character and how much time you have spent with the demo. I think you really like the game so cough up the extra peanuts and consider it a Christmas gift to yourself. Merry Christmas

It would be something if one of these trolls that come here to try and stir the pot showed a little intelligence in the matter, instead of barfing up the regurgitated leftovers of other people. Clearly FaxisAxis isn't the man for the job.

Nothing like a shot of controversy to generate some interest it seems. However, looking at some of your recent reviews I question your integrity. Your criticisms on things that *should* have have been improved in Combat Mission, such as relative cost, game improvements, content etc, didn't prevent you recently from praising another innovative wargame where an easier and better case could have been made for such points. Even going so far as saying the high cost, at 1.5 x CMFI, was justified, and yet it still rated an 8/8 from you. Price alone, that's quite the stretch from calling CMFI a $20 expansion pack. It seems your goal posts can be a moving target, and a wide one at that.

Watching that video, the question I ask myself is how can someone styling himself as a reviewer approach a game in such a bored, exasperated, even annoyed, manner? He asks himself 'What now?' - well perhaps a career change? Or at the very least realize you are not a wargamer and do not present anything meaningful to wargamers. The obvious nitpicking and laundry list of pet peeves, while ignoring or glossing over the obvious improvements with the engine, makes that video pointless and negates any relevant input. Perhaps as Childress writes, he is still carrying around previous baggage. Either way the reviewer is completely clueless to real world tactical problems and the raison d'etre of a simulation like Combat Mission.

Very nice work!

Yeah I'm not getting the criticism either. From the majority of screenshots, it appears the opposite is true. The LOD is definitely improved for the near distance and there is a much more natural transition as the details change. The drastic cutoff present in CMBN is no longer there it seems. Check out some of the QB screens posted by sdp, awesome stuff.