Lt Bull

Aris' Dust and Smoke Mod of course!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMo8AT0ERN0&feature=youtu.be Comments?

Interesting, but given how hazardous this is to HT crew, I think I will wait for patch.

FYI, this vehicle is bugged and wont be fixed until next patch. I't will not reload it's main weapon. PS: the forum search tool fails at searching for "SPW 251/21"

AGHH!! I am guessing you are positive it's a bug that has already been recognised? What am I going to do with these vehicles in this scenario now? Maybe i ask my opponent to put the game on ice until it's resolved. I have 4 of them! (Scenario is MG Counterattack at Son). gubu, the screenshots of the normal damage tab were taken from a different vehicle.

No, I can issue the order, they just don't execute it.

Yeah I was going to post the ammo as well just to show all was normal. if there was any doubt... Here is the full shot: Morale fine. Ammo fine. The info on each unit member you get on the bottom left of screen just says each of the 4 crew members are "spotting", so no reloading apparently occurring.

Hi, Been playing a scenario that features the new MG vehicle, the SPW 251/21 with the triple 15mmm cannons on it. An awesome weapon system that I never even knew existed. I have been ordering it to area fire at several targets and have found it at times not responding to my area fire orders, or not firing at all. The only clue to what may be going on is in the unit damage tab. (This vehicle has been under fire). Here is what a normal damage tab for this vehicle looks like: Here is what I see with the vehicle that won't shoot. The damage indicator is green (as in normal/no damage) but the name of the weapon is greyed out. What does that mean? Nothing in the manual about this. I assume the reason it's not firing is related to this. Strictly speaking, according to the manual the weapon damage indicator being green means it is undamaged. Bull

I think that my biggest disconnect and frustration with this game occurs when I am trying determine LOS. I totally sympathise with the the OP and the issues with placing AT guns and trying to work out what is and isn't in LOS and why sometimes stuff that should be obviously in LOS isn't and vice versa. Part of the problem is interpreting the LOS tool (that is all we have) and understanding exactly what is does and doesn't tell you. Vanir did mention something I certainly didn't know; that when it says "reverse slope - no aimpoint" then you "probably" could see a tank at that spot. Is this out of the manual or from experience? (PS: I probably should check to see what the manual says anyway, but I doubt it would go in to too much detail). The problem I have with the LOS tool is that I have no idea if it is as smart as I would hope/want it to be for the job it is meant to do. I am quite sure it isn't. For starters, regardless of unit, does the LOS tool always just check LOS from a point on the ground between the feet/tracks of the unit to another point on the ground somewhere else, totally ignoring the actual "eye height above groud" of the unit checking LOS? I am quite sure the the target point is always some point on the ground (ie the mouse hugs the ground). If it did take in to consideration spotter eye height above ground at least for infantry, then I would expect this to be affected by the unit posture for infantry for example (eg. standing or prone), something players don't control directly. This has always been my understanding of how the LOS tool works, and consequently has been of limited value given the in game combat LOS between units does actually take in to consideration the spotters eye height above ground and the height of the unit being spotted. The biggest dilemmas when I dealt with the LOS tool occur when I am dealing with long grass/wheatfields. What actually is the condition for the LOS tool to say LOS exists? The ideal LOS tool would give you control over the height above ground of the start and target point. Can anyone be certain as to exactly how the LOS tool works? For me at least this discussion has been well overdue.

Been playing the campaign called "The Road to Nijmegen". Great maps and battles. I have however played two missions (WEGO), Mission 6 "Mook" and 7 "The Heuman Lock Bridge" , that were meant to be approximately 25min/turns in length but are both actually a full 3 hrs. Here is a screnshot from Mission 6 "Mook". Odd that this is the case given the campaign itself was probably tested multiple times.

Yes how stupid of me, my bad. Nothing to see here. I have re-watched the offending replays more carefully The reason I assumed the 0.38cal was for the MG is because that it was used up very quickly and because once it was expended it seemed like the MG didn't fire anymore. Had no reason to think the gunner would use 0.38cal until after it used up it's ammo. Seems they like to fire off quite a few pistol rounds in-between MG clips. Also not seeing the MG fire with plenty of 6.5mm still remaining is a function of the high reload times modeled in this weapon. How I didn't bother to check the ammo type (was more looking for ammo quantity) at the wiki page is a worry though.

Hello I have just started playing a scenario with Italian units and discovered a most unusual feature. The squad HQ units feature a Breda M30 MG that only comes with 20 or 21 rounds of 0.380 cal ammo. This ammo depletes itself in less than a minute of combat. Is this loadout normal/intentional? What use is this weapon given it's only good for 1 minute? From what I understand 20 rounds is equivalent to just one clip for this MG.so basically they carry no other ammo for it except the clip that is already in it? Further, it doesn't seem that the ammo in the Italian vehicles (like trucks) is 0.38 cal so no chance to re supply it during a game it seems. Given the Italian army is severely hamstrung by a lack of automatic weapons, the one squad level MG assigned to them comes with just one clips worth? Am I missing something? Bull

There is a mod out there that enables the CMx1 style vehicle data to work just like it does in CMx1. Can't remember what it's called.

Hello I don't know of any mods for the CMFI/GL buildings. The ones I have for CMBN are just awesome thanks to Tanks-A-Lot. The vanilla CMFI buildings are OK but just look too clean/crisp. Would be awesome to have the CMFI buildings modded a'la Tanks-A-Lot. Anyone know if there are any in the works or if they are in the sights of any modders? Tank's? PS: The BIGGEST contributor to making otherwise nice looking textures and 3D models look horrible is the way lighting and shadows are implemented in CMx2. The lighting and shadows used in CMx2 is by far the most backward, poorly implemented, poorly considered and detrimental feature of the entire game. This one feature that "bathes" the entire battlefield with hard light and shadows that literally prevents the game from properly showing realistic looking progression of shades/tones/colours and shadows. If you dont know what I am talking about, it kind of describes it here.

Now we are getting desperate trying to explain what is going on. I bailed out every vehicle within 200m of the unit and made all other HQ units run away from that unit. The sole "gunner" HQ unit with no radio still has some telepathic ability to call in arty, and the 155mm stuff at that which I would have expected to be only available to the FO and higher HQ units. FYI, I have always found the whole "arty comms network" in CM very flakey. Most confounding is trying to understand why some onboard mortar units have trouble being "available" assets despite being deployed and within range of their HQ/radio et. Anyway, here is the file to see for yourself.

It won't let me take a screenshot with the range pointer but the range to the HT is 72m with no LOS. Regardless I moved the HT further away and the unit can still call in arty. Whats all this talk 'radios being abstracted for FOs' and radios begin separate from arty? Is this documented? Certainly news to me. So radios are really only to determine CnC? BTW, that unit is not the only unit in this scenario that has no radio, is a lone single isolated soldier from a HQ and can call in arty.

No. I had issues the arty request just before the screenshot. ??? Arty call privileges/ability has nothing to do with radios? Thats new to me. Is this in any of the manuals?" Totally confused with what is going here.

Hello Can anyone explain why this HQ unit can call in arty given they have no radio and are not within range of anything that does? Thanks Bull

I concur. Great work!

Hey guys, Need an opponent to play against in this scenario. Have already played it twice as Germans, I am now looking to play as the US. So if anyone wants a go at defending as Germans, send me email/msg/reply here. Bull

This conflicts with what Childress quoted, I am assuming, from some book (that book?). :confused:

This is a most curious/odd statistic if true or correctly quoted. 17,000 bombers built and 160,000 men lost??? I am assuming lost essentially means dead/died/unaccounted for (not just wounded) as a result of action as a crewman on one for the 17,000 bomber. That means that for every allied bomber built, on average 9.4 crewman would end up being killed/lost etc in some way. That's more than what would be the average number of crew aboard allied bombers. Who knows how many more would have been wounded. As reference, crew of a B-25 was 6 and for a B-17 it was 10. I have read some sources say the average lifespan of WW2 bomber pilots was around 5-6 missions. Do the math.

Macisle, those are probably the most amazing screenshot comparisons I have ever seen for CM. The attention to detail you possess to make those CM maps look so much like their RL counterparts is simply astonishing and I absolutely appreciate the time and effort that must have gone in to all this. Well done. I can only hope you are inspired (even paid) to produce more jaw dropping RL based maps like this. I really appreciate this sort of work. Cheers Bull

Womble, you indicate that perhaps the QUICK command could be used for this purpose. I can't see how that can work. As scouts, I want a balance of: moving at a reasonable speed maximizing their ability to SPOT/DETECT/LOCATE/IDENTIFY enemies/enemy fire while they moving, essentially thier SITUATIONAL AWARENESS decreasing their own exposure and ability to be spotted by the enemy The QUICK command overdoes the first requirement while significantly taking from the other two. I assume the game mechanics stay true to the reality that the slower a unit moves (assuming an upright posture) the more likely it is going to detect enemy positions/enemy fire during contact. While using some units as "bait" and issuing them QUICK commands while others observe seems like some kind of work around, it still is not the way units assigned as scouts are really meant to work. In most case they are the only eyes out there at the time. I agree with Michael: It seems so obvious but this reaction does not seem to apply to units given basic "non-assault" posture type move orders. The overriding reaction is "don't find cover, start running to the next waypoint even if it is closer to the enemy and in terrain more exposed than the one you are currently in". And this by SlowMotion I really do think the game could all do with a tweak to address these issues. I am aware however that in Real Time game play perhaps having less intelligent TacAI behaviour is not so much an issue as it may be in WEGO because a fast reacting player can always issue their own new orders whenever they feel like, unlike in WEGO. Now I have just conducted a "speed test" to get an idea for the relative speeds of the HUNT, MOVE and QUICK commands and I must say that I am kinda pleasantly surprised/shocked. To my total surprise, the HUNT order for infantry is FASTER than the MOVE command by about 29%!! Is this news to anyone else? I have only tested across open ground. The QUICK command is about 188% faster than MOVE, 123% faster than HUNT.