Holman

They're called "Pioneers." They should be in the various infantry lists.

I saw some strange numbers recently. They don't affect gameplay (as far as I can tell), but here goes: A 12-man 44 pattern US rifle squad got absolutely *clobbered* by a high-caliber artillery shell. I don't know what the gun was, but it was big, and the shell landed right on top of my poor guys. The squad was immediately routed, understandably, but as they ran back towards the friendly map edge I noticed something weird. In the unit screen's casualty box (next to the red cross), the number was "30." In the active soldiers box (next to the helmet), the number was "-18." Obviously, if you add 30 and -18 you get 12 (the size of the squad before the arty hit them). I take it that everyone was dead, and that I was watching their routed ghosts flee the field! Still, I think BTS should know about the goofy math bug that must be involved here.

I'm very happy with the Operations model implemented in CMBO, although naturally I'd like to see it become more complex and customizable in CM2. The moving frontline is an improvement over a series of set-piece battles, IMO. A possible solution to the "how far to advance?" question just hit me. What if Operation designers simply added labels to their maps, essentially rough markers for the 1/4, halfway, and 3/4 points? That way, we'd know if we were stuck at the "fifty-yard line" or if we were closing in on the goal. (Obviously, you could call your 50-yard line "Clerval Farm" or "Narrow Ridge," just so long as you mentioned it as the halfway point in your briefing.) In fact, these labels could easily be retrofitted to the original Operations (where relevant) by the designers. We could all then download the new versions. Good idea? Am I overlooking something? Paul "Martyr" Roberts

It refers to an experience upgrade you can give to the AI's units. With "+1", Green becomes Regular, Regular becomes Veteran, etc.

All you actually did was delete the latest auto-saved game file (called "autosave"). When you start a new game, you should get a new autosave file automatically after the first turn.

What a marvelous thread to have arisen on a WW2 wargame board! I'm sure we're unlikely to come to any final consensus, but it's nice to see so many respectful and articulate (as well as informed) comments here. Perhaps it's only because I've just had a couple of beers (it was a hard day), but I'm intrigued by the multi-continental exchange that's taking place in this very discussion. We've moved from the double-edged sword of colonialism to bemoaning the minority status of classic intellectual texts and education. And one of the chief examples appears to be Saint Augustine, an African subject of the Roman colonial order who allied himself with a religious movement that would eventually come to dominate the central and northern European provinces of the Roman empire (a larger Europe which would itself inherit and transform the Roman traditions that once impinged so violently upon it). As a more-or-less confirmed atheist who nevertheless has a great deal of respect for Augustine and his tradition, I'm rather impressed. I'll bet they're not talking about this sort of thing over on Quake-warez-Dude.com.

Hey, as long as we're on Spoiler Alert for "Fear in the Fog," I have a question for Wild Bill and anyone else who has played this scen a few times. I've played it twice, both times as the Americans in single-player. On my first run-through, I set the AI to "use scenario defaults," and the Germans executed a very well-coordinated assault on the railway station, doing me serious damage. I actually surrendered when I saw the horrible beating I was taking. The German attack had already heated up by about turn 8. (My guys had not yet made it into the buildings to set up good defensive arcs.) On my second try, since I knew the direction from which the Germans were coming, I put the AI on "free setup" and rushed my forces into the railway station. (Since I'd blown some of the surprise with my first try, I pretended that HQ had informed me of the station's importance, and that I was under orders to get there quick.) Having gotten into place, I waited... and waited... and waited. Finally I started getting sound contacts on turn 16, but I didn't see any enemies until turn 19! With only six turns left, and with me in good position of both VLs, I only had to pin the enemy down. (I did lose both tanks though.) The lesson I'm drawing from this second game is that "free setup" is not a good idea when playing against the AI on a very densely-wooded or otherwise obstructed map: the computer might wind up spending all its time just getting its units to the battle. Wild Bill, does this seem right to you? To be fair, the attack, when it finally came, was all together and not scattered, and the Germans used good supporting tactics. On a broader note, when do you think it's a good idea to go with "use free setup"? Perhaps scenario designers and playtesters could try this feature out, and mention in the briefing whether it seems a good or bad idea. Paul "Martyr" Roberts

Bullethead, I hope you don't see my response to Pillar as some kind of knee-jerk politicial correctness: the history of colonialism *is* complex, as you point out, and it involves benefits as well as detriments. My reading on these issues has ranged from Chinua Achebe to Robert Kaplan, and I can't imagine fitting the range between their opinions into one or two pat slogans. My response was mainly motivated by the language of an "untapped New World" at the start of the thread. Some will say that an excessive focus on language is precisely the definition of "PC," but, well, I've been teaching English for the past six years. What else can I do?

Oh, for what it's worth... Be aware that the present chaos in Africa owes quite a bit to the exploitation its people and its resources suffered under various sorts of colonialism (including the Cold War). This is not to excuse Idi Amin and similar dictators of their crimes, of course, but the modern history of Africa is replete with good (and indifferent) intentions gone horribly wrong. That said, you might not want to plan your project in terms of charting a "New World" and its "untapped" resources. Africa is very old, and it is probably quite tired of being tapped by outsiders. Just my geopolitical $0.02

Unless I'm misremembering, I've noticed that BTS converts British "pounder" ratings to standard US/German millimeter ratings on the unit info screen that pops up when you hit Enter. This makes it easier to judge just how big those Limey weapons are.

Hi all, Am I right in assuming that the "+1" or "+2" levels in leadership bonuses are relative to the commander's experience? In other words, that a Green platoon leader with a "+2" combat icon is roughly equal to a Regular P.L. with a "+1" combat icon (and that both are equal to a Veteran P.L. with no combat icon at all)? This allows some nuances in setting up commanders in scenarios. Compare a Green Lieutenant with a couple of +2's to a Regular Lieutenant with no bonuses. The former (perhaps an eager and talented replacement) is actually better at directing his soldiers, but is still not used to the sound of explosives and the presence of people trying to kill him. The latter (a tired but tested grunt without a real flair for inspiring soldiers) is not as good at directing his soldiers' fire (perhaps he doesn't care any more?), but he is still less likely to panic when he gets into combat one more time. Perhaps this is all obvious, but it allows a certain amount of "role-playing" when you think about it.

Several factors could make this possible. Most likely, the jeep (armed with a .50 cal MG, which is very powerful) killed the Hetzer's unbuttoned commander. This could cause a low-experience crew to panic and bail out. Your jeep was lucky. But remember that an "abandoned" result comes from the crew bailing, not from the jeep somehow crippling the armored vehicle. I suspect the Hetzer crew was either low quality, stressed out, or very unlucky.

I see what you mean about the direction of attack, Jeff. It would be great if BTS would allow us to change the direction of reinforcements for each battle in an operation. Maybe in CM2. Good luck with your design!

Jeff H., I'd be very interested in a scenario that depicted the German attacks on Frost's battalion from the north (and east and west). If you need someone to help you playtest, please drop me a line. Paul "Martyr" Roberts

Hi all, I recall the manual stating that wheat fields block LOS differently depending on the time of year (i.e. the height of the wheat). However, I seem to recall being able to see clearly across the fields in games set in (at least) June, July, September and November. I'm at work, or else I would do some experiments with the map editor. Can anyone verify that wheat fields actually block LOS at the correct time of year?

Wow--Thanks, Madmatt! How's the Modpack 2 coming along?

On the other hand, the padlock allows a wise scenario designer to force intentional difficulties on the player. Sure, you may know (or strongly suspect) that the enemy tanks are going to be coming through this path or valley, but your AT guns are way over *there* and there's no time to move them. Real commanders faced this kind of problem all the time.

Looking at photos in Robert Kershaw's IT NEVER SNOWS IN SEPTEMBER, p. 132, it looks like there are four blocks of buildings running alongside the road bridge just after it crosses the river (and just before it crosses a major underpasses and meets a hill, where the bridge's elevation pilings are no longer necessary). Of those four blocks, the three closest to the river appear to be at or even below the level of the bridge; the fourth block has peaked roofs that are slightly higher than the bridge. It really is an elevated bridge! If I were at home, I'd boot up CM and compare the scenario map to these photos. I'll remember to do it this weekend. Wild Bill no doubt had access to these or similar photos in designing the map.

Just a bit of a (cold water?) niggle: If the CSA had come out of the Civil War as an independent nation with its own "unique way of life," would it have been anything but a minor agrarian society in the 1940s? Most of the industrial might of the United States was concentrated in the rust belt, both in the 1860s and in the 1940s. The thousands of Shermans and B-17s that tipped the balance in WW2 weren't built in Alabama or the Carolinas. I'm not bashing the South (well, except for the "unique way of life" part), just questioning the abilities of an independent CSA. [This message has been edited by Martyr (edited 07-07-2000).]

Thanks for the mini-tutorial, Wild Bill! However, I'm confused now. What is the difference (for the purpose of games against the AI) between padlocking units and choosing "use scenario default positions" in the scenario start menu? Perhaps I'm misreading, but your message seems to suggest that the padlocking units is the only way to make the AI use your default positions. If that's true, then what is the effect of choosing "use scenario defaults"? Thanks for any clarifications.

Ironies of Battle Dept.: I had an elite PIAT team sneak close to a King Tiger and knock it out. The brave Brits then hunkered down in a nearby building in order to rest. Not two turns later, Allied air support dived in on a bombing run against the knocked-out Tiger. (Since it wasn't burning, the pilot's error can be understood.) However, the two bombs sailed slightly over the Tiger's hulk and slammed right into the light building where my PIAT was hiding, destroying the structure and killing the team. Alas!

Max Hastings (author of OVERLORD and other respected histories) has a book called simply DAS REICH. It deals with that division's march through France towards the D-Day beaches after June 6, 1944.

Interesting question. I imagine that most CM players enjoy games at other scales, and right now hexes are the only way to go for operational-level games. I love the CM system, but I'm definitely also waiting for 82ND AIRBORNE, the sequel to 101ST AIRBORNE IN NORMANDY. This is a hex- (or square-) based game at the level of individual soldiers. It's a different experience from CM: almost like a role-playing game, or like a very realistic X-COM.

Just some thoughts on the situation you describe, TeAch: I've seen similar indoor use of satchel charges but with the building NOT exploding around the soldiers. In fact, nothing clears out enemy infantry faster. I think of the catastrophic explosions as just that: catastrophes that no one plans for. Since the interiors of even the light buildings are somewhat abstracted, and are assumed to have several layers of (invisible) walls and doors, perhaps you should imagine that your Pioneers were throwing their satchel charge down a hall from a couple of rooms away, and that they didn't expect the whole house to come down. Bad luck for them, of course.

The ambient sounds and voices are a terrific addition to the immersiveness of this game. Here's my favorite example of the soldier's "small talk:" I was playing as the Brits and was able to knock out a Tiger with a PIAT at very close range. The German crew bailed and ran, but of course the Tiger remained sitting where it had been knocked out, very close to a building where I was hiding some troops. On the next turn, I happened to be zoomed in close to my soldiers near the tank (who were not otherwise engaged in combat), and I distinctly heard one of them say, "Would you LOOK at that thing!" The tone was not fear but something more like admiration and awe. Clearly, they were admiring the size and impressiveness of the tank they had just taken down. What a game!