Kingfish

Here's a few things we must accept if we add a dig-in command: 1) Troops will become tired, with the possibility of exhaustion in certain terrain types 2) Unable to defend themselves during the dig-in process, or at half strength but only getting half the dug-in bonus (signifying half the troops defending, the other half digging) 3) Longer delays in executing commands if player changes his / her mind and orders troops to do something else. These are just a few off the top of my head. Anyone else want to add to the list?

Hamster guided rockets at that! Better accuracy than a TRP.

What happens if they start digging and they break a water main, now you've flooded the whole battlefield. Or worse, they cut the phone line. There goes your TCP/IP game. No, digging in is not a good idea.

Who gives sneak command to units in sparse or open ground? If this new hunt command is an improvement to the existing sneak than it's logical to assume that it would be issued under the same circumstances, i.e. dense woods, fog, night, etc... Only if fired upon first, therein lies the problem. Common sense tells me if you are sneaking thru close terrain and you encounter the enemy you would want to: a) shoot him first and then, go to cover in case there's more of them out there. As it stands right now the existing commands only allow us to do one of those steps. It's either: 1) move - go from waypoint to waypoint, shoot if need be, but continue moving (IOW don't seek cover) until you get to the next waypoint. 2) sneak - go from waypoint to waypoint, stop and take cover if fired upon first (IOW don't shoot him first) Think about this, why can't the same reflex that allows moving infantry units to fire first also be added to sneak?

I have, and it deals with Mark IVs misidentified as Tigers. A Tiger makes a distinctive "clanging" sound when moving, and I've heard that sound coming from misidentified Mark IVs on numerous occasions.

No, Bill Clinton is still alive.

Do a search!

There is a big difference between combined arms tactics with armored infantry and leading with HTs to shield Croda. Imagine a commander telling a platoon of HTs to "Go out and die for Croda"

Isn't that what Bil said in the Sunken lane scenario?

Is it gamey to send your trucks out first to "draw deer fire" or should you hold them back and advance with bubba and the hounds?

What does it say about close in city fighting?

One problem with sneak is that, unless fired upon, they will continue sneaking. So if they encounter an enemy MG team, mortar or FO that is walking by they will ignore them, even though in real life they would just blow them away. The same holds true for two opposing squads sneaking towards each other. They can literally walk thru each others formation without shooting.

I recommend the "Any port after a storm" and "No rest for the weary" scenario packs. Not really an operation, more like seperate scenarios linked to a common campaign (the first is the drive to Cherbourg, the second is the advance down the Contein peninsula). They are reinforced companies in size, about 30 turns a game. I have both packs in my HD. If you are interested e-mail me and I can zip them to you later on tonight. My address is in my profile.

There is a big difference between combined arms tactics with armored infantry and leading with HTs to draw AT fire. Imagine a commander telling a platoon of HTs to "Go out and find where the 6pdrs are"

Just some friendly advice, you might want to add a spolier alert to your post for those who haven't played this one yet.

I have a fairly large scenario in my HD depicting one of the Commonwealth landings. Can't remember where I got it, but if you want it e-mail me and I can zip it to you later on tonight. My address is in my profile.

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/001958.html

Bruno, I mean save into the CMBO directory. The next time you get a PBEM "plotting" file (not the movie file) open it and hit alt-S. The file is now saved in the CMBO directory. Now close the old version, open the new, search the scenario directory for your file, open it, choose e-mail and you're done. File is now upgraded. Remember, you can only save the file if you are plotting. If you only get the movie you must wait until you get to plot.

You can upgrade a game in progress. Just open the game in the old version, save, exit old version, start new version and reopen game. It is now upgraded.

Your profile doesn't list your address. Send me the setup, either side is fine with me.

Not a good idea. Page 95 of the manual states: "Units that exit the map during an operation will not return for the next battle. Therefore, exiting is generally unwise" Take it from one who learned that the hard way

Here's an interesting quote from the manual (page 92): "Their real life advantage is that they can be placed MUCH faster than normal minefields and hence were used often to cover hasty retreats" I read that to mean that they were held in reserve, ready to be deployed in emergency situations, IOW during the battle.

I'm bumping this one with the hope that I get more responses to my questions.

No, because it's assumed to be pre-registered, so no LOS is required. However, an FO that is out of LOS will have a small delay compared to one with LOS. Even so, the response time is still alot quicker than without the TRP. Onboard mortars can use indirect fire on TRPs, as long as they don't move from their initial setup location. Once moved they can only fire indirectly on the TRP by using a HQ unit to act as spotter. Also, any unit with LOS can use direct fire on the TRP with increased accuracy.

In my HD is a scenario that depicts a column of retreating amis trying to get off the map with the Germans in hot pursuit. While a small task force held the Germans back the long columns of trucks, HTs and men filtered off the map, yet my global morale would drop a little each time another group exited. You would think the reverse would be true, as more men exited to safety my morale should have risen.