ASL Veteran

I'm sorry sly, but you are imagining things. I just tested it and I can say with 100% certainty that a dismounted jeep won't spot a thing. Here is how you can test it before you go too far out on a limb and start to look foolish : Go into the editor, take the default size map and put a tall wall across the bottom of the map about five squares up from the edge. Go into Allied purchase and buy a US infantry battalion then delete everything except for the command element. You should have two radio jeeps, a commander, and an XO. If you dismount one or the other you should end up with a dismounted radio jeep. Place the dismounted jeep on the other side of the wall then leave the commander, XO, and the other jeep on the back side of the wall (near the edge). Purchase whatever you want to purchase for the axis - I purchased an Italian engineer company. Select them and deploy them along the top map edge. Create an AI setup zone across the top of the map by using the three by three sized paint brush. Make sure all your Axis infantry are deployed in the setup zone. Go to AI plans and paint the Axis setup zone using the three by three paint brush across the top of the map. Set the AI to ambush at 150 meters so they won't fire. Save the scenario file and move it to your scenario folder. Play the scenario as the Allied attacker. Guess what? You spot nothing no matter how long you sit there.

I don't know what thread is being referred to, but the answer is that pushing tanks isn't modeled in the game. In fact, I think you can pass right through them if I'm not mistaken. From a reality standpoint I'm not certain how simple it would be to push another tank if it had lost a track or something. Sure, tanks of similar weight could tow another tank if it was in working order but just ran out of fuel or something. The Germans used to do that all the time. With a missing track or a damaged road wheel it could very well be impossible to move a tank. I recently read a first hand account of an immobilized Elefant where it tried to turn around on a slightly elevated road and got partially stuck in a ditch. The idler arm was bent and an attempt to pull it out with towing pintles resulted in snapped towing pintles because the wheels wouldn't turn. They decided to return at night with a wooden block that they could place on the damaged road wheel that the mechanic had hand carved in order to make another attempt to tow it, but that ended in failure as well.

There is no campaign map ala Close Combat. You can see what your squads do by selecting them - I don't remember how exactly because it's been a while - but you can get kill stats for your squads. You should be able to do that in the demo actually. It's not broken down by individual soldier though.

If it's an occupy objective the objective will remain green until the end. You just have to leave someone on it and make sure no enemies occupy any part of it. Touch objectives will disappear when you touch them.

In Windows 7, I've managed to find my IP by going into the Control Panel, Network and Internet, Network and Sharing Center, then looking down on the middle right side. You should see a "Access type: Internet" beneath which would be a clickable "Local Area Connections". If you select that a small window will pop up, then click "Details" and a screen will pop up that has "Network Connection Details". There will be several things listed "IP Address", "IP Default Gateway", "IP DHCP Server", and "IP DNS Server". One of those is the IP address you would use to run the game.

It's a thread about nothing.

The designer has no control after any first turn bombardment. The designer can set a bombardment that begins on turn one, but after that the AI uses it on it's own.

To be specific, I have a NVIDIA Geforce GTX 590. Do you play on Best graphics quality setting?

It might be helpful if everyone who sees these gaps can put their system specs here so someone at BFC can check it out. It may not even be a known issue yet. I have an NVIDIA card / windows 7 and I've never seen gaps like that.

I think you are going to want to be a little more specific about what you are looking for. It's also something that would be difficult to compare since I don't think there are any maps or scenarios that are common to both games. If you are strictly looking for a frame speed or something like that - how would you make a direct comparison?

I've gotta say that I've never noticed gaps like that on any maps I've viewed. I can only see the designer added bocage gaps. Perhaps it's a video card thing or perhaps it shows up on the lower graphics levels? I always play on best, but sometimes bocage does look funny on maps if I try something less than balanced.

No, as far as I know there is no way to transfer maps from CMBN to CMFI.

Yes, you need to download the 1.11 patch. Once you've done that then you will need to reinstall the 2.0 upgrade over that. CW only brings the game to 1.10. There should be a 2.01 patch out soon too, so you will probably want to download that when it comes out.

I seem to recall that the reason you get the problem with the Marder crew is if you install the 2.0 upgrade and install the 1.11 patch on top of it. You have to install the 1.11 patch to your game first, then you have to install the 2.0 upgrade on top of the patched game.

There are actually pretty extensive designer's notes for that battle. Those notes do a pretty decent job of explaining what was going on for the 10th, 11th, and 12th of July.

The HG Pz Division was split into two groups for the attack. The Right Group had the Pz Regiment and the Pioniers and Recon troops. That's what you command in the campaign - exactly what the right group had. The Left Group had the Panzergrenadier Regiment (less the armored battalion) and the Tigers from the Army heavy tank company. That's what you get in the scenarios Biazza Ridge and Hot Mustard. There was a third group from the HG Pz Div that was attached to Group Schmaltz and fought against the British. IIRC that was the Armored Pz Gren battalion and the assault gun battalion. The German campaign forces are historically accurate. I would guess that the designer doesn't give you any reinforcements because the battle depicted happened on only two days (maybe three I haven't read his briefing).

That bunker isn't at Biazza Ridge. That bunker is located at the Acate River. You can drive past it in Google Earth and see it because it's still there. Biazza Ridge is several kilometers east of that. If you actually look at the little map the Battlefield Detective put you can see Ponte Durillo over on the left side - that's at the Acate River. Over on the right side the Battlefield Detective has a big arrow where the airborne troops went to Biazza Ridge from the east, and you will note that he places Biazza Ridge over there. I think the designer did an impeccable job of researching the scenario. I'm not so sure about the accuracy of your Google searches anymore.

Where did you get the idea that there was a concrete bunker at Biazza Ridge?

I'm going to say that there wouldn't be any recoilless rifles for the German paras in Market Garden. From what I can tell they served the role of the infantry gun, but because they used so much propellant they stopped making these guns in early 1944. Only 450 were made (75mm) and there was a shortage of ammunition for them because propellant was in short supply. I'm going to guess that all the propellant was going towards panzerfausts and panzershreks. They are known to have been used in Crete, Italy, and the Carpathian mountains.

In order for the AI to use it's artillery assets the truppen calling it in have to be sitting around for a while. If the AI attacker hasn't been given any pauses at a location that exceed at least five minutes then they aren't going to call any artillery because the spotter will constantly be on the move.

I think he's referring to the in game screen shots and not the field manual examples that you posted. :confused:

Steve has publicly stated that there will be Fallschirmjager in the MG module. Official scenarios usually adhere to the theme of the module, so it's doubtful that any Monte Cassino scenarios will be included with the Market Garden module. I suppose it's possible that a third party Monte Cassino scenario could be created from the Market Garden module, but there may be TO&E differences between that time frame and Monte Cassino. There would also not be any New Zealanders in Market Garden. There are no Fallschirmjager currently in CMFI as you discovered. If a future module is planned for CMFI and if that module includes Fallschirmjager, I think it's safe to assume that there is a high probability that something involving Fallschirmjager on Monte Cassino will be included. So, if you want to command Fallschirmjager on Monte Cassino with a BFC created scenario, then you should probably wait to find out what future modules for CMFI are planned by BFC.

The west wall bunker in my first description was a machine gun only bunker. It doesn't matter what's firing from the bunker. It only matters how much effort went into making it. Field works concrete bunkers probably won't be 2 meters thick, but even so you shouldn't assume that any tank can destroy a bunker easily from beyond point blank range. Don't forget that concrete bunkers also have a means of shutting the firing ports when they aren't being used. I'm not sure what your expectation is though - do you expect any tank to blast a field works bunker into rubble from 1000 meters with one shot of AP? What would be the point of spending all the time and resources into building a bunker like that in the first place?

The fact is that we don't know what a CM bunker represents because it seems to be some sort of 'generic' bunker. I've also read that 2 meters thick for German concrete bunkers was standard. Certainly you aren't suggesting that the bunkers on the beaches at the French coastline weren't up to the standards of the West Wall (which was neglected for years btw). I've also read that Japanese log bunkers with coral reinforcing were almost impervious to anything beyond point blank range. They seemed to be capable of surviving massive bombardments from US battleship guns just fine. I imagine if they were using Palm Trees for their logs that would contribute to the bunker's resistance since the properties of Palm tree logs is much more springy than other types of logs. I believe that South Carolina being called "The Palmetto State" is a reference to a revolutionary war fort that was impervious to cannon balls from British warships because of the properties of the Palm Tree logs they were using. If you have any reference material that you would like to share about non West Wall bunkers then I'd be interested in reading it. Opinions and assumptions without something substantive behind it aren't very helpful to moving the discussion forward.

I'm happy to be of assistance. I guess the ball is now firmly in your court. Perhaps you can explain for yourself the process by which you arrived at the conclusion that it would take very little effort on the part of BFC to perform the tasks you feel they should perform? We can all then judge whether your explanation or my explanation is the more accurate one.