Slappy

Actually, you can put trenches in buildings, but you need to put the trench there before the building.

1. No. No shape changes allowed, just skins. 2. Ask around. I think there is a post on the front page right now asking for help putting together a full list of AK bmps. 3. (optional) There may be some other problems to consider with your proposal. Commandos who panic running off across the channel for home is the first one that comes to mind. 4. (optional) You can change pavement to water by copying the copying the water bmp into the pavement file number. Of course, you won't get the shore effect as there are a number of water bmps for edges and corners and only one pavemetn.

I found this to be both well reasond and insightful. It represents, along with unrealistic maps, why 80% of bad scenarios are bad. Hear this man.

It has to do with relative armor composition of the two armies at the time. Pretty controversial though given past discussions.

I always start new editions with smaller units to get a feel for the mechanics and the units, but generally find myself progressing up the ladder once I get a feel for it. I play about 75% PBEM these days and generally in the 1500-3000pt range. I think this makes the outcome more dependant on skill than luck in a relative way (one rare (and bad) outcome ok when you have 8 tanks, not ok when you have two). The other thing about PBEM is that you don't have to play the whole thing end to end. It takes only about 10min to watch the movie and process most turns even for a 2500pt battle. Sure, it takes months overall to play 60 turns, but the individual effort is manageable. I can easily keep 4-6 games going at a turn a day while I'm drinking coffee, doing laundry, etc. I find it much more manageable for my relationship than 4-5 hour sessions v. the AI.

Well, that's a different kettle of fish. Fire from multiple and disperate angles is modeled. If you get more flanking from the 6 rather than the 3, I can see that might increase suppression. That said, if we're talking 3 units firing separated by 120 degrees v. 6 separated by 60 degrees I'd still take the 3.

Not entirely true. There is a maximum allowable number of ambush markers in the game. I know this is uber mechanics groggy, but it's been discussed before and has something to do with the total number of units constraint so I believe it varies with the force size.

There is that and the increased chance of ricochet given the oblique angle of impact. In the illustration, the shell won't turn. There is a decent chance that it will bounce off the armor and head 'up'.

AP rounds do have a small explosive charge. They're nowhere near as effective as HE, but they're better than nothing if you impact closely enough

Do a search. You will find hundreds if not thousands of posts.

This is modeled.

Be sure to crack on a flat surface, not the edge of your bowl which can drive shell fragments into the egg.

All true. What wasn't pointed out is that you probably don't want to bunch up a whole company at night. I know it's tempting to stick together when LOS is tight, but it can be deadly as your example demonstrates. Suppressive fire is much more effective at night, making proper scouting and spacing that much more important.

Set to 'Italy'. That's what I do, and it's way more fun.

Since the design crew have never released the calculations on firepower, just think about it as a relative measure. 105 is ~ 10% bigger than 95%. It will deal out about 10% more pain. That said, with that kind of difference, ammo, position, morale, and a thousand other things will make a much bigger difference in the outcome of the engagement than FP. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Yes! You guys are the best! This is my all time favorite BO scenario. I am not worthy.

Actually, I think most would prefer the 'see your own mods' system. 1. You picked them. Why should you have to look at your opponent's taste in mods. Maybe he's using those godawful ugly ASL mods or somefink. 2. Running the mods out of your hard drive seriously cuts down on the size of files. The PBEM file just carries a number for the point of the units, and they are sculpted on site. You want to send hundreds of bitmaps with every file? 3. Personal mods allow those with slower (or faster) processors to control the level of detail and graphics processing demand. No fun if your opponent's super hi res mods slow your play to a crawl. OTOH, why look at his clunky CMBO downsamples when you're running a tricked out machine.

Yes. You DO NOT have to target the minefield. In fact, it may be counterproductive. Just have them sit 10m from the edge and wait. It may take 3 or four minutes, but they will clear it. I know that sounds like a long time to wait, but you try clearing a path through 400 square meters of mines in four minutes.

When rebooting fails, reinstall. Copy your saved games and mods out to a separate location and move them back in after a reinstall. I've found this cures the problem when a reboot won't and it's a lot easier than sitting through. Do you ever want to watch the movie more than once?

I can only assume that Charles is commenting on MGs firing down at tanks at what he would consider more typical angles (tank 100m away from building), not the rather more extreme tests done here with Pzs parked directly under the window.

Not that slow. Hi mom! I'll be pulling her down as soon as I can get home.

Well, in the East, there were plenty of areas that were bypassed by the advancing armies, particularly in the beginning of the german invasion and toward the end of the german collapse. Large groups were either cutoff by rapid advances on their flanks or designated 'fortress' areas by their command and tasked to hold out for as long as possible at all costs. Some held out for weeks or longer. There were still german pockets sticking it out in polish cities when Berlin fell. In general, commanders did avoid house to house fighting, but sometimes it was unavoidable, usually for strategic reasons. Stalingrad sat astride a river, making it difficult to bypass. Berlin was stormed in order to prevent the Allies from having any chance to take it (at the cost of thousands of needless russian casualties). Many towns sat on important roads or raillines that were needed to bring up supplies. As for points in CM2, I'm not sure. I definitely believe that there should be more and more flexable ways to 'win'. 'A Warm Place to Sleep' (sic?), one of the BB CD scenarios depicts two small forces fighting for a building to spend the night in. Now, I agree that having both sides if the building is destroyed makes the scenario more interesting and the narrative a lot better. I just don't know how often that would come up. There have been a number of discussions on the boards about civilians, civilian casualties and the destruction of property in the game. They're probably pretty easy to search for. I generally come down on the 'leave this out' side of the argument. Too much to deal with that doesn't relate to the tactical challenge of the game. Also, I just don't think that the commanders cared that much about civilian property. Read any account of the war in the East and you'll pick that up pretty quick. I don't know if you remember this from the US move into Baghdad in 2003, but an Abrams put a round into a highrise hotel, killing several reporters, because they thought they were under small arms fire from the hotel. Now think about it. If the US in 2003, about six days into a cakewalk of a conflict, was willing to crank a 120mm round into an occupied hotel in front of live TV cameras, what do you think the average regard for local property was in the back country of Poland in 1945 after four years of brutal warfare?

Hear him gentlemen, he speaks the truth. This seems a bit unrealistic. Do they just trail the phone lines out the back of the trucks while on the roll?

I may get beat up for saying this on the BO board, but I would not buy it if you already have BB and AK. Two reasons: 1. BB and AK are pretty advanced in terms of modeling, more so than people realise I think. BO has a simpler FO targeting method, MGs are terribly undermodeled and infantry morale overmodeled. There is no morale model for vehicles. The stock graphics are pretty weak and you'll need a ton of mods to get up to the graphical level of AK. Overall, a ton of stuff was 'fixed' in the later releases. 2. 95% of what is in BO can be recreated in AK. Everything but Pershings and King Tigers is available in AK. Hell, there's even a bocage hedge if you like Normandy. You may have to play with the dates a little, but you can set up Battle of the Bulge scenarios all day. That's my take, but in the interest of fairness... CMBO is widely regarded as being more 'fun' than the others. Weak MGs, super infantry and more trees mean that you spend far less time scraping your broken conscripts up off the floor and throwing them across yet another expanse of open steppe to be slaughtered. Also, many of the scenarios are absolute classics. Depending on your personal disposable income, you might get your money's worth on them alone.

This is realistic and in the game. A .50 cal will penetrate 20-25mm at point blank. I'm guessing that a MG42 or similar smaller MG will probably penetrate 12-15mm. The tougher question is whether these weapons will target a tank. MGs are generally coded to not engage buttoned tanks. You may have to target manually. Open topped vehicles are a whole other ballgame. Even rifle squads should be able to take out a Marder or HT in this sort of situation. There is special coding for fire from above on open topped vehicles.