Bimmer

I don't think there would be any problem. These scenarios are all quite small and relatively short. Turns go quickly. Nonetheless, I think somewhere around a 45-day maximum time period for each round would be adequate (none of them are over 45 minutes in length).

PBEM would be the default; if both parties agreed to RT, I suppose it would be OK, but I never play it myself.

I'm finishing up development of a set of scenarios that I was going to put them out through the Repository, but it occurred to me that there might be enough interest to warrant using them for a small tournament before releasing them into the wild. What I'm proposing is a straight bracket tournament; no complex scoring, just winner goes on, loser goes home (mostly because it's just easier for me to administer). Four scenarios, all using the same map but each otherwise unique. This arrangement would require 16 players. Preference would be given to those with prior tournament experience; AARs would be required for every scenario completed; anyone who drops out would be publicly shamed. This is an informal testing of the waters to see if there's enough public interest to go forward. If there is, I'll post up a formal announcement/sign-up thread.

I'm sure there are technical limitations that prevent it from occurring, but what should really happen (based on actual period artillery procedure as I understand it) is that once a mission has gone FFE, a new TRP should appear at the spot, allowing quick follow-on barrages on the same target.

On the way.

Yep. Just holler if you want 'em.

Ah. Let's hope it gets sorted in the next patch. Thanks.

I've seen this, particularly with the US .30 medium MG; the tripod is quite low, and it seems that sometimes it sets up at a point where the LOS is blocked by the berm of the bocage. I haven't thus far found any good way to avoid this.

** SPOILERS ** I'm playing Le Hamelet PBEM as the Germans and I've got a couple of issues related to wooden bunkers. First, I moved my mortar platoon HQ into a wooden bunker early in the game. I decided to shift it elsewhere, but I find that the "Dismount" button is disabled, thus I cannot move the unit out of the bunker. Second, I have an HMG team in another bunker. It came under fire from a Sherman, took two casualties, and the bunker was penetrated and is now listed as destroyed. The remaining four soldiers are still in the bunker, and are unsuppressed, but the icon remains greyed out and again, I am thus unable to move the unit out of the bunker. I haven't played with bunkers much, so perhaps these have been touched on before, but it does seem that there are some bugs remaining.

Don't worry, I'm patient. I appreciate your efforts, and your willingness to consider making adjustments. Looking forward to them.

Yep, that looks a lot closer to the actual greyish plaster, and the stone looks really good underneath. If you intend to do other shades (and I hope you do - I'd really love a set of authentic building textures), I would continue to move toward the beige/cream/yellow palette that appears in direct light in some of the photos.

And more:

Yet more:

More:

Here's some photos - I tried to select a variety of details. Hopefully they are helpful to you. The colors look closer to grey in flat light in photos, but in reality the beige tones in the brighter shots come through consistently. There are some buildings that are arguably grey, but even then it's a warmer shade. There are also more brick chimneys than I recalled, so that may be a less valid criticism on my part.

These look really good. Can't wait to see the final versions. A couple of minor critiques: - It is unlikely that a stone building would have a brick chimney, or that plaster would be applied over brick. Most Norman town buildings are close-fitting exposed stone with stone chimneys, or plaster over stone; rural buildings will sometimes have a rougher exposed stone look. - Most Norman buildings are a sort of light beige color rather than grey; I suspect this is simply due to the color of the local stone. I have plenty of color photos if they are desired. Just let me know if I can help.

Thanks Gpig. Very interested to know how it works out H2H. Do you play RT or WEGO?

Just had an M3 halftrack flying down a hardball road to establish a blocking position race past a German PSW 234. The PSW put a burst of 20mm into the track, killing half the 60mm mortar team, both ammo bearers, and the soldier attached to the platoon HQ. The track gunner swung the .50 around and put several bursts into the side and back of the PSW as they sped past. The turret on the PSW couldn't follow fast enough, sparing further destruction. The turn ended just as my track moved through the gap in the bocage it had been heading for, revealing the back side of another PSW on the edge of the field. The remainder of the mortar team was suppressed, so I had the platoon commander grab the bazooka out of the track and prepare to dismount. As the turn replayed, the track gunner hosed down the back of the second PSW (the crew of the first having bailed and now out of sight beyond the hedgerow) while the lieutenant jumped out of the track, hit the dirt, and put a bazooka round right into the left rear quarter of the second PSW, causing it to burst into flame.

Thanks for the feedback. The nature of the map (tiny) is such that the enemy is often very close. They really are primarily intended for H2H (no AI plans), but I did try to deploy forces in a way that would make them useful.

Just curious if anyone has any feedback on these. One user gave them a one-star rating but didn't leave a comment, which doesn't really tell me much. I'm more than happy to accept criticism, but a low rating without any explanation isn't very helpful to me in determining what was perceived to be wrong. Any comments, positive or negative, are welcome.

Ah, memories. Tabletop miniature wargaming...so many wasted hours.... Anyway, IIRC the rulesets they mention (Angriff and Tractics) were fairly abstracted. I'd suspect the ranges work out to something on the order of 25m/square or something along those lines. As with any abstracted map being adapted, the scale of things like buildings will be way off when translated into CM.

Depends how much space you have to deploy. If you have sufficient depth in front of the objective, I'd buy lots of infantry and make your opponent fight for every field; a small mobile reserve should be enough. If, however, you are constrained and forced to defend close to the objective, a screening infantry force in front, a second line through or even behind it, and a large combined arms reserve would be better. Stick with on-board mortars for artillery. Of course, if I were your opponent, I'd buy a metric ton of artillery and blast a patch right through to the objective, or simply flatten the objective, again depending on the way the map is set up. All the above is IMHO; I take no responsibility if you follow any or all of it and get your ass handed to you.

If we're making requests for flavor objects, I'd like to throw in my two cents for anti-glider poles ("Rommel's asparagus"; should be super-simple to make) and a couple of bigger farm wagons, maybe one loaded with hay, one without (less simple).

Read this: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=99637

Yeah, I tweaked them just to make them a bit more interesting.