Bannon

I would have never guessed that!

I do enjoy a good Clint Eastwood movie

Good point! Thanks

I know this is morbid but my curiosity is getter the better of me. Would a human body present enough resistance to cause a HEAT round to go off?

I’m not even sure what “technical malfunction” means. A missile just fell off the pylon? There has got to be more to this story.

Crystal clear and thanks.

Good points. Thanks!

Do we have enough M2 and M3's in inventory to spare?

I can’t possibly like this enough!!

I found the following on YouTube and since so many of you are well informed and/or experienced, I wonder how you feel about what is presented here and how what we’re learning in Ukraine might change the Army’s plans? The Transformation of US Tank Divisions (2030): https://youtu.be/nV4W8w1plug

I am not offended or challenging your statement, but I am curious what you meant by it? What about being German would cause someone to not believe an attack was imminent?

With so many cameras turned in the direction of the explosions would we have seen some trace of the follow-on missiles?

I know data are still coming in and analysis is ongoing but how might CMBS change given all we are learning? For example, will every scenario come with a boatload of drones? Please understand I am not asking for insights into the CMBS modules Battlefront is working on.

Is it possible to order a paper manual for this engine?

Erwin, I am pretty sure that 152mm unit never advanced to fire for effect and in fact I'm not sure it ever fired spotting rounds. So, I believe I've learned: Don't bother killing the living spotting team member as a way of freeing up the 152mm unit The 152mm unit may become available later during the battle This is a PITA since that barrage was a precursor to my attack, but I guess this is some of the unpredictability of war. Thanks for you and AlexUK for your help.

AlexUK, thanks. That’s what I was afraid of. The mission hadn’t started firing yet so I guess the best thing for me to do it to get this guy killed so I can recover the artillery.

Early in the battle I used an Air Controller Team to call artillery fire from a 152mm howitzer and all looked well until my opponent called artillery into the area the observer is in. As you can see in one of the photos the observer has taken a casualty but on the surface the fire mission still appears to be set. However, when you open the artillery panel you'll see the 152mm is not selectable and has both DENIED and RECEIVING shown. So, I'm not sure what the status is and I can't cancel the fire order. Can someone explain this and more importantly what can I do to not loose the 152mm battery? Thanks

@George MC, I'd like to think that somewhere on Battlefield's improvements for the 5.0 game engine is an ambient sound level control. Of course that assumes an updated engine is in the works.

@George MC, yes, I can control the level of ambient noise (wind) by selecting different wind strengths in the editor. Heavy is annoying through Light which is barely perceptible. The HQS 5.0 mod is an improvement but heavy wind is still noticeable. @37mm, I'm not sure what those packages do but I'm downloading the BS and CW ones now. Thanks!

@George MC, thanks. I downloaded and installed "HQS 5.0 CMSF CMSF2 CMBS CMA CMCW" and the sounds are noticeably different. The incessant wind sound is replaced by aircraft, helicopters, and sirens. It's not as loud but I'm not sure I like it. I'll look for other alternatives but thanks for pointing me in the direction!

Is there a way to turn down the volume of, or eliminate entirely, the environmental (e.g., wind) sounds?

I was an application developer for a good part of my career so I can sympathize with your point!

II hope that is not the case. It is my understanding that this will be a free update for everyone that owns CM:CW.

@BFCElvis, thanks for all the updates. I couldn't wait any more and purchased CM:CW direct from Battlefront while I wait for the Steam version and I don't regret it. Great game. In the prior messages you referred several time to PBEM+++ (notice the third +). Was that a mistype or is this a new/updated PBEM system? Thanks and please keep up the good work.

I'm glad it's sorted as well. Not doing so would have always made me question my units. BTW, John is aces in my book. He's always been very responsive and helpful to me.