Apa

Skipper: 1) Did you see the Mannerheim line, or was it one of the lines build during continuation war, if you were in Russia, then it was propably Mannerheim Line, if you were in Finland, then it propably wasn't. I also have seen those late-war defence lines, damn impressive, propably one reason Finland had the peace treaty instead of losing the war. French and Poland had one big difference during their wars. They were facing cleverly implemented (don't know if this is a good word for this, but I don't know a better one...) blitzkrieg army. During winter war Soviet officers hadn't propably even heard of blitzkrieg. I didn't say that the Siberian troops of Russia would be any lower quality than finnish, but the troops from the warm areas propably were. And I didn't speak of living in cities, I spoke about winter quality of the troops, two completely different things. Finlands highest ranking officer, Marsalkka Mannerheim, was earlier in his life an officer in Russian army. If he had stayed in Red army, he would have been killed years before the war, that is quite sure. That is what happened to majority of the high ranking officers of the "kingdom army" (now I really don't know how to say that in english, but the army russia had in WWI). Now, Mannerheim was very important to Finland, like propably his russian equivalants would have been to red army. And yes, red army officers were good enough to win the war, but it took Winter war, and some years of war against germans before they knew what they did. In operation Uranus it was the first time (at least according to Anthony Beevor's Stalingrad, doesn't say it directly, but says something like this: German officiers were surprised of the attack. They never believed, that the Russians could use BZ) when the Russians used Blitzkrieg tactics, and they had been fighting for some years with heavy armored forces (I think they had lost something like 10000 tanks that time...). Talk about bat officers . But yes, they learned their lesson. One of the most important things for Operation Uranus to succeed, was that German had one moron in their armys hierarcy, and it was the highest ranking. Now a trivia question, who am I talking about? But russia would propably have won also without hitler taking the command, but that is something we will never know (unless BTS makes a game that is similar to Third Reich) Apa

Yes, Finnish army was almost all conscript, but they were used to living in the countryside, and were even before war a lot in forests during winters, so they might be better modeled as veterans in CM game terms, even though they didn't know too much of the tactical side. But finnish officiers (at least higher ranking officiers) were better than their Russian equivalants, thanks to Stalin... The reason finns were so lot in the woods during winters, is that Finlands most important industry was forest industry, and if you are a farmer there was nothing else to do during winters, than chop some wood... And easily over half of Finlands population were farmers. So if one compares these farmer-soldiers to some troops from areas of Soviet Union where there is almost never snow, and almost no forest, one could easily say that those Russian soldiers were the conscripts, even if they had better training. It is also known fact, that Russian winter equipment wasn't too good during the winter war (a lesson they learned well, and the next one to learn this was Germany during winter 41), and then add some bad tactics and the massacre is ready. Apa

Dorosh: According to your text, it would be hard for infantry that is "taking cover" to rotate, but it seems that it is not so now. Something to consider for CM2? Leonidias: Infantry should be able to rotate something like 45 degrees almost instantly (I don't know what is the effective firing arc of infatry), but as Dorosh said, turning 90 degrees is something that takes time. Maybe it would be good to say, that I haven't been in army (jet...), so I don't have any facts, only a good feeling, that there _might_ be something that could be done better. Also it would be fair to say, that these aren't any too setious things, but they might make the game better, and that is a good enough reason for me to talk about them.

Yes, maybe you are correct, but it feels stupid when an enemy runs straight into your foxhole and kills your FT... no fire from that FT at all... btw the FT was unspotted by enemy inf, rotated into correct direction, and no hide / ambush. But I also misused it by not having supporting infantry. And about that barrage part, you are propably correct, but still if you are trained to do that, it doesn't necessarily mean that you will do that in combat, atleast veteran troops shouldn't do that...

Sorry boys, couldn't resist 1) Flamethrower squads should turn faster. Try this: Have a squad run past a FT so that it doesn't get closer than ~15m to the FT. FT doesn't fire (at least in my tests). To me this seems that something is wrong, but haven't never used a flamethrower in real life (well nowadays my real life is CM but still...) 2) Flamethrowers should target at enemy infantry even when enemy inf is not in range, so that when the squad comes to range, they could immendiately fire. 3) This is about morale, and I think it is well known that this isn't realistic, but just want to say it again: I have made a squad accidentally run through a barrage, and yes, it runs straight into it, gets broken, and runs away of the barrage. If I had been there, I wouldn't have run into that barrage... would you? propably very hard to "fix", and an endless source of bugs when done. Ok some toughts from me, feel free to express your opinions, but please, in better english than mine

btw My mail address is anssi.kaariainen@kolumbus.fi, dont use that email button, it goes to different address... Is it possible to have the email button send email to different address than you registered with? Also, I would like to keep this registration address, anssi.kaariainen@kolumbus.fi is my CMBO address... Apa

Another point I would like to point out (hmm, my english isn't too good today...) This would be a perfect way to model the defending of stalingrad, for example. The equipment, and the men were exactly the same _before_, and _during_ the fight of Stalingrad, but the morale was different. PanzerLeader: The globalisation of morale works to some extent, but it is true, that it is unfair to the competitive players to have random morale, or morale dependant of time. Except time dependant morale could affect the point system too... But for me, playing for fun & realism, this would be perfect. Also the player could see the global morale rating to some extent: a good commander knows what his mens are thinking, also maybe a bonus for good commanders to know ones troop morale better? Jason: I see leaders command rating as differen thing than the morale of troops. I didn't know about the levels of morale available in CMBO, I tried to do a search, but it wasn't working at the moment... But this idea is slightly differen from what it is now. And send me the scenario Anybody want to play it with me? See you at the #pub, I'll be there chatting about this, and a lot else too Apa

Just to make my point a bit clearer... How did I came up to this idea? Well, what was the difference when summer changed to winter, and the Russians got the advantage to their side? Well, the most important thing, ofcourse, was the winter equipment of the russians compared to the no winter equipment of the Germans. But for single battles the difference between the equipments wasn't _that_ big. So lets have a time dependant morale. Now during the winters the Russians will fight better, and the germans will withdraw more often, and when summer comes, the sides are switched. To me this sounds like what it _realistically_ were (ofcourse I am no grog, so their opinions would be highly valued...) Hope this helps to understand me a bit better. Apa

Well, I would do the opposite, with having no levels at all, having a sliding scale(?), that is. And I don't know is it so strange to have conscript troops that wont run away, they are just doing nothing. And level 7 (the original 1-10 scale) could be something like a bit above avarage, not superhero. That means that conscripts would run away indeed. I dont know if you got it wrong, but I mean that this morale level (maybe fanatism level?) would be _in addition_ to the level gotten from the quality of the troop, not replasing it. (like the fanatisim is now, at least I suppose so) Apa

I chatted about this with some friends of mine at the local #pub, and it seems that this haven't been talked about here earlier, at least in some months If I have got it right, now the system is like this: there are 2 different hidden morale levels, your troops can be "normal" or fanatic. Now what I am suggesting is that there would be more morale levels for different times. For example lets say there is 10 different morale levels (not named, just a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 would be something like... hmm chikens, and 10 the defenders of Stalingrad. Now, the effect of this morale level is clear. If you have high morale troops, they wont break as easily, while the level 1 troops will run even before they see the enemy Something like the effect of troop quality to morale... The level would be time dependant, and randomized to some extent, so that if you play at, say, winter 43, as the Russians, you would be very likely to get a high morale troops. Also there could be a setting of over ruling this for the competitive players. This is one of my first posts, but I hope for some opinions on this.

Uutta vuotta. Paljonkos meitä suomalaisia on täällä nykyjään? If you knew what we are talking about... Anssi Kääriäinen

The preview feature is not enough, as you can make as many battles as he want's to, and try to play the first turns until he has the weather he wants to, even if it says random weather in the preview screen. You can do this, because even if you load your own created file, and set the password for the enemy, the first setup file will _not_ change. I think this isn't too hard to fix, but just wanted to say this. This way one can also make unbalanced force mixes with computer buy (but this is easily done now by just buying your own forces, but letting the computer buy for your opponent). btw I see this really as a problem, as I have been playing in some tournaments, and there I can't chose who I am playing against.