SlowMotion

Agree... Now this feature is usable against the AI, not in PBEMs.

Yes, this seems to be the way the game "thought" about the situation. I had used Target command and the tank used its MG.

On the other hand if your tank normally has a gun and then Target command no longer works the player would know that the main weapon is no longer functional. IMO this is very important, because your tank cannot defend itself against other tanks anymore. I don't view unit damage tab that often, so I might miss the event that caused the gun damage. Maybe that "balloon" above units could flash when the main gun gets damaged, the same way that happens when an infantry squad gets casualties? Or maybe this already happens, I should check

In a PBEM I saw this: My King Tiger's main gun had been damaged, MG was still functional according to info panel. So I thought it would be possible to use the MG (Target Light), but not main gun (Target command). But I *could* give Target command, but not Target Light. Why? I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't know which weapons the tank actually used, but IMO available commands vs available weapons is not working properly.

Yes, tank riders is one of the biggest improvements of CMRT compared to CMBN. I really wish this was included.

In first 3 there is an attacker and defender. How much stronger the attacker is depends on the battle type. Map objectives are usually in defender's part of the map. In meeting engagement both sides should be about equal strength. Map objectives are usually in the middle of the map.

Thanks and agree that in a way this current system makes sense, because this way ammo ISN'T shared every time some units are nearby. I think it would be cool if units could ALSO share ammo the same way Acquire command works. If you'd like to get some type of ammo from another unit you'd select this other unit and then Acquire command. All options that are now available in acquire could be used. So you could choose which weapon type and how much.

CMRT manual says "Soldiers can automatically share ammo with other nearby infantry units that belong to their formation, as well as with nearby vehicles" Does this "belong to formation" mean a HMG team and an infantry squad cannot share ammo? Because that is what I'm seeing in a CMBN PBEM game. The last man of the HMG team has no ammo for his rifle, so he cannot shoot. A squad in the same building has ammo that could be used in the rifle, but isn't sharing any. The HMG team member is also carrying some 9mm ammo which he cannot use. Wouldn't it make sense to give these to the squad because they do have weapons using 9mm bullets?

Thanks! BTW: it would be nice if ALL maps would mention dimensions so that players can see this info when selecting a QB map. It's one of the most important things of the selection process IMO.

Just noticed a tiny problem that has to do with QB map selection in CMRT v1.0. Normally if player selects a map, the game lists possible maps that match the selected battle type. Maps with "Meet" in their name when you've decided to play a Meeting Engagement QB, "attack" in the map name when playing a Attack QB and so on. For some reason when playing Attack QB, the game lists map #77 which is a meeting engagement map. I don't know if this map selection happens based on map file names or the scenario type that you see in Scenario Editor, but it seems there is something wrong with this map.

You can play, but can't use units or maps from MG module.

Sometimes I use Covered Arc command to hold fire until enemy unit moves close enough. I've noticed that sometimes an enemy unit spots my waiting unit *before* moving inside the arc area and starts firing my unit. My units seems to just take casualties instead of opening fire. Would it be possible to change the AI behaviour so that if my unit notices that it has been spotted because it is being fired dangerously (enemy infantry shooting at a tank from 500m away might not be dangerous, but another tank from same distance would be) then it would defend itself and ignore the arc?

It's more fun to play against a human opponent than the AI. If it was possible it would be great to try a turn based mode where you can have 2-3 players on one side. Even 2 players against the AI would be great. Each player would command his own units and all sorts of foobar situations would happen - just like in real war.

I think that's a good idea. You could decide whether you want a new AI plan to be used if there are still some unplayed ones left.

I've read that in real encounters Soviets often used to shoot at Tiger's track. When it was lost from one side of the tank this caused the tank to turn before immobilising. This then allowed gunners to aim at the thinner side armor intead of the strongest front parts. It would be cool if this effect was simulated in the game.

It's not just selecting a unit where this causes problems. You also cannot see where the unit is rotated. So in order to make sure they are looking at right direction I need to move the camera near the ground level so I can see the unit. Then move camera up again so I can see other units and repeat. Causes quite a bit extra zooming if units have moved to "new" buildings during previous turn.

If I select a unit inside a building, the roof and walls become transparent so I can see the unit. BUT: some buildings also have a level ceiling layer, which does NOT become transparent. And as result it blocks visibility to the selected unit unless you view it from next to the building (not from above). Should it be like this? Shouldn't the whole building become transparent?

As you have surely seen drones are developing fast. Both civilian and military models. It will be very interesting to see how they will be used in the future. I do not intend to add updates to this thread any longer, but there are some good websites which provide drone news such as http://www.suasnews.com/ http://www.spacewar.com/uav.html

Some footage of a Dassault made drone flying in formation

Autonomous cargo drone's succesful test flight: http://www.suasnews.com/2014/04/28563/worlds-largest-multirotor-makes-successful-maiden-flight/

IMO schrecks seem to shoot differently than in CMBN.

One thing I've been wondering about those exit times is: are they absolute time counting from battle start or are they relative time starting from the time when first units arrive to their target area? So if you think an AI group arrives to some area after 10 minutes from battle start and you want this group to leave this area between 10 and 15 minutes from battle start, should exit times be 10 and 15 or 0 and 5? The manual says "If you do not use Exit Before/After time variables then the progression from one Order to the next will be seamless." Does this mean exit times should be all 0?

It was not an anecdote. I've been testing a scenario. AI tanks move according to AI plans so I know in advance where they go, so it's easy to test the same situation time and time again. I've seen this same case several times and the moving T-34 has spotted much better than the static PzIV. Maybe I need to test more whether buttoned status matters here.

I don't know about armor strength, but PzIV seems to be much weaker in spotting than T-34 with 76mm gun. While playtesting a scenario I've seen many times how a static PzIV in ambush position behind some trees does not see how a T34 drives ahead and stops. After a moment it spots the PzIV about 45 degrees from its driving direction. Turret turns and PzIV is killed before it sees the T34 that is almost exactly ahead of it.

Based on my one QB experience that work was worth it. I immediately noticed that now AI truppen are doing something new.