c3k

FMB, there are too many exceptions. Sure, I can try to remember which weapon does what, but a little icon - like a house with an "x" over it - would sure be helpful. There are so many "soft launch" rocket weapons that I don't know which weapon has a "soft enough" launch to be fired from inside a structure. I can only imagine that CMSFII will be worse with regards to the plethora of available weapon's choices.

I've just started playing CMSF after a long absence. Yeah, it's as fun as I'd remembered. I did, however, forget that the Panzerfaust 3-IT600 can apparently be fired from indoors. That lack of knowledge affected how I deployed my troops. I split off a lot of antitank teams and put them outside of buildings. Many of them died...needlessly. It would be an understatement to say I was surprised when I saw an indoor squad fire its Panzerfaust 3. Would there be any chance to add an icon to show whether or not a weapon is limited to being fired outdoors? Ken

Sgt. Joch, Thanks for checking into the anti-tank team question. It's a moot point for me; the Sryians in Bier und Bretzel already took the teams out of my OOB. Ken

My personal take is that CMSFII "Temperate Zone" is more likely than any update to CMSF. Rather than re-building the CMSF engine to be better, it seems better to continue to update the engine (beyond CMBN) and port in the models from CMSF as available. There is a note in the 1.32 patch thread about German antitank teams not having weapons. I've seen it in the NATO: Bier and Brezel (sp?) battle myself. I imagine BF.C will put out one more patch to finalize the game and then that'll be it. (Unless 1.32 is, indeed, the final patch.) Just my .02 with absolutely no insider sourcing. Ken

Note to self: do NOT play CMSF against the Syrians the same way you play CMBN. T-72's are some serious hitters. Time to shake off some rust.

The B/W photo has got to be a 150+mm howitzer. The bore size/barrel thickness shows that it cannot have had too much muzzle velocity. As well, it seems - purely a bit of guesswork - that it may have been disabled by draining the hydraulic recoil mechanism and then firing it. (That could be on purpose or a result of damage.)

Rokko, Thanks for the detailed posts with pictures, and the followup. Ken

The Horch sedan should only be included if, when the German HQ team is riding in it and dismounts, an attractive woman sidles out next to the commander and asks him how much further is it to Paris. Ken

These are nice ideas. One thing to remember, runners/telephone/pigeons ( ) are simulated. I had an XO team (I think) which had access to artillery, yet they had no radio. These guys were driving around in a jeep. Their delay time for artillery was on the order of 11 minutes. Their ability to communicate corrections was ABSTRACTED. This abstraction represents the other comms that are out there. You don't always need a radio for a team to be able to communicate up the chain when it is otherwise isolated. Ken

Like the other said: SLOW means low-crawl. That will fatigue your troops until they're useless if you're trying to do that over 200+ meters. Heck, even 16 meters (2 action spots) is what I consider a bit far for SLOW. Advancing over open ground means moving some scouts out front. They're the bullet-bait. Everyone else is in overwatch. Then move forward, after the scouts make it, with a "1 move, 2 overwatch" pattern. That's my .02 Good luck. Ken

Aaaaahhhh!! Take it back! This patch will TOTALLY ruin all my plans for any free time I may've thought I had! Get back! The power of Christ compels thee! Thanks for the work, gents. Ken

I'm unfamiliar with hamachi, other than its name. How does it work?

Do you have a screenshot, or better yet, a savegame? If neither, can you explicitly walk through exactly how you get this to occur? Thanks, Ken

2 exceptions, both based on the attacker firing on the defender. If the defender has been given a very large swathe of territory in which to set up, then the attacker should not be castigated for trying to determine the likely strongpoints and bombarding them. Likewise, if the scenario is one which states that the attacker has already found the MLR and has previously located enemy strongpoints, then that intel represents hard-won information. In that case, too, the attacker should not be subject to approbation for a 0 turn bombardment. (And an appendix: if the designer is creating an historical situation in which the 0 turn bombardment represented the start of the battle, then that'd be okay.) I think that's it.

I agree that 0 minute bombardments on the likely start position is a bit distasteful. This is especially true of QB meeting engagements, but it also holds for other battles.

He only gets dizzy when they drive somewhere...

I agree that a simple "continue" or "repeat" order for an FFE would be nice. I don't see how this breaks the game. If I just spent 5 to 11 minutes registering, spotting, correcting, and FFE'ing a target, an immediate request to continue (or repeat) should not incur the previous delays. It should just fire another FFE. Just my .02. (Search the CMSF forums for the same discussion. ) Ken

Indirectly that is available in the UI. If you watch the green status message in the left corner, there will be soldiers who are "aiming", "reloading", or "firing". Hovering your cursor over the UI will highlight the base of the soldier and turn his status from green to white. The others will be "spotting", "planning", "hiding", and so forth.

Of course I have come here. You knew I would. Equally as predictable, I must agitate for FLARES which can ignite conflagrations! Enemy near a haystack? Flare! Strongpoint in a house? Use that flaregun and aim for the curtains! A burning battlefield is a happy battlefield. Ken

Regarding loss ratios: are these the TOTAL losses suffered, or the losses suffered when Shermans combated Panthers? Panthers on the steppe - with good weather - could use their range. Panthers in the bocage or woods of Europe, could not. Oh, and it had to get to the scene of the battle. As JasonC posted, a lot of Panther units would suffer 50% tank losses per day. (Roughly 90% of the losses were recoverable and repairable, but not in time for the next day's fight.) All the above is "rough cut", but it lends a perspective with which to judge the various loss statistics. Ken

I have never seen the "!" in CMBN.

I like it how it is now: the "pirate-eye" comment hits it nicely. The dead show me who I can buddy-aid for plunder and treasure. Or ammo and weapons. What I'd like is to have the endgame screen show all the dead where they fell. "Here is where the 300 from Sparta held." That would be a pile. Ken

Oh, not to get on too high of a hobby horse, my point is that past a certain level of verisimilitude no game will be an enjoyment to me. There is a line which I find distasteful to cross. Of course flamethrowers should be included; I do not want to see flaming death animations in this, or any other form of entertainment. That is my choice. Nor do I want to see limbs and other human desiderata scattered across my computer monitor. I apologize for veering this away from the illumination theme. Flamethrowers: yes. Ken

In a quite horrid wat, showing how terrible these weapons could be, in addition to the flame-thrower effects, there were multiple accounts of men having their phosphorus grenades get struck by bullets. These impacts would cause the grenade to start burning - while strapped to the man. While they screamed for their buddies to shoot them, the attack would stall while everyone watched the horror. Real men, real brothers, sons, and fathers suffered and died in this manner. I'm glad our pixeltruppen do not undergo this. Despite all my tongue in cheek hyperbole, I would not like to participate in recreations of human horror in my gaming experience. Count me out from any support of flaming "candlewicks". FWIW. Ken

Yes, shrapnel and ricochets are deadly. And modelled. The replays of this happening are little gems of gaming goodness.