c3k

Hmm, I'd get a Skorzeny unit set up, pronto. Buy some captured Shermans, disguise some Panthers with sheet metal, and march them towards his front lines, all the while announcing they're there for "force balance". I do like the idea of a dozen or so JagdTigers. Each with about a dozen MP44 SS on 'em. Of course, mobility is key on the attack. Well, mobility and firepower. Let's not forget flexibility. So, mobility, firepower, and flexibility. I'd focus on tracked vehicles. Anything with wheels would likely be too slow or bog. (Unless there's a deep freeze???) Infantry: in my use, each platoon gets used up by executing a single task. Like, a platoon clears a minefield kind of task. Or, clearing a bocage field, taking a key terrain piece in a town, etc. (Assuming there's resistance.) So, I'd estimate required infantry based on how many tasks you expect them to undertake against resistance. Tanks: You're the monocle wearing German! You need cool tanks. Lots of 'em. With big guns. Or AA cannon. 30 autocannon tracks would help that infantry. Popcorn is a-popping. Wating for more. Ken

"In depth terrain analysis"??? You want my in depth analysis? The snow's up to my friggin' shins! As always, looking forward to one of Bil's masterpieces. (His AAR's always bring to mind the woman in the red top in that bar in Boston. Ahhh. http://community.battlefront.com/topic/110127-allied-cmbn-market-garden-beta-aar-the-better-beta-beater-reader/?do=findComment&comment=1455314 But I digress. I love his analyses. He's like a data-borg. He crafts a beautifully accurate enemy sitrep, then pounces on the first opportunity. Time to get the popcorn ready. Ken

Edited. Sigh. I misread the OP. I thought he said, "...in a way that excludes quality and maturity." I'll just shuffle off to a thread that'll have me.

What!?! I have to WAIT for more??? Great stuff! I'd gladly pay the full cover price. Really nice. I mean...really...nice. Thanks, Ken

No. And once they start, they just...(wait for it)...snowball.

Subtle joke? It was about as subtle as the ton of bricks it took to MAKE that wall! I wasn't trying to snow you. I'm not being some sort of flake. At the risk of you giving me an icy response, or a cold shoulder, I'll admit that it was a joke. Now, don't go freezing me out of future threads on this release. Ken "all hail the winter"

That's because it's a TALL wall.

Ahhh...you've discovered "the purchase game"! Think of it as a bonus puzzle. Solve it, and you'll reap a rich reward. Kidding aside, yeah, it's a pita to figure out your options. Toss a screenshot up and we can give better help. Or, someone more knowledgeable about the storefront should be along in a bit.

"Damn. It may have been shot off. How big was it before?" (Background: "Nope, mine's okay.")

Thanks...but the other item is that this does not occur with all units.

Got it figured out. The Pause only occurs at a waypoint. Terrain does not matter: having an intermediate waypoint is the "trigger" to allow the pause. (In my earlier tests I set one waypoint 4km distant.) And, this only occurs with HUNT. So... HUNTing, and TIRED, they will PAUSE at the next waypoint they come to. Ken

Indeed... Great pulsing mammaries! Glad to hear you're on the mend.

Pete Wenman: I've tried HUNTing with both WeGo and RealTime and drove my men to "exhausted". I included a full US platoon (HQ, FO, 3x Squads, 2x MMG, 2x Javelin): no one ever auto-paused. How did you do your test? Savegame available? (Since you found something...you've got the ball. I'm out.) Ken

A simple editor experiment will confirm... A fresh unit can be given FAST to a waypoint 4km away, through mud with wet ground conditions, while carrying extra weight. At some point, they will not be FASTing, but just QUICKing. At no point will they pause. Eventually, they will drop to MOVE, and continue in that mode. (Some units may recover from "exhausted" to "fatigued" while using MOVE: others do not.) At no point did any unit stop or pause.

LOL...Thanks.

I've never seen a foot unit pause on its own. I've pushed foot units into an exhausted state from rested, with no auto pause. Vehicles will auto-pause when they detect a collision. Usually the rear vehicle pauses for 3-5 seconds. Either it's new behavior, or, as mentioned above, an HQ had its subordinate units highlighted when the HQ was given a pause. (I've done it too many times to count before I finally learned. Now, I only do it sometimes. ) Let's see what the savegame shows. Ken

Hmm, I'm curious if the change is one-sided. In a WeGo environment, only one side processes the turns. It may be that whichever computer processes the turns, you'd get a different outcome: 1. Skwabie processes: both sides have lowered TCs and invulnerable mantlets 2. Other Guy processes: both sides have normal TCs and vulnerable mantlets. Or, a third result which has an asymmetry which would be unfair: 3. No matter who processes, only Skwabie has lowered TCs and invulnerable mantles. I'm curious... Since this "hack" is something that CAN be done, I'm glad Skwabie took the effort to post about it, here. If BFC thinks this is an exploit which should be closed, they are now aware of it. Meantime, I'm more focused on the possible mantlet issue. Since, if it is an issue with the King Tiger (or Tiger II, call it what you will), then it stands to reason that it's an issue with all vehicles. Those with larger mantlets would be more "susceptible": Panthers, Shermans, etc. Their mantlets cover more of their turret front than the Tiger II's. Ken

Whereas I'm not part of the Battlefront team, I am a beta tester. My participation is indicative of BFC being made aware of this thread. Now, that does NOT mean that there is agreement that Skwabie's supposition that the Tiger II turret front, mantlet, or armor behind the mantlet is either too weak, missing, or otherwise mis-modeled. It does mean that there is interest to look into it. Hence my desire to find out how he performed his tests. Of interest would be the Soviet tests performed on Tiger II's, which link has been graciously provided upstream by Alchenar. The Soviet 122mm tank gun in the IS2 was quite capable of knocking out Tiger II's. The issue, to me, revolves solely upon whether the armor (and trunnion, gun, and other big pieces of metal) behind the mantlet is modeled correctly. The first step would be to get real-world data on when the mantlet would be penetrated (all the way into the fighting compartment) and when it wouldn't. And then perform the same tests in-game. This will take time. I do think that removing the gun hit-box gives a large advantage (too large). Weapons were hit and rendered inoperative. Hacking that out of the game process removes the one way outmatched opponents could harm the Tiger II. IMO. Ken

Well, of course I'll add my well wishes, but I do have to point out how much this will benefit the rest of us... With Phil/Kohlenklau laid up recovering, that means the only thing he'll have time/energy/ability is to CREATE MORE CM GOODNESS!!! Win-win! Hoping that made you laugh. Not hard enough to rupture the sutures, but enough to make it hurt. Best wishes for a full and speedy recovery! Ken

Fire-fights with tanks isn't the job: protection from them could be a secondary role. Plus, mobile firepower to support the infantry fight is always a good thing. Bunkers, improved positions, etc., can inordinately hold up infantry. Nearby HE tossers fix that. This role has been played by regimental cannon companies, infantry guns, StuGs, and others. (Sure, some were pressed into anti-armor roles, but they all started as HE support.)

I can only point to this post http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119354-army-wants-more-lethality-for-strykers/#comment-1609499 I made awhile ago. More firepower means more fun. Vertical launched Javelins by the dozen. Sweet bliss!

Bah! My engineers would never "be" attacked...they would charge! With demo charges, of course! Jumping onto the back of the Tigers, cigars clenched between manly jaws, they'd pry the hatches open, and saying "Hier ist ein Weihnachtsgeschenk. Bitte," they'd hurl the pre-lit demo charges inside and then close the lids and lean against them to keep 'em closed, just because. The muffled whumps, followed by smoke rings coming out of the tanks' barrels, would indicate success. THAT'S how it would go.

Thanks.

Skwabie, Nicely done. 1. Does the lowered TC spot better than a buttoned up TC? 2. Does the lowered TC spot as well as the "up" TC? Mantlets: You're saying you've changed the code? = I was unaware that TigerII's had bad coax mg's. I'll look at it. = Mantlet issue which has armor behind them not accounted for: are you sure? Without repeating tests that you've done, if I'm going to send this in as a bug report to the developers, then it'd be good to see before and after results with the ranges, ammo types, and numbers of samples. Thanks, Ken Edited for a followup: I've confirmed the coax issues. Thanks. The bigger issue of the mantlet armor remains open, in my mind. Please post about your testing, as I've indicated above. Thanks.

I saw that, and rewound it a few times. I = think = that the round went over the first one and struck the cupola of the second.