c3k

Ian's option 2 has the side effect of having the unit CONTINUE to fire until it reaches the next waypoint (where there's a new combat command). That may be what you want...or not. Just pointing out the difference. Edited to note: if IanL has time to post, he has time to PLAY! Git to it!

It is orders of magnitude harder to intercept with APS. The timeline is short. Much shorter than an S300 or S400 has to do with. The distance/mass don't quite scale: time certainly does not. As well, a near miss with a frag warhead does a good job of knocking out an aircraft. Aircraft are, after all, made of the thinnest, lightest, materials possible which JUST meet the strengths needed. It's not hard to frag out a turbine engine. To knock a kinetic penetrator out, you've got to hit it. That's why most (all?) current APS technologies rely upon directed explosives. That's the only way to get something there, fast enough. The differences are whether that explosive is aimed via timed sheet charges (Trophy), or aimed via launched projectile (Quick Kill and probably Afghanit (if that's what the intercept system is called)). The aiming has to be precise. Near misses are as bad as a total miss. S300 warhead can explode 10's of meters away, and it's just as good as a direct hit. The timing is critical. APS is dealing with 1,800 m/s incoming penetrators. Mach 2 (at mid 20's and up) is about 600 m/s. (Many variables there. Could be up to 700 m/s. It all depends on air density.) Short answer, it's child's play to knock down an aircraft compared to trying to swat away an inbound projectile, whether it's a "slow" rpg, a "medium" atgm, or a "fast" penetrator. The nearest technology is the exoatmospheric interceptor that the US has been testing for awhile. And that's still easier.

Progressive rifling is an efficiency thing. With constant pitch rifling, the projectile loses a bit of oomph with the initial bit. (The projectile is thrust, with no spin, into a "fully" spun twist.) As the velocity increases down the bore, the spin rate increases, yet the pitch is constant. Progressive rifling smoothly accelerates the spin in concert with the increase in velocity. Pitch of the rifling is tied to velocity of the projectile. It is hard to manufacture. It is hard to calculate the correct progressive rifling rate AND ensure that all the projectiles meet that profile. The benefits are not very noticeable. (Crosswind effects on APFSDS is countered by the use of wind sensors/lasers/etc. The spin of rifled rounds produces minor other rotational effects of their own, in addition to those of wind.)

Gah! Hoist by my own petard! In a non-sequitur sort of way. My only excuse is that BLSTK's constant bleating about sheep had me concerned about rampant animal viral-strain STD's being introduced at the party. Really. It's a weak excuse, I know, and it may make some say "ewe!" in disgust, but there it is. Ken (going out on a lamb with this one...)

Remote control tanks: that leaves open the good ol' "insert a worm into the electronics and wait until you need it" scenario. "Boris? Why are you turning your Armata towards my headquarters? Boris?" Edited to add: amusing, to me, that smoke grenades are now called "soft kill" systems and are deemed "Active Protection System" sub-elements. LOL. Does that mean infantry squads engage in "soft kill" when they throw THEIR smoke? Smoke is a defensive suite. APS is another defensive suite. Sure, integrate them with sensors, but calling it an "active 'soft kill'" system is very funny...to me.

Hmmm, a savegame would help, but I deleted my v2.12 install a while ago. Just a thought: is hit-text toggled on?

We all know Kettler would never drink an appletini. It'd be an organic carrot smoothie he'd have in that glass. Don't forget Bil Hardenberger, walking about in his smoking jacket ( see here: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/110127-allied-cmbn-market-garden-beta-aar-the-better-beta-beater-reader/page-34#entry1461738 and ) with a retinue of aids surrounding him. As the women vie to get his attention, his aids keep them away. They'd only distract him from his tactical ruminations...

Slip-rings were used by the British to enable the L7 gun to fire HESH rounds effectively. That kept the round from spinning. Rheinmetall got caught cheating in the M1 gun shoot-off. They used APFSDS projectiles with weighted noses to improve their accuracy, not the standard rounds. The British weapons development took rifled tank guns as far as technology allowed. The German approach showed that (with modern tech), smoothbore had finally surpassed rifled weapons for developing kinetic energy penetrators.

Lots of reasons. One, simple, reason is for higher muzzle velocity. Rifling is a drag. Newer finned sabots are as accurate (or moreso) than rifled rounds. This gives smoothbore the edge. Again, that's a fairly simplistic explanation.

Or by using the fire extinguisher to block the door track so the rounds are all accessible. Sure, those doors are meant to be closed and protect the crew, but it's much more convenient to prop the extinguisher there...

It is hard to kill dug-in ATG's. Next time try machine-gunning one (Target Light area target order), have another tank SMOKE it, then move your HE chuckers up to kill it. If you're taking effective fire where you are, that should be where you aren't. You're in a kill-zone. Get out.

Nice! North of the road, I'd suggest the unmarked unit between "2" and "3" Target Brief x2 or x3 at the contacts in the woods. (I like x2, 30 seconds.) Have "3" Target Brief once, then displace backwards, shift north, and re-position behind the bocage. Make it a HUNT move into position, after QUICKing back and up. Go north 2-4 action spots. This will give Ian a picture of greater resistance on your north. South of the road: Lonely outpost up near the corner of the road/orchard will soon die. Not this turn, but maybe next or the one beyond that, it'll be time to pull it out. There's a nice gap in the road near the ATG for it. "1" should rout and survive. When able, get it close to its HQ. Eyeball close. They'll be brittle the rest of the game. Being near the HQ should help keep them in the fight. "4": Hmm, if you go to the foxhole, it will die. But, it may stick it to Ian. However, that is a known location. Don't get on Ian's side of that bocage, or you'll likey die for nothing. Instead, maybe go up to the angled piece of bocage by the road entering the orchard and see if you can pour some defilade on any of Ian's guys. Or, pull back more, maintaining a low profile, to ambush Ian's guys when they do debauch from the orchard. Or, retreat behind the marsh. ATG: double-check your LOS/Target Lines. If it is blinded, still, then I'd suggest pulling it out. Going two road gaps back, so it's on the road, east of the 'schreck and just north of the trench, may give a nice flanking fire. I'd think about then (after it's unlimbered and ready to fire) moving the 'schreck up, depending on what's happening. The time to move is getting close. But, if you still have blue target lines from it, then keep it there (my preferred action for it). Mortars: don't think all the ? you see are each individual units. They're frequently trails from the same one. Ken PS, tell Ian to stop loafing about!

(Long, explanatory, post deleted. Because it isn't worthwhile discussing.)

A board-game manufacturer has announced a pre-publish pricing for a new game about the British/Canadian beaches at Normandy. The design really is a -g-rand -t-actical -s-ystem. Sorry for the stuttering. Anyway, I own the other 3 games in the series (market garden has 2 games and one in north africa.) The replayability is far less than CM. You get less gaming for your purchase. The pre-pub, discount, price? About $200. Were I to decry that price (since it is just a modification of the market-garden games: same series), I'd be hooted and hollered off their forum. Shrug. Just pointing out that boardgames go for a LOT more than CM. You can argue if it's worth it or not (boardgame cost vs. CM), or just ascribe this post into the "non sequitur" basket. Every consumer has to make their own choice. The sum of those choices determine success. BFC has been far more successful than most other developers. This falls into the "let me tell you how to run your business" thread. Now, if you have some CONCRETE ideas as to what you'd like to see in Bulge in exchange for the full game price (beyond what ChrisND posted), let's hear 'em. Edited to keep the ghost of my Latin teacher resting comfortably

...chirping.

Crickets...

You also assume that EVERY customer should be forced to buy CMBN before they can play Bulge. (An add-on requires the base game, first.) Perhaps BFC is trying to NOT make Bulge dependent upon multiple previous purchases?

It's fine to WANT a low price. Seriously. However, you've attached a couple of assumptions into your WANT: not much new content, and not much effort to create. Without going into the obvious debate, let me ask this: after the first full-price game, when would it be appropriate for BFC to charge for another full-price game? Meaning, if they released "Poland, 1939!" (which I want), since that starts the East Front, how could they ever charge more than an add-on module's price for anything on the East? I mean, "Barbarrosa, 1941" would only be a tweak of Poland's maps. A lot of the tanks, artwork, etc., would be similar. Then again, "Gates of Moscow" would be just like June of '41, only with terrain colored white. And looking west, sure, $55 for "France, 1940" would be "fair", the next battle for France, "Greatest Day" would just recycle the East Front's German gear and paste it on top of "France, 1940"'s terrain. In such a manner, you could argue that BFC should only ever charge "full" price for the first game they made and that everything else is an add-on module and ought to cost $20. (Or whatever number you like.) The value of an object is not determined by the person who is selling the object: it is determined by the people who want the object. So, the market will determine if BFC's pricing strategy is correct or not. Here's another way to look at it (if you want): Imagine that BFC goes out of business in a year. So, Spring of 2016 there is no longer any hope of any patches, no vehicle packs, no new theaters, no new conflicts, etc. The ride is over. If, at that point, someone were to ask you, "When you bought "Bulge" for $20, would you have spent an extra $35 if that would have kept BFC in business?" I'm not arguing your points. I'm just trying to introduce different perspectives to what may be behind the pricing and the whether or not you're buying a module, or insuring a future for a game series you enjoy. I hope "Bulge" has enough content and that it's good enough to be deemed worth the advertised price. Regards, Ken

Then the vertical mounts would be totally wasted in all but a rare event. That's 24 rounds, wasted, unless something drops from about 80 degrees. (The Javelin is top-diving, but not that steep.) The intercept tech seems (AIUI) to be based on EFP/HEAT. You've got to AIM the effect at the incoming projectile, and do so far enough away from the vehicle to disrupt the projectile. EFP's produce high speed slugs and modern tech allows the slug to be aimed. (That's the Israeli solution.) The Quick Kill (and Afghanit?) uses an interceptor which seems to have a HEAT-style warhead (based on the ring-and-rod shaped explosions they create) which sends their effect at the projectile. Janes probably (as LnL hinted at) conflated a smoke shield which is hooked into the sensor array as part of an APS. At that point, it becomes semantics. Is an automatic smoke deployment system considered an "Active Protection System"? Not to me, but I don't get to determine definitions. To me, APS means it can physically intercept/destroy the projectile, not hide the vehicle. Ken

The Bumerang's amphibious drive modules are awesome. I want to know how long it'll be until troops use them for shredding cabbage for their borscht. Turn 'em on, put a bucket behind them, and toss a head of cabbage in it. KP duty just got fun! OT: I cannot see how the smaller canisters (vertical orientation and mounted in the steerable arrays) are anything other than smoke grenades. The larger, horizontal, cylinders could hold APS projectiles. The energy needed to launch an interceptor fast enough to intercept a modern projectile fairly begs for a lot more rocket propellant than what the little cylinders could hold. Jane's says they're part of the APS. I say they're smoke launchers.

I'd like the ability to directly draw on the 3D map. If you want phase lines, draw an orange line and label it "Phase Line Golf". Have a desired attack plan? Draw some arrows and pointers. Know where the enemy is coming from (intermittent contacts), draw some red lines. I know that I will forget some contacts in long games. An overlay of personal graphics would help. I'd love to have it toggled on and off with a hotkey, and allow me to use colors, fonts, and different thickness brushes, etc. The ability to erase, delete, and edit individual elements would be important. For example, if I draw a red box around a woods, to create a clearing task, I'd like to delete the red box once the woods are cleared, but keep my phase lines and my other enemy markers. An eraser icon would do it (if it only erases the add-on graphics). Is that similar to what you're thinking about? Ken

Hah! Don't listen to the haters. Next, Lanzfeld will be saying that Reese's peanut butter cups WEREN'T invented by two strangers, one eating chocolate, the other peanut butter, walking into one another. "Pardon me. You've gotten your chocolate in my peanut butter!" "And you've gotten your peanut butter on my chocolate!" OT: after you birth your new creation and post it, you'll notice dozens (or hundreds) of downloads...and nary a word. Don't be discouraged. The number of downloads is what matters. (Although a kind word or some praise wouldn't be remiss.) Look at the repository and count the reviews against the number of downloads. Yeah.

Like the previous three four: CMFI is a GREAT game. The lethality is lower than CMBS, the lines of sight are longer than CMBN, the unit count is less than CMRT. Sounds like the Goldilocks solution for you. I enjoy CMFI a lot. No, there's not as much content available online as with CMBN (user made battles, etc.), but there are some great mods which spruce up the look. The forces are so much less lethal (less armor and airburst, laser-guided, etc.), that maneuver actually works. There should be a demo for you to download and try for free. Give it a go and let us know what you think.

Top armor: the vertical smoke launchers would, I assume, create an opaque shield over the top of the tank. That should negate a lot of the top-attack weapons, like Javelin, which use optical tracking. As long as the tank can create the cloud fast enough (and shift position?), it should help. A cheap way of providing protection. (Cheaper than trying to armor the entire vehicle.)

There are a lot of good tips here. I follow a couple of different techniques, depending on whether or not I know/suspect the building is occupied or not. First, NEVER use ASSAULT when approaching/entering a building. ASSAULT moves each team of a squad, one at a time, to the waypoint, and then to the next waypoint. If I have a 3-team squad, that's a whole lot of exposure time for the first team. Instead, split off an ASSAULT TEAM. (It's in the Admin command tab.) They're the guys with the grenades and CQB weapons. If I know/suspect the building is occupied, I'll nail it with every HE weapon I can, for at least one turn. That will pin and suppress the occupants. If nothing else, the Assault Team and Covering Team will TARGET the building. (Note: if you split a squad into teams, but don't give them movement orders, they'll recombine. To prevent this, give a "false" movement order. QUICK (or anything else) with a PAUSE greater than 1 minute.) When it's time to assault, I lift the TARGET commands and use TARGET LIGHT. (TARGET uses HE, which causes friendly casualties). I make sure no heavy machineguns use TARGET LIGHT. They will not cause friendly casualties, but they will cause suppression/pins. Not good when you're about to kick down a door. Use TARGET BRIEFLY, say, 30 seconds. Have your assault team PAUSE for 30 seconds. (Or just 15 if they need ~20 seconds or more to get adjacent to building.) The goal is to have the least delay between the lifting of TARGET orders and your assault team getting to the building. Have the assault team get next to the building. If there are enemy units/exposure down the street, smoke the LOS that way so your assault team is not vulnerable to aimed fire when stacked at the target building. If the wall they're on has windows, have them TARGET BRIEF into the room. Give them a 15 second PAUSE, then QUICK into the room. It is very important to add a 360 degree covered arc at the end of the QUICK order, encompassing the room plus about 5m. You don't want your guys orienting to the original target spot they had when stacked outside and looking inside. (You could give TARGET BRIEF twice, and then you'd give a 30 second PAUSE. It depends how many grenades you want to use and how much spray and pray you think is appropriate.) The overwatch element(s) should engage any enemy which try to flee or shift positions within the building. Or, give them a PAUSE (to coincide with their TARGET BRIEF command) and shift positions with a move order, and from that new location use TARGET (or LIGHT, or BRIEF) to suppress other locations. If your assault team stacks next to windowless wall, that's even better. Use a breach or demo charge and BLAST your way in. That'll pin/suppress most of the enemy. Same rule: 360 target arc at the endpoint with a 5m or so circle beyond the confines. Now, if you want to get fancy, time a second element to charge in AFTER the first one dominates the room. Have the second element FACE a specific direction, like the room next door. (Check for interior windows and doors.) If you don't know/suspect an enemy is there, a much more abbreviated approach would be appropriate. Less booms, more small caliber (TARGET LIGHT), more observation time from a distance. Don't try to enter (after the prep fire); just get next to it and look in. The walls will protect your guys from surprises inside. (Of course, they may get machinegunned by enemy units in a different building, but that's situational dependent.) You WILL lose men in MOUT. No competent enemy will let anything else happen. Since there interior of buildings are abstracted, you should expect enemy to survive your cover fire/grenading when you enter. So, even if you follow the procedures I've written, men will die. This just minimizes it. Hopefully. The timing is something you'll learn with more play. If you have a "bad" entry, save the game and replay your orders phase until you find a timing which works. That kind of repetition is the best way to learn. YMMV. Ken