Mad Mike

Sounds good. Thank you very much for the effort, I know it is a huge amount of work.

Thanks, Normal Dude. Like I said, it is good to have a german campaign created for the module. So the campaign will center on the efforts of 2nd PzDiv against St. Lambert-sur-Dive, as can be seen in the following links? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hill_262_20_Aug_1944.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_262

A first overview can be found here (maybe not the most groggish of sources): http://www.flamesofwar.com/hobby.aspx?art_id=748 As the 2nd PzDiv was employed right at the junction between the US 1st Army and the 2n British Army, the choice to do a campaign based on it for the Commonwealth module seems a little bit odd. The most notable action against Commonwealth forces seems to have been the participation of elements of 2nd PzDiv in the fight at Villers-Bocage. It is nice to hear that there will be a german campaign. I would have expected any "core force" other than the 2nd PzDiv, to be honest, especially since the Waffen SS will be introduced in this module and quite some of the Waffen SS formations were heavily engaged against the Commonwealth forces (most notably the 12th SS, of course). But maybe somebody can provide some more information about 2nd PzDiv and its relevance to the fighting against the 2nd British Army.

Right, I still remember that one .. quite infuriating. If I wasn't already mad before, this one would certainly have done the trick.

Yes, it does please me. Good idea snake_eye, maybe it will be implemented sooner than later, as it is only a very small change.

Ha, maybe I should have put "No siffo998" in the title.. Anyway, it has been standing there for like two turns. Maybe I have to wait a little bit longer, who knows.

I gree with you, snake_eye. Maybe it would be good to have both, one set of checkboxes for the designer to check for the modes of play the scenario is intended to be played. Together with the information if there are any AI plans defined for a side, it would become quite straightforward to make an easy guess. So if the designer should forget to check the box "Play vs. US AI", there could still be an indication that this is possible because of existing AI plans. Same would also be benificial for the reverse, a selected checkbox but no AI plans could mean exactly what snake_eye implied, that the scenario is ok to played even without an AI plan. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Maybe a little bit more info will be forthcoming with the next title.

Why put all the responsibility on the designer alone? Some support by BFC would probably go a long way to improve the situation. For example, when a scenario is saved in the editor, CM could automatically determine if there are any AI plans for any side. This information could be shown in some sortable manner. It's not like the information is not already there, we just don't have any easy way (except opening the scenario manually in the editor) of accessing or seeing it. If AI plans exist, it is very likely that they have been put in in order to make the scenario playable against the AI. This way, the designer wouldn't have to remember to put "play as US vs. AI" or similar things into the description. Which is really just a workaround for not providing enough info by default on scenarios. I guess we will have to wait a long time for this, if it should happen at all. Maybe with CMx3?

Hi all, in one of my current PBEMs I came across the following LOS inconsistency: 1. Enemy M4 Sherman selected, both the HMG team and the StuG are highlighted to show that they can spot the Sherman: 2. Now the HMG is selected, it can see the M4 Sherman (the icon is shown): 3. Now the StuG is selected, it can NOT see the M4 Sherman. Hm, strange: 4. Reverse view, with the HMG and "Target" order selected, the HMG could shoot at the M4: 5. Reverse view, now the StuG is selected with the "Target" order. It can trace a blue Target line to the exact spot where the M4 is positioned. Still, it can not see it (despite the fact that the functionality "click on enemy icon to see which own units have spotted this enemy unit" is telling us differently): Has anybody a good explanation for this or is it just a bug? If it looks like a bug, a save game would be available. Cheers and happy new year, Mad Mike

Yeah, that would be true in reality, but in CMBN it doesn't matter so much because the MG42 is hugely undermodeled in it's firing characteristics anyway .. it shoots more like an assault rifle then a Machine Gun. Mind you, the same is also true for US Machine Guns. Also, the tendency for the MG42 to be shot from the shoulder (again, just like a rifle) has already been noted. Realistically, this gives very bad results by spraying fire all over the map (so, good modelling in CMBN). Unrealistically, it is employed much too often in this way by the german squads in CMBN, who don't seem to understand that the MG42 LMG has to be deployed on its bipod to give good results. Maybe it is a limitation of the engine, not allowing the proper deployment of squad operated weapons. But if the ability of the M1 Garand to not have to re-cock the rifle between a number of shots is advocated, surely it must be even better to have a MG with a 50 bullet belt ( or even extended ones, 100 to 150 bullets, which was easily doable) to put down this volume of fire into an AP or two.

I guess the obvious advice here, since it involves BFC, is: " Then don't hold your breath! " SCNR On a more serious note, I would also prefer the East Front earlier, but I don't think this is going to happen. And like others with more intimate knowledge of BFC internals have already said, the originally envisioned 6-month release cycle for modules seems fat too optimistic and way too ambitious for a team with these kind of limited resources. But in the end, they will get there, it just takes a little bit longer.

Yeah, that would be a possibility and the statement could certainly be interpreted this way. But in recent years I think the term 'retailer' has changed to also include internet-only companies (think Amazon) or even purely digital distribution (think Steam). So my interpretation of 'retailer' raises some questions about the statement that: "CMBN is not being sold in retail anywhere. As with previous releases this is a deliberate decision by us and part of Battlefront's business strategy (successful now in its 11th year)." This seems to imply (again, only my interpretation) that CMBN is meant to be exclusively distributed via Battlefront.com for a couple of years. The website I found seems to make an alternative interpretation likely (distribution also by other digital retailers). So that's why I asked my original question, since I (and as it seems, other members of the community) were under the impression that CMBN is ONLY available through Battlefront.com. Some clarification from BFC would be nice, if only to satisfy my curiosity about this topic. EDIT: Just realised that you, twthomas, posted the original question regarding retailers of the physical (boxed) version of CMBN. I assume that you were only interested in the physical aspect in this question and apologise for kind of "diverting" this thread, I hope that is OK.

Small correction, it's only five variants.

Just promoting my program a little bit. If you're interested in the campaign flow, you could use my CMBN Scenario Organisor (see my sig below). It will show you the victory levels required to advance to specific versions of scenarios in the RTM campaign (and others). Paper Tiger is right (how couldn't he be as the creator of this great campaign), you must have got a draw (or lost) in the mission before "Hell in the Hedgerows v2", which was "Neuville au Plain". If you had won at least a minor victory, you would have got to "Hell in the Hedgerows" (which is v1 of this particular mission).

Hi stephsen, like the others said, very nice mod, gives the game a whole new atmosphere. In fact it is so different, my wife just asked me if I bought a new game, AGAIN, because of the new artillery (incoming) sounds. So beware when using this mod, there might be some explaining to do . Thank you very much and a merry christmas, Mad Mike

Just out of curiosity, what is this store selling then? :confused: http://www.macgamestore.com/product/1947/Combat-Mission-Battle-for-Normandy/ Apparently, just one month ago, they even had a disount on it.

Hi GaJ, First of all, thanks for this great tool (to you and all other developers involved in creating it). I was trying to get the following to work: - Received the following first file: "LH(USA)-MadMike(Ger) 001.ema" - Put the file into Incoming Email, H2HH would recognise the game name - After generating the return file, H2HH wouldn't recognise this return file and wouldn't copy it to the specified dropbox folder Checking the log window, H2HH doesn't recognise both ema-files as valid turns, always claiming that the most recent incoming and outgoing are 0. Renaming the files (getting rid of the "-" and "(", ")" )solved this problem. Is this something which will get changed or should we just pay attention to how we name our games? Cheers, Mad Mike

Great work .. don't want to imagine how long this is taking you. I'm wondering, how do you handle conversion between the different tile sizes between CM1(20mx20m) and CM2 (8mx8m)? Maybe it would be possible to write a program that generates the input for the CM2 map from map programs like GoogleEarth (or Maps), so that instead of CM1 information, real world information is used? Anyway, terrific effort .

This kind of damage modeling was also in CMSF, where the russian 40mm automatic grenade launcher was the biggest threat to western tanks. Due to the high volume of fire from these grenade launchers, a lot of immobilising track damage occured in these tanks, even when the hits actually registered on the upper front hulls. There is most definitely some abstraction in the whole damage distribution system .. but to be honest, I would expect it to be abstracted.

No wanting to be pedantic, but the Luftwaffe was of cause part of the Wehrmacht. The Wehrmacht consisted of the Heer, Luftwaffe and Marine. Now, the Waffen-SS was not part of the Wehrmacht, put was put under its operational control.

I would also like to provide some small AAR for this great scenario. First of all though, I would like to thank my honourable opponent Siffo998 for this fantastic game. I think we both took quite some losses and still kept playing with a lot of energy and, never to be underestimated, a steady and reliable turn reply rate. Cheers and thanks for that! *** SPOILERS *** I was playing as the Germans. The recon phase of this scenario was probably the one where I made most of my bad decisions in this scenario. I lost almost all my recon assets and was only able to reach one of the three "Touch" objectives (the crossings). One result of this was that the "Alternative crossing site" later fell into US hands quite easily. I didn't really have any recon elements left on the north side of the river, so I couldn't really hinder the advance of Siffo998's US troops. This also led to some US troops (around one to two platoons of Infantry plus Tanks) making it across the main bridge and I was barely able to contain them in the village. It took some agonisingly long turns until finally, I was able to clear those troops with the help of the StUG batteries, the halftracks and infantry. At the same time, I used the Panzergrenadier platoon and the 4 Panthers to attack the alternative crossing site. I decided to concentrate my only artillery asset fire here (two 81mm mortars), which must have had some good effect on the US infantry which had taken the farm at the alternative crossing site. I lost one Panther and some Halftracks in that battle, but I was ultimately able to clear the village and orchard and take the objective. The heroic perfomance of one Panzerschreck team certainly helped (see screenshot below). At this point, I was able to shift one Panther to the other side, helping at he Main crossing site, where I had lost 3 of my 6 StuGs to Siffo's Shermans. I used a second Panther in a risky breakthrough maneouvre to cross the river via the northermost bridge. It succeeded, but cost the Panther another crew member - which reduced the crew to 3 of 5 in total (due to an earlier casualty). I thought this encirclement would be more effective than it actually was. The Panther came down on some US forces from the North and managed to kill another Sherman, for the cost of being immobilised. Finally, I was able to take the main bridge and cross over to the north side. This proved to be a very cumbersome process for the vehicles, as quite some tanks and halftracks were destroyed at the approaches to the bridge, nearly closing it completely for any vehicle traffic. Luckily, I was able to sqeeze one Panther and some halftracks through all the destruction. The destruction in the village as seen in the screenshot below was entirely caused by US artillery, showing the ample supply available to the US player. Basically, the US side can deny effective movement through an area for a significant duration of the battle. I lost at least two halftracks and mor soldiers to direct hits from this artillery fire. In the end, Siffo998 surrendered. But as can be seen, he inflicted quite some casualties and it was a very hard fought battle. I never felt completely safe until the very last minutes, when the result became clear. See some screenshots below, including the most distinguished units of the german side. I was especially satisfied with the stellar performance of the Panzerschreck team, which I would give an EK I. I would recommend this scenario to everyone for H2H, as I don't think that a German victory is a foregone conclusion. There are too much variation and different opportunities and possibilities in the map for that. SUPERB Scenario!!!

Or how about using a Wiki for that and just Sticky the Wikis location? It's kind of astonishing that nothing like this has been done yet. I think dieseltaylor created a wiki for CM, I just put a page into it with the three clubs known to me: http://combatmission.wikia.com/wiki/CM_Multiplayer_Clubs Maybe we could improve this wiki and make it a resource for common information? Cheers, Mad Mike

OK, first reply then: I have been able to play it, just yesterday, in Realtime against the AI. It was quite interesting to watch the long range Panther vs. Sherman duels. It took about 5 to 6 minutes to load (a guess, I didn't take the time) and it played quite sluggishly, as could be expected. But it was still playable. Now the funny thing. At first, I tried to load Fire Brigade after doing one of my WEGO PBEM turns (small scenario, Deville). And surely, I got an OOM while loading Fire Brigade. I had this maybe three to four times before in total (including CMSF, which also had OOM crashes) and it always happened when trying to load big scenarios after playing another battle before. Whenever I load big scenarios with a freshly started, "clean" CMBN, I will not have OOM crashes. Even when I played something beforehand it is not guaranteed that an OOM will occur. Strange stuff, really. But it should be reproduceable, at least to some degree.

I finished it, got a Major Victory out of it. The last mission wasn't a CMBN highlight for me and this in a collection of scenarios which always were close to be frustrating. Anyway, I will gladly take a medal for it .

Hi Erwin, to be honest: no, not really. I guess I'm a little bit like BFC in this regard . But seriously, with the latest addition of the "game version used to create the scenario/campaign", I would have to update the Organisor every time there is a new version of CMBN. For the time being, I have to count on the willingness of the people who are using this to update. I think the process is not too involved, considering that all you have to do is swapping one file (the jar-file). Cheers, Mad Mike