Vanir Ausf B

In addition to what Ian said, the only upgrades BFC charge for are when they go from one whole version number to another, i.e. from version 1.xx to 2.xx. The Market Garden module will bring the game up to version 2.10 so as long as you already have the 2.0 upgrade you won't have to pay anything. Version 3.0 -- which they will charge for -- will not be released until the next modern warfare CM game, according to BFC's last comments on the subject.

That type of game rules change is like bug fixes in that it is actually part of the game engine version rather than exclusive to any content (module). So anyone who installs the next patch will have it whether they buy MG or not.

Any test of how long it takes to spot a unit in LOS is going to be a measure of how difficult or easy it is to spot that type of unit, even if that was not the intended purpose of the test. Comparing the number spotted in two test runs each featuring a different unit type will be a comparison of the relative difficulty of spotting those unit types, assuming all other factor are held constant. That there was no concealment is perfect since you wouldn't want any unless you were trying to test concealment.

I think some people are reacting because he has a column literally right on the map edge rather than just near it. But if that's where the map maker put the dead ground then so be it, IMO.

To me, edge hugging isn't as much of a cardinal sin it was in the CMx1 games. In a CMBB QB ME a large randomly generated map would be 4-6 km wide with the VLs concentrated near the middle. The map in this AAR is 1.6 km wide and one of the VLs appears to be locate almost right on a map edge. On CMx2 maps you have to use whatever terrain there is and assume your opponent will do the same. It's your responsibility to make sure your flanks are anchored on some impassible terrain or map edge or are at least adequately guarded. It looks to me in one of the recent screenshots that there may be a raised berm that runs parallel to the map edge where Bil's forces are advancing. In some of the zoomed-out shots it appears there is little more than an open field on the other side of the berm. So Bil either hugs the edge or runs them across an open field, probably in LOS of Ken's forces in the Dune's area. If the mapmaker puts the best, or only, cover along the extreme edge of the map I find it hard to blame a player for using it. I blame the mapmaker if anyone. Ken's left flank is not anchored on anything. I'm not sure if he didn't notice the dead ground along that edge and thought Bil would have to cross the open field, or if he just assumed Bil wouldn't dare make use of it. :cool:

IIRC Bil is a former US Army officer with the 1st Cavalry Division so it's no surprise that he prefers his infantry to be highly mobile with plenty of armored support.

I think it would be more the opposite. The wizened vet would be the more likely to make the correct calculation that firing from the cover of a building is less detrimental to his health than running out into the middle of the street and then pausing to fire while in full view of every enemy soldier in the area. It would be the fanatics who would find the latter more appealing. However, I do suspect BFC is going to over-model the likelihood of injury or death when firing from buildings, at least initially. In reality the chance of that happening was quite small since there are really only two ways to hurt yourself or someone else when doing it: firing with a wall or similar obstruction within the minimum safe clearance area behind the weapon (which is 10 feet for a Bazooka, for example), or firing when a friendly soldier is behind the weapon. It is a bit nonsensical to only model this chance of injury when firing from indoors since these circumstances could and did occur in all sorts of other environments. A soldier outside of a building firing with the breech end of the weapon up against an outside wall or parked vehicle is going to be done for the day. Same with soldiers firing from within foxholes or trenches. But the game presently allows firing from these locations with no chance of injury or even suppression. But I'm presently still too happy about this huge change in the right direction to worry about it before I see it in action

This may be a dumb question to ask, but what does this do that H2HH doesn't?

What is definitely needed is something to compare the results to so that there is some basis to make a judgement. Otherwise the interpretation of the results will be largely subjective. For example, I keep coming back to your own testing of tanks spotting tanks vs. spotting infantry. I think almost everyone would agree that a Sherman tank sitting in an open field should be more easily spotted than a squad of infantry in the same field, but your test suggests this is not so in the game.

Results so far indicate they are made of flesh and blood, thankfully pixelated

"the thwack of their impacting flesh cannot be described." Whatever sound mod you are using, I want it.

OH THANK YOU GOD (i.e. Steve)

It total debt, yes. But a more accurate measure of the real economic relevance of debt is in terms of % of GDP, by which the US ranks 15th -- slightly worse than France and Belgium, much better than Ireland and Japan. BTW, in terms of purchase power parity: 6. USA . . . 93. China . 133. India

China ranks 80th.

The other error is that they have somehow managed to bury the back end of the halftrack up to the axle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_%28August_1996%29

I've never heard the Germans referred to as aboriginals before. Or the Japanese.

Oh gawd, no. Our tiny brains would explode if faced with any more options. We know this because MikeyD has a fragmentary memory of BFC Steve or maybe someone else saying something like that at some time in the past decade.

It was in the real war too

BFC could say. But they probably won't. I can say that it has been reported before and we have been told by a beta tester that BFC is aware of it.

If nothing else, I have learned from reading this AAR that the correct term for a group of halftracks is a focus. That could server me well at the next Trivial Pursuit night.

This is an odd thread to in which to ask, but the answer is yes, the PC and MAC versions play fine with each other.

If you look at the test results poesel71 posted, one apparent issue that is not getting any attention is that all else being equal -- open terrain, no movement -- tanks are more adept at spotting infantry than they are at spotting other tanks:

They also only rejoin if located in the same action spot.

I would almost bet money that comment was in reference to in-game commands rather than options on a setup screen. I seriously doubt that anyone ever quit playing the CMx1 games after being rendered dazed and confused by the QB options screen. It's also contradictory to warn against the perils of too much complexity in one breath and then suggest a vastly more complex solution (make a scenario) in the next.