Vanir Ausf B

It does that too, to some extent.

Somehow I doubt that the Soviet troops using panzerfausts to mousehole between adjoining basements considered them to be suicide weapons I'm not entirely sure what you are referring to since no one has posted anything featuring an RPG-7. If you mean the two videos I posted, those are B-10 recoilless rifles. The "mid-body" bulge, which is actually located at the breech end of the barrel, is a venturi nozzle. It's purpose is to spread out the force of the propellent charge over a larger surface area of the barrel so that the barrel doesn't explode, thereby enabling larger propellent charges to be used without making the barrel thicker. It does practically nothing to lessen the backblast, which in the case of the B-10 is several times more energetic than a Panzerschreck.

*sigh* http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=73a_1374260554 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a80_1373203646

What else would you spend that $35 on that would give you greater entertainment value?

Not really. The best anyone has come up with is a general guide:

Very much so, despite the nonsense MikeyD posted earlier.

ONCE MORE UNTO THE BREACH, DEAR FRIENDS, ONCE MORE. OR CLOSE THE WALL UP WITH OUR PIXELTRUPPEN DEAD!

What is wrong about letting soldiers fire rockets from buildings? They could and they did. And they still do in urban fighting today. All of those ideas listed are good ones, but as Zebulon mentioned, most of them involve significant changes to TacAI. Corner peeking would require new animation. The last two items have been essentially ruled out by BFC. By comparison, the engine already allows rocket firing from buildings (e.g. PIAT). It's just a matter of allowing it for the specific weapons.

Do you actually play Combat Mission?

I find the continued inability of infantry to use buildings as cover to attack armor from more tiresome than the discussions regarding it.

From the CMBO 2.01 readme: Special note: MGs now have more effective aiming, rates of fire, and suppression effects. These highly requested changes make combat more realistic and more challenging tactically. Suppression, but not accuracy, from small arms fire was also increased.

My guess is M-36. The M-18 may not have taken part in operation Market Garden, but it was in action in Normandy from July onward and therefore could have been included in the base game.

This has been reported before, but I might as well bring it up again since it's on-topic. In the QB purchase screen for US armored infantry battalion all of the vehicles in the headquarters company are missing, including the mortar halftracks and the entire assault gun platoon.

I noticed Schultz is back

I've often wondered why BFC brought forward that camouflage bonus from CMx1 for AT guns but not for vehicles.

It's not necessarily a bad idea. The downside is that a larger waypoint will obscure any distant units it is near or in front of.

My experience with bocage specifically is that if they are withing 2-3 action spots of it they will deviate from their plotted movement to hug it if the next movement point is a long distance off. This is while moving outside of contact with the enemy. This tires them out and slows them down considerably when moving over long distances and makes it necessary to either avoid proximity to bocage or plot a larger number of more closely spaced movement points, which also slows down movement.

What I do in that situation is plot a movement order to the exact spot the enemy unit is at from a friendly unit that has already spotted him. Then you can mess with your tank's waypoints and do LOS checks without having to deselect the tank (assuming you have "show all movement paths" turned on). You just have to remember to delete the movement order from the spotting unit before you end your turn.

My experience is the opposite. Any nearby cover acts like a magnet, to the extent that it can be difficult to move troops in the open near cover.

IIRC correctly the manual states that vehicles under a Hide command have a spotting penalty. If that is true the command is worse than useless.

Someone's been sniffing something.

Then why did every WW2 army issue them? Were there not enough Garands and K98s to go around? Heck, the Soviets equipped whole squads with them. I completely disagree with that blanket statement. Their relative utility is situational, and in my experience SMGs are much more dangerous in the game under 100 meters than any rifle save for the MP44. Having one or two SMGs in the squad gives it tactical flexibility.

Yes, but there is an exception for existing area fire plotted before LOS is lost to smoke, which will continue after LOS is lost. So if your opponent drops smoke but the turn ends before it thickens up too much you may want to get some area fire going onto suspected movement routes to see if you can make him waste the smoke mission.

Are those "other games" running in DirectX or OpenGL?

As well as allowing us rebellious colonies to continue pushing the boundaries of impropriety.