Vanir Ausf B

This and this at least.

What I am waiting for more than anything else is the next CMBN patch, which will likely coincide with the release of OMG. So... OMG!

You are wise, Michael, given that you are speaking to a man who once knocked out Apollo Creed. At least womble has an ocean between them.

US 105mm HEAT has about the same penetration against vertical armor as US 76mm APCBC at 100 meters. But it's actually better in some ways because it's penetration does not decrease with range. And it is less affected by the slope of armor -- such as on Panther upper hull -- than most kinetic penetrators. As mentioned, its downside is that it is not very accurate.

I asked about this a couple of years ago. We know that the next major release, CMFI, does not have this. But AFAIK, at the time, BFC was not yet planning on making CMFI. So the next major release they were planning on will be Bagration. So, maybe then?

You can always use the target command from a waypoint to see the distance to any other point, if you really need to know.

I look at the far left display of what each individual man is doing. If they are deploying then one or more will be listed as doing so. But I do agree with womble that there should be a "deploying" status added to the central info pane.

Bill wouldn't give him three chances, but if GaJ were successful in killing even one of his tanks my guess is that Bill would respond by keeping the others more out of sight, which would be a positional win for GaJ, or Bill would concentrate them more for protection, which would make them harder to kill but would limit their fields of fire and allow more than one to be blinded by a single smoke mission. Plus, Bill would have one less tank. IMO using his highest value assets as forward lookouts, even hull down, is an audacious move on Bill's part. I know he's not letting them sit in one place for long, but for all he knows a Panther or Tiger could crest one of the ridges he is facing at any moment and he has nothing to deal with one of those. At least I don't recall seeing them mention any restrictions on unit purchases.

I think GaJ could stack the odds significantly in his favor using the methods I mentioned earlier. It would be risky, yes, but I am of the view that when you are at a disadvantage you need to take more risks rather than fewer to maximize your chances of winning. I'm not sure what alternative low-risk plan GaJ may have for dealing with Bill's tanks. He's not likely to sneak any Schreck teams into range in that terrain. For the moment it looks like smoke, but that is temporary.

I wouldn't characterized it as reckless, but he has exposed his armor quite a lot. I am puzzled that GAJ has let him get away with it.

I suppose I will be the contrarian here and say that western Europe 44-45 is my favorite theater and time period. And I love bocage because it empowers infantry, something CMx2 desperately needs. What bores me are open maps. You know when you see one of those that it's going to be decided by who has the last tank. East front is fun for a change of pace, but it's always bugged me that the Soviets never developed a decent infantry-portable anti-tank weapon during the war.

I have seen many pictures of white belts (see previous page) and tan ones. I don't think it has anything to do with being clean. I suspect different manufacturers have them with different colors of cloth.

I agree. He needs to take advantage of Bill showing his armor first. I don't see any opportunities for flanking Bill's tanks, so I think GAJ should use his 2 tanks together to engage each one of Bill's in isolation. I didn't see if his tanks are attached to his infantry battalion or not. If they are there should be no problem getting spotting information to them to increase their chances of getting the first shot. He could drop smoke on one of the Shermans and move his panzers up into hull down positions while it clears.

It's on my list. But so is the more recently written Closing With the Enemy: How GIs Fought the War in Europe, 1944-1945 by Michael D. Doubler

Speed does matter with bogging. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=101135&highlight=bogging&page=7

I would have brought a third tank before transport. The map doesn't look to be particularly large (around 1 km per side?).

Yes, I've noticed that. You get a similar effect when the TacAI tries to rotate the hull towards a new target. The turret gets "dragged" off target by the rotating hull and has to repeatedly re-orient onto the target. But if you stop the hull from rotating with a move+pause order (I wonder if a pause order by itself would work here? I will check) you can run into other strangeness if you give a covered arc. If the tank acquires a target near the center of the arc where its turret is already facing all is fine. But if the target is much off the center of the arc the turret will turn to the target, fire, then turn back to the center of the arc while reloading, then turn back to the target, fire, turn back to the center of the arc, ect.

If tanks are in the same formation they are normally always in C2 with each other, so if even one of them spots something it is likely all the others in LOS to that something will spot it very soon after due to information sharing.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=104765&highlight=marder+bocage

1.11 GAME FEATURES * Tiny explosions don't damage tank tracks so much. Maybe related?

Given the highly (and I think a-historically) lethal and flexible nature of artillery in the game I'm not so sure about that. Killing potential is certainly a factor, but when I buy a battalion of infantry I don't do so expecting them to kill an equivalent number of enemy troops. This is true. Armor and artillery are both more dangerous than in the CMx1 games, but infantry seems more vulnerable and less capable. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1391031&highlight=bail#post1391031 Yep, Jep. It's not clear if it's a cover issue or a weapons effects issue, but small to medium caliber HE that was primarily used for suppression historically is very lethal in CMx2. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=106702&highlight=mortar+test&page=19 As for the QB pricing, I haven't used them much, but their usefulness tends to be more situational than most other units. So a small number of well-placed minefields could be worth a lot, but if you are looking to make historically accurate belts of them backed by long stretches of barbed wire that is not feasible. It was the same way in the CMx1 games. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=27948 If AT mines are detonating too late to affect fast moving vehicles that would be a bug. The game does mostly leave it up to the player to know what can kill what and to decide when to chance it. I'm fine with this, but there needs to be a better way for players not familiar with the technical details of WW2 weapons and armor to make an informed decision. Fortunately BFC has recognized this and is planning a feature that will work somewhat like the CMx1 tooltip that would tell you what the odds of a kill were. I think they actually do this pretty well most of the time if you don't shackle them with covered arcs. +10

Starting at 1:27 you can see a Flak 36 turn what appears to be about 90° in 5 seconds.

2 other factors that play a big role in the spotting of ATGs: 1) Size matters. An Flak36 88mm is much more easily spotted than a Pak38 50mm. 2) Range. At 200 meters your guns will not remain unspotted for long no matter what you do. 500 meters will let them live longer. At 1000+ meters ATGs may remain unspotted for long time periods even when firing in LOS of enemy units.

Well, yeah Sherman 75 vs Panther A 500m. 5 v 5 Turn 1 No orders Hits: 14 Misses: 5 Turn 2 No orders Hits: 27 Misses: 0 Turn 3 indefinite Pause + Move added Hits: 12 Misses: 13