Vanir Ausf B

Another strong argument against may be that without the ability to re-man the gun there isn't any good reason to un-man it in the first place. At least I have yet to use the feature. Since abandoning the gun ends it's day anyway my motivation is towards letting them go down in a blaze of glory, taking as much of the enemy with it as possible. I hope the feature that got cut in it's favor wasn't AAA or a Combined Arms QB option... :eek:

Was that a rage quit at the very end?

Got it. Very nice! The only downside is that at lower angles the fine grid creates moire patterns all over the place on my machine. But I understand that isn't the fault of the mod and may not even happen on all machines.

Oh, cool!

I tried searching the Repository for all mods with the word "gridded" or "rocket" in the title, as well as under your author name but could not find the mod.

It refers to the gun mantlet.

+1. Much less horrible than hanging.

It's grown from 2 people to 6 in the past 12 years, most recently when they hired a second programer 2010. CM 2.0 is an engine upgrade. CM:FI has a few features now that CMBN lacks because it is a more recent version of the engine. But those improvements are going to be back-ported to CMBN in a couple of months. BTW, doesn't CMFI already have planes? What it's lacking is stuff that can shoot back at the planes.

*SPOILER* Bois de Baugin has several German AT guns on the defense.

It's still a little to the left. Not as much as conservatives claim, but for example Forum is unabashedly left-leaning (it's produced in San Francisco so it almost has to be) and there is no conservative equivalent.

I understand it can be done, but is there any scenario you can think of in which all crew-served weapons and vehicles are assigned extra value?

By that logic we could do away with scoring in QBs altogether and let players argue about who won. Actually, that would be far more "realistic". Scoring is fantasy no matter if it's for QBs, scenarios or campaigns.

LOL, no. December at the earliest from what they've said in the past.

Pre-planned artillery in CM may be less flexible than IRL, but I seriously doubt it is less effective in the aggregate. Jon himself has posted to that effect in the past. My emphasis added.

I apparently don't qualify for personhood since I don't expect unrealistic amounts of flexibility. By the "fireplanning function" are you referring to pre-planned bombardments? They are already so effective in the game that many people disallow them except in specific circumstances. Is the effectiveness of pre-planned bombardment under modeled?

Then it makes sense that he's looking for some new forums.

Hey, Tom! Sorry you got left out of the movies. Well, not really, but at least there are several sites you could try out. http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=221 http://webandofbrothers.yuku.com/forums/3/Challenges#.UDWFjqMkpNs http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/thefgmforum/forums/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy.160/

Why would it suck?

http://faculty.ncwc.edu/mstevens/205/205lect02a.htm

I suppose someone should ask the question. Why isn't Point Target the only type allowed after setup? I rarely use anything other than Line. Should I feel dirty?

The grid is great, but I don't like the desaturated terrain. Oh well...

I've seen it happen many times also, but only when continuing to fire at previously spotted units that they lose LOS to. I even set up a test to try and replicate units reacting to invisible (to the player) enemy units and couldn't make them do it.

I'm still waiting for someone to post a save game showing this. I find the whole idea of stuff not being shown to the player bizarre.

I assume the second set should be Tank vs. Tank. Great work on these tests. I agree that this seems to be the opposite of what it should be. It may partially explain why we often see complaints about infantry being spotted too easily, but not so much with vehicles.

Have you ever seen a pissed-off tank crew on the attack in CMBN? I would arm everyone with pistols if I could.