Vanir Ausf B

I think this hurts the AI more than it helps it. It only works once or twice before the player learns to never leave the setup zone on turn 1. The frequency needs to be toned down so that the AI isn't blowing it's artillery budget on empty fields most of the time.

In a perfect world...

Not after the patch.

You can't.

It's funny how someone can start a thread saying they don't like the game and it gets 1000 responses. Someone else says its the greatest invention since beer and nobody notices. I like the game too, warts and all

I wonder if there is another game involved or if Fred is just gonna fly solo.

If I were to lodge a complaint about CMBN in general it would not be that the game doesn't work, but rather that figuring out how the game works is difficult at times. The UI is functional once you get the hang of it, but getting to that point is not as easy as it should be. For example, being able to click on the C2 display to go to the HQ unit it represents is great, but I had been playing the game for several weeks before I discovered I could do this, because the UI doesn't make use of some basic UI conventions that have been standard for years, such as tooltips or highlighting clickable items when they are moused over. At the very least this should be in the manual, but I have not seen it in the relevant sections. Compounding the UI issue is the fact that some game mechanics have quirks or limitations that are not documented and are therefore confusing to the player. Ammo sharing is a great idea and the manual states that it works for units in the same formation, but it takes experimentation to discover that the "formation" in question is only the same platoon, or in some cases the same section. It's counter-intuitive that units cannot share ammo with units from another platoon, so this fact should be spelled out explicitly. Adding to the confusion is the UI adding the unit's own ammo to what is available to be shared from other units into a single number so it can be difficult or impossible to know how much ammo any one unit really has. It's possible for FOs and HQs to call in fire support from units to which they have no C2. This seems to be some kind of engine limitation. No biggie. I think most people can accept that this is a game and it can't represent reality 100% of the time. But these things need to be documented and explained somewhere, if not in the UI then at least in the manual. Leaving the player to ponder if this is a feature or a bug until some kindly beta tester explains it on the forum is less than optimal. CMBN offers the player more tactical options and deeper gameplay than CMx1. This does add some complexity to the gameplay, but I don't think it requires a massive amount of brainpower to understand. Anyone who can understand real-world tactics is capable of playing and enjoying CMBN. What it does require is a lot of patience and persistence to understand the UI and undocumented game mechanics.

It's been mentioned that the patch is in release candidate status, so it is unlikely to be far off. I personally could never go back to playing CMBB after CMBN. Infantry squads only filling a 1m x 1m space is too 1990s for me.

So am I wrong or am I right that the Bat HQ has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the fire an FO calls in?

I don't think this is how it works. To test this out put a green FO and an elite FO under a green Bat HQ and see if FOs have the same or different delay times. I haven't tried this but I suspect the elite FO will have a shorter delay time regardless of the Bat HQ because AFAIK any unit calling in indirect fire is assumed to be communicating with the firing unit directly rather than funneling the request through a higher HQ. You could also test this out by seeing if the FO can even call in fire when out of C2 with the Bat HQ.

Nah, keep it.

Blah, nevermind.

Are modules considered major releases or minor releases?

I remember someone saying that originally in CMSF vehicles could not clip through trees but the TacAI couldn't handle the pathfinding, so now vehicles are allowed to clip through trees to some extent.

It's the same way when doing LOS from a waypoint. The distance is always from the current position. I would guess that changing this is somewhere on their to-do list.

How much would CMx2 benefit from multithreading were it capable of it?

I need to play some more to be sure, but right now I'm feeling dubious about the utility of large caliber HE chuckers like StuH 42 or Sherman 105. It seems that in CMBN even medium caliber HE like German 75mm or US 76mm will wreck any infantry or AT gun it lands near. The extra oomph provided by 105mm HE seems to be overkill at the cost of reduced anti-armor effectiveness.

Oh, from your post at the top of this page I was under the impression you were testing with 1.00. At least it's being looked into. As for never hitting at 300m, if the sniper can see it he should be able to hit it at least occasionally, especially after repeated attempts. If it is impossible in the game the TacAI should realize that and hold fire.

I cannot replicate these results. I have set up my test exactly as you describe. I have run the test with the snipers on a 9m hill and with them at ground level. I have run it with the Panthers' left side facing the snipers and with the right side. In none of these tests did I see even one TC hit. http://www.2shared.com/file/dtpJ6QuU/gunnery_sniper_aboutface.html

I moved the Panthers to within 200m. Still no casualties. I then adjusted the height of the snipers to 9m (I have been testing them at 6m). No difference.

Regularly? I'm seeing "never", even with elites. I could definitely hit a human head-sized target at 300m with any decent scoped rifle, and I'm just a regular joe civilian.

I just repeated the test with elite snipers. No casualties. Tried again with elite snipers and the Panthers perpendicular to the incoming fire. Again, no casualties after several minutes of fire. This was at 300m. I'm going to start shortening the distance to see at what distance the invincibility wears off.

So elite snipers can hit the commanders at 100 side-on, but regular snipers cannot or very rarely do at 300m head-on. Is that an acceptably worded statement?

Confirmed. I tested US snipers against unbuttoned Panthers at 300m. The snipers can blaze away all day and never hit a tank commander. The vast majority of shots hit the "weapon mount", suggesting the snipers are aiming at the tank commander's center of mass, which is inside the tank. Just as oddly, the tank commanders do not button up under fire. Test saved game: http://www.2shared.com/file/vuj0R5OA/gunnery_sniper.html

Oh, that sounds bad.