Vanir Ausf B

This map is epic. I would love to see some more like it.

There is a problem with one part of the Tiger's front hull armor right now. It's not as thick as it should be. It's being fixed in the 1.01 patch.

It appears the problem is that orders were issued in French.

The Germans finally engineer something to address their logistical problems.

Range was 500m. I didn't have to do anything special to get them to use tungsten. They seemed more willing to use it than in CMx1, in most cases using both rounds right away (they only get 2). There is some randomness. Sometimes they would fire 1 round of AP then switch to tungsten, sometimes firing one round of tungsten then 1 round of AP then switching back to tungsten. Other combinations were seen here and there, but I would estimate that the first shot was tungsten at least 2/3 of the time.

My testing of 76mm tungsten was of the quick and dirty variety. Only about 40 observed hits each on Panther and Tiger turret. Penetration was not "virtually certain" against either, but the odds were high; I would estimate around 80% for each ( I did not record them, so don't quote me on that number ). That compares to 24.5% for APCBC*, which I did record and was derived from a vastly larger sample size.. * Panther turret front and Tiger turret front resistance vs. 76mm APCBC at 500m is effectively identical in the game. I did run a test of the Panther turret at 300m. Chance of penetration in-game is 33.6%. That is on 289 observed impacts. So you are gaining only about 9% moving from 500m to 300m. I'll let the grogs wrap their heads around that one. All testing done using Panther A (mid). A couple of other observations not directly related to tungsten: 1) At the ranges and angles tested -- 3-500m, straight-on equal elevation -- the odds of a shot trap ricochet into the top hull is so low I wonder why the Germans bothered with the mantlet chin on later models. I have only seen it happen twice in over 700 observed impacts. Do the math 2) The game does not model the Panther hull machine gun port as a weak point, or if it does the chances of a penetration there are infinitesimal. I have never seen any hit on the upper front hull penetrate. I do not record hits on the upper front hull (what's the point?) but the number of observed hits there must be well over 500 by now.

Ahhh, I just noticed that George MC uploaded a nice big map to the repository a couple days ago.

And the setup zones on some maps are very small. That's the real killer. If the enemy knows the exact boundaries of your staging area but that area is km^2 that's a big difference than if it is 100m/side. EDIT: HA, like 4 people posted while I was typing

Yeah, but IRL you don't usually know the exact boundaries of the enemy's staging area.

The largest QB maps included in the game are around 2x2 km, but most of these have very open terrain. There are some a little smaller that are more tactically complex. I don't find maps smaller than 1x1 km interesting, but I also prefer Bn sized games. I wish someone would convert the Huzzar and Monthardrou scenario maps to QB maps, if that is possible. There is a QB map based on Huzzar but it is a small stripped-down version. I may do it myself if it isn't too hard.

There is a 16 sq km map? It is true that the small CMx2 maps take a lot of the guesswork out of artillery placement.

I just checked and we are both right. Men with a 360° arc will stay facing whichever direction they were moving. But men given a 180° (or lesser) arc will change face towards the center of that arc as if they had been given a Face command in that direction. This behavior works the same for tank turret facing.

It doesn't? If spotting checks are made for each infantryman, as I assume they are since LOS and LOF is calculated for each, then I would think having everyone looking in one direction would increase spotting chances in that direction. But the main reason I use 180° target arcs is because I can control facing and engagement range with the same command. This is important because Face commands and Target Arcs are mutually exclusive at movement waypoints.

Battlefield effectiveness is the only factor. And rarity, if that option is used.

I think the OP was asking about the price we pay for them in the QB purchase screen, not the price the US government paid for them in 1944

Yes, I have seen it happen in testing. But only once in nearly 250 observed turret impacts. So the odds of it happening are so small that I wonder why the Germans bothered with the mantlet chin on the D. I also saw it happen once on a Tiger.

Interesting. If infantry are shooting center of mass at AFVs instead of at the exposed commander in the turret that would explain why I've seen so few tank commanders killed by small arms fire. It would also mean that infantry shooting at unbuttoned tanks is even more stupid than we thought. How did you test this?

A competent opponent? I think the tutorial missions are designed to be easy to win.

The rarity modifier for US rockets is actually pretty big. But the base price is so low to begin with they remain affordable (rarity is just the base price times some number). Nobody knows why they are so cheap ( or rather: nobody who knows is talking ), but the prices may be changed in the next patch. Until then it is best to ban their use completely. We have also been told that the Calliope rockets will be removed from the game in the first patch, but will return in a later module. As for opening prep. barrages, the consensus is that they should be disallowed for Meeting Engagements, and probably for the defender in Attack/Defend QBs. Some people feel they are ok for the attacker. My personal view is that artillery in general is so powerful in this game that for game balance purposes it's best to ban opening prep. fire entirely. If you want to use your artillery like that then you should at least have to buy some TRPs, IMO.

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but the game really needs a 180° Cover Arc command. I use them far more than 360° arcs.

Correct, but the OP was asking how they performed in-game.

Who says they don't?

Yes, but keep in mind that your spotter only needs to be looking at the target area when you call the mission and when the spotting rounds arrive. In between those events you can hide him. Just remember to unhide when the artillery mission button starts flashing.

Yeah, I don't think any of those sound like their real life counterparts. I'd like to have different engine sounds for different tanks. Panthers and Shermans should sound as different as the Garand and K98

A bit of testing in the game suggests that tungsten significantly increases the chance of penetration against Tiger and Panther front turret. Most -- but not all -- hits will penetrate, compared to 76mm AP which usually does not. This was at 500m. I did not test against Tiger front hull since the turret results almost guarantee that tungsten will work well there. Against the Panther front hull tungsten doesn't do any better than AP, at least not at 500m. It may be able to penetrate the upper front hull at very short ranges, like 100m, but I didn't test it at that range.