Vanir Ausf B

But the same question applies to CM1. How many CM1 scenarios were really that large? None of the official scenarios were anywhere near that. The map for the BB13 tourney at We Band of Brothers is 3.2 km x 2.8 km, which is smaller than some CM2 maps on my hard drive.

That is not true. At a certain load point the unit will no longer be able to Fast move. Pile on more ammo and it can't Quick move either.

This happens when there is already a file in the outgoing email directory with the same name (QB 001). Delete it and the ~QB 001 (temp) file the game creates when this happens and it should work. Do note however that your attempt to circumvent the QB purchase point limits in the scenario editor will not work. When you begin a QB any forces place there in the scenario editor are ignored.

But the same question applies to CM1. How many CM1 scenarios were really that large? None of the official scenarios were anywhere near that. The map for the BB13 tourney at We Band of Brothers is 3.2 km x 2.8 km, which is smaller than some CM2 maps on my hard drive.

That is not true. At a certain load point the unit will no longer be able to Fast move. Pile on more ammo and it can't Quick move either.

That is not true. At a certain load point the unit will no longer be able to Fast move. Pile on more ammo and it can't Quick move either.

That is not true. At a certain load point the unit will no longer be able to Fast move. Pile on more ammo and it can't Quick move either.

And just to follow up on my post on the numbers, I do agree with Slysniper on one point: you don't need to know the exact numbers and no one should construe these tests to be an argument that you do. The numbers are just there to inform your tactical decisions, or to inform map-makers. Do you need to know that a grass AS with a tree in it provides 20% cover while a light forest AS with no tree provides 10%. No, you do not. But knowing the general relationship can make your decision tree more accurate and showing the numbers is simply a means to that end, and I would argue that this is useful to the extent that some of these relationships are not intuitive.

I'm pretty sure the plan is to miss the date and then make fun of you for trusting their judgement, again.

Here's an interesting discussion about the use of Sturmgewehre 44 and it's availability. Definitely something to consider for the upcoming CMRT module. It comes down to the conclusion that the use of the StG 44 was more widespread than usually thought.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2568621&mpage=1&key=&#2568621

Below is a link to a similar topic reference dust and smoke.  The behavior of dust and smoke was changed with the 4.0 engine release. 
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/125914-smoke-as-a-force-field/
After 4.0 it seems you can no longer fire through smoke at all.  I have even had a case where some of my own vehicles were kicking up a lot of dust and the cloud of dust drifted in front of a shooting vehicle causing the vehicle to stop shooting.  The vehicle was on area target and should have fired until told to stop, ran out of ammo or had something really bad happen to it.  Another frustrating thing about this is that the status block (lower left screen, green text) will incorrectly advise that the vehicle is aiming, firing, aiming, firing etc when it is not.  I tested this in CMBS and one of the WWII titles (IIRC it was CMFB) about a month ago. 
 
The smoke / force field wasn't a huge deal as long as we had a work around for it.  However 4.0 seems to have removed the work around.  In theory if the conditions are right you could follow a smoke screen all the way into the OpFor main line of resistance.  I hope maybe this behavior can be tweaked with the other 4.0 stuff that BFC is tweaking. 

The accuracy of aircraft strafing in the WW2 games got hit with the nerf hammer awhile back so it's probably deliberate.

Manners borne from fine breeding and a slightly haughty hauteur
And wine and beer, lot's of it. ;).

I disagree. I think accuracy has already been toned way down compared to reality. If you've ever paid close attention to how many shots it typically takes to hit troops in the open you'll see that soldiers in CM are borderline incompetent at marksmanship.
 
If you want to point the finger at high casualty levels in Combat Mission you would be better off looking towards artillery and mortars, which are too precise by far and at least in the WW2 titles too flexible.

That was true years ago due to their going-out-of-business low price, not their effectiveness. The prices were adjusted and there's no issue now that I am aware of.

I think the Abrams in CMBS is somewhat more godly than in reality. I also think the technical aspects of armored vehicles matters less in real wars than in war games. In an actual war between NATO and Russia it would matter very little. The main effect of having an inferior tank is wounded national pride and maybe a hit in the export market.

I think the Abrams in CMBS is somewhat more godly than in reality. I also think the technical aspects of armored vehicles matters less in real wars than in war games. In an actual war between NATO and Russia it would matter very little. The main effect of having an inferior tank is wounded national pride and maybe a hit in the export market.

I think the Abrams in CMBS is somewhat more godly than in reality. I also think the technical aspects of armored vehicles matters less in real wars than in war games. In an actual war between NATO and Russia it would matter very little. The main effect of having an inferior tank is wounded national pride and maybe a hit in the export market.

I think the Abrams in CMBS is somewhat more godly than in reality. I also think the technical aspects of armored vehicles matters less in real wars than in war games. In an actual war between NATO and Russia it would matter very little. The main effect of having an inferior tank is wounded national pride and maybe a hit in the export market.

If that is your cup of tea you should check out Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm, also published by Matrix (is also on Steam). Less a game and more of a simulation compared to Combat Mission but it does what it does very well.

im just disappointed they couldnt be bothered to add shtora eyes to complement the trophy ears.

I would differ slightly from what has been said in that I don't think it's changing positions per se, but rather limiting unbroken exposure time. As @sburke mentioned, launch time for a Javelin is 15-20 seconds from spot time (varies by unit experience rating). Assuming the Javelin team will probably not spot your unit instantly upon reveal at typical modern combat ranges this give you about 20 seconds of safe continuous exposure time. This is just enough time for a tank or APC to pop out of cover, stop and fire one round or burst at an area target then move back into cover (10 second Pause command at waypoint). The turret must be pre-rotated towards target prior to movement. Rinse, repeat. It does not matter if the enemy knows where your vehicle is if it's never exposed long enough for a target lock. Longer exposures to engage enemy vehicles with direct fire are permissible, but only from keyholed positions.
Modern warfare against Javelin-equipped forces requires a level of micromanagement and exhaustive LOS checking someone coming from the WW2 games is unlikely to expect.
 

I would differ slightly from what has been said in that I don't think it's changing positions per se, but rather limiting unbroken exposure time. As @sburke mentioned, launch time for a Javelin is 15-20 seconds from spot time (varies by unit experience rating). Assuming the Javelin team will probably not spot your unit instantly upon reveal at typical modern combat ranges this give you about 20 seconds of safe continuous exposure time. This is just enough time for a tank or APC to pop out of cover, stop and fire one round or burst at an area target then move back into cover (10 second Pause command at waypoint). The turret must be pre-rotated towards target prior to movement. Rinse, repeat. It does not matter if the enemy knows where your vehicle is if it's never exposed long enough for a target lock. Longer exposures to engage enemy vehicles with direct fire are permissible, but only from keyholed positions.
Modern warfare against Javelin-equipped forces requires a level of micromanagement and exhaustive LOS checking someone coming from the WW2 games is unlikely to expect.
 

I would differ slightly from what has been said in that I don't think it's changing positions per se, but rather limiting unbroken exposure time. As @sburke mentioned, launch time for a Javelin is 15-20 seconds from spot time (varies by unit experience rating). Assuming the Javelin team will probably not spot your unit instantly upon reveal at typical modern combat ranges this give you about 20 seconds of safe continuous exposure time. This is just enough time for a tank or APC to pop out of cover, stop and fire one round or burst at an area target then move back into cover (10 second Pause command at waypoint). The turret must be pre-rotated towards target prior to movement. Rinse, repeat. It does not matter if the enemy knows where your vehicle is if it's never exposed long enough for a target lock. Longer exposures to engage enemy vehicles with direct fire are permissible, but only from keyholed positions.
Modern warfare against Javelin-equipped forces requires a level of micromanagement and exhaustive LOS checking someone coming from the WW2 games is unlikely to expect.
 

He was on as of a few hours ago. I lean more toward Ken’s view that in his rage he has embedded some keys in his hands and is unable to type for the moment.
Baneman “Alexa call Bil. . . . . A whole lot of nasty names. “
Alexa “I have an assortment of names you have previously called Bil.......”