Rocky Balboa

Don't really see how BF can leave the flak units out of the MG module as these units were pretty much present at every bridge and were in some cases the first resitance encountered by the airborne troops ....

Can't imagine playing East Front without seeing burning stepps and maybe even a molotov or two?

Would that be a violation of the BF Games EULA to use images from the game to sell his mag?

heh... kind of hard to miss when he creates mods for the game ...

The fact that your tank could not reverse did not lead to its demise. Even if it had room, it would have still died because the US tank fired and took it out in one shot. Had the first shot missed then maybe the inability to reverse into cover would have been a factor. Your second tank did have room to reverse but it didnt survive either. The big question I have is why didn't at least one of your tanks spot the US tank especially with it moving and firing in your LOS. If possible I would like to get some information from you on your tank crews. What was their status and experience level? Where these green crews when you purchased them?

I'm don't agree that his tank placement was in error. There may have been other locations that might have been better but I don't believe it's location kept it from engaging the US tank. In addition he had his second tank in a seemingly perfect position (assuming it had a clear LOS down that road) to support his first tank. Even with the bad luck of losing his first tank, the second tank should have at least gotten off a shot. Also Losing the second tank essentially the same way he lost the first was just an unfortunate mishap that no one could have predicted. All in all I think the German player had the initial advantage in force composition by having a 2:1 superiority in tanks. And he used them correctly by placing them in positions where one could support the other.

Wow!!! Absolutely awesome document, so many gems of information and insight into the operation. Just briefly skimming over the document I pulled out this one account on the use of aerial spotters for indirect fire. Can't wait to get more time to read through this document.

I think the level of civility in this thread has been pretty restrained at least somewhat less than the apparent arrogance and exasperation exhibited by the reviewer in his video. I would like to see CMSF art and data ported to the CMx2 engine as well and I would expect to pay considerably more than $10.00 for that upgrade.

I don't think anyone has necessarily dissed the stock artists, perhaps we don't praise them to the extent that we do the modders because we don't really understand what level of compensation if any they receive from BF. The only compensation the modders get is praise from the community and the knowledge that others players enjoy and appreciate their efforts.

Good AAR and I enjoyed the read. After the German player lost his 2 Panzers the game was pretty much fait accompli. This is the way it is in most battles. There are usually one or two key turning points that will decide the outcome. Had the US player lost his armor early on then I dare say the outcome would have been considerably different. Most certainly the US player would have had many more casualties. C'est la vie I applaud the German commander for continuing with the battle even though he was dealt a very severe blow with the loss of his Armor.

Sounds like a great opportunity for a Mod

Sure adding AAA would be nice but I wouldn't put it as a high priority for a WW2 title, not over fire in any case. The number of games I've played with any kind of air support I can probably count on 1 hand. So I really can't say I have noticed their omission. On the other hand, the lack of fire effects on the battlefield to me are quite noticeable. There are certain operations where the lack of AAA will be more noticeable namely the breakout of the British 30th XXX at the beginning of Market Garden. Quite a bit of CAS was used during that operation but with diminished effect due to German AAA. With all this said for a modern day title like CMSF2? I would say AAA is more important than fire to implement because the use of CAS has greatly increased in modern times as well as the need to have more effective ways of countering it.

+1 ... All rounds on target ... Fire for effect ....

I believe (of course you would have to ask BF to confirm this) the 1st turn bombardment rule was added to the game to give the attacking player the ability to bombard what he believes is the defenders position prior to an attack or to prep and objective area prior to an attack. This is of course necessary because the attacker normally has the initiative in this situation and it is assumed he has done some reconnaissance of the area. Allowing the defender to do the same is IMO contrary to the spirit in which this rule was made, it was never meant for the defender to be able to bombard the attacker on turn 1 regardless of whether he guesses correctly or not. I think the OP was asking for a similar clarification concerning the purchase of tigers and IMO the two issues aren't the same. The purchase of tigers is within the spirit of the game, so they should be allowed however, additional ladder rules can be put in place to discourage the behavior.

I've said it before but I suppose it bears repeating again, what BF decides to charge for their work is their business, what you decide to pay for it is yours. Would more competition change things? Maybe, but currently I don't see any, not even close, and to be honest I haven't seen any since CMBO so I'm not holding my breath.

I'm not necessarily interested in playing with the flamers but adding them pretty much necessitates adding the probability that buildings, fields and wooded terrain be combustible as well. When I see buildings or woods burning as a result of an arty strike or the use of WP, this will greatly enhance the realism of the battlefield for me.

Perhaps a rule that any ladder game involving tigers must be played twice with the opponents switching sides before a win can be awarded. Or at least give the US player an option after the game to declare another match.

Easily fixable? Seriously, do you really think this is whats going on at BF?

Not sure why this is such a big issue for folks, lowering volume or muting sound completely is such an easy thing to do outside the game with OS functions ....

Gentlemans Oasis ...

Great set of features but now that its released, I'm specfically interested in the "...and more!" stuff. Is there a complete list of fixes (errr updates ) that somone would like to share?

Mods don't matter but you must both have the same base game version and the same modules which cover the scenarios you want to play

This has been one of my frustrations with the game as well and that is that weapons fire doesn't appear to produce at least a sound contact giving a general direction. I have witnessed this specifically with night battles where I have scouts forward of a patrol with the patrol following maybe 50 to 100 meters behind. The scouts are fired upon and possibly killed or pinned but the follow on squad has no idea where the fire came from because there is no sound contact.

Just wondering, do you get paid the same amount today as you did back in 2000? Business models change as the industry and costs change. BF is not doing anything that most other publishers have already moved to several years ago and to be honest imo their pricing is very competitive considering the size of their market. Bottom line, what they charge for their work is their call, What your willing to pay is yours. Any other discussion is a waste of time.

I'm of the opposite opinion at least until we have some confirmation as to whether the MKIV was buttoned or unbuttoned and the condition and experience of the crew. I'm more concerned at this point that the Sherman was able to spot, fire and score a hit so quickly while on the move. Of course the fates of war are fickle and more formal testing would need to be done to determine if there is an actual problem with the simulations mechanics.