Erwin

Um... that wouldn't be real spam would it??

I thought the original textures were too green. Also, check out Aris' first set of terrain mods as those were also greener than this recent set.

Awesome story - thanks.

Ok, so ten minutes later a hidden TD that was keyholed nicely pranged one of my precious Panthers. However, I really enjoyed assaulting into the farm while another platoon worked its way towards the barn and crossroads. This was a rare scenario for me where I suffered only 5 or 6 inf casualties in addition to the tank. Thank goodness, as I had lost way too many men in the previous scenario - half of them in the last few minutes as I raced towards the exit, thinking the Amis were finished. This time I stayed cautious to the end and was rewarded with a TOTAL VICTORY, even tho' I didn't quite get to the Barn objective, and nowhere near the exit. The arty seemed to take care of the SPG's since all the crews were found to be hiding in trenches. Not sure if that was the designer intent, but it made it easy to mop up the few inf defenders that had survived the barrage. All in all, one of the most original scenarios I have seen in CMBN so far. One of my favorite scenarios as well. While it may feel "easy" I liked the fact that my good combined arms tactics (I like to think) were rewarded, rather than facing one "tricky" impossible to avoid, fatal ambush after another, (or one bloody "Hard Knocks" type scenario after another). Really looking forward to battle #3. I see it is a much larger map and looks like more room to maneuver - assuming I can get thru the bocage, and not sure if I get any charges again. BTW: None of the Germans seem to have Schrecks in this Campaign. Odd? One observation about the game system. During Campaigns I occasionally Cease Fire to see the effect of the arty barrage (no looking at the map of course) and to see if my tactics were being effective re causing casualties. So, a few times I let the next Battle start. I was surprised to find that the starting forces in follow-on battles were slightly different every time I looked. Eg: Sometimes there were 2 FO's instead of one. Sometimes there were 3 tanks instead of 2. The number of guys in squads was slightly different etc. Not sure if this has anything to do with a Designer decision, or if the game system randomizes things a bit.

Again I think the game "system" effectively sims that, but the graphics doesn't quite match. I bet it's a similar issue to the TARGET command flicking to a different tile. I still find the actual fire effect to work as desired even tho' one may not be able to place the TARGET exactly where the enemy is standing.

Yes, thank you. It's an observable improvement (again). The terrain finally looks about "right." And I like that new mud tile you just did as well...

PIATS actually do have rocket power IIRC, but I guess it doesn't light up for a few meters so can be fired from an interior.

1) Try angling the BLAST command at an angle rather than directly thru the hole. 2) Alternatively move them away from the hedge and BLAST to the hedge, but not thru it.

Well, I already unpacked manually from the CMMODS download. However, when I compared this latest opus of yours with the version you did dated 8/31/11 in addition to the changes I think the railroad and road graphics are missing from the latest version. I manually copied them over to a new folder which in a flash of I brilliance, I named "RR & ROADS" and placed it inside your CMMODS d/l textures and doodads folder. (Man, I wonder if should now download the 3 files at Repository. Why only 2 at CMMODS?)

Reposted here from a milsims group as I thought it might be of interest: "Well, perhaps start with evidence from outside the military arena and look in an Academic Journal Simulation and Gaming is perhaps the most accessible, This has a large number of high quality journal articles demonstrating examples of serious games that can assist learning and change attitudes. There are a number of projects using games e.g. see the European funded project http://www.aspis-learn.eu/index.php which uses games to change peoples ideas about public spaces. The project is European Union funded for three years. There is no question in the academic world that serious games have the potential to be useful training tools. Back to the military perspective, it is apparently harder to demonstrate the same. To carry out a test, a sample unit would have to deploy to Afghanistan without using training games prior to deployment. There performance would have to be compared to a unit that did use games prior to deployment. e.g. measuring casualties taken. Obviously, the US/UK military are not going to carry out such a test. However, there is some evidence that the use of serious games in the military can work. See two examples below from a book chapter on serious games that will be published in March 2012. (I am the co-author of the chapter). "Example 1: The Canadian Army conducted a study into the way they trained their Troop Warrant Officers on the Leopard and Coyote prior to deployment to Afghanistan (Roman & Brown 2008). Traditionally the course lasted 6 weeks, had no game based content and a 28% failure rate. They experimented with different proportions of game based training, with the following results: Serial 0602 (No VBS®) Serial 0701 (1 day VBS®) Serial 0702 (2.5 weeks VBS®) % pass on 1st trace 0 30% 67% % pass by ½ of traces 61% 72% 100% % pass by end of course 72% 83% 100% "It should be noted that there was no reduction in the amount of live training available for the course, yet substantial savings in ammunition and vehicle mileage were still able to be made, by those who had reached the necessary standard being released from training early. This not only had a psychological impact on the remaining students, but the instructor to trainee ratio increased as the training progressed and the remaining trainees benefited from more personal instruction. "Example 2:In a recent deployment to Afghanistan, one unit actively embraced the potential benefits that virtual training could bring with the VBS2 system, requesting additional training and a set of the training equipment to be provided on loan within the unit to allow them to conduct their own training. They trained extensively with the system until personnel at all levels were confident of their roles and responsibilities. This approach was vindicated in the eyes of the Officer Commanding when, on their first patrol in Theatre they were attacked within 20 minutes of moving out of the Barracks. He was personally convinced that lives were saved by the quick reactions and application of the correct procedures inculcated in the men by use of the simulation (Burbridge, 2010). It is possible to go back into military history and see examples of serious wargames and their impact on war. "The Western Approaches convoy game played in Liverpool during World War II was an example of a game played for training, helping to induct new convoy and escort commanders into current best practice. However, Commander Gilbert also used the Western Approaches games for operational analysis, reasoning through U-boat commanders’ likely responses to escort tactics. He was subsequently applauded by Winston Churchill for his input into the eventual success of the Allies in the Atlantic convoy battles." (Curry, 2012)"

Ok thanks... They are very pretty. (However, I still prefer beat up and battle-worn.)

It would depend on how many divisions would be made available for the East Front. Also, the Germans were losing Divisions daily IITC, so any new ones may have simply been more cannon fodder. I wonder if they could reallocate all their air to the East Front to regain air supremacy, if that could have had an effect.

BTW Fuser: Does this terrain mod completely replace your older one?

I hope our wonderful modders note the highly muted appearance. Too often our uniforms are a bit too colorful/bright.

frankly am scared to open anything posted like that in case it's a virus...

Downloading now. Very exciting! It's just the two files right?

Well, they were pretty crappy in '39-42-ish due to Stalin having purged all his best officers. But, they did learn their lesson and it's almost a certainty that they could have beaten Germany alone in the final years. The numbers of Divisions on the East Front make the entire West Front look like a small sideshow. And one reason why the vast majority of us old time wargamers really don't like Normandy, it feels like the 2nd eleven, or girl's soccer.

And more game news that is weirder than RL: http://news.yahoo.com/video-game-maker-linked-us-prisoner-iran-212600834.html http://paxsims.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/iran-covert-information-operations-and-the-politics-of-videogames/ I think I played the CIA game they mention a few years ago in my prior life. It was execrable and unplayable (at least the version I saw).

Agreed..... So, there isn't a setting like we had in CM1 where one could set a repair/recovery % for units KO'd in missions of a campaign? I recall it even depended on whether you had won or lost the previous battle, since if you lost, you presumably lost the terriai that the damaged equipment was sitting on. Ah nostalgia...

Rocky: Yes, tech performance is not my problem, but anything that improves the visual "performance"... But, like I said I would like to see a clearer explanation of where to install it etc, (how to uninstall if needed) and assurance that it won't do anything nasty to my clean system.

Am about 23 minutes thru the 2nd mission and this one is a LOT of fun. It's like playing "sniper" with tanks. After sending out infantry recon (and preplotting arty with a regular HQ since I had lost my FO in Battle 1) I started to see lots of US artillery pieces. I was able to bring a tank and the 37mm halftrack up my right flank and after shifting around a bit was able to get LOS to about 6 of them so far, plus some halftracks and trucks, all of which have been KO'd with NO friendly casualties or losses so far. That's the best I have ever done. I liked your trick of putting the US armor in craters. It definitely made em harder to get LOS to and shoot em, but I finally managed. But, it's getting to that time when I have to send in the infantry to the buildings, and I cannot breach the bocage for the vehicles, so they'll have to go on the road, and I suspect some ambushes... Some may consider this scenario easy so far. But, I like that I at least "feel" that I played smart and have (so far) been rewarded. We'll see how the 2nd half goes...

Just completed battle one of this German campaign. A well-designed scenario. It's an excellent and interesting map, mixture of combined arms troops, and challenges that allow for multiple strategies to achieve the objectives. The Germans also have 105mm arty (altho' no mortars) and an ATG, although I never found a way to use it. I try to not replay saved games when something bad happens unless it's the game system itself that has f**cked me. Am happy to say that this only happened once I think when vehicles mysteriously decide to go into reverse for no apparent reason - usually around restricted terrain and bridges. The battle has some nasty surprises from ATG's but I was able to have all my vehicles survive. Although one PzV bogged and immobilized. But, that was ok as the terrain is dryer than the otherwise also xnt but infamous "bogging campaign" HOFFNUNG and the road was littered with (pre-existing by the designer) craters. I especially liked seeing destroyed German and US vehicles from what is obviously a prior battle. So, one can intelligently assess the situation to guess where the ambush points may be on the road. And this map is large enough for flanking maneuver. You also get 2 platoons of engineers to open up the bocage. Lovely. It was a bit strange to only get two slightly beat up PzGrenadier platoons with the two full strength engineer platoons. I treat engineers like gold dust cos of their explosives and even though there were more of them than regular inf, I was loathe to use engineers in a recon or forward role. So the PzGrenadiers got pretty depleted, a man here and there KIA and WIA etc... Had one disaster when I got distracted from the main mission and sent a platoon after some fleeing US troops at the side of the map. The US must have gone fanatic as I lost maybe 8 inf trying to wipe out these stragglers! Lesson is: Don't get distracted by what one thinks may be an easy kill. At the end I started to race to the exit zone, and ran into another ambush (and lost my precious FO!). Again unnecessary haste as I had 20 minutes to go and plenty of 105mm arty. Got a Total Victory with all that time to spare. Although I won the points for low casualties, I think I really should have been more patient and careful and only suffered half of the 40 or so German WIA/KIA. In particular the engineers got wasted at the end as I ran low on inf. I worry that will come back to haunt me in later battles. The only criticism I have is the briefing, which is written using some German militarese terms re the formations, and it took me a while to figure out what I was supposed to have. Plus one tank was missing - it turned up as a reinforcement. But, that isn't mentioned in the briefing so you wonder about it... I also thought there are too many engineers and I would have preferred to have an extra inf platoon and one engineer platoon. Not sure why the Germans didn't have mortars. Also, when one loses a FO and it's not replaced it's kind of a disaster and I do have to consider if I will need to replay the last 10 turns as going forward into Battle 2 now I have no FO. Started battle 2, and again it's hard to understand what units I will be getting from the briefing. But, I do not see any engieers at all, and that is worrying as now there is no way to bust through the bocage on either side of bthe road. So, this looks like the Germans are being forced to follow and clear the road for the tanks to continue... Kinda scary, and why no engineers suddenly since it's the same KG as in Battle One? Will report back how this one works out. PS: In case you're wondering why I don't post pics it's that partly am too lazy to learn how, but primarily that once one gets down to Level One where the pics look good, one can't tell the difference between any map or any troops - they all look the same, and there are many other xnt pics/AAR's out there already.

It already exists... it's called "enlisting".

That's another good point. Altho' one should protect FO's, on the occasions that one loses a critical unit like that, the entire campaign can be in jeopardy... Sometime a battle or two later. And who wants to replay battles just to get one's FO back. Suggest either 2, or a FO reinforcement, or different battles use different segments of the same formation each with their own FO.

para: see post a couple pages ago on Gapa Gamma. I was hoping for some advice on installing to improve CMBN performance before I go screw up my machine.