Erwin

One problem with the FO is that it's often the one guy who is the observer who gets hit and the other two guys can't do squat. Also, the affected FO is not replaced in future scenarios in a campaign - just like HQ's which have lost their C2 capabilities are not replaced, nor does the affected platoon ever get C2 to its HQ ever again.

One issue is that I have found church steeples (in the game) to be death traps if the enemy has any sort of larger gun firepower. It is such an obvious target.

I babied them, moving them SLOW and trying to keep em on roads - hence my frustration. I agree, if they had returned in subsequent battles I would probably not be complaining. Even the provision of a few armor reinforcements would mitigate the issue of excessive bogging/immobilizations. Hope designers do that in future as an easy fix.

AKD: I am in the final scenarios of the HOFFNUNG Campaign, and I did have 20%-30% (ie 2-3 tanks bogged/immobilized in every prior scenario (even when moving SLOW) to the point that I became nervous about moving them at all. Maybe I was just unlucky. But, it spoils the fun/entertainment/relaxation aspect of the game (for me). Counter-intiuitively, the wheeled vehicles seemed to be able to move as fast as one wanted on any terrain with hardly any bogging and no immobiliizations at all. The problem with going on about "realism" is that CM series is NOT realiistic. There are tons of abstractions and gameplay compromises that had to be made to make something fun that can be played on a PC for a reasonable COTS cost. The latest discovery I made is that one reverse a truck with a gun up to a hedge and have the gun dismount across the hedge in the next field. I need to see if I can do the same with infantry. Does it annoy me that this is "unrealistic?" Not at all - cos it doesn't destroy the fun of the game and it doesn't irritate me. The old saw about justifying some irritating/time-wasting phenomena because it's "realistic" just doesn't cut it. This is an entertainment product and it's full of holes and compromises like ALL entertainment products.

+1 to Rambler's designations. Simpler is always better.

Sounds greatl. However I wish you'd explain more in the description who 9th Company is/was and what was the situation. (You seem to assume some knowledge and I have no idea.)

There is still the basic point of why people play wargames in general and the CM series specifically. Clearly there are differing motivations amongst us. However, I do not want to play CM: LOGISTICS COMMANDER, or CM: MAINTENANCE CREW cos it's not as much fun running around imagining myself as a terrific platoon/Co/Bn/KG commander and blowing things up. However, I know it's all BS and not a lot to do with the RL job of those positions... and being good at CM does not mean one would be worth spit in the RL job. A game needs to focus on the fun aspects - and that doesn't include having 20%-30% of your tanks immobilized in every scenario of a campaign.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/11/22/playing_panetta Also, re China: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/9/inside-the-ring-584291397/

You have to get rid of Zone Alarm Toolbar.

I thought that when a mod has several options eg: tank numbers... that the system allocates them randomly - so one could have different numbers every time one loads a scenario with that tank. However, every time I load the Dealership scenario, I find the tanks shown have the same numbers - it seems like it's always the first (default) mod option. ie: tank name.bmp So, in what order would "tank name 2.bmp" and "tank name 3.bmp" be loaded... sequentially when there is more than one tank in the scenario?

No inconvenience at all. It's impressive you've done so many with only this error.

No, not your fault at all. Anyhow the method works fine. One simply needs to know when there is an exceptional mod situation like this. Anyhow, plz keep putting warning signs in your mod folders, it helps...

I was curious: What happens if you use the traditional method of inserting that space AND change the name via the Properties menu. Does the option still appear? ie: Do the names have to match/be identical using the Properties menu AND the regular method of renaming (or is that automatic)? Ok, I just tried it and it seems that when one changes the name via the Properties menu, it also changes the name as it appears in the folder. But, apparently the reverse does not work.

I like your idea of a vision of the Virgin Mary or somesuch appearing over the battlefield when one has saved enough men via buddy aid. A couple of us have been asking for French hookers/red light district brothel building... I also like the idea of CM:Zombies (a much more realistic simulation of human vs zombie warfare than any other game out there).

And confirms my instinct to never play RT games vs humans as there are many monster RT players out there like (obviously 14 year old) Vinnart who take RT stuff way more seriously than I ever could (or would want to).

You issued a warning re using the Properties menu to change the option names for the StuG but not for the StuH, so I forgot. Thanks. To clarify, one has to put a space before the .bmp via the "Properties" menu for ALL the mod options, not just the original vanilla one that comes default with your mod, correct?

http://wargamingcommunity.wordpress.com/2011/11/21/israel-vs-iran-wargame-compendium/

Try CMMODS accessed thru WeBoB (YUKU).

Did you try "Wet" conditions? And re your very interesting results, the high rate of immobilization is frustrating for an entertainment product - EVEN if it were reflected by RL. Yes, if you want a simulation to test out RL tactics etc and logistics one needs accuracy. I could understand that for modern war depicted in CMSF (not that they immobilized much at all of course). But, for a WW2 game that one turns to for leisure/enjoyment...

I like to use all your options by renumbering the .bmp's and copying all to the main tank mod folder. Ok, I checked the dealership and found that the numbers on the skirts are reversed back to front (at least for the skirt mod that had been randomly selected: "438"). I loaded the dealership several times. I tried loading with a space before the .bmp, and with no space. I thought the options are selected randonly each time. However, the same number (438) keeps coming up (reversed) altho' sometimes the skirt has a piece missing. (So, I presume the skirt is shared with the Stugs or other tanks?) Please clarify exactly which graphic needs the "space" before the .bmp, and which do not. This "space" issue is confusing.

Lovely as always... Thank you! BTW: Is the space after the name an issue with all CMBN mods, or only with this StuH Mod?? Am wondering if I have to go back and insert that space in all my other mods when using the optional graphics (which I always renumber and use).

That's great for exterior walls/bocage. But, not sure it applies to the original issue re when you are IN a building trying to blast to an adjacent room.

Jeez, I never even heard of any of the other games... Talk about feeling "out of the loop." Voted for CM, natch...

Glad to be helpful FMB. And thanks for the heads-up, JyriEric.