Erwin

Casualties so far?

Aren't bogging probabilities mostly dependent on pounds per square inch exerted by the tracks. So, the wider tracks found on most Russian tanks helped them go fast over squishy terrain. Of course a lighter tank with thinner treads may have also been ok.

I read elsewhere that it's better to move tanks QUICK rather than SLOW as the "bogging to distance traveled ratio" is better that way. But, that seems so counter-intuitive/unrealistic that I have not been able to bring myself to do that. It seems realistic that tanks move slowly and carefully to lessen bogging. Certainly there is less chance of damage to the tracks if tanks move SLOW through gates/fences - that seems realistic. Out of curiosity can you poll your testers to find out how they moved their armor? On or off road and what speed? BTW: Why did you eliminate the engineers (at least for the 3rd and 4th scenarios I have played)? I know my engineers were alive and even had a couple charges left after the 2nd scenario.

I understand that, MikeyD. However, for a game, especially when playing a campaign, it's very irritating/frustrating to lose a couple of tanks every scenario to immobilization rather than combat. In the otherwise xnt Hoffnung campaign I am enjoying, by scenario 4 I have lost 3 out of 5 PzIV's and 2 out of 5 Panthers to simple bogging/immobilization (none to combat) even when keeping them on the road (which I thought in the paved roads of Normandy should be better than cross country). It gets to the point that I am scared to even move tanks at all. At this rate there is a good chance that by scenario 6 I won't have have any armor left - all lost to bogging/immob. I think that is way too high a figure even per historical data. And it's way too much for a game - not fun at all. (I suppose the problem could have been mitigated by reinforcements - but that is a design issue.) Someone posted that it's better to move tanks QUICK as their "distance traveled to bogging ratio" is better that way. But, that just doesn't make sense - esp for game that tries to sim realistic behaviors - and I do enjoy that aspect of CM2.

Thank you. Your mods are always xnt. BTW: Re your compass, which color is North?

Great to have you back. As you can tell, we are in withdrawal and desperately need the new designer drugs that only you can create. (And welcome to the Homeland Security watch list.)

No it's not a biggy. It's just strange to always get the same "Tactical Victory" result. I do miss that in CM1 the level of victory seemed to (usually) have a direct reference to performance in the scenario. Possibly thru bogging/immobilization in earlier scenarios I lost 2x234/1's. But, your briefing maybe should be edited to allow for the fact that one won't get the full complement of whatever due to losses in prior scenarios. I just received my reinforcements and I am down to 3 Panthers and 2 Pz IV's. None of the tanks have been KIA, all but one were immobilized by wet terrain in prior scenarios, (one lost 2 crew). I really recommend changing the weather to "Dry" for your otherwise xnt and fun campaign as losing so many units to conditions beyond my control and despite my very best efforts to use roads etc. is frustrating/irritating and not conducive to gameplay value/enjoyment. (I suppose you could rationalize it and say that the losses are due to Allied ground attack aircraft, but then why not have aircraft?)

Not only that but you can copy mods for "war-ravaged German faces" and use em for the US to make them look a bit worse for wear as well. By renaming the uniforms you cold also presumably give the US German uniforms and vice versa.

Check out the YUKU Band of Brothers site. We still play a a lot of CM1 over there.

FYI: A huge new CMBB campaign tourny is starting over at Band of Brothers ("Birthday Bash 10").

A different character to the first two as there are no engineers. So, the tanks can't find innovative ways across the map, but are forced to use roads and obvious openings that can (and are) covered by ATG's. Combined with my fear of frequent bogging and immobilization as the ground continues to be wet, this turned out to be much more of an infantry-centric attack. That also resulted in about the same inf casualties as the first two scenarios added together - about 20 KIA + WIA. But again, won a Tactical Victory even after all US surrendered around 12 minutes to go. This lack of victory levels that mean anything... Is that a design issue, or does the game system make it hard/impossible to provide meaningful victory levels? Note: At start of 4th scenario briefing says that one will have "four 234/1's plus 3 Pumas," but I only got two 234/1's (plus 3 Pumas).

Looks like we need a "Saving Private Ryan" rescue mission to locate and extricate...

I have a feeling it's not 100% sure either way, just a probability.

We haven't heard anything from you in ages, let alone any new spectacular mods. Hope you are ok...

Note that in two campaigns I have played the XO does NOT give C2 when the HQ is destroyed. Neither does the Co HQ give C2 to subordinate platoons when their platoon HQ is KIA. So, there appears to be a bug.

For what it's worth I had a Panther drive over those mines. But, while it had damage to the tracks it survived and it was able to reverse out and still be useful elsewhere. So, once again it shows that in a battle situation recon vehicles are not tough enuff to survive and should be left back, or only give covering fire from safe positions at best.

There appears to be way too much bogging/immobilization of tracked vehicles, (specifically tanks even when on roads) in the game vs wheeled vehicles. One of the reasons tracked vehicles were created was to traverse terrain that would bog/immobilize wheeled vehicles. However, one can run wheeled vehicles around open ground in wet conditions at QUICK and probably FAST all through a scenario and I have never seen one bog yet. It's crazy when, in a campaign, one can gradually lose all ones tanks to bogging. I very rarely have lost em to enemy fire. It's getting to the point where I'm scared to even move em at all. I know CMBN is designed to be infantry-centric, but...

One problem I have with this campaign (as the ground is wet) is that bogging and immobilization of armor is the BIGGEST problem. The tanks bog/immobilize very quickly, and it's completely unrealistic to have to move them FAST because the "bogging/meter" ratio is lower. If they keep bogging/immobilizing at this rate I will have hardly any armor left in two more scenarios. There is something quite wrong when wheeled vehicles can be driven with abandon across open fields and thru woods at QUICK and nothing ever seems to happen to them, while at the halfway point armor moving SLOW has already bogged 2 tanks. The whole point of tracked vehicles is that they could go where wheeled vehicles could not in muddy conditions especially. If we got them back in the next scenario it would be acceptable, but I just don't believe this rate of immobilization reflects RL.

So to be safe, one has to explode the .brz files, and compare them with the regular folders full of files and select and rename where needed the ones you want to get the desired result(?)

Had the same issue happen repeatedly. I wonder if it's a issue related to German squads that are large enuff to be split into 3 teams.

This is the sort of unfortunate game system AI bug/eccentricity where I feel it's legitimate to replay the turn with different pathing - since you are having to play/manipulate the game system rather than depending on good tactics.

Be good if you could tell us your (cumulative) casualties at each time stage.

This is an issue that has puzzled me as well. When one has a folder named (say) Zfolder, are ALL the files in that folder loaded last, or would a .brz file have files in it that could be loaded last (ie replacing the Zfolder files), thus creating the confused mod graphics that Scipio experienced?

Well, I am sure one can try any route. The one I chose happened to be maybe too easy. I would always defend the flanks as a defender, and in this case it was easy to roll up the US left flank (German R flank).

Ok, soviet satellite...