Erwin

It was the US troops in the "chateau" a few hundred meters to the left of the town I was referring to as "in the center" of the map. In the endscreen I noted there were two ATG's plus mortars and significant inf forces around the chateau (I would label locations too plz). If I had tried that route, and THEN had to fight around the town to get to the EXIT I doubt if many of Gerber's guys would have survived. It would also be a longer route - I may have had to rush more or run out of time. I was surprised you did not place inf ambushers in the woods to the left of center. That danger was why I chose the RHS of the map thru the farmhouse. IMO one NEVER should attack thru or close to woods with vehicles etc. if there is another choice. Also, without incentive, there is also no reason to fight thru the town since one can squeeze by via the map edge. As I said b4, the town should not be so close to the edge, or there should be obstructions at the edge to force the player thru the town. Since this is a campaign I am not sure what it would prove if I played scenario 4 with a full strength force. Getting the balance between having enuff opposition while not taking too many casualties to complete the campaign is very tricky and a major part of the challenge (both in design and to play). I hope you make the changes and then give us one more chance to play from Battle 1.

brilliant!

Well, it's good dedicated folks like you who make the innovations that make CM so addictive. Thanks!

entrenched commericial interests in existing plant and machinery. remember wars are usually about some people/companies making lots and lots of money.

"Just my opinion of how I want to spend my time." And we'd all fight to the death to defend anyone's right to spend their leaisure time as they wish...

"if France had as much as itched a finger (militarily) when germany re-occupied the Ruhrgebiet Hitler would have shat in his pants and had ordered a retreat." Agreed. But Hitler was a great (strategic) poker player and correctly predicted that the "decadent, weak" Allies would do nothing in response to, Anschluss, The Rhineland, Czechoslovakia etc. That's what makes him a great strategist in the early years (including his rise in the 30's). As mentioned, the Germans had virtually nothing on their western borders for several weeks after they invaded Poland and the French could have simply walked into the Ruhr. Maybe the reason he liked Rommel so much is that Rommel was a similar gambler (with good operational instincts). Their arrogance and over-confidence re their gambling skills eventually done em in.

"Personnally I think you are all crazy to want to take it to that size." But, of course that is why so many of us loved CM1 and still play it. You represent a different market that wants the small-scale infantry dominated battles that CM2 caters to. And we can't wait 10 years for affordable computer to be able to handle large CM2 scenarios. By then the game technology will have moved on yet again with CM4 or whatever. In any case, with CM1, IIRC I was able to play the largest scenarios within 3 years of CMBO first coming out.

Germany was always a land power given its location. They did not have the economic capacity to outbuild the Brits and French etc in shipbuilding, so they didn't try. Bismarck and Tirpitz and all the other pocket BS's etc were always designed to be raiders of commercial transports. They did almost do the Brits in with U-Boats. But, the US lendlease and eventual entry saved the Brits' from starving. It's interesting to speculate if Germany had negotiated a ceasefire with USSR in late '41 (Stalin seemed prett panicked and may have gone for it) whether the western allies would have also caved at that point. Of course it would have set the stage for another war some years later as the Allies would have rebuilt their armies to be much stronger than Germany by then. So, I think Hitler and the Nazis made a lot of brilliant strategic moves and were not idiots at the start. Their big mistake was in their "conquer the world" and "racial superiority" dogma which gave them a rope long enuff to literally hang them. eg: the Nazis were welcomed as liberators from the hated Soviets in the Ukraine. But then their brutal suppression gave the Ukrainains no choice but to join the Soviets. Had the Ukrainians provided manpower to the Nazis vs the Soviets...

Exited all surviving units with 4 mins to spare. 5 KIA, 8 WIA vs 62 KIA and 29 WIA for the Allies and a vehicle. German Minor Victory 200 : 154 Didn't understand the Gas Storage VL. It is not named and can't be seen even in the endscreen. Recommend you label it as a location. The town was easier to get thru than I expected. Massing the tanks and inf seemed to easily kill or suppress any US that opened fire. But, I felt weird/gamey that I could hug the right map edge and get thru with little opposition. Esp when I saw how many US were still around the center of the map. I would have been massacred had I gone that route and still had to deal with the town to get to the exit zone. I would recommend that the town be placed further away from the Exit zone and right map edges. I also worry that even though I didn't think I was making careless moves (I replayed the turn if I thought I had done something really stupid and got casualties as a result), I could not prevent gradual attrition of Gerber's inf. 12 of the 13 casualties are from the original 31 escapees. (One was from the mortar ammo bearers.) I think that replacements should be set at around 50% of losses to simulate other deserters etc joining Gerber. Aso maybe make his group Crack to simulate their desperation. Anything to make it a bit easier to kill the US and get through without losing so many men and starting the next scenario with so little inf. Battle 3 looks like maybe it could be easy(!?) but am thinking it may be better to wait for you to make adjustments first...? I get the feeling I will soon only have my vehicles and crews, but virtually no inf.

"a refusal to recognize the logistical issues involved..." Yes. Many did realize that but were overruled/fired by the fanatic Nazis who had taken control. The Wehrmacht were horrified at Hitler's gambliong moves early on. But, he kept being proven right... until he wasn't and by then it was too late. We see pragmatism overruled time and time again right up to today's conflicts. Something to do with the politicisation of war, the fact that the decision makers generally have little/no experience of war, and they rarely have skin in the game (ie: none of their kids doing the dying). Yes, there are always the rare exceptions, but in general... "They didn't plan for the war they picked." They picked exactly the right war (blitzkrieg) to match their economic capabilities. But, when things dragged on, that's when the pragmatists and realists were overruled, and Hitler was powerful enuff to drag Germany into an unwinnable/untenable situation. It was his ego and the survival of the Nazis that was at stake, and they were willing to destroy their own country in order to maintain power as long as possible. Rationally, the Nazis could probably sued for a peace in the early years and kept much if not all of their gains. But, that wasn't enuff. plus they probably estimated that they would merely delay the final armageddon as the Allies would come back for revenge when THEY were ready. Germany had to win big and win fast or economically they would be f$$$ed. They gambled, and then kept doubling up (down?).

Oh thanks, Vin. I have some of those. I forgot. Are the brz file small arms sounds named for the weapon so you know which sounds to rename? Sometimes I think I spend more time buggering around with mods, mixing and matching than I do playing the games.

Do many/all of the sound mods from CMSF work with CMA (and vice versa)? Also wondering about some of the Soviet-built vehicles and Mujahideen "uniforms".

Thank you for keeping on improving this. However, I have d/l several versions already and don't really want to keep installing and uninstalling. Have you any projections as to when you will have a final definitive version?

I dunno if anyone has played the really interesting looking "Fire Brigade" or "Bloody Omaha" (the original version) to any conclusion but they brought my pretty high-powered system to its knees. Either it slows down to unacceptable (to me) speeds, or it crashes. CM1 is the only game system which can enable one to easily play Regimental-sized scenarios with severl companies of armor and other vehicles on the largest maps possible. CM2 is brilliant for smallish company-sized infantry-dominated and urban warfare scenarios.

Can someone please list just one example of a similar sized game company that is producing these sort of high quality niche games and that is more responsive to, and taking better care of its customers than BFC... At least then, posters here could say 'Co X does it like this, and it works great, so why can't BFC?" Otherwise, everyone here sounds very naive re the issues and challenges involved in running a "micro" company and developing computer software.

The question is even though the target line snaps to a location you may not quite want, when your unit fires, does the game system calculate the effect on the location as if the enemy unit was there? ie: Is this visual phenomenon merely one of the many game abstractions, and the effect you desire still occurs? (I still find I am able to damage the enemy and win battles regardless of this strange effect... so I ignore it these days.)

The war in North Africa is sorta a metaphor for the entire German effort: Amazing successes early on primarily due to superior doctrine re tactics and an innovative commander who had been trained with the new ideas vs a numerically much superior foe, plus importantly, control of the air. Then attrition and supply problems as the Germans became overconfident and overreached. Inability to replace losses. Finally, defeat as the enemy (Allies) became overwhelmingly stronger, learned better tactics and took command of the air.

Around 20 mins to the end: Have elected to go on the right map edge and use engineer to blast a hole for the vehicles in the RHS bocage. The MkIV and Stug are safely through and facing the town. KO'd an ATG. But, US small arms fire and mortars continue to attrite the Gerberian infantry. 5 KIA and 5 WIA so far. If there is little opposition in the town, I may make the EXIT zone, but it looks like I won't have enough men left to continue. Generally I think it's not good to locate Victory Locations such that it encourages players to use any map edge. It feels gamey. But, I see no other option that would be suicide, and things are bad enuff for Gerber's infantry as it is. Bardosy: Did you play this campaign through and did not suffer this inf. attrition? I think I am down to about 15 infantrymen from the original 31!

I like the look of those wheeled mounts for the 20mm. It's those types of obscure vehicles that I miss from CM2. (I always liked all the lesser known CM1 recon vehicles.)

Ok, I agree with that too as that is how I thought the game worked... I thought the implication was that another soldier can come by LATER and pick up the HMG or Mortar that has been left lying around. It was a confusing thread: 1) Jaresh: "Had a MG team whose gunner died and vanished from the map. Later on I brought back the team to the spot where he died as I noticed his barely used MG lying on the floor." 2) Quote: Originally Posted by Erwin Can one pick up a weapon without giving buddy aid? 3) Wego: "In the case of HMG and mortar teams, yes. The mg\mortar is transferred to an active soldier without any buddy aid required. Done for balance reasons I believe, the teams would be a bit too fragile otherwise."

Bloody 'eck... Those Aussie school bus drivers must be tough! "Yer goin' ta school if it kills the lot of yer!"

So you contradict what Wego McPbem said: "In the case of HMG and mortar teams, yes. The mg\mortar is transferred to an active soldier without any buddy aid required." Anyone know which it is for sure?

Thanks for the info. Didn't realize that. Any idea re what happens re picking up "enemy" HMG and mortars when you have a red vs red or blue vs blue scenario?

If you don't find anyone here, also check at YUKU's Band Of Brothers CM site.

The detail of CM2 is both its strength and its weakness. It is great to have the added realism. But, there are still many, many abstractions, and the time to play a turn has soared (for me). It takes me a week or more to play a scenario (assuming it's not tiny), that's often several hours/day, and that means weeks/months to play a campaign. I cannot understand how other players are getting thru campaigns so quickly per the threads we read. I agree, I do not like RT unless it's for the smallest scenarios. I wish posters would say how they are playing their scenarios as the mode makes a lot of difference re the advice/hints they give.