Russkly

Right, I want it, and I want it NOW!!!!! Give it to me. R

Hi. I've been watching tanit's excellent video walkthroughs of the CMSF NATO German campaign, and I know he mentions this issue in his commentary. I have tried to search the forum on this topic to see if it's already been dealt with, but I couldn't find anything. Apologies up front if I've missed something. Without going into spoiler-type details, I am surprised at the generally poor spotting performance of the German Gebirgsjaeger sniper teams (playing on 'Elite' level - don't believe that the level changes this, however). Some of these teams are 'crack' or 'elite' and yet, even when given the same positions as, say, FOO/JSF/HQ teams, they fail to spot the enemy positions that these latter spot. Having been an artillery officer, and therefore about as far from being a sniper as can be militarily (lol), I would have thought that elite sniper teams would be those to spot enemy units first given the same conditions as other friendly units. That's what they're trained and equipped for, AFAIK. In one particular mission there are quite a few of these teams assigned, and they can enjoy excellent fields of fire, but they are much less effective than I would have hoped. I end up having to use JSF teams to bring in expensive arty simply because they are the only ones, who can see the enemy; even though they share the position with a sniper team!!!!!! Anybody else experiencing this, or am I just using them wrongly? R

Cheers, Sneaksie. Hadn't grasped that the balance mod was designed for multiplayer, and not for altering the default or add-on campaigns. Must try MP at some point. R

Bump. I know I'm boring... R

If I've been lazy in not searching more effecctively the impact of the balance mod, please let me know. Otherwise I would be intrigued to know exactly what differences I could expect to see when playing the Centauro campaign with the balance mod applied. Haven't noticed anything yet, but then the mission I'm on is rather challenging... Thx in advance. R

Agree with all the comments. Given the need to micromanage, this game for me needs to played at platoon level and no more. Also, when AFVs are around, infantry is almost redundant. This is clearly historically true to a certain extent, especially in the early war years, when infantry AT weapons were basic, but I still find it frustrating that AFVs manage to spot my infantry hiding in buildings with their status set to "Ambush". Also frustrating, as posited above, is the AI taking out individual infantrymen with ATGs at long distances - in defensive scenarios ATGs would surely not reveal their carefully-selected positions for the sake of one section leader (with good "Scout" skills) over 500m away. Moreover they often take him out with the first shot. In my opinion, this is either a game for AFVs vs AFVs/ATGs or pure infantry vs infantry, both ideally at no more than platoon level, in order to allow the degree of micromanagement that the game requires and indeed deserves given the high level of individual unit detail and modelling. ToW2 is distinctly better than ToW, IMHO, but the play balance and scenario setting needs to be altered a little to alow the game to live up to its strengths, and the default campaign (Centauro included) does not achieve this. Casualty rates well above 70% for infantry do not reflect what actually happened (often) in WWII unless I'm mistaken. My twopenny's worth. R

SPOILER: Noticed this too in the second mission of the Centauro campaign. END SPOILER Please excuse my ignorance, and indeed my laziness if this is covered elsewhere in this forum, but what differences will one see in the Centauro campaign when using the "Balance Mod"? Really appreciate the efforts on this - the game needed a little 'tweaking'. Still find this game is best for maximum platoon-scale engagements. The detail is so rich, both in terms of graphics and unit management, that anything beyond this level forces me to raise the camera and lose the wonderful detail of having individually-modelled soldiers, etc. Moreover, infantry is impossible to keep alive when tanks are around. I suppose this is 'realistic', but I find the best way to play when both tanks and infantry are involved is to keep the infantry well out of the way while the AFVs/AT guns, etc. slug it out. Seems a shame really to have all that lovely infantry and then have to hide them. Perhaps infantry vs infantry combat is the way forward... R

Thx, gentlemen. Now enjoying the first Italian mission! R

@Moon, Apologies for the "Helloooo...", but I was ignorant of the option you proposed - still, ignorance is no defence, so sorry again. I thought that, since others were experiencing similar issues, this thread would be a good place to share feeback and solutions. I will try a different browser and report back. R

Helloooooooooooooo...?????!!!!

Would appreciate some advice, please, chaps! R

Bumpety, bump, bump!

@Sneaksie, Will that include XP64? R

@Moon, Any suggestions as to the IE8 settings that will allow FTP file download? I've searched Internet Options - Advanced, but I can't find the relevant option. Set Security to Medium, but to no avail. This is the error message I get:

Set to English (UK), but still no joy. Would be good to be able to use it, because I'd like to design some infantry-only scenarios. AFVs too dominant in this game, especially the spotting in built-up areas. R

Got it last week in Spain. R

Thx, Sneaksie. All already set to UK. Same problem. Any more ideas? R

Oh, I forgot to add that I did search the forum for an answer, and I have tried right-clicking, selecting Run As, and then selecting Administrator and un-selecting the tick box for running the program with restricted access (I don't know why this is set as default anyway). R again

@Sneaksie. Sorry for long delay in completing this list, but I've had my PC upgraded, so I wasn't playing for a while. Here's the list as far as I can tell: Get rid, man. Target out of sight. We're gonna' die here. Move out, move out. Damn right. Engine damaged, Sir. Artillery battery ready for support. Fire for effect. R

I'm probably being stupid, but when I try to run the battle generator from the program menu in Windows Explorer (User Campaigns and Battles options are greyed out in actual game menu for some reason) I get the following error message: "Wrong game version. The application will not work with a current version of the game Theatre of War. Error: #3000". What am I doing wrong? Appreciate the help, as always. R

Agree. Campaign could be more immersive - we have the wonderful awards and progression system, but over 5 loosely linked scenarios this doesn't bring the immersion that could be possible (especially nearing in mind that my infantry always seem to experience >50% casualties). Would be great to have a dynamic campaign using similar map sets, where you could really track your soldiers' progress - I just auto-assign at present. More units are also required - Brits had more than just Valentine in this theatre, I believe, but I will check. It has fantastic potential, but I'd like to see the desert war done really well in ToW2 before expanding to other theatres. R.

@General_solomon. Go now; it plays well now apart from a few things that the various reviews have already pondered.

Thx, Sneaksie. So, if I as the player can see a target or indeed a piece of ground, I can bring indirect artillery fire down on it? This LOS could be from a bailed-out tank crew member, or a stranded tank, or a lone infantryman? Just needs LOS from someone to let me know the target or the area of ground's there? If the case, wouldn't it be better for all indirect fire to have to directed by an appropriately-trained soldier? The only way to target ground, beyond an FO or officer with the appropriate net clearance, should be pre-sets, which is another thing altogether (I remember that CM modeled this well). Indirect arty's so powerful, that I'd like to see it historically represented by precious FOs or the proper tank/infantry officers, or pre-sets. CM:SF does this well. Interesting debate! R

Harsh! Unmarked minefields placed immediately BEHIND the starting dispositions! That's Soviet doctrine lol. That would be a good step forward - not sure how many arty-trained infantrymen you'd find in a standard British 1943 infantry section, however. Probably none, so perhaps it should simply not be possible? Furthermore, who is able to perform as an FO in the game? From what I know, it should either be 'embedded' FOs, probably at nothing less than battalion (company?) level, or, at a push, platoon commanders. Three so far: Get rid man (at least I think that's what he's saying) Target out of sight We're gonna die here Will post more as I replay the first 3 scenarios of the Bristish campaign. OK, I can get the driving thing - even I could drive an AFV432 after a few minutes' training, but operating the weaponry? Fundamentally in all the reading I've done about WWII I have never come across instances of infantry manning tanks. I'd love for someone to prove me wrong, since, as stated before, it is a core element of ToW2. Looking forward to surrender options - getting a few diehard tank crews and infantry, which need to be surrounded and pounded before they bail/panic. I would suggest that casualty rates in game are MUCH higher than in real life. Good thread - some interesting and fundamental points being debated, and thanks to you, Sneaksie, for being so vigilant and fair in your replies. R

@GoodGuy, Thanks. So you actually have to ctrl+c to copy and then ctrl +v to paste, and then manually insert " " at the end of it? Now let's see if this works... R