RockinHarry

Test playing my yet smallish MOUT scenario with 1.01. 1. Infantry can shoot far from within and into the interiors of (modular) buildings. Looks like the abstraction of buildings interior cover and concealment is rather low. 2. I had a number of US infantry shooting at german infantry in a building through outer walls without (visible) windows. I´m using mostly modular buildings and change the facade with CTRL-CLICK quite oftenly. I somehow have the guess, although the facade changes visually, the internal 3D window/door setup does not match and change properly. Can´t tell if it´s a particular building or just a random occurance. 3. A Sherman tank was able to gun down german occupants in 3 different modular buildings, with just the coax/bow MG within 1 minute and ranges between 10-30m. The Shermans reaction, tracking and engagement times were truely incredible. My overall impression of buildings so far, is that they´re death traps most of the time. It´s mostly sufficient, to spray rifle and MG fire into them and getting the occupants killed, instead of just heavily suppressed. Infantry squads bunch up too closely at single windows. I solve this issue partly, by splitting squads to components and assigning illogical facing commands (away from the enemy), in order to get the team members a better share of available windows. Oftentimes this is the only way to get the squad machine gunner into a useful fighting position.

I´d already replied in the other thread. You can use highway tile segments and that´s the closest you get with regard to curbs and such.

I guess "laying down" in FH/trenches is meant to be abstracted "kneeling" or "ducking down", so footprint of single soldiers is minimized to provide less of a target vs. tree/airbursts also? (otherwise...a foxhole has to be of the size of a grave, in order to allow true laying down) I´d already my guess about the open end of trenches beeing more vulnerable in 1.00, so I quickly learned not to use single trench segments at all. Thanks for fixing. Will do some test runs on my small forest & trenches map.

Like it so far. Appears to give a way better overview on ones forces.

Rockinharry, you erred! Did you try highway tiles yet? They provide some nice sidewalks for ya.

Thanks! Downloaded and installed smoothly. Now on to continued test mode...........

No curbs and such in CMN (like pavement & street tiles in CMX1). We can just mix and match from roads and tiles beeing in the game now.

Though beeing "german", I´d rather like seeing a Pacific module, instead of any revisit of a desert TOW. As already has been pointed in the Maps&Mods section, modding CMN to italy seems to be possible and if BFC ever considers an early war module (France 1940), as desert mod would not be long to be waited for. I see some issues with high density jungle maps and game performance, as well as varity for battle types in the pacific though. Western and eastern front TOW offers way more in this regard IMO. But a +1 for pacific...at least after Bagration & Barbarossa.

Yes, that´s how it goes either this way, or packing stuff up with Rezpack...results basically the same. Just did my personal MG42 mod and have the 3 files reside in Data\Z.

So far, I´m quite satisfied with CMN graphics and a couple of minor things will be dealt with by the various skilled modders around here. One issue left to me, some odd ambient light shading as reported here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98340

In a small test scenario of mine, I occasinally see in one single action spot a damaged (leafless) tree, like the ones getting damaged by mortar/artillery fire ingame. It´s sometimes in the editor and sometimes (or both) in the games unit setup phase. There´s no crater in the particular action spot and it´s just a single tree. Could be I had a crater before and later removed it. Is there an undocumented feature ingame for placement of damaged trees/structures in the editor? I remember the "flat rubble" tile trick (as mentioned in the GM) in CMX1, where this way, placement of damaged buildings was possible. ..or is it just sort of glitch?

No idea, if it´s a bug or not. "Barns" oftenly are not that tightly built and planks are fastened more in a sloppy manner (to improve ventilation?), so it might be, something like that is abstracted in the game. Restricted view and shooting s/b possible from such barns. Is CMN building walls assumed to be paper thin, when it comes to spotting and shooting through windows btw.?

Nice works! Looking forward to DL them.

Thanks. I´m keen enough, to name that mod and just have it uploaded at GAJ´s Mod Warehouse. http://cmmods.greenasjade.net/mods/4471/details

Figured it not a big deal actually. Changed color temperature to 5500 K (warmer) and added a subtle, spotty dirt layer (color picked from original dirt tile) and the result looks pleasant to me: Edit: Picture taken at clear weather, noon.

yep, we need more dirt and weathering overall. Anybody yet modded cobblestone and pavement tiles?

lol ...invisibly tied to the road with a steel rope something.

Doesn´t work, even with the old CMX1 trick applied. Once the game ist started, it resets the barb wire to clear (no violating 3D terrain elements in there) map places. You just could alternate barb wire with wire fence in neighboring spots, but not within the same spot. No idea with mud and vehicle bogging. Did not test yet, but I would assume...beside soft ground condition setting. I´d like to have transparent, individual "mud" layer tiles, that also apply to FOW rules. Thus one can also make true "terrain reconnaissance". Something similar to running into mine fields unexpectedly. ...just another brain fart.

That odd (double X) fence construction is not much of an obstacle to infantry moving across. Figured, infantry roughly take 1 more minute to cross (quick mode), than infantry on plain grass, but yet more, as single soldiers bump into each other, pause and then resume crossing. From testing ground tiles & infantry movement speeds, I found heavy forest and mud slow the most. Grass, dirt & rocky/hard are evenly fast. Edit: From fastest to slowest (Ground condition dry): Road, grass, dirt, rocky, hard - plowed field, mud (-20%) - heavy forest (-60%) - marsh (-70%). Did not test all and figures are approximated. For use as "wire entanglement", I´d probably try combining some with mud/heavy forest, but that adds maybe just half a minute of extra delay. End of brain fart.

Yes and I see problems with AI handling, but overall the unit is already quite fragile due to it beeing "oversized" with all team members bunching up and stepping into each ways, particularly when it comes to individual fighting positions within an action spot. So while "splitting" might not be the ideal solution, coding a better support team logic seems to be more obvious. So far, I´d avoid using HMG teams for engagement ranges below, say...500-800m and use LMG teams instead. I´d also generally avoid houses for use as HMG positions and make sure the placement action spot, does not contain too many obstacles (walls, trees..). Waiting for 1.01....

..if things have settled after the patch 1.01 release, will do some.

Same here. Normandy is well covered by stock scenarios and campaigns, with most scenario makers currently working on more. With interest mostly outside the normandy setting, I´m tinkering more with "prototyping" battles (urban, forest, ..non bocage) that also may give a hint for probable issues in later modules to come. So back to the orchards then. Given examples have orchards put on perfectly flat terrain. With terrain contours now having a more pronounced effect on LOS/LOF, one can spice up any larger terrain parts with scattered +1 (or -1) m height variations. It likely offers some more cover for prone infantry and also looks somewhat more natural. No idea, if that resembles real normandy style orchards in any way. Put under most the "centered" type orchard single trees a +1, but could´ve used less.

Yes, I generalized with regard to only two types of fences available in CMN and creating non normandy style maps & terrain. Hopefully (no doubt actually) we get more varied stuff to work with in next modules.

Things would be more simple (with regards to HMG42 teams), if they could be divided to ammo bearers and gunners. So far, all of the HMG42 team is treated as whole combat unit, with those guys that actually should not be involved directly in combat (ammo beares/team leader), seeking their "fighting position" within the given action spot. Internal positioning logic should be more like 2 gunners/team leader upfront and remaining team to the rear and heads down, until some "emergencies" arise.

Yep, another good option. So far I have most research materials aqquired about Brest and Aachen, but at last it doesn´t matter much, as it´s out question to build a multi square km city map and fight through it with Btl size units. The ruined cities all look almost the same, so I´ll likely focus on a more generic embattled city part, with rather Cpy sized forces, with a loose tie to the Brest or Aachen events. We´ll see.