RockinHarry

Nice! More dirt and weathered walls add a lot to the overall normandy landscapes. Generally, the dirtier, the better!

Actually what Sergei said, but I´d prefer the somewhat darker tone in rainy weather conditions, which isn´t portrayed well in CMN.

Rates of fire and ammo expenditure depends also on individual nations "fire/engagement tactics". In case of the german HMG34/42 the STANDARD use is "continuous" bursts and a "fire order" at a particular target would usually include amount of ammo to be used. Standard measure would be 1 belt (of 50 rounds), 2 or more, dependent upon particular target. ..until barrel needs to be changed. Also standard procedure includes to keep an iron reserve of 200-300 rounds. Allied water cooled HMGs would benefit even more from using "continuous bursts" in the game. I guess the main "problem" in the game is rather "target switching" and time chunks to be used, in order to achieve certain weapon effects. Maybe the game code considers bursts of up to 7-9 rounds on a single target (infantry squad/team) enough to ascertain desired game effects (suppression, wounded, kills), so computing times are kept to a limit to keep frame rates up? Other point to consider is that various wargames of this scale keep ROF low, in order to provide more "action time". If game length is 60 minutes and ammo is burned through in 10, what to do in the remaining 50? Nonetheless, I´d prefer realistic ROFs in conjunction with faster ammo expenditure and have ammo replenishment improved as well (ammo/supply points in or near the frontline, which are necessarily NOT vehicles).

Never mind. Just found my answer here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=92558&page=2

...was just a bit toying with the demoes map editor and thinking about "fake" basements. Guess it has been tried before (in CMSF?), but I want to ask, if sunken multistory buildings can be played with? I "sunk" some modular 3 story building into map spots, 3 meters deeper than surrounding map spots and added a flat balcony to the 2nd story, thus making it look like ground level. Can infantry "hop" from level terrain straight onto the second floor balcony, or would it still try entering the building via the sunken base floor (my guess)? thanks Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us

..and you can expand on that by playing CMAK with its many NWE/ETO mods and scenarios.

Realistically, a "preserve bridge" objective should be more of concern, if you yet need it for friendly movements. Otherwise you´d already have it blown in the face of an attacker in time. (yes, there were many occasions, where a defender failed in doing that) A bridge has no "physical worth". Tactically, a (undestroyed) bridge just has its worth, if one can deny the enemy crossing it by observed fire. So a "bridge capturing" objective must include any commanding terrain, surrounding the bridge in question. I´ve seen many CMX1 "capture the bridge", "gain bridgehead", ... scenarios fail in that regard.

+1 No need for BFC to go excessive with it. If game performance is of concern, there could be always the added "option" to degrade the visuals, just like in CMX1. With regard to "balance", no FT unit can rule a battlefield alone. Crocodiles are not invincible and small FT teams can die more quickly than any other infantry type unit in frontline combat.

I really do hope for terrain fire & smoke effects added to CMN very soon. Otherwise battlefields just do not look like...battlefields.

...to remind, this thread is about internal crew member coordination / reaction speeds, NOT turret or hull rotation speeds. Speaking solely of the "human" factors involved.

Not just that. With all of the HMG team members shooting at the enemy, more of the whole unit is exposed and to be spotted for return fire, which makes current vulnerability even more debatable. Full game owners could experiment with "reduced" size HMG teams and add ammo bearers seperately, if something like that is currently possible.

I find the synchronization/coordination of AFV drivers and gunners a bit too perfect in CMN. I´d rather like to see some noticeable delay between driver and gunner actions, i.e let the driver first turn the hull and then the gunner turn the turret, aim the gun. CMN AFVs behave much like modern (CMSF) ones, with all that computer hardware onboard.

It´s possible to have FHs/trenches placed closer to hedgerows, if the diagonal hedgerow variants are used on a map. There´s lots of other interesting possibilities on maps, which have mainly a diagonal layout (as opposed to standard N-S, or E-W orientation). No idea, if the game engine can handle that well...

+1 for ability to split every support arm squad to gunner and ammo bearer teams, for mentioned reasons (target size, vulnerability ect.) Edit: How many times did you see all HMG team members bunched up around the gun in RL and under fighting conditions? Realistically, a HMG is a point target and less of a mass target as it´s now in CMN...unfortunately.

I too wish for movable waypoints, just like in CMX1, but I guess difficulties for implementation come from live navigation within a true 3D environment, with all that possible single objects within a 8m tile/action spot. There must be a good reason, that BFC did not take this feature over to CMN, me guesses. If that´s rather a matter of CPU processor power, then BFC should start to think about support for multiple core environments and maybe PhsyEx as well.

Easily said, with a Hitler in lead of everything, knowing nothing but "hold at all costs / no retreat", or "counterattack with inadequate forces" orders. It was the grandest waste and misuse of military leadership competence in history. So when speaking of "germans" you´re speaking mainly of Hitler, not Manstein, Guderian, Rommel, to just name a few. CMN is not grand strategy, so on the small scale we play and when defending, you can "withdraw" from outpost lines, which usually are given covered withdrawal routes (to the MLR). Beeing in the MLR is a different thing. Usually you have to stand and die (or rout, when a forces morale breaks) and wait for local counterattack, which is to regain positions, but not to save lifes of those been overrun, unless pocketed or isolated. Other "retreats", might include those to move to switchback or alternate positions, which needs careful planning beforehand. It´s up to a scenario designers setting of parameters (big picture, situation, objectives, casualty threshold), that might oppose our tendency to save our Pixeltruppen from digital death most of the time. Any other than "planned retreat", is very difficult to conduct, no matter what set of movement orders is used in CMN. Otherwise, obey orders and fight to the last bullet.

possible variations: Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us

In my experience it was about 5m, just across the hedgerow.

That´s the basic setup: Uploaded with ImageShack.us ...at least for the "sunken roads" type, that can be seen on the german positions Carillion map showing as ======, with trees and the many dugouts aligned. Edit: In fact, these pathways are not really "sunken roads". The aligning hedgerows (berms) just give that impression.

Could be so. Then they were most likely busy assembling a "grenade bundle", when they throw it later that turn. That would explain the effect on the Sherman. I later figured, the Sherman had track damaged and with that close proximity to german infantry, decided to bail out instantly.

In Busting the Bocage I had some german infantry dropping a "sticky grenade" at a Sherman just few meters beyond a hedgerow. It was a frontal hit and caused the Sherman crew to bail out. The odd thing was, the german infantry did not show to have any grenades at all. I guess, this is similar to the abstracted "close aussault" in CMX1!

Exactly! ...with diagonally placed ones beeing even somewhat tighter than straight ones (~4m, compared to ~6m). I guess the Tac AI will have great difficulties navigating vehicles in there. Uploaded with ImageShack.us Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Diagonal placement of hedgerows makes the sub mesh geometry appear rougher and adding 1m to placement spot, pronounces the effect. Would be interested, if this altered geometry has any effect on cover/concealment with infantry positioned there. Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Interestingly, CMBN editor allows construction of these 1 way sunken roads! Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The original german positions map from the St-Lo book, is even more enlightening. Good stuff for in depth analysis: http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/100-13/mp16.jpg