Tankgunner

How many TRPs will be available for the defending units supported by heavy artillery? Without them all 122-mm and up will be almost useless. Will TRPs be able for dug-in field artillery - for exampl, to protect roads or bridges?

Will it be able to provide off-map fire support from 76-mm artillery pieces? 76-mm Russian guns were made as a universal divisional-level weapon (contrary to the AT-only PaK-40)

Some thoughts after pursuit thread. Suppese a stronghold tactics. A company or a platoon of infantry dug in heavily on the hill. An attacking tank troop has a task to move deep forward (to destroy an artillery position or to encircle a larger unit). It will not engage at all, or will try to minimize losses and punch throuh defenders, leaving them behind. What 's the result? Strongpoint still exists, tanks are behind him (and theoretically even left the map). Much like as in CMBB operations. But here i may wish to stay with my defenders at all cost, letting tanks pass through and blocking the infantry column behind the. Here is the question. How the game will solve breakthrougs?

Suppose an infantry Coy (no AT guns, molotovs only) catched by the enemy tank unit at the open. Trying to resist (something like a ME or Probe-type game) may result in complete destruction. The best tactical solution is definitely a withdraw on turn 1. But on the operational map panzer unit is surely "faster" than infantry, and withdrawn unit is supposed to be completely routed, splitted by small groups of soldiers without control. I wonder how to solve this. May be heavy losses and disorganization of "routed" unit, and some kind of "time of win" logic: a) Attacker completely captured the map in few turns (so he cathes retreated units) or spent 30minutes to get 500 meters of ground (he delayed, and defender managed to disengage). Surely not a complete destruction - I want to left a platoon as a screen and quickly move the main force back, to the nearby wood.

Yes. Click here for about 20 images (the page is in Russian). http://www.kubinka.ru/newindex.php?id=179〈=1

Early G, 80-mm front hull but no shuerzen screens

Kubinka, 11.09.2005 Tanker's day re-enactment

[/QB]

You can overrun the gun by a MG fire. You can't do it by tank itself. Here is an example file (CMBB PBEM, no password) http://www.kubinka.ru/gun-test1.txt http://www.kubinka.ru/gun-test2.txt note that units are out of ammo, and Matilda is not using its coax MG And by the way, I'm rather young, but drove a live Pz38(t) ant dealt with other WW2 stuff...

Consider a) you just have no HE shell at all you're shooting too slow (poor ROF)or your optics is poor In both cases if you will engage in a gun duel, you are a grill. The only option si to get close and crash. So did lots of T-34 crewmen, and beleive me, they were right. I've dealt with a T-34/76, it's terribly hard to aim at something even from a slow moving vehicle But, at the same time, crushing walls or turning around on a trench is a bad idea and is generally a movie trick.

No! It does not. And that was one of the main drawbacks for me. Run a test with a tank without ammo vs an AT Gun, you'll see. I can't attack with Matildas moving across italian 47-mm gun just to have the enemy in perfect condition behind them. And I hate to see that my T-34 running to the flank of two PaK40 guns can not crash them, and have to stop and fire. And enemy gun was often faster... That hurts.

I've already filled my wishlist in the poll thread, but I'd like also suggest introducing ramming feature for the vehicles. Running right across the enemy ATG or MGfoxhole (crushing them by weight) was a common tactics, though it was sometimes dangerous to the attacker's suspension and armanent (unexperienced crew could block tank's tracks with wrecks or damage the gun barrel). The same could be applied to terrain obstacles, like walls and barbed wires. If an AFV have crossed the wall or wire fence, infantry should have less problems with moving through the obstacle. I don't mean no problems at all, but runnig through scattered bricks is not like climbing at the wall.

I recall old times of Close Combat series. Each soldier is modelled, commands gives to a squad. When deployed, squad tends to scatter within a fixed area, trying to find the best cover and firing position: in line when in a ditch, in pairs if there is a line of foxholes, in bunch when in the small wooden hut.... Movement was the same - line/horde rushing forward in assault, sneaking and leapfrog running in advance under fire, column movement whein in quiet. Panicked soldiers fleeing far back with lose of control I hope here we'll see the same. TacAI will decide how to scatter individual soldiers, and, huh, it will be a hard task to BFC to force TacAI to do everything well. AI in CC often failed to deploy 1-2 soldiers, so they kept knocking at the closed window all the game.

Add: 1. Convoy movement 2. Triggered defensive obstacles: a) minefield activated by a demolition team (by wire). This could simulate a heavy HE charge on the bridge or on the road, widely used by commando, partisan and guerilla units. russian FOG remote-controlled flamethrower fields 3. Better hand-held anti-tank weapons simulation. Now only Germans have sufficient range of AT weapons. Russian grenade bundles and RPG-40/41 high explosive grenades, British sticky mines and so on are not present.... 4. Multi-turret wehicles with multi-targeting option. From T-28 and M3Lee to remotably controlled turrets and MG of modern AFV. 5. Wehicle blocking LOS Keep: 1. PBEM (huh, I'm not the first one here...) 2. WEGO 3. Scale 4. Interface concept

Sorry. scenario name have been removed from post.