sonar

Nice one c3K, will have look at that. Cheers.

What happened after D-Day? Guest speaker Thomas Bradley showcases Canadian Army participation during the Normandy Campaign in France, June 1944. His presentation includes dozens of soldiers’ stories, vivid maps, and rare photos that seem to leap off the screen at you. Mr. Bradley opens his talk with historical accounts of Canadians fighting SS troops on June 7, 1944 and concludes with the war crimes trial of Nazi SS General Kurt Meyer. This presentation took place on April 22, 2017 at the Brigadier Jefferson Armoury in Edmonton, Alberta. Enjoy Cheers.

Great work Thief2125, much appreciated. Cheers

Two and a half years on the eastern front....never mind battle packs or vehicle packs or any of the faster to release content that was going to be the beauty of the new engine, we don't even have snow yet. c'mon too, too slow.

Anyone know if this is possible? Cheers.

Hi. I have the same issue although with me I am wondering if I can upgrade from a windows version to Mac OS X I have CMBN V.2. When I looked at the upgrade options it says on the page I must have the Mac base game installed, I am taking it that I will have to purchase the whole game again if I want to play it on Mac OS X ? Hope I am missing something and this is not the case. Cheers.

I would love to see evidence of the 'exhaustive education' in how to slide beneath a string of wire. "Right lads, listen in. Your real training begins now. for the next two weeks you will undertake intensive sliding under wire fence training, followed by a short refresher course on bootlace tying" Unless under fire, men are not crawling under wire fences with Bergen's, radio sets, weapons etc in any army. Sorry pal for having a wee dig, but hey lighten up the tone a little bit eh, reads like your just moaning.

I'd like to see a bit more control over what type of ammo is available in ammo dumps and vehicles, so you could resupply AT guns and mortars or even just a generic infantry resupply that contained not just extra rounds but also grenades, rifle grenades, smoke grenades and panzerfausts. Be nice to better tailor resupply for specific situations or weapons. Cheers.

It would be good if it was combine squads and If it also took morale into play so theoretically by combining a worn out platoon you could scrape together something with a bit of rallying power, as it is I'm tending to leave thinned out squads as is for the reasons Erwin stated. Cheers.

playing around with the new upgraded version, First impressions I love the way the inf move now much more realistic looking, so far. Anyway the new small dream feature, how do you add this ? If it is a new terrain tile I don't see it. cheers.

Ha, what could be more patronising So you have deemed that this thread has maybe unwittingly wandered into a few areas that may actually be worthy of your consideration, although you stand by your sarcastic attack on the original post and have another jibe attacking its validity. I am out of this, said what i had to say, been interesting seeing other peoples opinion on it {thats why I posted in the first place}. In the end we'll all have to wait and see, the game will evolve the way it will and I'm sure I'll still be playing it. Cheers.

Vanir Ausf B, in regards to bunching up causing casualties you said "I don't think it does, assuming the tree is between your men and whatever is shooting at them" Surely that can only be effective if there is only one source of fire and it is coming from the twelve o'clock position because incoming fire from any angle outside that, say the ten or one o'clock, will draw a straight line through three or four men and a burst of automatic fire can easily lead to a stack of dead men. And speaking of casualty rates, I know fighting in close terrain or built up areas will rack up the scores against the attacker who is heavily disadvantaged in these conditions, I expect that should be the case and have no gripe with that, but the stacking behaviour i'm seeing is leading to needless and avoidable attrition {see pic 4} which is frustrating as the player has no control over this and no I'm not asking for more micro managing.

"slightly bunched up" they are lying across oneanothers legs,what would tightly bunched look like? . Are you serious when you say you can't equate this to more casualties. look at the last pic, four men lying dead piled atop each other. have you ever heard the expression "shooting fish in a barrel" ? I agree that it is probably {I think} down to all the men going for the best cover and therefore they all converge on a single tree {although not always, like the two men on the left in the first pic, they are not near a tree} My point, once again has nothing to do with tactics, it's about how the men position themselves when they go to ground, this causes casualties that would be avoided were they not to behave as such, and are therefore needless. Vanir, the problem with that is it maximises the chance of pic 4 being the end result of this behaviour. Cheers.

Ha, no not snot nosed, just responding to your patronising assumption that i have not read = don't know, what I'm talking about when you said. "I think a good reading of action in the Huertgen may alter your perspective on levels of casualties especially in forest fighting".Really..... cheers for the link though, now that was being helpful. So below are links to four screens that i took from a random saved game, they are all from the same turn and there were more I could have uploaded but I think these provide enough evidence as to what I at least am seeing as wrong. Hopefully this works and you will see what I am talking about. Pics 1-3 all too easily end up resembling pic 4. This has nothing to do with how I or anyone plays the game, rather it is the way the game plays itself. Cheers.

Well I don't know about how bullet trajectory is modelled i just know that, that's the way they lie and thats the way the die. Sorry if I sound a little irate but I think I have been very clear in what i am posting about, frustrating when an answer to a specific question is met with repeated posts about how to play the game. spacing lllll s p a c i n g l l l l l. Thats what is causing the problem, men lying shoulder to shoulder or on top of each other. IanL please drop the condescending tone that you adopted from your first reply. I've been member of the BF community since 2003 and usually find the experience to be helpful and informative, if I bring up a concern about an aspect of the game i'm not looking to start an argument with anyone or make them look foolish I am doing so because I like the game and want it to be the best it can. Cheers.

Hey.I'm looking at the battle I'm playing right now and in a lot of teams {not squad} there is at least two men, lying on top of each other, are you telling me that is realistic? Stop telling me how to play the game, I know how to play it, you are not telling me something I don't already know thanks I have read about Huertgen, that is not the point, i am not talking tactical decision making. I am talking about needless casualties due to the fact that there are too many men confined in too little a space i.e. one action spot. I don't know how to post screens or I would. Cheers.

I have been playing this game for a while , I know all the drills and have heard the arguments. my whole point is there are too many men in too small a space i.e. one action spot and therefore needless casualties are unavoidable . this is the problem, not the way i'm playing.

IanL, I don't think overlapping your squads is playing cautiously. I'm talking about the men in the same action spot, there are too many of them, that was the whole point of my post. I mentioned about pushing too hard I said i don't buy that, because my point is there are too many men in one action spot and no matter how you play you will take needles casualties. Like I said it looks wrong and it is, you did not address that in your reply, you basically dodged the whole point of my post and said I am playing the game wrong and I play unrealistically. as we say in Scotland "Aye right". Cheers.

Or will we have to wait for a new engine? Sorry much as I love these games, the spacing or lack of between squad members is way off. The casualties in cmx2 are much higher than before and can't get close to the kind you read about in combat reports. I've heard the arguments about pushing harder than a real life commander would do, but i don't buy that. You can play as cautiously as you like [ and i tend to do so} it won't help, because as soon as a squad comes under fire it will start taking needless casualties due to this. I'm looking at a battle i'm playing now and every squad member in every squad, is lying toe to toe with one another, and woe betide if there is a tree about as then they will lie on top of one another. It looks wrong and it is, squads get chewed up and there is nothing you can do about it. if you think i'm wrong, have a battle in a wooded area then look at the casualties at the end, most of the dead and wounded will be lying on top of each other stacked up behind a single piece of cover i.e. a tree. The bumping into one another while trying to get into position is another result of this, the ai on the whole does ok, it's just that they can't help themselves and you can't help them as there is literally no where for them to go as the are too many men confined to too small an area. if they were spread out even a little more than present, I think you would see casualties figures drop quite a bit, because from what i'm seeing a lot of the casualties are avoidable and are sustained due to the simple fact that they are just too close. Cheers.

Hi. I remember reading something from a german anti tank gun ace, who said that to eliminate the threat of dust giving away their firing position,his gun crew, when setting up would wet the ground in front of the gun and then lay their zeltbans down.

Great map building helper. Cheers.

I recently started imposing c2 restrictions on myself. for instance, If a forward squad comes under fire from an enemy in a tree line, i don't allow mg that is on overwatch to area fire in support or any artillery, until the info has been passed up to at least an hq that could relay the info and command them to do so. This makes me much more conscious of maintaining c2 links and it is more realistic way to play, rather than borg spotting on behalf of your troops and having them fire on targets that in the game they are unaware of. Cheers.