sonar

Hi, for me there are two things that really need to be rethought or just fixed.The first I would argue is a flaw in gameplay the second is a hamper to gameplay. 1... Fix infantry behaviour, movement and spacing which i'd say is about fifty per cent what it should be and in game can easily become ridiculous. 2... The long asked for "follow me command". It's a shame that there is nothing more disheartening than loading up a scenario and seeing a load of halftracks and stuff as trying to recreate or play classic mechanised force scenarios rapidly becomes an exercise in extreme tedium. These to me are the biggest flaws in the game as it stands and I'd say, given the games time period and tactical scope they are pretty serious. Fixing these two things i think would allow a more realistic, fluid and enjoyable game and i would much rather time be spent on this than new modules and the like. Cheers.

Real in game fow 1. When you move a unit, then at some point realise someone was not given the order and you have a squad/vehicle left way behind...oops. 2. Ordering your mg into a risky but crucial firing position..and forgetting to tell them to deploy..grr. Any others?

Aye...thanks for the explanation.

Yup, done that but that loads them for download, how do i get them to display on the page?

Ach, can't load screenshots, is there no faq post for stuff like this, total hassle.

1. 2. Looking up the hill. 3. Looking downhill. Hi, don't know if this is known about, but i stumbled on a way to have water on higher elevation.

Hey Grunt. Glad you liked it, your post reflects the outcome i was aiming for, in as much as the way the scenario would play out. thanks for the feedback pal. Cheers.

Hi mireKm61. I understand what you're saying. Two quick points 1. i could have spent more time on refining it but this was as much an exercise in just getting a scenario done and posted up. 2. I intentionally did not want make it too hard, and it to be an all or nothing, do or die type mission. It's supposed to be more a typical "day at the office", where the goal is readily attainable and the intention is really to carry out the mission without decimating your own men in the process. Hope that explains it, and thanks for taking the time to let me know what you thought. Cheers.

Well, the description pretty much tells you what to expect from the scenario.

Ok, you are right, no use complaining about lack off community effort if I haven't contributed anything myself. My first scenario "Cutting the line" is up at the scenario depot, feedback appreciated. cheers.

Hi, ok this is my first attempt at a scenario, this is in reply to being challenged to contribute something of my own after having a moan about lack of scenarios. Company sized mission in built up area. i wasn't sure about victory points, so I'm not certain on how it will award the winner but basically the mission is doable, and the real test is to have your force in reasonable condition to continue the fight. If you burn through your men to attain the goal then you can consider this a fail. one other thing the mission is set for one hour time limit, this was an oversight as i meant to change it to 45min. Anyway, this is a first go, you can find it in the scenario depot and it'd be nice to hear what is right/wrong about it from the community, hope you enjoy. Cheers

People talking about whats next for CMRT. Well, seems like it's a big thing getting the ss, and a bit snow but in reality whats the difference between a Wehrmacht co as opposed to an ss co, apart from a few minor insignia changes. I would rather see work going into refining the infantry battle, which to me is where the most notable failings in the game reside and also the quick battle system, which is inconsistent in it's results to put it politely. While i'm on a grump, i'd say the whole battlefront community has gone into a bit of a slump since the new engine was introduced. I will say, the modders communities quality and output is amazing and yet,scenarios are like hens teeth and it seems like there is nothing much to say on the forums in as much as it seems like the new engine isn't inspiring the same kind of debate that we had in the days of CMBB. Maybe it's just me...? I don't mean to sound harsh, i still love battlefronts ethos, and will follow on regardless. I just feel there is something missing from the picture and that there is an "almost there" feel about the game for me at the moment.

OH, and these mini engagements would become much more interesting and intense within themselves and I think,could possibly lend players to go more towards the scale the game was designed for? cheers.

ASL, in regards to slowing the game.If the forces were given a larger bootprint on the field as i suggested, there would be less concentration of force, the game would progress at a different pace yes and maybe a slower one,though with more realistic results and when I say realistic I don't mean slower=boring. For instance,two full squads firing at each other from cover would commence at a more realistic pace in terms of ammo expenditure and casualties, a lot of the time you would be able to leave them knowing there will be a few mins of plugging away before one or the other pinned instead of every squad on squad engagement being the instant crisis that it is more than often right now and giving time to carry out flanking moves and such which can be done yes,but too often it is a case of having two mins at most to get counter suppression on the enemy or you can forget about the squad you are trying to help out, so infantry engagements may be drawn out little more but this in itself would possibly offer opportunities and not necessarily restrictions.If i need three squads to overcome one enemy squad in cover, a lot of the time as it is now my infantry look terribly crowded but there is no option because they need to be cheek to jowl to get los in order to gain fire superiority over this other tightly packed force. This undoubtedly leads to higher casualties and to "the tactical eye"looks very wrong.

When i first started the new cm, the unrealistic casualty rates bothered me.The consensus seems to be this is mainly due to players pushing their forces much harder than would be the case in reality, yet even playing as cautiously as i could, trying to play it 'by the book', not pushing too hard or giving unrealistic orders, the casualty rates would still be way higher than expected. I think that the biggest cause of this is the way the squads behave. When they run they go into the conga line of death and when they stop they are all bunched up. A full squad takes up two action spots. How would this play out were it doubled? A squad spread over four spots would survive much better than at present. A lot of the time you see two/three men hit because they are lying almost on top of one another. Fighting in woods, they all want to hide behind the same tree..arrgh. When one man is fired on, there is almost always at least one of his pals right behind him and when using cover i.e. craters, ditches, windows..you get six men lying on top of each other in one crater or two men in the ditch and four sitting on the lip, or four men at one small window. I know some of this is due to limitations within the game but would giving the squads a bigger footprint solve a lot of this? Also, if the squads were spread out you would not have one tightly packed bunch of shooters firing on another bunched up gang. the firing would be much lessened in these exchanges due to los within the squad but i think would flow at a more realistic pace. Last point. The maps would probably become larger as you force would spread out more effectively, yes there are large maps at the moment but it still comes down to very tightly compressed squads moving within it. Yes it would be great to have formation type orders, skirmish line etc, but until that is manageable, if ever, just giving them more room would I think cut the casualty rate drastically. I love these games and nothing else comes close to cm but it is strange that for all the time gone into making it so realistic, for me one of the biggest flaws is down to the omission of one of the very basic rules of combat....Spread the f***k out, keep your spacing. Cheers.

Hi.Open applications, right click CMRT, choose "open package contents". Then open contents folder then the resources folder, you will find it in here. cheers

Hi, a little thing I would like to see would be simulated smoke pots for Pioneer squads. I don't know if this could be done by making their existing smoke grenade give off more smoke and burn longer or what, but something emiting smoke for a few minutes at time could create enough concealment for them to actually achieve something.It seems that smoke grenades and smoke pots were a pretty essential part of their equipment, and I think it would lend to them being a bit more specialised than at the moment and also more capable of performing their historical tasks like wire/obstacle/bunker clearing.The use of smoke was deemed to be so much an integral part of their capability to carry out their role, that the german pioneer assault pack even has two pockets designed specifically to carry two smoke grenades. So even assuming every man in the squad does not have a full load out, the pop smoke capability of a pioneer squad is surely under modelled as it is now where they have the standard two smoke grenades that all [I think] inf. squads are allocated. I think if this could be implemented there is potential for pioneer units employed in the assault to closer resemble the valuable asset that they were in reality more so than they are in the game at the moment. cheers.

One of the ancient ones. i'm not arguing about the likely hood or not of the german capability to destroy the Red army,that is immaterial. What is important is that the german high command themselves by their own estimation believed the only chance to win outright against Russia, was to Destroy the Russian army in the field in the summer campaign of '41. It failed in this objective. The "Whole rotten structure" did not "come crumbling down". Cheers.

Always found these forums to be friendly and helpful. Shift8, reply to my posts by all means, but drop the unwarranted, condescending tone thanks. Shift8 the objectives of 1942, have nothing to do with what i was saying.For outright victory against the Russians it was always going to be a one shot deal for the Germans. By their own estimation, the Wermacht had to destroy the Red army, and quickly to win a war with Russia, it failed to do this, this was the turning point of the eastern front. I also said the destruction of the Red army, if you took me to mean that I envisaged killing every one to the last man, well you're mistaken. Ironically, one thing you do say, is that," Nobody wants to fight to the last man, and even if they did, it wouldn't matter". Where in fact this very quality in the Russian units was, as I'm sure you are aware, a significant factor in the German failure to obtain it's strategic objectives in the summer of '41. Maybe D.Glantz, can put it a little clearer than I can. "Hitler did not issue his directive 21 for Fall Barbarossa until 18 December. When he finally did so his clear intention was to destroy the Red army rather than achieve any specific terrain or political objective". Cheers.

Irrespective of the territorial gains, the failure to achieve one of the main objectives of operation Barbarossa, that being the rapid destruction of the soviet army in the summer of 41, signalled eventual failure further down the road. Hitler was obsessed with taking and holding terrain but it didn't really matter how much he took and held, as the undefeated enemy just got stronger and stronger. On a tactical level, we hear a lot about casualties in cm battles being ahistorical, this is explained away as "real commanders wouldn't push their men as hard as cm commanders. If you take the view that you should reinforce success and not failure, can't it be argued that a lot of real battles would bog down due to commanders being given unrealistic objectives, and the same commanders, would be unwilling to sacrifice their men on senseless "take the hill" type operations?

Have you seen this ? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3148431/Police-discover-WWII-TANK-anti-aircraft-gun-hidden-cellar-German-pensioner-s-house.html

HI, trying to get ai to blast through a wall, I thought this possible, but no luck ?

Hi, was looking on google earth and found what can only be, to my mind, soviet defence works on the Kerch peninsula. In the attached jpg, you can clearly see the trench lines and there is what must be an anti tank ditch that can still be traced running cross the neck of the peninsula, and is in the correct area, that being where Manstiens 11th Army broke through the soviet line .Loads of cratering, also a line of pill boxes in front of the main defense line. loads of interesting stuff in this area. looks like it has been left more or less undisturbed since the war. If anyone wants to check it out on maps or eath, the screenshot is taken about 3km along the road south of the village of Batal'ne. Here you can pick up the anti tank ditch where it crosses the road. This is all of course assuming I am correct in my thinking, but i am quite confident that this is what it appears to be. Cheers

Hi, Gary, welcome aboard.sorry can't help you I'm new to mac's, hence my post. If i were you,I would start this as a new topic, if you want it to be seen, as this one, is kind of dead now. Cheers.

Thanks guys, that's a great help.