I tend to agree with the folks that argue that it would not be too much work to include a "bocage" like feature in the new game.
In Italy, some battlefields contained features such as terraced fields located on hillsides where the levels were separated by tall, ancient stone walls that represented equally problematic obstacles to vehicle movements.
Assuming that one can take care of the one difference they had vs hedgerows (the fact that they only occured on points where there was an elevation change)by using the elevation system, this feature could serve as a "dual purpose" slot where modders could insert "bocage" for BO scenarios developped with this new engines, which would need different style buildings, bridges, trees, tree-bases, fields, grass and brush etc. anyway.
My main beefs against "bocage" as it is modelled within CMBO are of a different nature.
Graphically, "bocage" hedges look totally differe3nt from how they have been represented. The most glaring omission is the trees that were included in every hedgerow in Normandy. This forces the representation to show the hedges around "tall pine" roads, leaving a few gaps with "scattered trees" to allow for crossing points. The result looks OK from a distance, but very unrealistic in "1" zoom level close up.
As for the mechanics, the techniques perfected by the Americans to cope with hedgerows consisted mainly of armor co-operating with engineers to blow gaps in the hedgerows for the tanks to pass through. The "Cullin" device was an alternative method, but by no means the universal one adopted.
The game completely fails to simulate the blowing of gaps in the hedgerows. It makes it far too difficult for infantry to cross a hedgerow, and does not correctly reflect the cover value of these obstacles to units sheltering behind them from fire, as well as its concealment potentials.
It is to be hoped that in the new engine that is being developped these aspects will be taken into consideration.