GreenAsJade

Mordante posted a new CMSF mod at the CMSF Mods Warehouse. It's Mordante's "Mord's Afghanistan Fog Of War Icon Mod" Description: "Replaces man based units/teams with the generic infantry icons for more FOW at a glance. Players won't be able to identif..." GaJ

Mordante posted a new CMSF mod at the CMSF Mods Warehouse. It's Mordante's "Mord's CMSF Fog Of War Icon Mod" Description: "Replaces man based units/teams with the generic infantry icons for more FOW at a glance. Players won't be able to identif..." GaJ

Note that saying "CMBN penetration data will be available just like CMSF" doesn't help those of us who don't play CMSF... GaJ

Yes, that is sad. You can of course argue that a commander in the war doesn't know all this stuff with mathematical precision, so why should we have that data. However, the commander would have a better idea than the average non-grog playing the game Also "will it penetrate from this angle" is possibly not so much of an issue in modern warfare, but it is utterly critical in many armoured battles in the WWII situation... the tank v tank tactics depend on knowing if you need to take a side shot or not at the very least ... so in the context of WWII, it's a "wonderful playing aid, can we please have it" GaJ

In one of the AARs, the comment was made "I couldn't tell whether my tank would be able to penetrate his in this situation", and the subsequent question "Is the shell penetration and armour thickness data available to the player?" GaJ

Most WWII-only players already tried the CMSF demo when it first came out - it doesn't put them off CMBN, only CMSF. But, as one of those, I can say I'm happy to wait till CMBN comes to try this all out... GaJ

Sounds great. I'm looking forwards to trying it when it arrives GaJ

+1 Yeah, the appearance is great!

LOL (geez I have to add characters to have a LOL!)

Cool thx (Don't the receivers have antennas as well? Are these obvious from engagement distances?)

In the AAR, JonS mentioned: Can someone elaborate? I would have thought it's "all bad, fix please" GaJ

Wierd eh? How would you actually know that (IRL)? Kind of an important thing to know, isn't it? (Or is "in command" less of a big deal in CMx2, since for a start there's no "extra command delays" associated with not being in command!) GaJ

How did you know it was the HQ tank? GaJ

Says the man with the new toys!! GaJ

Says who? It's all just software GaJ

Nice report - great to see what some action looks like. At one point you mentioned that you're not sure whether you can puncture the Jpz front on. Got me wondering: you you have onscreen the armour penetration tables, like we do in CMx1? You know - the nice little coloured bars around the tank in the status window, and the info window with the thicknesses, angles and gun penetration data? I have to say that if that _isn't_ there, this will be a major blow for non-grogs (like me) playing the game... GaJ

.... and then he posts .... a road!!! GaJ

Yea - the AAR is way better than any of the threads... GaJ

... great idea! And the table of contents, too, so we can actually find the comments we care about GaJ

So CMx2 has "covered arc"? I didn't know that - this will make it feel nice and familiar. PBEM is exatly what I'm interested in. So I was basically asking "how would you go about telling your guys, at the beginning of the PBEM WEGO turn not to hide (because you want them spotting) but not to open fire unless someone comes _out_ of the woods?" If the answer is "You set a covered arc at the perimeter of the woods" then.... cool! GaJ

Would you have chosen to shoot at them anyhow, giving yourselves away? How do you control this sort of thing in CMx2? Ta, GaJ

Interestingly, in CMx1, that would likely have shown up as "Crew?". Not that it would have made any difference in this case, since the only logical response was to blow him up GaJ

What is "Borg Reaction Time"? GaJ

Woo hoo GaJ

Ironically, an "oops we bumped into each other" is possibly the most realistic situation where tank riding would come into play. As in "oh ****, get off quick". I think tank riding to enable gamey scenarios like rushing to a meeting engagement victory point is a not a good one to be asking for. As I said earlier, its possibly a _good_ thing that tank riding isn't in, so this sort of silliness is lessened. It also ought to be the case that the more realistic victory condition thing lessens the occurence of "rush to the middle flag" scenarios, though I don't have experience to tell me that. GaJ