John1966

Sorry, I wasn't after an argument. Thank you. But not sure what the Engine 4 manual is. I've got a manual with each of the games and the modules but I assume that's the Game Manual you're referring to. I read the manual for CMBN (v1.0) when that came out and after a change in PC and various other things, I actually purchased it again recently (v4.0) rather than do all the upgrades. I must confess that I haven't read the manual again (that I assume to be the Game Manual) as it didn't occur to me that it would be dramatically different. The UI looked the same after all, so I thought I knew how to play it. Perhaps it is the same/similar on this one because I may have forgotten things from when I read it originally. TBH, I only ever go to the manual these days if there's something I want to know how to do and that isn't very often. Hadn't ever felt the need to use the Combine Squad command so I hadn't looked it up. I only asked here because it was being discussed and I was curious. I thought that would be OK. I wasn't blaming anyone for anything.

Interesting. The side hull armour is a bit thinner than the rear but only behind the wheels (so not sure what difference that would make). But a 20 degree slope at the rear would actually suggest you're better off firing at the sides.

Basic staff management.

Read them 20 years ago. And the strategy guide (anyone remember that?). Then the new manual when CMx2 came out. (Unless an "Engine Manual" is a different thing.) Doesn't mean I remember them though. You find your own way of doing things and, like I say, never used Combine Squad as I'd not felt the need (because I had somewhere along the line thought it had meant a different thing).

Exactly. Which is why I never realised what it was for. Having said that, combining different squads that have been whittled down to a few men would be useful. Especially in campaigns.

Yes I know. You seem to be misunderstanding what I'm puzzled by. You can combine teams into squads without the order. So the command seems to be for reorganising the squad rather than just recombining it (as you don't need the command for that).

I posted an anecdote in CMFI last night about Catch a Tiger but I've been puzzling about it. It's not a spoiler to say your main objective in this one is to take out an immobilised Tiger with your infantry (that's basically the mission). I was pretty pleased with how it had gone. All the supporting infantry eliminated without the Tiger getting a shot off so time to close in with the bazooka teams (there are four available) to get it. One team was in front (wasn't expecting it to achieve much but I wanted all sides covered so the Tiger couldn't just rotate and blow everyone up). One to the side. Two to the rear. Ranges were about 20m. Front one a bit more. One of the rear ones quite a bit less. Now we all know Tigers are tough SOBs so I was a bit surprised when the first shot from the front got a penetration. Then the team at the side got three penetrations with their first three shots. But that was all the penetrations either team got. But the two teams at the rear (who I was banking on for the coup de grâce) unloaded most of the ammo, hit every time (10+ hits): not one single penetration. OK, could be flukey (but that's very flukey if I'm getting front/side penetrations) but am I missing something about a Tiger's armour? Were they tougher at the back than the side or something? I know the angle of the shot is important (I assume) and I think the side team were close to ninety degrees on, but so was one of the rear teams. Tiger inflicted 9 casualties while this was going on (so major rather than total victory). In the end the platoon HQ got it with a grenade.

Now you're confusing me again. You can't combine teams from different squads, can you? Good if you could for precisely that reason. If they were in the same squad then you can combine them by sticking them in the same place.

This can be a bit strange. Last night I had a squad who were "tiring" and when I split them they were both "ready".

Interesting. Seems a bit zen though. I've never really thought about it but having a full squad over three (not necessarily adjacent) action squares seems a good balance. That'll be why.

So many rear shots from bazookas at pretty much point blank range that I start to run out of bazooka rounds. One team who are completely out run off to the truck for more (and get blown up by the Tiger on the way). Then someone gets it with a grenade. I realise it was probably more complicated than that inside the tank but the AI can't tell anecdotes.

So if I've got this straight, the purpose of Combine Squad is to turn your three-team squad into a two-team squad (of the same number of men)?

Why would you want to do that? Doesn't that just make your squad less flexible?

Yes, I know. I do it all the time. I get all this. I know about the squads AS positioning. Although I confess I'd never noticed the significance of the columns - that's useful, thanks. I never knew I could tell how the weapons would be distributed when I split squads.

They do if they're positioned right. Not sure whether it has to be the same AS or adjacent ASs. I've never used the Combine Squad order (really, I haven't) and they recombine when I want them to (usually). Happened an hour ago. And in that case I hadn't even wanted them to. You've got two icons and then one disappears. Usually at the start or finish of a turn.

But they do it automatically. Or they're supposed to. Isn't that what this post is about? As above. They do it automatically when they're together so what's the command for? I'd hoped it was for combining different squads that have become a couple of men due to casualties. That'd be useful. But I don't think that's what it is.

Play against me. Your pixeltruppen will toss grenades about like they're going out of fashion while my guys try too remember where they keep them. Seriously, the AI has got it in for me with grenades. As soon as I get in grenade range all that happens is I get pasted with them. Defenders seem keener than attackers which actually seems a bit counterintuitive to me. I also have a sneaking suspicion the Germans are keener to chuck them than most.

I've never used this command because I'm not sure what it's for. It's usually greyed out anyway. I'm ready to learn. How does it work?

Played my first Italian scenario last night (as the Italians) and, to my surprise, got a total victory. So today I had a go at this one. Five attempts, all abandoned after about five or six turns. Nope. Not happening.

Yes. I too, have done miraculous things with Bren carriers. Well that's the interesting thing. I've never really thought about it before but, now I do, the Queen of the Battlefield does seem a little more heroic than perhaps it should be. I was hoping a Bren carrier grog would come along and explain just why the CM carrier is modelled to be such a beast.

Won't a halftrack with no passengers back out sharpish under small arms fire?

Hmmm... Interesting. Why can't a Bren carrier be harmed by rifle/MG fire? It's usually quite effective against halftracks. Infantry will even fire on tanks, if only to keep the crew's heads down. Funny thing is, I'm always surprised how effective carriers are in CM. Things stick with you and I remember 30ish years ago playing with carriers in a Squad Leader game. I don't exactly recall the rules but they were similar to halftracks but the occupants (crew and passengers) were always considered "crew exposed". So in the game I was playing with them, about eight were more or less knocked out (occupants broken) in a couple of turns. So I've always had it in my head that they're "a bit rubbish" even though they're rather good in CM. It seems that in CM they're actually better than a halftrack. Certainly as far as crew/passenger protection is concerned. I'm not sure why that should be. After all, you can properly duck down in a halftrack. Carriers should surely offer less protection?

Is that a bizarre historical quirk or a bug? (Genuine question)

I'm sure the award winning historian will be delighted by your assessment.

Just going by Anthony Beevor's Arnhem (because I just finished it).