JoMac

Yeah, maybe it was the 'Fatigue' Status I was thinking...The Driver may quickly return fire upon dismount, but unlikely to hit anything due to Suppression, Panic, etc.

I don't think Mounted Crew has it's Moral modeled the same as one that is dismounted...So, it's likely he was cool & calm and able to return fire.

Yes, me thinks the same... I know we just had this discussion just recently (and over the yrs), but just wish BF would do the same Small Arms Center-of-Mass shooting (it might, but I don't see it) for ALL Vehicles that are unbuttoned/passengers instead of directly shooting at the Vehicles Crew (top part of vehicle)...This will at least give Crew members a better chance to button before getting hit. I think the premise would be that the initial Small Arms fire would attempt to suppress the exposed vehicle crew by hitting the Vehicle in general to force a button (easier to hit a whole vehicle then the crew), then afterwards try and hit any Crew who didn't button...Basically a progression of Small Arms Fire that might take an Action Cycle or so to complete. Yeah, as it stands now it seems you are better off exposed in an unprotected vehicle, then you are unbuttoned in an Armored Vehicle. Joe

No...I mean, Really...As in, you should know that the Brits take their time and think things through before moving, this in contrast to the U.S., who Say & Move all in one step...lol.

Might have a point there regarding being a slightly easier target...But, I'm sure it's already modeled that the pixeltruppen is looking through the Gun Sights by slightly bending over.

Pixeltruppens can't eat...There is no Animation for that, or for them bending down a few inches to look through the gun sights

Really, Bullet...I mean, REALLY !

Yeah, the U.S. 37 can barely penetrate the Turret Face of PZIV at 500 meters, but it cant do so against the Turret Mantle or Upper Hull. Also, these smaller caliber type guns have smaller penetrating effects, and so it usually takes a few penetrations to cause a KO. Joe

I will wait until the 1st Patch (out of many that will come out, I'm sure) is incorporated into CD before ordering...So, will wait a few months. Joe

No, Silly...They still have a Module (or Scenario/BP) that will include the French Forces, and that Whatchamacallit Operation in Southern France. Joe

You do understand, User1K, he is asking if the Building Types & Placement are there as intended. Basically, are the Doors, No Doors, Mismatched Building Doors all designed that way in your Scenario. Joe

Oh wait...are you playing Turn-Based or Real-Time ?...If Real-Time, then I imagine you could Unbutton/Button anytime and as frequent. I should've been more clear in my original post in that it's in regards to Turn-Based.

In that case, I think you unbuttoned the Tank at beginning of turn (unless it was already unbuttoned in previous turn), and in middle of a turn it buttoned-up due to small arms fire ( or commander buttoned to help as a loader ), then unbuttoned itself at end of turn ( some sort of button/unbutton cycle )...maybe ?

Yes, and my thoughts the same...It's best suited to be one of those All-or-Nothing Commands. And, how odd would look to see unbutton/button every waypoint (especially if you have a waypoint every 5 meters for example). Also, and to your point I think, if the engine doesn't track the event and you button due to small arms in middle of a move (before reaching a waypoint), would it count towards the upcoming waypoint or separate...If the later, then expect even more unbutton/buttoning in a turn, and that would really look odd and simply unrealistic. Back to the drawing board with my thoughts...

You are allowed Commands such as Move. Shoot, Arcs, etc, at different Waypoints, but wish this Option was also available for the Unbutton/Button Command...Guess this would follow under the CM Wish List Thread or somefink. Joe

Don't bother, since you will be using CMx2, then expect Three-Fold more casualties then Historically was the case. So, the whole 506th should no longer be in existent after the 1st Campaign...Oops, you mean to only use 1x Company (Easy Company), then, I expect this to be done in one Battle. Joe

Also, note the Spaced Armor on the Gun Shield...Should deflect most all Small Arms, except the .50 cal, unless from Long Range. Joe

You can post this in the 'Opponent Finder Forum' closer at bottom page, or , here also works. Now, in saying that, I have CMBN+CW+MG @3.12 ( no VP or SP )...Let me know if interested in up to Reinforced Company size engagements ( Meetings for now )

I think, Steve, is trying to say; "Ok, You Two, Get a Room Already", or something to that effect Anyways, and on that note, we might continue this 'After Thought' discussion with a new Thread in the 'General Discussion' Forum...

Yes, been to APG several times over the years. Ok, I always thought the Side Skirts were around 10mm making it the same as the Gun Shield...Hmm, maybe the Side Skirts were only 5 mm then ( making the 10 mm MG Shield better protected ) ? And a Small Wold after all...Indeed, I also played with ROCO, & Roskopf (1:87-1:90 scale...Roskopf had many of the WWII Russian Vehicles that ROCO lacked) on a makeshift Terrain Table using Tractics, then switched over to Micro-Armor using WRG, Combined Arms Fast Rules (fast version of Tractics), etc...What's AD ? (not Dungeons & Dragons...I hope). I still remember when Me & Dad went to the local Gaming Conventions (Va, MD, PA area) once or twice a year to look at the different Rules, and Terrain Tables, etc (Historicon, HMGS, Cold Wars, etc). Back then, we also visited Hobby Shops, one called 'Squadron' (Model Shop), and 'The Little Soldier' (Miniatures Shop) somewhere in Maryland, or Alexandria, Va. I give all the Credit to my Dad, since he brought me up on this stuff... 'Lions & Tigers & Bears...Oh, My' ! Anyways, sorry for being 'Off Topic'...Sometimes my Passion for Gaming gets in the way, and I reminisce the days of old.

Ok, got it, and I was over thinking my response abit. I think the Stug-Halftrack type Gun Shields are made from the same plates as the Armor Side-Skirts (around 10 mm), and AT Gun Shields had a little more protection (15 to 25 mm). The reason I say the above is that I use to visit Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD a few times in the past (70's to 90s), and remember using a Tape Measure to measure the thickness of different Armor and Plates, etc, to use with a set of rules called 'Tractics' for HO, and WRG 1925-50...Ahh, The Good Ole' Days of Miniature Gaming.

Then again, CM might only model this Small Arms ( or Direct Fire ) Progression effect against Vehicles, Field Pieces, etc, and not Map Objects ( basically, anything that's in the Map Editor ), such as Buildings, Walls, and all other Terrain Elements.

Oh, I actually disagree to that last part...If you are Hit while Prone I think it's far more dangerous...Now, of course, on average ( depending on circumstances ) I would rather be Prone vs Upright/kneel when firing or fired upon. Now, that I think about it, I wonder how CM Models Prone Personal vs others when hit...Does the Prone Personal have a greater or same chance of becoming Heavily Wounded ( or is it just random )?

Might be that, John, is wondering if the ATG Shield works off the same principles as the HT MG Shield, where directed Small Arms will focus first on the Center of Main Body or Shield itself, then towards the slightly exposed personal (on top or sides). Which brings us to another off topic ( but not really ) question: If the above is correct, then I wonder if this same logic also applies to Personal in Buildings, behind Walls/Hedges, etc...Where Small Arms fire is first directed against an Intervening Object, then focuses towards the personal behind it ( basically, suppressing object before trying to kill it) Oh, this could be interesting...Now, I wonder how this would play out (using same Test Principles as Rokko) if the same MG bearer fires against Personal in Open, then vs Personal behind Stone Wall/Hedge. After all the Test Runs, would the Personal behind the Stone Wall have a better chance of survival then the one in the Open (as one would expect).

Yes, and that should be right and same thing I was thinking...It's easier to spot something that generally doesn't belong or sticks out in the immediate surroundings and so generally easier or faster to spot...Then, from there ( in case of HT w/Mg or Unbuttoned Crew) the Progression of Area-Fire, then becomes a point on the Vehicle, etc...It's good that this behavior is modeled. Now, are you also looking into having the Unbutton Crew of any Vehicle ( Tanks...including Stugs, HT's, etc ) have a TAC AI behavior change to ducking more often as it co-insides with Small Arms Progression ( Hey, those Bullets are getting awfully close, and think I should duck or button up ) . I know you also mentioned no Unbutton if loss of Crew member. Anyways, at this point, Steve, recap once more at what your going to consider looking into...unless you think nothing else has changed since your older post.