Erik Springelkamp

But that might not be a suitable construction for giving one away as a present, as the recipient might (even unknowingly) use up all your activations.

If you want blue to be the weaker side in a meeting engagement, you will have to give him inadequate weapons.

I suspect this is a geographical thing. Is it true that all those that could not see the pictures were located outside the USA or Europe?

But not because of nationality, but because of the equipment the team has. Actually I think CMx2 already can show this behaviour: men in the same team keep together anyway, and if the one with the rifle is shot, the other will recover the rifle. No need for specific AI behaviour, although one could argue that buddy aid might be speeded up a little under such conditions.

And then you can only order in steps of 5 minutes. But maybe this is realistic for a full prep fire barrage, but each battery must hold out for 5 minutes, so either a lot of ammo is needed, or a slower rate of fire.

No, because you cannot get fire starting at minute 1, 2, 3, and 4. And fire that is not pre-plotted is less predictable.

1 FO can order all the barrages, and he doesn't even need LOS to the target areas for pre-plotted fire, but starting time can only be chosen on multiples of 5 minutes.

Well, with my post I wanted to state that in many scenarios in CM the percentage would be much lower than 99%. In a lot of single fights the results would average out to the expected outcome, but in the critical AT phase there is a lot of decisive chance. I think that will be similar in CM:BN with defending AT-guns. Will they kill? Will they survive the counter-fire? You can change the odds by skilful placement, but the actual roll will often decide the outcome of the battle.

But chess doesn't have die rolls. A lot of results in CMSF or CMx1 for that matter still come down to a few crucial hits or misses. In the armour dominance phase one or more hits by an ATGM launcher can make all the difference. I have played from the same saved defensive Syrian setup a number of runs (the AI plan has already been chosen, so it is the same each time), and have experienced very different outcomes, where sometimes a crucial AT team scores a lot of hits, and sometimes misses the first and is immediately destroyed by counter fire. So tournament players can still whine about their unfavourable die rolls, and sometimes be even right to do so.

RPG29, Panzerfaust III, AT-14

"CMSF beta tester" proves that they were there when it mattered, and not just joined opportunistically for a popular hit :-)

Nice! First try in first scenario. Now I will have to reload and to brood.

anti-virus is usually the greatest nuisance of them all.

Tree modelling has been changed to make it faster (and they look good). Trenches have been removed in the old form for performance reasons (and for FOW of course). Other than that I haven't heard of much rendering differences with CMSF.

That works :-)

Unfortunately these links are forbidden for us mere humans.

So I returned from my extended visit to the residency. Very entertaining afternoon with CMBN at Dave's classy apartment. Playing CMBN was going smooth, coming from CMSF. While Dave urged me to rush all my Americans forward to experience some nice explosions, I couldn't help myself first sneeking an artillery observer forward and ordering some mortar fire on enemy positions. On board indirect mortar fire is beautiful: you see the crews loading the tube, and you see the bombs travelling high through the air onto their targets. I loved the new tree rendering, and although it is in a way more primitive and I expect it to be much more efficient than the CMSF model, they actually looked better than the CMSF trees. I have complete trust that CMBN will be a joy, and the current beta already worked very convincingly. We spotted very few glitches. Maybe the air support was a bit accurate, maybe a German bunker was a bit resistant: a dozen Sherman hits on the slit should have silenced it?. Germans would have been disappointed - but we Americans cheered - that all recorded panzerfaust/shreck hits on Shermans only led to temporary abandonment of the tanks. I guess fine tuning all these factors will take its time, and I would say to Battlefront - though this will get me angry reactions from the forum: take all the time you need to get it perfect :-) All in all it was great fun, thanks to Dave for staging this event.

I'll bring droge worst from Groningen

1) There is a spread of the shots, I just put some area fire on a building, and I saw the shots hit left middle and right part of the floor. 2) I think the 40mm grenade launcher is inherently inaccurate, also with aimed fire. 3) Discussed in the CMBN AAR: if you shoot too high, you won't see where it would have hit, so the tactic seems to be correcting starting from shooting short.

But the difference is whether you save (part of) your force for another day.

Hmm, change that to 'creative industry'. I think there is a creative world that follows different philosophies.

One gets the impression from the questions that the RPS people had read some of the recent discussions on this forum.

If Disney puts a stolen story in a movie, they always get copyright, for ever and eternity.

Fixed that for you.

Yes, I have been frustrated in scenarios where the maps were far too small for the efficient employment of Saggers. When there are only two corners where you can use them, it gets easy for the enemy to apply artillery, while when you would have a ridge of a few km length with a view on the target, the situation would be entirely different.