Heliodorus

You only need to run 30 tests to get a probabilistic normal distribution in a sample size. Not hundreds. Didn't the panther's gun have greater muzzle velocity over longer ranges? Even though it was a 75mm versus an 88mm, it was a better tank-killing round, I thought. Also, the Panther's turret armor was not materially better than the Tiger 1's turret armor, and it had an infamous shot-trap at the mantle that sent rounds ricocheting downward and through the deck-armor into the crew compartment. However, in a hull down position, the Panther turret was a good bit smaller than the Tiger 1's.

Perfectly clear explanation, and I've benefited greatly from it. Thank you very much. That is sort of what I thought was happening; that 4.squad was actually in command via A.Company, irrespective of the problem between 4.squad and 2.platoon, and separately, 2.platoon and A.company. But I didn't want to assume. This system of benefiting from your parent's parent is what I would have hoped for, actually (and seems very realistic given what I saw of warfare first-hand). I'm not really sure overall what the benefit of C2 is in terms of spotting. I understand that when 1.squad sees a confirmed enemy for the first time, only he knows where it is. And I understand that he can pass up information to his chain of command (which can then be dispersed via the C2 chain to other friendly units). But from a practical sense, if you can't see it yourself, you can't shoot it (or call arty on it), so all of that tangential relaying of information would seem to me to be unhelpful: until you are in a spot to physically see a that unit's location, you can't shoot at it. If you can see the location, even if you can't confirm the enemy unit yourself (but someone else can), for game purposes, I can target the space and it will suppress and do damage. So I don't understand the advantage of passing on information about targets to other units that can't see them. What can units do if they learn about targets they can't see? Finally (this round), does an HQ's leadership value help his subordinates (that are in the C2) with anything more than 'morale checks' for lack of a better term? I'm thinking Advanced Squad Leader here, and wondering if the leadership ratings in CM have any parallels.

Okay, back to a C2 question. I have a company of infantry. 2.Platoon has 4.squad (MMG) that is the only unit I have that can see any other unit. 4.Squad can see a Pak38 (there are no other targets or "?" on the map at all right now). 4.Squad is in C2 to the 2.Platoon HQ judging by the C2 icons of eyeball and shout (I think it's to that HQ, but it might not be), which is off in a house about 60m away. Immediately adjacent to the 4.squad MMG unit is A.company HQ (to which 2.Platoon belongs). The 4.squad shows a break in command as follows: 4.squad shows red to 2.Platoon HQ 4.squad shows red to A.company HQ 2.Platoon HQ shows red to A.company HQ It would seem that the building that 2.Platoon HQ occupies is sufficient to block LOS to the A.Company HQ. I would take a screenshot, but when I lay down the contents into Paint it shows up as a black picture of my windows desktop, so there must be some catch to this. Here is what I don't understand: Why does the 4.squad show C2 with it's platoon HQ (by icon) but the chain-of-command section of the unit display shows a break to 2.platoon HQ? How can 4.squad be in command if the display shows red X? To a lesser extent, what is up between 4.squad and A.company HQ? Why is that chain-of-command red if literally the A.company HQ is adjacent to the 4.squad? I would ask why A.company HQ can't see/shout at 2.platoon HQ, because it seems to me that if the 4.squad has shout and visibility to its platoon HQ, then the A.company should have the exact same shout and visibility issue, since they are literally right next to one another. (In this case, I think the 2.platoon HQ is too far into the building along the sight line that the A.company HQ traces, but the 4.squad traces almost the exact same LOS to the platoon HQ.) It's weird.

Well my point in saying I was a tanker was simply to steer people away from having to ask me if I knew things like overwatch, hull down, etc. I was simply trying to distance myself from a first time tactical game player. I found the first CM very tactically realistic, and so far I have no real problem with tactical realism in CM2. I'd prefer to stay out of the ruckus about the game as I have less than 20 hours with it so far, and it generally makes me happy (although I was using recon-by-exploding-tank, which is hard for a former tanker to see the results of...) If I may get back to something I'm trying to learn, I'm really unclear, then, about the C2 roles of company (and higher) HQ types, their XOs (and support teams, and how those two differ), and how best to maximize my C2 effectiveness. That's a very new concept to this edition for me. Elsewise, I shall take it slower, and break up squads. I think because I was used to the CM1 orders-delay, which is now gone, that I gave long complicated orders and tried not to deviate from them much (and I kept trying to slide my waypoints ever so slightly between turns, which is also gone since delay is gone, I guess). Last question (for this post): I haven't opened the editor yet, but is it fairly simple to figure out how to update the times of the scenarios? As I learn the game, I'd rather slow it way down. Thanks for all the helpful pointers.

I've played the tutorial campaigns, read the manual, played a half-dozen quick battles, and now I'm playing a couple of scenarios, and I keep getting wiped the f*** out, having to restart, rinse repeat. It seems I can only solve these puzzles by failing at every possible permutation. I'm kind of having two problems: spotting, and understanding small arms damage/cover from small arms. I'm only working on two scenarios, one I "cracked" and one I'm throwing my hand up in disgust at. Either might have been downloads (I downloaded tons of files before I started playing scenarios, so I don't know which are originals shipped with the base game). Pleasantly Shaded Wood (cracked) and A Delaying Action "PSW" was an infantry only game, and I beat that on the third try simply because I figured out where the defenders were in the first two, and I stacked the deck for a cheap win in the third. I'll refer to this game because I got decent experience with small arms combat. "A Delaying Action" is basically an open map with German AT defenses awaiting 4 Shermans and a company of infantry. It's driving me crazy. Even with infantry and tanks moving together, I'm not seeing AT guns until they're blowing up a Sherman, and the AT guns are literally in the open. What does one have to do to spot something without holding up a 'shoot me' sign? I'm a former tank crewman so I understand hull-down, bounding overwatch, buttoning up, etc., and I'm a veteran CM1 player (with many years break). I'm not just charging tanks around like this is an RTS. I'm getting really tired of tackling one layer of a defense, only to be shredded by the second and having to reload. It's destroying the real strategies of tackling scenarios. I've been moving infantry and tanks across an open field together, bounding. Infantry isn't seeing enemies in buildings until within 40 meters, at which point the squad falters at the first enemy team's 2-man rifle fire... If I get into a building, it's like it's worse than lying prone in a grass field - they provide no protection. In fact the only thing I've seen thus far that provides decent cover against small arms are trenches (which the Germans have in Delaying Action), bocage, and stone walls (but the first HE round drops those like dominoes). I only had to cover about 120 meters of field, which I took about 12 minutes to do by bounding slowly. I took out one 88mm via being hull down and extremely long range (500 meters) with direct Sherman fire, and the rest of the damage I achieved was done by artillery. I'm very frustrated with the spotting algorithms in this game so far:why am I so apparently easy to see and hit and they are so much harder to see (not all that much harder to kill, except in the tank/AT gun battle, which I know is supposed to favor surprise), but why is my infantry not seeing ANYthing when not under any fire at all?

So since you mentioned nothing about any special game abilities, I assume that such teams are basically be used normally.

+1 (!) So now I'm on to another quick battle. I've played a couple of those now, the first two with automatic troop allocation by the AI. Worked out well enough, though in one of them the main body of my force consisted of MMG and HMG teams (and ammo bearers). Only 3 squads of infantry, but probably 15 to 18 MGs (most heavy). Seemed odd. Any comments? Now I'm on to another in which I'm buying my own troops (and letting the German be auto-selected) with an infantry-only constraint to both sides. Why can't I buy paratroopers in June 44? (And why are engineers referred to as 'pioneers'?). And what is an "HQ Support" section for? Under several types of platoon leaders (or battalion) I'm seeing things like the HQ Support, and an XO team, and an "operations team". I know what an XO is, but do they have any C2 functionality in the game? What is an Operations Team for, and what is an HQ support section for. How do people use mortars teams after they are out of ammo? And the ammo bearers? I understand from reading the manual that basically higher tier, parent-type HQs won't affect subordinates that have their own integral HQ. Is that always, or 'only while the integral HQ section is alive'? I've ended up some times with HQs that had no attached subordinates to command, but if I double-clicked on them, the entire battalion was selected for movement. I'm a little lost as to the distinction between being the "HQ" of something like a battalion or platoon and being a viable C2 helper/morale helper. What's the point of taking risks with a company or battalion HQ section when it really has no subordinates that it can improve through command? Should I be starting to notice distinctions in how units perform based on whether they have no commander (either dead or not in C2 range), versus a unit that can see the commander, versus a unit that can shout/talk to the commander?

Well, I think I understand hedgerows now, at least, and anything larger than that is bocage/impassable without breach/natural breaks, from what you've told me (and much obliged for the help). On the random map created for me, there were no gaps in a quite large proportion of the bocage. Is it common to have large areas of bocage without gaps? In the scenario I've switched to (Platoon Patrol), natural breaks are present someplace in every field. I haven't checked much of the forum yet, but has the user community created scenarios outside of the June-to-August time frame of the original game?

I find that to be a negative selling point. Peeling my green/yellow color-blind eyes through miles of hedgerow for a gap does not equate to fun gameplay in my book. Unhappy. But thank you for the clarification.

After playing through the two tutorials (and being a CM1 veteran with a long hiatus from the game), I set up a quick battle, gave a bunch of orders, and then watched as my infantry ran 1,000 meters tangent to the objective I gave them that was 50 meters directly in front. I've gathered based on the ridiculous reactions to all my move orders that the tree-lined hedges between the infantry and the move objective was impassable. Fine, I understand hedgerows, but the problem is that I can't tell the difference between what is impassable and what is navigable. I'm a little bit colorblind, though I doubt that's really the problem. In CM1, you could check your LOSs and (IIRC) the game told you what type of terrain was what. How can I tell, short of an obvious break in a hedgerow, whether something is navigable? In the campaigns of the tutorial, you could navigate any hedgerow (with infantry) so I wasn't expecting this. How can I tell what types of terrain are what, any cover values they have, and the transit movement penalty that might be incurred in crossing? I am searching the manual, but all I can find is icons of terrain amongst the editor pages, which isn't meeting my needs.