akd

Not .22 cheap, but it's out there.

The AI is given some leeway in firing nearby foliage obstructions, otherwise they would either slaughter themselves or never ever fire when positioned anywhere near foliage. In reality, locations would be chosen where there were openings in obstructions, or openings made as needed.

XO units (and yes I know it is platoon sergeant in this case, but I am referring to function) don't have a C2 function unless their HQ is destroyed, but if that does happen it is handy for them to have a radio. On-map indirect assets have three options for being "in contact": 1. In C2 up their own chain of command to an HQ with a radio (in most cases this is their platoon HQ). 2. Adjacent to a stationary radio-equipped vehicle (these are the only radios they get to "borrow"). 3. Within voice range of the currently selected spotter.

You cannot use these procedures to derive probable error for any particular weapon system at a particular range, as there are factors other than precision that play a role. An example of an actual figure given for probable error (range) of a weapon system in a particular range band has already been posted to this thread: 3m for the M224 firing charge 0. That is as precise, or more precise, than field artillery, but only in a narrow range band. Should off-map mortars be given a greater default range from target? Perhaps.

Hmm...moving target should be less but I didn't test, although a slowly moving target headed straight toward or away from the weapon would have little effect.

Anything that is listed under "Artillery" is off-map. You can find on-map mortars and infantry guns under "Infantry", "Armored Infantry" and "Armor" (although these will also have an option to set up off-map at the bottom of the unit purchase screen).

Effective range does not mean the range at which the round ceases to exists. It typically means the range at which you are as likely to hit as to miss a typical target. Anything beyond effective range is more likely to miss than hit, but there is still some chance. (Quick tests I conducted a few weeks ago suggested a 10-15% chance of a first round hit at these ranges by Panzershreck.) Panzershreck could be fired on area targets out to something like 800m, so the ballistic potential to hit something is there for quite a distance beyond effective range. Doesn't mean it is a good idea to try.

Timing is a separate issue, and I would definitely agree that tank crews do a number of things far too fast.

I tested Brit QF 75mm at 800m against side-on Panthers. Crews were regular-normal. Daylight, clear and no wind. 10 lanes with the test repeated 3 times (30 total). First round hits 3 out of 30 - 10% chance to hit Second round hits (if first was a miss) 14 out of 27 - 52% chance to hit I have a scan a December 1944 report giving the range for a 50% chance of a first round hit against a stationary hull up tank for the QF 75mm (with range errors occurring) as 800m. 800m was also the average engagement range for tanks in the ETO. Normandy was certainly less, and in game is probably even less than that.

??? Vehicle windows are transparent.

No offense, but opinions don't matter much. Data matters. Do you have some that can be compared against the game?

If Unit A spots an enemy and passes that information to HQ X and HQ X passes this information back down to Unit B, Unit B will be more likely to spot and engage, or respond to as a threat, Unit A's target because they will have a suspected contact ("?") at that location. To make the C2 system more meaningful, I personally will not area target a location where I (as player/god with knowledge of all contacts of all units) know an enemy to be present unless the targeting unit has a suspected contact marker on that location. I'm not 100% on the effects of being in command, but my understanding is that the leadership values help with information distribution and morale.

Confusion results from misinterpretation of the chain of command display in the far lower left. This displays the status of the selected unit's normal chain of command. It is a chain, not a tree. It does not show the selected unit's link to each of the listed HQs, it shows the selected unit's link to its own HQ (first HQ in the list), that HQ's link to its superior HQ, and so own. So in your above example, we can tell from the chain of command display that the selected squad is not in contact with its own HQ because of the red X next to the first HQ in the chain (Platoon HQ). We can also tell that the platoon HQ is out of contact with the Company HQ because the next link up is also red. You know immediately that to restore the normal chain of command, both the selected squad and the platoon HQ must be brought back into contact with their respective HQs. However, your squad still shows "in command" status by voice/visual icons. This is because a unit that is out of contact with its own HQ can benefit from command by a superior HQ in its own chain of command, but only within voice/visual command range. Your squad is under temporary command from the adjacent Company HQ. Unfortunately, there is no visual indication of where this link comes from in the interface. You just have to know that if a selected unit shows a red X next to its immediate superior HQ (first in the chain of command display) but also shows "in command" icons that it must be under command from the nearest superior HQ.

Brecourt Manor. I'm pretty sure it is one of the stock scenarios in CMBN.

IF you have the top HQ selected (or any intermediate), what Moon said is true. You will see the the information as it arrives up the chain of command, not as it appears to each individual unit in realtime. The HQ will have either no information or severely delayed information on contacts made by subordinates out of C2, and will consequently not be able to pass this information down to other subordinates in a timely manner. However, if you have no unit currently selected, you will see all contacts of all units, whether they are in command or not.

XOs will form a new HQ if the HQ unit is destroyed. Pretty useful when it happens.

This is a known game limitation. If a unit has a qualified observer in it, it is always able to access indirect assets, regardless of its own C2 or radio status. OUT-OF-CONTACT on an asset has nothing to do with the currently selected spotter. C2 or radio status does matter for on-map indirect assets, however. If the asset is not in C2 to an HQ with a radio, or isn't nearby a vehicle with a radio, then you will see OUT-OF-CONTACT in the artillery menu.

That green dot means does not mean that the Platoon HQ is in contact with the Batt HQ, it means that the Coy HQ is in contact with the Batt HQ.

There are quite few members of the testing team who can put "former" in their title, and several that can use "current". Some of their experience translates, but I think they all have to learn just like everyone else does. They certainly don't hold back when they think the game has something wrong or has turned real world tactics on its head. Yet you think if one former tanker finds the game difficult, it proves something is fundamentally wrong. Silly, silly remark.

Absolutely nothing.

CM1 also handled units as having no real size or shape in the 3D game world.

It does use up grenades, but if you are playing WEGO, there is an oddity where the grenades are removed from the total at the start of the turn (before you see them used during the replay). They will also close assault with satchel charges in the same circumstances (located in the same or adjacent tile as the tank).

Yup, sample rate is wrong. You will have to convert. I use Audacity, but I'm sure there are other options.

Sorry, that is just speculation, not actual data. For example, probable error (range) for modern US 120mm is 25m at 4500m. Might very well be wrong in game, but we're not getting there that way. And from that other thread: You are not likely to find much data on CEP for mortars, especially older systems. You are much more likely to find probable errors for range and deflection. Here is some data on the post-war M29 81mm mortar: M29 81mm Mortar firing HE (charge 4): @1000m…Range Probable Error = 7m…. Deflection Probable Error=4m 50% Zone = 14m x 8m…. 100% zone = 56m x 32m @1500m…Range Probable Error = 9m…. Deflection Probable Error=4m 50% Zone = 18m x 8m…. 100% zone = 72m x 32 "Dispersion rectangles" for French pre-war mortar: Accuracy of the 81mm Mle1937/31 mortar : • 8m x 17m square at 460m range • 9m x 32m square at 995m range • 17m x 35m square at 1730m range • 32m x 42m square at 2060m range

If someone has better data and can set up a test in game to prove that game deviates significantly from this data, they should put it forward. Unfortunately nobody seems willing to do this. All that is ever brought forward is: 1. It doesn't feel right. Change it to the way I think feels right. Lets have a forum poll about how it feels and if 5 people agree, it has to be changed. 2. X game did/does it this way. 3. On June 10, 1944 Sergeant Doe missed a Tiger at 500m! Tanks should be missing at 500m! I think the ballistics are fine, as is the basic interaction between experience setting and these ballistics. I think error due to psychological factors could be increased, but obviously enters into very subjective territory. This is incorrect. Stance can change dynamically based on movement type, threat and best observation position. Generally, soldiers not moving are more likely to be prone.