poesel

I'd like to differ. I agree with you that shooting straight up into 8th floor is a rather seldom occurrence.
What's IMHO worse is the lack of limits to gun depression. Because that makes it easy for tanks to defend versus close assaults. And I mean VERY close assaults with grenades.
Without a limit to depression a tank can literally shoot through its own motor.

A grenade assault which does not kill the tank is the death sentence for the attacker because a tank has no blind spots where it can't shoot you.

For a certain type of battle this happens quite often. See picture.

Glorious March to Victory, Final Post - "Like Tears in Rain"
Well big thank you to all who watched.  I figure I should stop leaving you all hanging, so we cease fired on the last turn (33 I believe).  Now take the end-screen with a grain of salt:

So first off there was a dumb double-accounting error for the Soviet side.  Basically the parameters were:
En Cas 50% = 50 VPs
En Condition 50% = 50 VPs
Dollbach Village = 100 VPs.
The error was the Soviets had another 100 VPs for having fewer than/better than 50% cas/cond, so I subtracted that because if we had paid attention Bil was above 50% too.  So the score was really 100 because I held the town.  (Note, also a small error in that his M150s were counted as tanks...a bug we noted for fixing)
The outstanding question is "could Bil have reduced me to 50% without going there himself"...that one is tougher.   So for Soviets:
215 men: lost 71 = 33%
17 Tanks: lost 10 = 58%
17 AFVs: lost 9 = 53%
For the US:
138 men: lost 56 = 40.5%
12 Tanks: lost 6 = 50%
17 AFVs (also counting his mortar carriers): Lost 6 = 35%
So this was by no stretch a "Total Victory", that was straight up on us for not checking the victory parameters.  I hold the village but given the drubbing I received in taking it, I am not sure I can put a statue up in Red Square for this either.  Add to this the fact I started with a lot more men and tanks, it starts to push the whole thing into Draw territory to my mind.  
Now Bil had much better arty, had air (I had none) and EW which made my arty next to useless without TRPs (which I did not have) so there is that.  And my starting position was not the best but it is a poor craftsman that blames the workbench.  
I will let you all judge for yourselves.  Regardless, was a helluva fight, the kind that comes around only every so often,  and we are all working to get you guys a chance at it yourselves soon enough.
 

Here is a map with the positions of all included FB scenarios, campaigns & maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zetZ6VPvwx0g.kFKcTFo1c88A&usp=sharing
I've tried to locate the positions as best as I could. If you find mistakes please PM me.
There is also stuff from BN, CW and parts of MG (thanks Pete!). I plan to include the pieces from the other titles over time and maybe even non-BFC content.
If you'd like to participate please PM me.

Here is a map with the positions of all included FB scenarios, campaigns & maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=zetZ6VPvwx0g.kFKcTFo1c88A&usp=sharing
I've tried to locate the positions as best as I could. If you find mistakes please PM me.
There is also stuff from BN, CW and parts of MG (thanks Pete!). I plan to include the pieces from the other titles over time and maybe even non-BFC content.
If you'd like to participate please PM me.

As a Linux user I sometimes look through WineHQ for capabilities of running some Windows stuff in my favourite OS. Last week I've found that there is a Wine patch that enable run CM2. It seems that it passed unnoticed, so I'm writing it here.
So far, I've tested demo versions of CMRT, CMFI and CMBS and on my 8-year-old laptop (Linux Mint 19, Wine 3.20) they all run without any issues.
The question is: how it looks with full versions? I'd like to know that they work before purchasing. If there are another Linux users (who don't want to dual-boot anymore) I would appreciate for sharing the results of the tests.
 
Regards

I dismounted most of the German infantry from their Marders in case they could be seen early. Man, those Panzerfaust 3's are large !

But it is an impressive sight as the reinforcements move up

Further orders - since Bil is covering the Dig Site, he doesn't have anything looking down in the other direction due to his protective mound. So I think moving another Scimitar forward would be good

At least one Marder joins the Watcher in the Woods - that's a good position even if the range is a bit too great for useful area fire against Bil's uncons.

Final overview of the bulk of my position - Both Leopards have moved onto the highest tiny mound available.

MINUTE 4
Team 2’s AT team finished setting up its AT-7, aimed at the Scimitar near the ruined farm and let fly… the missile just skimmed the turret but hit the ground well beyond…

…immediately the accompanying Fennek spotted the team and fired a few volleys of grenades at this team.  None hit, but the grenades were churning up the ground as they moved closer and closer toward the end of the turn. 

The AT team fired a second missile that is still in the air at the end of the first turn.  I will be pulling them out of the line next turn... hopefully they get out okay… if not, that’s okay too as long as he loses the Scimitar.  I’m on the edge of my seat…

Neither of my vehicles in this team got a spot this turn... I will be pulling the BMP out of the line next turn in order to re-mount one of the scout teams as noted last turn.  The LAV-AT will stay where it is for now, I expect Baneman will move a vehicle or two next turn near the ruined farm, and that might help the LAV-AT spot one or both of them.
Team 1’s BMP did pull off the line this turn, and will now wait for the Recon Platoon leader team to remount next turn.

The Fennek at Farm 2 dismounted this turn and entered the buildings.  It does not look like he wants to push beyond the farm at this point... he is happy to sit in place and provide support fire with the Scimitar towards my UNCONs near the Monastery.

Two of the four LAVs in my reaction force will be moving forward into keyhole positions next turn, hoping to get a spot or two on a Scimitar or Fennek.  This movement is in preparation for my Advance Guard which is just one minute out. 

The dismounts from this platoon are starting to move out on a route reconnaissance toward OBJ GARNET.  The other two LAVs are being held back in reserve.

In DUMAYR, Baneman is pushing his irregulars hard toward mine and it continues to cost him.  My teams are going to get critical on ammo very soon though, so he might be able to get an advantage.  I am switching my teams in this area to control their own fire.  I should have noticed the small amount of ammo they carried from the start.  I’ll try to provide them some support by fire from my positions near KT2, but to be honest, the action in DUMAYR is a side-show right now and I am not intent on pushing forward at all there.
My final Technical did extricate itself, so that will help some and it is moving to the sound of guns in DUMAYR-North.

PIR:  Will the enemy militia/fighters attempt to seize DUMAYR?  His assault is picking up steam, but it has cost him a lot of casualties to this point. I estimate he has lost 9 or 10 fighters (maybe one or two more) to 3 of my own. PIR:  Where are the enemy Technicals?  I finally get some contacts on his technicals, they are presently located near the built up area at the western most bridge.

Turn 2 :
Hahahaha, of course it turns out that assumptions made about Bil's options turn out to be wrong. This turn some of my Uncons get spots on units moving up just behind Apprehension Height and Worry Ridge ... because they're amphibious. I definitely did not see that coming, so "Bottleneck Bridge" immediately goes down as the most inappropriately named terrain feature on the map !

What appear to be 2 BMP-2's and one TOW-toting vehicle put in an appearance. At least one of the BMP's disgorges some men and the other probably does so too. So infantry are about to start peering over the crest next turn.

The good news is that none of these vehicles are poking their own noses over the crest, so I should be able to suppress their infantry with MG fire ( if I can spot them ).
Naturally, if they have any kind of AT weaponry with a range greater than 300m, I'm going to be sad panda.

Over the past few weeks I've been extensively testing the firepower of different American, British and German rifles, SMGs and LMGs in CMBN 4.0. I originally wanted to make a complete series of tests before 'publishing' the results, but I understand that there is an update in the making that will, as a minimum, adjust the rate of fire of some weapons, so for my work to have any impact, I should show them now rather than later. I am posting in general CM discussion. Although the tests were CMBN-specific, I believe that the same patterns in weapons effectiveness will be found in other titles as well.
Method
13 lanes, target troops in foxholes (4-man U.S. medium mortar ammo bearer teams, regular, fanatic, no ammo). Walls are used to separate the lanes over the last 40 meters only, to prevent ricochets from affecting the results. In each lane, one firing team (regular, normal motivation, no leadership modifier) engages the target troop unit using a target arc order. The firing team is so set up that there is only one man in the team with the tested weapon, and he is the only one firing. Ample ammo is provided from supply trucks so the firing unit does not run out of ammunition during the test. There always is a leader in the team with binoculars to aid with spotting at long distances. 13 firing teams with the same weapon are tested in parallel at distances from 40 to 600 meters. The test runs for 10 minutes or until all target troops are eliminated, whichever comes earlier. The total time in action for the 13 teams (between 0 and 7800 seconds) and the total casualties (between 0 and 52) is evaluated. Each test is repeated 26 times, therefore each weapon is tested 338 times at each distance.
An example of the test file is found here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d5b7qoex6cmigm0/Weapons effects BAR (Gunner) 400m.bts?dl=0
In total, there are 106 files like that one, each run 26 times for up to 10 minutes. About 10,250,000 rounds were fired by the firing teams and 72,530 casualties taken by the target troops.
Distance to target is the average distance of the 13 firing teams to the target action spot (as the firing team's action spot is 8 m wide, this needs to be adjusted for)
Firepower is here defined as the average number of casualties suffered per unit time by the target troops. Minor wounds do not count. The unit is bpm, "bodies per minute".
Rate of fire is taken from ammo consumption during the test, averaged from 26 instances. The unit is rpm, rounds per minute.
Accuracy is the number of casualties per round fired. It may not fully correspond to the number of hits per round fired as one casualty may receive multiple hits, especially with automatic fire. The unit is bpr, "bodies per round", multiplied by 1000 to make the numbers easier to interpret.
Tested weapons
MP40 (Leader), Sten Mk II (Leader), Sten Mk IV (Leader, Soldier), M1A1 Thompson (Leader) - distances 40-192 m MP44 (Leader), MP44 (Soldier) - distances 40-320 m Karabiner 98K, Gewehr 43, Lee Enfield No 4, M1 Garand (all Soldier) - distances 40-320 m Lee Enfield w/scope (Marksman) - distances 40-600 m MG42 LMG, Bren, B.A.R. (all Gunner) - distances 40-600 m [I am going to break up this post here, results come next]

First of all, some more notes:
there is no discernible difference in MP44 and Sten effectiveness whether it is fired by a Leader or a Soldier. I am showing Leader data only. similarly, there is no conclusive evidence that Sten Mk II and Mk IV are any different. I am showing Sten Mk II data only. MP44, Bren and B.A.R. switch from full auto to semi-auto fire above 150 meters, so there is a step change in the results between 120 and 160 meters where I ran the tests the statistics may still not be good enough for weapons achieving few kills at long distances, so the results for rifles at the edge of their range are indicative rather than accurate. Firepower
First note: the vertical axis is in log scale, otherwise the drop in firepower with distance would drown out all detail. I'll post the excel file so you can make any graphs you want.
Bolt-action rifles are at the bottom, Lee-Enfield appears to be superior to Kar 98K. Semi-auto rifles are better, both M1 Garand and Gewehr 43 are on the same level together with the MP44 (when fired in semi-auto mode). All SMGs are better than all rifles over their entire range up to 200 m. MP40 and Sten have very similar performance, Thompson is the most powerful SMG. MP44 is less powerful than SMGs but is in the same league with them until the 150 m mark. Bren and B.A.R. are generally in the league with SMGs as well but, of course, keep going beyond 200 m. The B.A.R. is inferior to the Bren, apparently due to its smaller magazine, and therefore lower average rate of fire. MG42 beats everything by a wide margin except the sniper rifle. The scoped rifle benefits much less from closing the range than the other weapons.

The only problem from my perspective is that SMGs keep their high performance out to 200 m. Their firepower does not fall much with distance in the outer part of their range, and as we will see, their accuracy (on "bodies per round" basis) is constant or even rises between 120 and 200 m.

[more to come]

Rate of fire
Not that much to see here, bolt-action rifles have the lowest rate of fire (including the scoped Lee-Enfield), semi-auto rifles have a higher one. You can see the difference between the Bren and B.A.R. as a result of magazine capacity (30 vs 20 rounds). MG42 has about 2-6 times higher RoF than everything else.

Accuracy
I want to highlight again that we are talking about kills per round, not about hits per round.
The green line on the top is the scoped Lee-Enfield. It's accuracy is super-high but does not increase that much with decreasing distance, so there is little advantage in getting close. Bolt-action rifles are more accurate than semi-auto rifles, although this cannot be confirmed at long distances (sample size issue, I believe). Bren and B.A.R. achieve more kills per round than over 240 m. The SMGs are at the bottom but as you can see, their accuracy is flat or even rises with distance above 120 m!

Excel file link (individual data is on hidden sheets if you need to see them): https://www.dropbox.com/s/qeltpvi732w91bt/CMBN weapons effects.xlsx?dl=0

Sorry to dig this up again but being (again) on the receiving end of Soviet SMGs one thought came up:
HE is nerfed a bit to accommodate the bunching up of pixeltroopers so shouldn't there be a similar mechanic for SMGs?
Obviously any spray&pray type weapon would have an advantage against high density targets. Maybe that is causing the perceived effectiveness?

Sorry to dig this up again but being (again) on the receiving end of Soviet SMGs one thought came up:
HE is nerfed a bit to accommodate the bunching up of pixeltroopers so shouldn't there be a similar mechanic for SMGs?
Obviously any spray&pray type weapon would have an advantage against high density targets. Maybe that is causing the perceived effectiveness?

I quite like this one because it made me chuckle.
 

I'm in, too.
To be honest - my main goal is to get that connector to CM. Which in turn means that CM opens up with some kind of interface. Which again opens a LOT of other possibilities.

I'm in, too.
To be honest - my main goal is to get that connector to CM. Which in turn means that CM opens up with some kind of interface. Which again opens a LOT of other possibilities.

Jason - I think we disagree here. I'm not going to run a test if there is no exactly defined expected outcome. Doing that is just a waste of time.
 
The question that (at least I) would like to have answered is if the PPSh is too accurate in CM. To test that I need a setup that only(!) tests just that property. Then I define my expected outcome before I test. If the result is close to the expectation then nothing is wrong, if it's off then there may be a problem.
 
That test is not realistic as in 'that never happened in reality'. It still tells us something about reality because an overly accurate PPSh would also skew all 'real' battles even if it might not be obvious.

Jason - I think we disagree here. I'm not going to run a test if there is no exactly defined expected outcome. Doing that is just a waste of time.
 
The question that (at least I) would like to have answered is if the PPSh is too accurate in CM. To test that I need a setup that only(!) tests just that property. Then I define my expected outcome before I test. If the result is close to the expectation then nothing is wrong, if it's off then there may be a problem.
 
That test is not realistic as in 'that never happened in reality'. It still tells us something about reality because an overly accurate PPSh would also skew all 'real' battles even if it might not be obvious.

Hello BF forum members,   I recently produced an AAR 'film' of a PBEM game I played out with Rico from The Few Good Men, as part of Rico's Cross of Iron multiplayer campaign.   I particularly enjoyed the final episode I played, called Blunting the Spear, and decided to make a film out of it. Rather than go for a standard PBEM game, Rico role played the Soviet side which made for a great experience for the German commanders. My encounter turned into a huge tank KO fest which I thought would make for a good AAR subject. So as a homage to Rico's campaign I've put together a film of the battle.   I've adopted a different style on this occasion to my usual commentary AARs, and tried to produce something which tells more of a story to reflect the fantastic storyline Rico developed for Cross of Iron.   On a separate note, I also hope the BF crew recognise my love for the game they've created. I'm a little annoyed that my work IP address has been banned from accessing BF's sites. I presume they've marked me down as a 'bad egg' for questioning the content of the upcoming CM Bulge release on the FGM forum (it's my understanding that BF staff have read the thread there). Please note this BF, when I've been critical of CM, it's always been out of a love for the game and a desire to see it become the best game it can, rather than a want to undermine it. I would appreciate it if you could take my work IP address off your ban list, I've tried emailing you about the subject but had no response.    Even if only in  a small way, I hope the few CM videos I've made over the years have helped to market your game and increase its audience. At the very least I hope the hundreds of hours I've put into making them demonstrate that I'm not some destructive CM troll.   All the best (and hoping you don't ban my home IP address)   Odin  

Some good suggestions, but not all would be in my top 10. Anything that would improve the AI is always a step in the right direction so i am always for that.
 
Most of what I think would be good to add to the game are all features from cmx1 that have proven to work that i hope return.:
1) +1 to the return of the ability to adjust points manually for QBs to desired setting, and to the return of a MIX variation that limits points for each branch to spend on.
 
2) The return of the ability to select a unit by clicking on its movement orders line.
 
3) And MOST of all to the return of passenger, open, or floor on status in the UI, and the return of some color coding for better ammo supply awareness. This last one should not be too much problem as the game already has code for swapping graphics, and color coding text upon condition. Shown under the portrait in this example would be text of either passenger, open, or floor # when the condition applies. In game it would overlay the text same way “bogged”, “immobilized”, “pinned” ect… do over the suppression meter when the condition applies. Contextually this text fits well with the portrait, and makes it more informative so one does not have to move the camera as much to determine those statuses like in cmx1.
 
Currently if a troop is carrying a weapon, and it is out of ammo there is nothing that jumps out at the player to notice this. Instead of the ammo text disappearing as it does now it would improve awareness if it stayed, showed “0”, with the text changing to red similar to how it does when a vehicle part gets damaged.
 
 

Obviously you have never been to Germany.
Not having papers is the worst offence here.

The internet would have been Goebbels wet dream and worst nightmare at the same time. Probably more nightmare as the problems current dictators have to close it up.

Hi Guys I love this game and I make my own scenarios with buildings ive made.

I watched Vortragsabend der Waldorfschule Überlingen and it' s really bad. This man is badly informed and/or intentionally deceiving is audience. He argues against strawmen most of time and seems to have a love for inaccurate analogys and metaphores. In a nutshell, he says that the german government is conspiring with the mainstream media to control the people, that democracy doesnt work because it brings people to power who have an opinion different from his, that everybody is so evil and immoral, and in particular the US and Israel. On the german Wikipedia it says that he, in other media, claims that 9/11 was an inside job and that the world is controlled by a zionist conspiracy.
 
In german, there is a word for what i felt while i watched the video, it' s Fremdschämen. The english language lacks a compareable word, but the dictionary of my choice translates Fremdschämen as follows: The feeling of shame for someone else who has done something embarrassing.

Lyrics:     Field Marshal, the advance will be in the defensive fire, the enemy has long been on the latest types of tanks. Only one thing can help us again power to winners, we need finally companies with new heavy tigers. Let the cat go ...    In Kursk first major attack in hawsers, enemy tanks have been shot at three thousand feet. Eight-eight cannons firing highly accelerated grenades, their rumbling startled many enemy tank crew.    Let go of the cat ... the ruler of the battle field, the kings of the battle. Let go of the cats ... eighty-eight millimeter superior firepower. Let go of the cat ... The enemy crews nightmare and her sheer terror. Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ...    Also superior in Normandy the opponent, no matter how strong the enemy Association, no raises at him like. Are rarely voluntarily started fighting with him and even small Tiger crews bypassed rather widely.    Let go of the cat ... the ruler of the battle field, the kings of the battle. Let go of the cats ... eighty-eight millimeter superior firepower. Let go of the cat ... The enemy crews nightmare and her sheer terror. Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ...    A handful of soldiers - enemy attacks - are totally inferior, but they grin contemptuously, rather than surrender without a fight. The attacker amaze why the men laugh, one hears a sudden squeak chains, splintering wood, trees crashing! And out of the undergrowth breaks - the sight you will never forget, a battle group of tigers with aufgesessner infantry!    Let go of the cat ... the ruler of the battle field, the kings of the battle. Let go of the cats ... eighty-eight millimeter superior firepower. Let go of the cat ... The enemy crews nightmare and her sheer terror. Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ...    Lest by the ratio of its launch numbers, read to, in what desperation they threw the enemy. Read the names of those who were aces on them, healing Wittmann, Carius and the others ... Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ... Let the cat go ...    Iron rusts in the steppe, in the earth are bones of those who faithful to the end never broke their oath. Still, the forest, silent pipes, nothing testifies to what once happened in silence mourns only the child who never saw his father.