PlatCmdr_too

I've exhausted play on most of what I deem are the more interesting maps that came with the disk and was wondering why there was no random map generator included in this version as was the case with the CMx1 series of games? Also, given this lack of unlimited random play maps, are there any online sites that anyone knows of where one can download some new, player created maps? Scenario Depot was my old go to but seems stuck on presenting maps for CMx1 games only.

The scenario is "FR-Hold until Relieved" and involves the wooden bunker on the U.S. side. I'll email my email address and you can respond in turn with yours to which I'll then attach and send to you the game file in question.

Yes indeed, that's the one, and what appears is also the same scenario. I wasn't aware it had been noted already, but do hope its fixed soon, along with my other issue concerning the teleporting troops after exiting a bunker...

I'm not a whiner or ranter but am pretty frustrated over a couple "glitch" issues in a current PBEM scenario based game I'm playing right now and would like to report these so we can have something constructively done to hopefully fix this in a future patch. I have no way of posting the content of these game files here, but would be happy to email them to the men in charge or even a Tester here if that works. Also, I should add that these occurred in a game that's loaded with the latest 1.01 patch. #1: During the initial setup phase, after exiting a squad that I had placed into a wooden bunker, the squad was broken into two groups, with the larger group being placed in "no man's" land well outside of my setup area and alongside the edge of the map. The only thing I could do was issue them a movement command for the subsequent first movement turn of the game, but otherwise, I had no way of moving them back, even after saving and restarting the game. And sure enough, as the movement phase started, they happened to be directly adjacent to a group of enemy forces, apparently in my opponent's setup zone. #2: While moving two squads across a foot bridge, they bunched up, then "fell" into the river they were crossing, and instantly became fatigued and stuck.

Thanks, your comment drew my attention to a missed detail, that the setup zones are static, which is now apparent when loading it into the editor. I assumed like most games, that this game would adjust to change the setup zones based on who was attacker vs. defender, rather than by what side was chosen. Problem solved, thanks.

With increasing frustration, I have twice now had an attack PBEM QB game (ver. 1.01) result with the attacker and defender zones being reversed at start-up, that is to say, the handpicked forces of my defending forces wind up setting up on the opposite side of the map from the area which is to be defended, clearly making this appear to be the setup zone of the attacker. I wish I had the ability to screenshot this, but don't, yet my description of this hopefully is clear enough. I can email this PBEM file to any beta testers or the like that would like to see this for themselves.

Fantastic, that clears that up. I was indeed viewing the foliage in terms of representative modeling not as being individual distinct features. I have to re-tweak my CMx1 way of thinking. Thanks!

Great, well so much for the certainty of hiding in "cover," which again, is my vexation.

I can appreciate the inclusion of micro-terrain elements such as terrain variation, various hard object obstacles, gopher holes , etc, etc. that provide defilade affecting LOS/LOF and which would be impossible to represent on map in the form of pixilated features. I accept as you say, these features exist on any piece of terrain thus enhancing one's cover. My vexation however is in knowing whether or not my troopers are in the woods per se where there would be greater cover offered than out in the open, regardless of these unmmodeled features being present.

I can appreciate the inclusion of micro-terrain elements such as terrain variation, various hard object obstacles, gopher holes , etc, etc. that provide defilade affecting LOS/LOF and which would be impossible to represent on map in the form of pixilated features. I accept as you say, these features exist on any piece of terrain thus enhancing one's cover. My vexation however is in knowing whether or not my troopers are in the woods per se where there would be greater cover offered than out in the open, regardless of these unmmodeled features being present.

Speaking of UI fixes, I hope the new patch also addresses the need for displaying additional unit position info as was standard with the CMx1 games, such as identifying if a unit is located in cover, such as "woods", "scattered trees" etc as the tree trunk modeling at present lacks ground texture and color to further define these areas, thus making it unclear whether your units are indeed in cover or not.

I'm now struggling with an additional difference between the two versions (CMx1 vs CMx2) as it relates to the way terrain features are represented. In CMx1, terrain such as scattered trees, woods, etc have patterned bases which makes clear where my troops are positioned, in addition to the user interface will identify where my troops are located, such as "open ground," "woods," "scattered trees," etc. In CMx2, while attempting to place my troops in cover, I can't tell half the time whether they are in cover or not as there lacks clear terrain boundaries and the UI additionally fails to tell me if my troops are in cover or not. I hope the patch addresses this issue, please fix or somefink!

Ah yes, this does help to define things better, with attention now drawn to this, I now can see a slight color difference between the movement boxes in the case of squads containing multiple teams. This remains hard to discern and was not immediately apparent. Thanks guys for helping to clear this up a bit.

If you would like to see a demonstration of this, I experienced this during the "Mission 3: Battle Drill" scenario from the Devon - Basic Training battles. While firing at Hill 2014 from the instructed, "Base of Fire" firing spot, my mortar team also opened up with small arms fire at the areas of Hill 2014 that were within the mortar team's LOS. Perhaps too close by your estimate, but this fire mission was located in the area I was told to fire from as instructed by the game manual itself. I'll likely need to use HQ spotters to avoid this occurrence in the future.

Perhaps that is the issue. I would like to assume that if the movement marker "yellow boxes" is indicating I can move there, and these fall within the area contained by the "woods" during the movement phase, then I'd assume all units moving into that previously highlighted grid would naturally falls in place within that previously marked area. I suppose I'll need to then accept the yellow movement grid boxes as a relevant marker, not an absolute marker as to where these troops will end up once they conclude their movement. Or am I assuming too much. As for the on-board mortar question, here's another issue. If for instance my mortar team has LOS to the enemy and fires upon them, is their position compromised more by direct fire in this manner than if they were to commence firing from this same position with the assist of a HQ directed fire mission using this same team whereby, even though still positioned with LOS to the enemy, the small arms then wouldn't come into play? I suppose I could playtest this too later when I get home, but was hoping for a quick response to save me the time.