SG1

Yes, realism may be the answer. I do not know the squad order of battle for French infantry in '40. But I sure know it was not necessary the same as in other countries' armies and did evolve. And kept doing so after the war. Editing may not be that much of cheating, especially if backed up by research... and of course provided you do not stuff each of your squads/sections with some 30 men.

I think we just need to be patient and sure enough a solution will be found later. The thing with Il-2 really is what we are talking about : we now have new maps or new versions of the older ones thanks to the modders and all these maps are better looking than the original ones, with a lot of details. But they require strong computers, and even some tweaking sometimes. This is all for players with a passion. I appreciate the decision to restrain taken by developers / distributors who want some return on investment and cannot contemplate striking too limited a market right away.

Problem for larger maps may be PC resource : larger maps, with details and a lot of units would most certainly be too much for today's or even tomorrow's computers.

Bought ToW. Toiled a little bit to adapt and understand. And now very delighted. Go for it !

Well, well, well... Sorry to interrupt philosophy and data dropping but I would be pleased to see the two following items in the game indeed : - the introduction of "incapacited" status, namely the soldier is alive but cannot fire nor move. - the corollary introduction of "saving" such incapacited men, I am not talking of restoring them to fully healthy status like in the Sudden Strike series, but of stabilising them using medics and of moving or dragging them to safety using other soldiers. I remember the "incapacited" status and possibility to move a badly wounded soldier using two other valid or slightly injured ones was present in a cardboard wargame I used to play in the late 70's / early 80's. It added a lot to immersion. Of course, we are talking ToW 2 here but I am pleading for the introduction in ToW as well.

Seem to remember using the "no fire" function is the way to do it. Since told not to fire they will stop aiming and stay put. However, the snag is they will not open fire when the enemy appears : you have to monitor them tightly.

Hello everyone, I have some difficulty grasping the full subtlety of the “defend” function. Could someone bring enlightenment ? I understand the “defend” function allows to attach one unit to some other unit, with the latter being then followed by the first one whenever it moves. I find this useful to ensure that the man carrying a machine gun or some anti-tank weapon is not separated from the man carrying extra ammo for the said weapon. I also understand how to attach infantry soldiers to a vehicle, say a tank. But then I have two observations or problems. First one is that the tank moves at full speed instead of slowing down at the infantry pace – as happens with games of the Sudden Strike series for instances. Second one is that once the foot soldiers catch up with the tank they place themselves all around without the slightest regard for a possible danger direction (i.e. enemy position). Reading some document I wrongly believed it was possible to use the “defend” function in order to have infantry move towards an enemy position using cover from the tank against small arms fire – I must have misunderstood. I also understand that the “defend” function is useful in defending a trench and should be preferred to “no movement” in order to ensure that soldiers stay put. I recognise my experience acknowledges this, but would nevertheless welcome any additional information as to how it works and what the exact differences are. And of course I would be grateful for any hint regarding what I am missing on the “defend” function. Thanks in advance for contribution.

I hope this helps. But never underestimate the rule also valid in real life : spotted = shot.

There are three difficulty levels (novice, regular, veteran). When the game was introduced full reality was obtained through veteran. Since patch 1 or 2 this has been changed : full reality, including equal skills in spotting and firing is obtained through regular ; veteran now means full reality in terms of ballistics, panic and so on, plus a better ability of the AI-controlled enemy to spot and aim. The latter makes up for scripting-induced limitations (i.e. the dumbness of AI). But it also explains why you may feel confronted to Übermenschen with laser aiming systems... Personally, I play regular.

Yes, must be the same as for tanks : people inside are killed by blast effect.

You are right in handling infantry with some caution. Charging a tank upright in the open is suicide in the game, as it is in real life (or death). Prone position, no move, no fire will help you a lot... until the tank is in reach. That means of course you have to use bushes, walls, etc. because, again, in the open you men will get spotted and killed, though at a lesser distance than if standing. For infantry fighting against tanks and other vehicles you have either anti-tank grenades or special weapons such as anti-tank rifles (early war) and hollow charge projectiles launchers such as PIAT, bazooka or Panzerfaust / -schreck (later war). Not all armies have these weapons, French for instance do not have AT-rifles, German and Russians have AT-grenades but I am not too sure British and US have some (though some of the grenades carried by the latter have a AT grenade icon in the weapon interface). With some insight and experience, I have reached a point where it is not much of a problem killing or incapaciting a tank with foot soldiers, especially if they are in a trench. A few things to mind, though : with grenades as well as with PIAT and the likes fire at short distance at a non moving target, which means fighting at very close quarter indeed and waiting for the opportunity when the tank makes a short halt to search targets, fire or change direction - use the obstacles here (a wall to crush ? the tank will decelerate and even stop for a quick moment, same for the trenches). Otherwise the grenade will detonate too far away from the target or the projectile will miss. Hollow charges and grenades will not blow the tank like an AT shell, most probably they will mortally wound the crew : that means the tank will stay put, untouched apparently, but you will notice it does not move nor fire anymore... after a while the icon will turn grey. If one of your tanks is hit by such a weapon, you will see the icons of your crew fade and disappear. With smaller armoured vehicles the effect is more radical and a bazooka shot may turn a Puma into a burning wreck instantly indeed. As for AT rifles, the ammo efficiency and penetration power has to be accounted for in relation to the distance and armour of the target, briefly said : wait for the last moment and aim at lightly armoured targets. Fortified MG positions, I suppose you mean pillboxes, have to be disposed of with AT weapons of the PIAT category. I have not been successful against them with grenades. Neither have I had any experience with AT rifles. This is a computer game and we have to live with the limitations this entails. But the above and the ingame experience do not contradict the infantry fighting training I got in the 80's and thus seems rather realistic.

By the way, Tartari, I have both your sound mod files. Is one including the other one or are they two different mods to be used together ? Reason I ask is that when I wanted to activate the two of them through JSGME I got a warning message that some already modded files would be overwritten.

Which difficulty level setting are you using ? Level 3 gives AI an advantage in spotting/accuracy.

Hi Tartari, No problem with your last link indeed. But I still get a 404 error using the one you posted yesterday morning.

Well, this one should do. http://www.softpedia.com/get/Others/Miscellaneous/Generic-Mod-Enabler.shtml

Hi Tartatari, Only snag is the link gets to HTTP 404 (of the fatal death). Other links to similar addresses are screwed up too. Seems there is some need for googling.

OK, thanks a lot.

Thank you Sneaksie, makes sense. While we are on the US/UK campaign, I am somewhat surprised by getting victory while it does not seem I have reached all my objectives : In Falaise I mopped up and took the hamlet in the valley (objective 1) but then decided not to go for a direct assault for objective 2 (eliminating all enemy defensive positions on high ground). I chose instead to attack the cliff on the right. After having taken the trench there, I saw the expected counter-attack, with tanks and infantry. I was able to destroy or at least disable all the tanks. As soon as the last enemy tank had been killed I had the victory message although the second trench was still occupied by German infantry, together with one or two AT guns at least, and some other infantry squads were on the verge of the map. In the next mission, Arras I think, I got the victory message after having killed the last enemy soldier in the settlement in the centre of the map, just after having seen a message informing me I had also eliminated some defense position near a bridge at the end of the map (objective 2) - a place I had not come near to in any way ! Of course I prefer this situation rather than the frustration of the French campaign where some of the maps had to be combed for the last remaining enemy before victory could be granted - and I never saw it for the last mission : not a German soldier on the playable map and still no victory. However I would be thankful for some hint on what may be going amiss. Thanks in advance and regards, SG

Hello, I am playing the stock game version, i.e. with latest UeberPatch but without any mod, obtained from BF through download directly. Looking into the Missions folders and sub-folders to print some maps, i found in the ally directory the trace of a mission named "Torgau" (U011_Torgau.tga) but there is no corresponding sub-directory as is the case for other missions of the campaign (e.g. U007_Falaise). Is Torgau a kind of phantom mission that has not been included in the final version of the game ? I have also the same question - doubled, so to speak - considering the numbering of the missions that goes from U001 to U011, but without any U009. So, where is my number 9 ? Thanks in advance for any light - though I am still able to sleep at night. Regards, SG

I second that. Some campaigns are more difficult and beginning with them while having no experience whatsoever with similar games might disgust you once for all, which would be a pity. The US/UK campaign is considered as the easiest one, meaning the most balanced one - you usually get an array of troops, weapons and support that leaves some room for blundering. I think next come the Russian and German campaigns, though in which order I do not remember. Then is the French campaign and, last, the Polish one in which the rather desperate odds ensure that anything less than careful and good positioning right from the start invariably results in defeat. Hope this helps. If you browse the forum, do not be pushed aback by very negative complaints about this or that item that has been got completely wrong by the developers while it used to be such a refinement in this or that other game. Have fun. SG

Hi Gnasher, Stationary aircraft for airfield construction ? Does this ring like SAS missions ?

Merci Crom. J'envoie tout de même un message à Anuman pour leur demander pourquoi ils n'hébergent pas les patches des produits qu'ils distribuent ; après tout, c'est du support. Slt

It seems the French version of the Überpatch is not to be downloaded at the usual address anymore. Any clue someone ? Any help appreciated here. Thanks in advance, SG

I double-guess learning Russian would not be a bad idea either since I am not too optimistic about games created in Russia always finding their way to our market through Western companies...

Fully right, which is why I prefer to go through the individual manual allocation.