Childress

Weren't they bandmates? Water's father was killed at Anzio. He composed the lugubrious and rather self-pitying track "When the Tigers Broke Free" in his memory. From Wiki: The song sets up the story premise for The Wall movie, set over footage recreating the British contribution to the Anzio campaign's Operation Shingle, where Allied forces landed on the beaches near Anzio, Italy, with the goal of liberating Rome from German control. These forces included C Company of the Royal Fusiliers, in which Waters' father Eric served.[5] As Waters tells it, the forward commander had asked to withdraw his forces from a German Tiger tank assault, but the generals refused, and "the Anzio bridgehead was held for the price / Of a few hundred ordinary lives" as the Tigers eventually broke through the British defence, killing all of C Company, including Eric Waters. In the second verse of the song (which makes up the reprise later in The Wall film), Waters describes how he found a letter of condolence from the British government, described as a note from King George in the form of a gold leaf scroll which "His Majesty signed / In his own rubber stamp." Waters' resentment then explodes in the final line "And that's how the High Command took my Daddy from me".

Yes and no. That fellow, now deceased, was the father of Pink Floyd lead vocalist and multi-instrumentalist David Gilmour. If you watch my little video carefully you'll see he's actually playing air guitar. :cool:

Sure, England isn't the sunniest country in the world. But after years of fighting under a pitiless sun in North Africa and Sicily one would think these men would have developed a manly tan. They've got pink knees! They remind one of pasty Balliol undergraduates preparing their Newdigate submissions under some leafy bower rather than the hard-bitten veterans they were. Modders! And, heavens, do they chatter on.

Let me say this scenario is excellent with a convincing, detailed map. Bravo to the author. The marketing comment was a bit tongue in cheek, one doubts BF inspects these things with an eye to corporate purity. The initial thought was that the quality of the of the Fallschirmjagers was raised to overcome the new, steelier defense brought in with 2.01 without a-historically inflating their numbers. But, as you say, the real battle was, apparently, a wipe out.

It's not the AI-directed troops that are making no headway- it's about our guys, who are attacking, making too much headway.

Interesting! I knew there was some resistance but hadn't heard of Doherty and Wood. Their heroics were no doubt clouded over by the controversy and subsequent finger pointing.

I noticed something in Gustav Line. Having dabbled in a number of scenario it seems that BF designers have ramped up troop quality- both Allies and Germans. Was this intentional? Example: SPOILERS I fired up Men with Suspicious Hats. I disregarded the author's advice and parked my Panzers on top of the hill with a panoramic view of the city. Bad decision: the Allies were shrewd enough to defend the interior ring of buildings. So I plowed on without them. My Fallschirmjagers have, less than 20 minutes in, penetrated close to the Victory locations. I saved and checked out the stat screen; the paratroopers have suffered less than 15 casualties while inflicting 70+; they're supermen. Against a force defending from stout and densely grouped buildings. The Americans units are demoralized; many broken. Virtually the the entire German side is rated Crack. I was under the impression that exalted ratings like Elite and Crack were meant to be sprinkled around sparingly; the legendary sniper, Wittmann, etc. These guys were tough hombres but... I've seen this in other GL scenarios- though I haven't tried them all. Units are juiced up in experience from CMBN without a doubt. A marketing decision? They do require less babysitting. Thoughts?

There appears to be a bug regarding mortar teams- on the right side of the map- in the 3rd battle which was present in 1.01. They show 'out of contact' although they are deployed, close by and show in command status. Mind, this was a saved game left over from the original version.

It's a lot of white stuff. Regrettably the soldiers' boots don't visually sink into it as they do currently in shallow water. Tank treads, either.

C'mon. There's always room for a punitive, Rubik's cube type scenario per release. But maybe not two...

Theses new units are cool- and look cool- but, on the German side, should they be present in an anti-infantry role when the skies are clear and the jabos are presumably circling?

Courtesy of sfhand: NEW v1.10 GAME FEATURES included in the Module: * Improved range of video card and driver compatibility with shaders. * Possible speed improvements depending on video card hardware and drivers. * Minor fixes and adjustments to shader behavior. * Corrected a problem that allowed mortars to change location but retain too much target acquisition. * Corrected accuracy issues with on-map artillery. * MGs fire longer, more accurate bursts. * Suppression from small arms fire accumulates faster. * Improved hit location calculations on bunkers. * Corrected a problem with soldiers bringing their weapons along when leaving bunkers. * Improved calculation of damage from anti-vehicle mines. * Path following improved on bridges, vertical moves between building levels, heavy weapon deployment and through marsh/ford areas. * Corrected small problems with the display of weapon deployment time. * Small arms fire versus unarmored vehicles is more effective. * Vehicles with paused movement orders no longer have lowered accuracy. * The purple targeting line for Pop Smoke disappears when it should. * Italian 47mm AP now has a bursting charge. * PSW 231 armored car turret rotation is properly centered. * SPW 251/10 halftrack can carry a 3-man HQ team in addition to its crew. * US high-explosive rifle grenades operate correctly. * Engagement range of US B.A.R. increased to reflect usage as a form of LMG. * Miscellaneous 3D model fixes.

Where are the notes for changes in 1.10?

'Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel'. Name the gentleman who produced that quote and you win a free copy of the upcoming Battlefront multi-player matchmaking app*! Hint: it occurred during a conversation. *with the 'Ignore' feature.

Puzzled. Your comments were rather negative and sweeping. Are you alleging that CM2 is an epic fail? Is your point that the world would be the better without it? Or were you just venting, expressing your version of 'tough love'.

Pretty grim assessment there, JK.

I don't believe the battle of VB can be satisfactorily recreated in a CM format. First of all, it can't simulate Wittmann's amazing luck. There were other events that can't be reproduced, for example Wittmann's tank pushing a Stuart out of the way during a key moment in the battle. Or, when his Tiger was disabled by a 6lb gun and he and his crew were able to jump into another vehicle- a current impossibility in CM..

You're right; getting gun elevations right is more important than perfecting zooks/fausts/shreck capabilities, real or alleged. Particularly in urban environments like Stalingrad or the upcoming Arnhem battles. But do you believe the solution lies in modifying, in a possibly ahistorical manner, other attributes in the interest of 'fairness'? Shirley, you can't be serious! I think that the idea of allowing tubers to fire from structures if they haven't moved since Setup has merit: an, easy on the programming, simulated pre-prep.

As noted (Womble?), interior spaces in CM are, by necessity, heavily abstracted and many different sizes are present. One supposes a room could be cleared for this purpose given time and opportunity; perhaps if the AT team in a structure doesn't move after the start of a scenario in a fashion similar to the camouflage bonus enjoyed by AT guns that don't move. Maybe you could have Green and /or Fanatic tube teams opening fire in an unpredictable manner and, importantly, outside the player's control: no manual targeting allowed. Certainly a spacious warehouse floor would be suitable. Definitely not barns with their abundance of flammable materials (hay?) and wooden plank walls. Any building sporting a blown out wall to the rear of the weapon should be okay. But the coding could prove tricky; BF hasn't been able to fix the anomaly of Rhino tanks reversing through bocage. You've made some telling points, but, on balance, I endorse the current implementation especially given the absence of appropriate penalties.

The Panzerfaust Just to add fuel to the fire, as it were: Caution was to be paid to the backblast of the weapon, it created an explosion blast of two to three meters ( 6.5 - 10 ft.) behind the tube.Therefore on many Panzerfausts, especially the early panzerfaust 30 m, a warning in large red letters printed on the upper rear part of the tube advised to stay clear: Achtung! Feuerstrahl! Sometimes other variations of this warning were stenciled on the upper rear. But the backblast wasn't only dangerous to bystanders: the rear of the firing soldier had to be free of obstacles for at least 3 m (10 ft.), otherwise heavy burns on the back of the firing soldier would result. Officially the rear of the gunner had to be free for 10m for safety reasons and the backblast was reported as lethal to a range of 3m behind the tube. Mostly the fiery backblast, but also the atmospheric pressure and the relative hazardousness of the blast's smoke put heavy restrictions on indoor use; this holds true even more for the Panzerschreck.Despite the seemingly easy usage and the fact that simple usage instructions were printed onto each weapon, many accidents happened because of wrong handling of often ill-trained personnel, sometimes also because of material defects of the weapons themselves.Although officially a single-use throw-away weapon, the used tubes of the all the Panzerfaust weapons were usually collected and returned for rearmament at the factory. Above all, do NOT try this: http://www.germandaggers.info/weapons6.htm

Well, that settles that.

Have to agree with JRMC1879. Nothing against the fair sex but, let's face it, first it was the board room, then the military now even our damned softball games. The last remaining refuge, where guys can be with guys, is the cigar store.

But which team let's it rip? Why should the Veterans, acutely aware of the downsides, roll the dice but not the hastily trained noobs? Why should the Vets position themselves in an enclosed space to begin with? Do we limit this to the zealous? Players will deliberately place Fanatic shreck/faust teams in buildings. Edit: Hmmm, maybe not such a bad idea...

John, here's the solution to your screenshot ennuis : 1- Take a picture using PrtScr or Fraps. Paste it into Paint or a multitude of other apps/programs. 2- Save it to the desktop. 3- Upload the file using a program like this: http://postimage.org/ There are many others. 4- Select a forum-friendly size like 800x600. 5- Select 'thumbnail for forums'. Press 'copy to clipboard'. 6- Paste it into your post. 7- You're done!

I'm fine with these weapons firing from structures provided the risk is there. If I, directing a shreck team, observe a Sherman 76 rolling by our 1st floor window guess what I'm going to do? Who cares if we end up with a couple of yellow icons. That game is worth the candle, as the French say... There's no cost/benefit equation currently worth considering. Throw in a burning building and two dead landsers that changes. Also, who should open up if the event occurs intra-turn? A seasoned Veteran team or a jittery, trigger-happy Green one? Is it Motivation based? Experience? And what choice does the enemy AI make? Complexities, complexities...