Childress

This map looks kind of dreary. We'd better get some Fallschirmjagers. Or at least an Elefant or two.

I see that Hardenburger has 1264 views to your 2015 as of this posting. You're the Axis. Perfectly understandable. Germans are the generally the underdogs the and posses that cool, Darth Vaderish appeal. Also their uniforms set the standard in WW2 haute couture. And the tanks: pure bada**ery. Also, beware. The fact that Bil chose a Meeting Engagement means that he wants to WIN.

Thanks, SS ! (hmm...) Must...regress...to...childhood.

Hand to hand combat? Doesn't exist in CM2. Too difficult to code, AFAIU. Not really a prob since that was vanishingly rare in WW2, the knife scene in SPR not withstanding. I believe there was a crude version of mano a mano fighting in CM1- essentially sound effects. Why can't the side with lower Motivation simply surrender if trapped?

Anyone noticed that when there are two dueling AAR threads on the forum the Axis side gets the preponderance of the Views? Often twice as many...

We all admire your guts. And his.

The game classifies a Scout Car as 'armor'? That's news...

HIDE: Belly to ground. Some peeking. Maximum concealment. HIDE w/ CA: Belly to ground. More peeking. High concealment. UPSIDE: No additional commands. Effective ambushing. DOWNSIDE: Fly in the ointment is getting the AI to use it efficiently.

Brits in shorts? Quelle horreur! JonS in shorts, now that's worth seeing. Or so I've been told.

Yes, but a hiding Bazooka team ought to hear an approaching panzer, right? And they're peeking' anyway. I favor my idea™ of giving a Hiding unit a functioning CA at the expense of slightly reduced concealment. And it poses no insurmountable programming challenges. I think.

There's no mod, sorry. The scenario author should, imo, consider grouping the formations in more or less logical manner, in proximity to their respective HQs and facing the front. Often they don't. Or they try to fool the player with a deceptive setup that encourages a suicidal defence or advance. Or scattered in the rear of the deployment zone. Blah!

They don't- at first. Can the crew tell if a hostile tank at 800m was destroyed if the only evidence is a 6 inch hole in the hull and the fact that is no longer appearing to move? The historical tendency was, given the uncertainty, to pump them full of AP . Eventually the evidence becomes irrefutable. I believe this was called the 'death clock' in CM1.

How does you tank know the enemy tank is destroyed? Unless it's burning...

Agree with your assessment of JK. He does own groggy credentials along with the... other stuff. His donations thermometer stalled at $43 struck me as especially pathetic. I'm thinking of sending him $20- a start to at least to help him get online.

http://networkedblogs.com/IGvDg

Of course, you're right. Who can argue with that?

Yes, 'under fire' is the key. This poster remains a skeptic (sceptic for you ,Womble ). But am willing to be converted- given hard data not derived from manuals and basic training.

Bad example, Womble. Who cares what some bureaucrats from the DoD back in Washington cooked up in their spare time? The manual from our DMV states that driver and passengers must be buckled up when the car is parked in the driveway idling. We need an anecdote from the 'battlefield'. I'll even settle for a photo. You're familiar with the expression 'honored in the breach'?

During the Napoleonic wars infantry units were expected to form squares- under fire- to deter cavalry penetration. It can be presumed that this option was not available to recently recruited formations. The maneuver took a great deal of experience, not to mention mind blowing sang froid, to pull off; it exposed the troops to concentrated artillery fire in the rock, paper, scissors dynamics of war in that era. Still, they had twenty years of practice to get it right. I suspect that concepts like 'chevron formation' fly out the window when the bullets start whizzing overhead. But you may have a point. Can you cite an anecdote? You hear of 'arrowhead' formations in ww2 but these were on the Company scale.

What kind of formations are you talking about? Using Hunt the troops will (IIRC, gaming PC's in the shop) spread with the BARs and LMGs hanging slightly back. Probably superior to line abreast for clearing a wooded area. I'm a bit skeptical of the incidence of complex formations in WW2 given the character of the armies involved: hastily trained draftees. Perhaps some elite units.

Good lord! You've really thought this through! Garment rending pathos, tempered with majestic and telling anecdotes, is the only way to go. I see that now. We'll even seamlessly incorporate all your sig lines into the text- for a modest surcharge. How's this: "Let us never forget the road by which Michael reached his position, the form of government under which his greatness grew, the national habits out of which it sprang and whose vision at this critical juncture will seen by succeeding generations as absolutely correct'" Mind, it's a rough draft. We've also signed up Beyonce and the Manchester United cheerleading squad for halftime.

You said she?

More likely I'll be the giving your funeral address, Michael. If the actuarial tables can be trusted. Do you want it light with a touch of humor or tear provoking?

Sounds like Mr. Carson from the Downton Abbey series. I want that actor to deliver my funeral oration.

How much effort does it require to modify one single variable? Really? My favorite way to play QBs in CM1 was via auto-pick. But that mechanism is just too wonky in CM2. God knows what you'll end up with- some kind of zoological assortment of units.