Childress

Maybe. But in my case of the squad hiding behind the low wall- with CA- would surely have eventually 'heard' the approaching troops in time to spring the trap even if the enemy had penetrated the arc. Some tweaking in order?

To the best of my recollection you just described how an ambush worked in CM1. I noticed, in 1.0, that when I hid some Germs behind a low wall with a Cover Arc and the enemy walked right up, stepped over the wall and close assaulted them. In CMBB they would have sprung to life when the CA was broached. It seems the Ambush/Hide capability now exists only in real time where the- detail minded- commander can intervene and lift the Hide order at the critical moment.

200m Damn, I tried to delete this post. I just noticed that I mistakenly 'Hid' that Ami squad during the test. (face red) On the other hand, once you're discovered, and are being fired upon by an inferior force you'd think you and your mates would get up and shoot back rather than lie there and evaporate. Eventually. Or somefink,

Never mind. Keep moving, nothing to see here.

Am I missing something here? I was testing foxholes versus open defence, on my set test map. Good news, the foxholes seemed to protect their German occupants. But I noticed something strange with the open terrain test. I ran it eight times and the German platoon never suffered a single casualty despite the 36 to 27 disadvantage. The Allies usually a dozen. But when the Allies were given a cover arc including the open German platoon area they shredded them. They seem to require the cover arc to engage them. The German platoon opened right up, arc or no. Explanation?

I'm getting inconsistent results firing indirectly with the IGs. It seems the guns need some room to deploy and fire properly. Try not leaving them in a tree or bocage-lined sunken road, for example.

If CMBN is anything like the CM1 games they addressed the issue by making tank crews really, really valuable in terms of points. Which is plausible considering the training involved.

One wonders why BFC didn't include a %chance for breech failure. You know, based the team's experience. Or somefink.

Yes. But do Priests?

I'd settle for the square of brown earth around the gap. That's enough. But it seems the implementation of this simple- and realistic- player aid is scatter shot. Also, I opened up yesterday a random QB- mechanised infantry- and all the HTs were stranded like POWs within a no-exit patch of bocage. No engineers, either. Kinda sloppy design, imo.

MD reminds me of the obsessive Captain Ahab in Moby Dick. Or the angry ex-wife. Good entertainment value to be had, however.

So far in my testing, ALL structures provide more resilience to rifle squads than open ground if the defenders have full LOF out of at least two windows. Even small houses (save one model, apparently built of wood). I've tried them all except barns and cathedrals. Regarding information, one gets the impression that BFC placed great importance on aesthetics in this version and hesitated cluttering up the screen with building data or command lines, for that matter. Would have been cool had they shared some of these parameters in the manual, however.

Hehe. The Million Dollar Question. I'm detecting a trend here.

I'm beginning to suspect that, given approx equal numbers, troops are better off in most buildings provided that the structure has two or more windows and the defenders have full (blue line) LOS to the attackers. If you're getting a grey line, hide 'em. Another interesting result of my test is that both friendly and enemy casualties go up the higher the defender is in the building. The guys on the 4th floor tended to have suffered the most losses and scored the most kills. That makes sense. But, if they are simulating cracks, you wish that BFC hadn't built the interior walls of barns in brick from several feet up.

I did, same (nearly) result. Problems arise, it appears, for the defenders when the building is at a 45 degree angle to the attackers. Presumably they're firing out of a single window while the attackers can spray the entire floor getting penetration hits and shrapnel kills. Particularly noticeable in the smaller type structures. Question: Barns are proving completely porous and enable the blue LOS line from every (windowless) wall. Is this WAD?

That may be the reason for the discrepancies reported. When the defenders show only a grey line out of building that's asking for trouble. Or so it seems. Also, the modular buildings and churches *seem* the most robust. Here's a mini-test with three structures: two modulars and a church. ~180m. The buildings, manned by Germans, FACE the Allied attackers: three squad vs three squads. The Allies are Regular and the Germans Veteran to compensate for the numbers difference. http://www.mediafire.com/?fhx5ai9534lrf2q I ran it eight times (I know...) and the Allies get pwnd.

Hehe. Once you've seen Paree... I'm losing more often than not as well. I don't even dare to start a PBEM. Partly, because of the 1:1 representation, I feel terrible guilt when a squad is moved down due to a perceived careless move and x out of the scenario. But visiting the battlefield screen at the end I see we were actually on track to victory. You need to make yourself accept casualties. CMBN, I believe, is a lot more unforgiving than the previous iterations and require unrelenting meticulous and patience on the part of the player. There's also, imo, the shock factor. The battlefields are claustrophobic and constricting, and danger lurks behind every hedgerow. I'd classify this one as the most 'frightening' of the CM WWII titles.

OK, you got me curious. I did a quick test. US vs US. One platoon in buildings, one platoon in the open. There were three buildings (variety) the firing lines were separated by a tall wall. 175m. Ran it several times. On average, the casualties for the troops in the open was two to three times higher than those in buildings. Oddly, the original test had Germs in bldgs vs Americans in the open. And the Germans came off worse. Of course, 12 men against 9 men and different rifles. Take both these tests with a basketful of salt.

In five minutes? Lol. They had to Move to the place first. When I fired up the battle as the Amis, , I plotted a movement in the setup phase to the building and checked LOS from the end waypoint: actually, full out to 200m, not 70m. Maybe it's just a 'barn' thing....

Nope, the very start of battle. No fire exchanged at this point. What happened was I tried the scenario from the German side and one of my squads Quick moving by this structure, seemingly blind to the axis of advance, got shredded . So, I immediately called a cease fire and checked the stats of the American squad inside: six kills. The German squad lost six men. From their position this was these were the first German units encountered in their vicinity, fewer than ten minutes into the battle. Then I reopened as the U.S. in order to check out the structure. Also, as a side note, it seems to me that units in a building, even with windows, should always get no better than the grey line when targeting. How can 12 men bring full fire to bear out of a couple of windows? It would seem to require gymnastic skills.

Please explain why this squad can fire 70m out (blue line) from this facing. The building has a name: Dan's Garage from the Chance Encounter scenario. Is it the type of structure that makes this possible?

Are the guns in contact with their platoon HQs? That's necessary.

That's OK. At this point Steve and Battlefront are used to conditional love.

Due to the hilly wooded area on the left, studded with walls in the interior, and the deceptively open area on the right. Also the commanding and seemingly inaccessible structure at the Allied end on raised ground. Compounded by the general gloom produced by rain and mud,

One gathers that those most discomfited by the first turn barrages are those who participate in H-to-H Meeting Engagement QBs. Maybe Battlefront can, in some future update, add a check box that prohibits 1st turn bombardments. As a matter of fact, it's not clear why pre-registered artillery should even appear in a battle that aspires to simulate a 'hasty deployment' situation.