LarsS

I've done the same tests with 500 kg airplane bombs and 14" battleship gun bombardment. The larger church buildings and towers can take a tremendous amount of punishment before even showing any sign of damage. It takes several 500 kg bombs to even wreck the roof of the buildings. Usually barns and commercial buldings, which seem to be the weakest buildings in the game, several blocks away from the explosions get levelled before the ecclesiastical buildings even start to look damaged. Guess the hand of God is at work or sumfink.

I believe it was intended for purchase and rarity points to be included both in QBs and in the editor. The manual (p. 129, e.g.) speaks of it in terms of the points being showed in the latter. So maybe we can hope for a patch in the future that updates the editor.

My all new shiny box waited for me inside my door when I got home today. No extra charges, no stinkin' VAT, no picking it up at the post office, no scratches, no nuthin'! I'm currently a happy camper. Oh, did I mention that the box is shiny?

When you blow the crap out of a building with direct or indirect HE the walls come down just the same way as when blown down by engineers' demo charges. Does this mean that the overall structural integrity is affected the same way by both types of damage? And, by extension, does it mean that an already weakened building could actually collapse when engineers blow in another wall? It would be hysterical if this happened when the said engineers were in the building, preferably on the top floor. Anyone see this happen?

Also remember that veichles serve as ammo bearers. The ammo in them will automatically be shared out to adjacent units if these are lacking. So, a mortar team with a nearby truck full of bombs doesn't need to send its dedicated ammo bearers to board it and aquire the bombs to get them. When they start to get low on ammo, they will automatically get it from the truck. Veichles even serve as ammo bearers to infantry from any platoon, not only their own. I find this very convenient.

I agree with regard to the editor. It kicks behind! I have spent untold hours just building stuff for CMSF and will do the same for BN. For the AI to do anything in any scenario on any map, it needs AI plans. Otherwise its units will remain in their starting positions and do nothing. Well, they will shoot at you if they see you, and the TacAI might move them some, but nothing aside from that. Making AI plans is actually quite easy. Making good AI plans can be a little trickier. If I were you, I would start by opening a QB map in the editor and just look at how the map's designer has handled the AI plans. And start small when tinkering in the editor. The principle for AI plans is the same for a single squad and a full battalion. And re-read the important parts for scenario creation in the manual; especially the bit about the "exit before" and "exit after" AI plan orders. They control when and how the AI will move its forces in battle.

Cool. That would be the "Paved 1" style road. How convenient!

What did a Norman highway -- or whatever other type of major road there might have been -- look like in the 1940s? How many lanes? What kind of surface and sealing? Any road surface markings? Basically I'm asking how best to build a Norman or generic French period highway in the editor. Also, would the "normal" railway lines have one or two (or several!) sets of tracks? Thanks.

I agree. The Germans get 2 Panthers or Tigers at the same cost as 3 Pz IVs, and considering the common engagement distances in the game, and the great difference in protection levels and punching power between them, I have a hard time seeing how their relative value is accurately mirrored in their points cost. Maybe I suck at using the IVs, but against the American armor and ATG threats in the game, I'd take two of the cats any day (that I care about cost-effectiveness, that is) over the three IVs. And facing Tigers and Panthers with Sherms or Wolverines at a 2:3 ratio is not an inviting prospect unless there is good terrain for manoevering and setting ambushes.

Open the scenario in the editor. Chose "Units" in the drop down menu to the upper left and the side you want to edit. The units in the scenario are on the right hand side of the unit screen. Edit them by highlighting them and then change the values in the drop down menus at the bottom of the screen. edit: too late

Sometimes I like to give the AI some fortifications when playing a QB. Sure, I have to pick the AI's units manually, so I know what I'm up against. However, that doesn't make the battle easier, since I can do my best to optimize the enemy for the specific map. And when given fortifications, the AI places them normally and man them with infantry. Also, at least on one occasion has the "suggest" option for picking the AI force yielded mines, and maybe the suggested units are tied to the picks the AI will do if automatically chosing its units. I'm just guessing that might be the case, but if so, one could come across fortifications in a random QB.

I noticed this in the Vierville scenario. The Americans got an engineer platoon as reinforcements, but it had not been assigned to it's own group, but instead was in the A1 group together with some units that were on the map as the scenario started. Unfortunately this group had "exit before" orders timed in the first few minutes of the game, which meant that when the engineers showed up at minute 20, their orders could not be executed -- the time had come and gone -- and therefore would not move. There were further errors in Plan 1 for group A1. The group was given three consecutive "exit before" orders at 00:30, 01:00 and 03:00 (if memory serves), but then had two more "exit before" orders, both timed at minute 01:00, which doesn't make sense.

Do you use only a single AI plan for the group? Sometimes I set up multiple plans and tell the AI to use all of them, but then forget to give proper orders for all of them.

The artillery button doesn't even light up in the interface for the SPGs, even for it's CO or for dedicated FOs attached directly to the unit. So it seems like the direct fire role is the only option for the guns in the game.

To get the AI to place the forces according to an AI plan in a scenario, you need to do the following: 1) Define a deployment zone on the map. 2) Place the units anywhere inside the deployment zone. 3) Assign the units to AI groups, or let them stay in the default group A1 . 4) Make an AI plan, complete with setup orders, for the group or groups by painting certain areas of the map, making sure these areas are inside the AI's deployment zone.

Great! I'm not nearly finished with the stock campaigns, but you can never have too many on your harddrive for later. Looking forward to playing this.

I think the light infantry options will be available in the later modules when light formations such as Airborne and FJs are added. As for the QB force mixes you see, I believe the AI likes to purchase full formations over individual veichles, which might mean it buys a full platoon of something expensive, like Panthers, and therefore not having many points left for much else. The force selection may be more balanced if you fight bigger battles (just a guess though, since I haven't played any of the larger QBs yet). You can also try to let the AI choose it's units freely without rarity restrictions and see if that changes the balance between infantry and armor.

I've knocked out maybe half a dozen Shermans with 'fausts so far. Maybe around half the hits scored had noticeable serious effects. The charges have a range of 20 m, I think, and seem very powerful. I think I'm three for three with them. -Edit: the Panzerfaust 30k has a smaller warhead and should be less effective than the 30.

If one picks random for type of battle when setting up a QB, one is not told what kind of battle was actually picked when getting to the unit purchasing screen. Is this intended? I mean, it makes a lot of difference for unit choice if it's a Meeting Engagement or a defence versus an Assault type of battle. I guess one could figure it out if allowed to preview the map, but if that is disallowed for the specific battle it gets harder. I kind of can see the reasoning for forcing the player to build a force "blindly". But as it stands, the defender is put in a difficult position. The attacker knows that any type of battle will need mobile, offensive forces. But the defender has to be ready for both a purly defensive battle and a Meeting Engagement. Come to think of it, a player can actually memorize (or write down) the exact point allowance he gets for each type of battle and figure it out that way. E.g. you get 1908 pts as the attacker in a Small Probe type battle, and as the defender you get 1185 pts. Still, it seems easier if the interface would just tell you when purchasing units. Especially since the force modifier can complicate matters further.

36%! Come. On.

Mer too. In about 25 minutes to be specific.

No! Njet! Nein! It will not do! I will have none of it! If the powers that be already knew that they wouldn't release the game until next week, Moon's comment in this thread would be unspeakably cruel. Cruel in an uncharacteristic and totally uncalled for way. Such cruelty surely cannot exist in this world. I hope... edit: wo-friggin-ho!

Wohooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

I've said today or tomorrow, at the latest. I'd hate to think that they would make me brake MY word;).

My "problem" is that the trees make the entire landscape look so nice that I don't have the heart to toggle them off so I actually can see what's going on under them. I guess that's the price I pay for having spent all that time back in the day building model train landscapes and, a few years later, Warhammer 40k battlefields.