snake_eye

The following pictures showing you the ground and the obstacles to which our StuG III has been confronted speak for themselves. However, I have to respond to MrMarsh precisely: 1/ You must have in mind that a scenario originally made for a Human against the A.I has its fortifications (being made available in the units purchase, found in the scenario editor) shown in the set up. The player who beneficiates of these fortifications (Pre-Registered artillery and mortars spot, trenches, hedgehogs, mines and bunkers The barbed wires are not found in the fortifications – they are found in the fences – They won’t move) will see them appearing at the setup time and will have the opportunity to move them. They must be, for that, in the designed setup areas. In other words if you don’t want these fortifications to be moved, you must be sure to exclude them from the setup areas drawn on the map. Doing so, you won’t be able to move in troops, guns, vehicles and tanks. 2/ If you look closely at the map and its designed setup areas, you will see that besides the Pre-Registered artillery/mortars spot (they move independently from the setup areas during the setup), you can not move many obstacles (trenches, hedgehogs, mines and bunkers). That is, at almost all the fords exits, but one. The Ford, number 4. You can however move them at the bridgeheads of the Rail/Road Bridge and the La Meauffe Road Bridge 3/The design of battle of Normandy (it is the same in CMSF) does not permit to fix obstacles like hedgehogs, trenches and bunkers in a specific position defined by the designer. In the scenario “Die Amis kommen” the WN1, WN2, WN3 and WN4 trenches and or bunkers can be moved . Only the barbed wires will remain. 4/The H2H player but also the player playing against the A.I should only consider moving the troops, vehicles, guns and tanks. He should not be permitted to move the fortifications. Since they take some times to be prepared (in a real battle), it would have been normal to fix their emplacement for the game. That not being done, MrMarsh (playing the Germans) can modify the map to such an extent that it won’t be playable by the US forces. The exits are certainly not all closed, but trenches and bunkers can be set in weird places. Surely, the tactical plans fit to the map made by the designer are completely changed, for the worst rather than the best. 5/ About the technical impact of the obstacles, you can rely on the pictures and the comments there after. I have to say, however that the only obstacles delaying the tanks and vehicles are the hedgehogs. You must close totally the line of advance to achieve such a result. The barbed wires are delaying the infantry, since they jumped over it. The trenches don’t seem to slow a tank. It crosses it in 13 seconds. To summarize in H2H like in a play against the A.I, I would advice not to move the fortifications. They surely have a reason to be where they are. For the rest, as long as the setup areas allow you to move, do it at your will. I shall dare to compare the scenario to a car. If you remove its engine and place another one different, unless you modify all that is around accordingly and rightly you won’t get the best car you are hoping to drive. Many thanks to MrMarsh, I must say, I had never thought that the fortifications and they are numerous in the scenario would be moved by the player. I needed areas to allow units deployment to afford the player with some variability to the scenario. These areas have the fortifications right into them ! Too bad we could not prevent them from being moved during the setup. That is unfortunately the same for all scenarios having fortifications within a setup area. I don’t know if fixing them has been an option thought by Battlefront. A StuG III is advancing toward a thick barbed wire defence of WN2. It will get across it in 26 seconds flat. Then it goes over a trench in 13 seconds, then through the barbed wires within the next 10 seconds and becomes immobilized after having exploded a second mine found on its path.

Hi George, I am right up with you about your spoiler explanation, that is why, I wrote that after Phase Line Blue the TLR stopped me instead of the Germans I should find in my next move and a bit farther, that: 30 or 45 minutes more, might have permitted me to fare better or worse than the draw. Honestly, I think that it would have been rather worse than better, since the Germans are well positioned Cheers

As I wrote it in the repository “Die Amis kommen” scenario’s page, I shall have a look at the H2H, seen on the German side and reply to the remarks of MrMash quoted below. I just have one thing in mind at the moment. That is that the obstacles in particular the hedgehogs ones are placed as they should be in a normal defence set up. That they did not impaired much, in the game ( Axis against the US - A.I) the moves of the infantry (barbed wires) and or the tanks (hedgehogs) as it happened in reality. Just an example: Tanks crossing dense barbed wires got often in trouble. The barbed wires slowing it down at the best, but usually getting entangled in the bogeys, the track and managing to throw it, stopping the tank. Quote: MrMash 2011-09-07 20:48:17 I have just started doing the set up for this battle as a H2H PBEM as the Axis, and I have noticed you have given the Axis so many hedgehog obstacles that combined with the deployment zone it allows every ford across the river to be blocked to vehicle traffic except one, effectively herding the Allied armor into a small kill zone at the edge of the map ? I am now going to have to modify this scenario by removing all the hedgehog obstacles so my opponent has some choices where to attack to make the battle less predictable and therefore more interesting. I fyou are going to make a map thats 1.5 km wide with numerous crossing points, please don’t undermine it by making it to easy for the Axis to defend using indestructible and impassable objects. Apart from that the map looks great and i like the forces i have to play with so hopefully, now the hedgehogs have been removed, it will be a good battle I’ll be back soon with the explanation about the good and or wrong things that might be resented during the setup. I am going to test the ability of the obstacles to stop the Amis at the ford exits. For doing that, I will have to move them over there. That was not what I expected to happen, if we want to stick to a feasible reality about that attack and or defence scenario if played in H2H, these obstacles should not be moved at will by the player. If you have some remarks about the H2H, set up and the battle you might have played from either side let us know about it.

Hi George, Reading that post, I looked at some shots I had saved while playing it as a demo. It was my first contact with Battlle of Normandy. At first, playing the US side, I was a bit caught out of balance by the foliage and the hedgerows of the bocage (on real ground it is so thick, that a dog might have difficulties getting through, besides your LOS is very much impaired). It was not that easy to spot the Germans and the icons did not help me, since they seemed in that demo to seat high above the units. It has been corrected or I got accustomed to it ever since. As usual for your scenarios, it was well done. The map had a good rendering and it was perfect for staging a tactical assault across the bocage. Thanks to the Rhino. Knowing the challenge, I was going to encounter, I moved my units cautiously, along 4 axis. If you look at the map below (The Germans units have been erased, not to give any spoiler), the left unit and the one on the road on its right reached the road along La croix Poitevin village. Some element on point reached Phase Line Blue. Each one was ready to assist the other during the advance. * On their right, the advance and subsequent assault was made on 2 close axis. That way, one could support by fire the other. They reached also Phase Line Blue. The Rhino with its Cullins’s device helped me getting through the bocage. I favoured the corners for getting into the fields. First I shot at the angles, using the tank MG and gun and then in enfilade. Once across the hedgerow with a tank on the left corner and another one on the right; I repeated on the hedgerow facing them what they did earlier. The infantry followed closely. The mortar teams stayed at the opening and shelled the opposite hedgerow, while the infantry moved closer and finally took it. That was repeated for every hedgerow facing the troops. No wonder it took time ! TLR stopped the game. It is too bad that it was the TLR that stopped it and not the Germans that I should have encounter in my next planned move. But that is another story. I did not lose any tanks, but only because I was very cautious and took my time. I had scary moment and even a tank crew bail out of its undamaged tank. Fortunately, no German tank killer team took the opportunity to smoke it. Later on, I was able to kick in the …..the tankers and they resumed the fight, after crewing their tank, without no more problem. I got 5 KIA against 24 KIA for the Germans and 18 WIA against 9 WIA for the Germans. I think that I got less KIA, since I was able to treat the WIA. The Germans, retreating had to abandoned their wounded, thus their higher KIA. At least, I presume that, this is the reason. To summarize, I liked every moment of that first battle of Normandy, I played. The only drawback, has been the time limit. 30 or 45 minutes more, might have permitted me to fare better or worse than the draw, I had. I won’t give any spoiler, but, usually when an advance seems to go better than expected, you can be sure that the worse is not so far away. Knowing the tricks you are usually pulling out of your hat that would not be surprising. Like particularly the one you made for the “Huzzar redux”. I had not played the original one. Pretty good map too. Thanks, George, for the great time you are offering us with your scenarios

Who thought that the A.I was sluggish? For the first time, I have been almost licked by the A.I in a scenario “Die Amis kommen!” Having designed it, one could assume that knowing the units and their axis of attack, I should have been able to counter them easily. Well, read the post over there, if you think that it is the way it happened. After doing so, you will never think of the A.I the way you do http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=99585 Look at the 7 shots of the unrolling attack, taken within 30 minutes. Very impressive Cheers

Last shots. Look at the shells streaks coming, now from the right friendly side of the Germans. That is the West side. Thanks to Handihoc. I had seen them before coming from the other side and did not react !

"Die Amis kommen!" scenario Who thought that the A.I was sluggish? First of all, I have corrected in the scenario editor, the data about the friendly side, which was not correct and rightly pointed out by Handihoc in its post. It should be West for the Germans and East for the US forces. I must say that having corrected the data, I was curious to see if it made a change in the playing attitude of the A.I From what you are going to read, one might assume that it did change something. For me it really did, since from all the test play done, things never happened that way. The A.I, I can say, took me by my pants! That is perfectly right for the units, but also for the mortars and the dreaded artillery shelling. In that scenario, one could assume that having designed the attack axis and knowing the type and amount of the units being engaged, I should have fought with an advantage against the Amis. Sure, I had it, but I did not expect that they could break through Hill 30 – WN2 and around La Croix Pochon in a pincer move and that right after having shelled heavily and accurately La Rondehaye. At least two houses were levelled to their basement. From the platoon protecting the company HQ and 2 mortars teams, only a few soldiers completely haggard remained, unable to put a fight. All that happened within 30 minutes in the last hour and a half remaining. I saved the game with 1 hour playing time remaining, since, very frankly, being taken out of balance, not by the attack by itself, but by its determined and aggressive advance toward its objective. I have forgotten to tell you that I had retreated, earlier, the MG teams from la Croix Pochon to a safer position in the bocage a bit farther back. It was a very good insight, since a shelling started on the farm and the barns as they were getting away. They got to their new position unscathed. As can be seen in one of the shot, a PZ IV and a STuG III are engaging the Amis in the vicinity of La Rondehaye with caution. Tanks are still on the summit of hill 30-WN2. I am hoping to be able to engage them from Sainteny with the Panther, I moved urgently there. Against the Infantry coming from la Meauffe bridge and progressing along the railroad yard, I have a SPW Hummel keeping them at large. For how a long time? At least the tanks seem to have been destroyed. Since the Kamfgruppe Bayerlein has lost for the moment 2 StuH 42 and 1 StuG III out of 3, the remaining ones, being already engaged, they won’t be able to leave their positions. The Kampfgruppe Kessler could try to move toward la Rondehaye, but that doesn’t seem to be a wise option with the tanks overwatching from Hill 30. The Panther should try to smoke some of them, before I can attempt that move. To summarize with one hour left, I have lost La Rondehaye and La Croix Pochon, but I am slowing down the advance toward the railroad yard. On its left (seen from the East) the road following the river and coming near the houses not so far away from ford 4, is partially checked. It seems that the tanks are not trying to resume their advance. If you encountering such dilemma in your fight (having corrected the friendly side data) let us know how you got out of it. Cheers Here after the 7 shots starting at 01:32 remaining time left, then 01:20, 01:20, 01:15, 01:11, 01:07 and the last one at 01:05

Hi, Handihoc, :cool: First of all, thank you for having played that scenario till the end and for the compliments. I shall try to answer the most frankly to your post and I shall try to lift the curtain on some choices I have made and why. But before, I want you to know that your comments about the last hour are damned right. However, that is a tricky last hour. If I consider it a certain way, I am right up with you, but if I think of it another way and that, is not the only one possible, the stakes are not the same. I shall explain you why,in the spoiler’s addendum a bit farther down. About the map: It indeed took a long time to do, but a longer time, it might surprise some of you, to think of it. I thought of it, first time, when I read again some AAR and tactical reports about some fights in Normandy, from both opponents. Historical books dealing mainly on Divisions and even on Regiments action at the time, give a broad idea of what is going on. More detailed books dedicated to battalion and Company level fights permit to have a better idea of what the soldiers were facing and enduring. Very often, however, the feeling you get doesn’t fit clearly with the fight you are analysing, since the writers quite often simply copy facts and don’t use new information being now days available, specially since the ULTRA archives (The German code had been broken quite early in the war. Thanks to the Poles and the French intelligence and passed over to the British) have been made accessible. Once, you get an idea of what was going on and how, you can begin to design a map, combining the ground features and the tactical possibilities that it could offer either in defence and or attack to either side. If you design a map offering no interest in regards of the A.I move feasibilities you have to drop it, even if it is an historical and faithful scenario of the battle. To summarize, the scenario battle should be faithful with tactical and historical background. The map should be similar of what was found at the time. But, all of this has to be mixed to produce something within the scope of the A.I of either side. Needless to say, if you are designing a H2H scenario, that doesn’t need to be done, since the map feature and the forces have to be like they were at the time. The player will make the difference by its playing ability in winning and or losing, independently of the chosen side. About the German human player side: I have chosen the Germans, since the map was designed with a defence in depth in mind. In defence, you don’t need to have forces in great numbers. In attack, you usually need 3 times as much as the defender. That has been that way, right up to now. That is, when you can not use to the best the modern weapons available. I was not sure at the beginning that it was a good idea. I was puzzled about the way the US A.I would react. In fact, I was very much surprised. The axis defined for the attack were followed for most of them in an intelligent way. Even the F.O did their job convincingly. BTW handihoc, you are right about the falling shells streaks. I had seen it, been surprised, but for some reasons, I have not thought of the friendly direction setting. The Germans are on the West and the Amis on the East. That can be easily rectified in the Data setting found in the scenario editor. Please accept my apologies. About the Stuart remaining in the middle of the ford : It did happen during the testing once or twice at the most with that Stuart, but also with a Sherman remaining at Ford 1. For the Sherman, since it was an HQ one, I assumed it stayed there, because that was a normal tactical position in relation to the others. For the Stuart, I have no explanation. ****************************Spoilers****************************** The 3 Stuarts coming through the last ford (the one closer to Sainteny) usually made it through and were engaged by the elements of the German platoon positioned not so far away. I was often caught by surprise (playing elite) when looking to the right, I saw them being engaged. They seem to arrive very quickly. I must say that engaging the Amis with the far left platoon, I was pretty much occupied. I usually don’t occupy WN2, but for a sole F.O. That F.O is doing his job, with the mortars sighted on the exits of the fords, and later on, he packs up and rejoins La Rondehaye. I am trying to avoid having troops deployed close to the fords. As a matter of fact, the US infantry once it deploys along the river berm and along the road is able to call mortars with efficiency. I have my tanks engaging from the farther away that they can. I avoid again short distances. That is not the best way to use them. Read my designer’ notes about the German tactical use of tanks. My tactical plan is to let the Amis come forward and just slow them down in order to create a bottleneck. Then, with mortars against the Infantry and the NebelWerfers when they become available, it’s only a matter of well choosing the F.O and the mortars available. It is essential to avoid the destruction of the tower and building observatory near the railroad yard. Without good observers, you can say good bye to these assets. The Nebelwerfers are not very precise, but they are a saturation weapon causing a lot of damage. The railroad bridge alongside, the road one near the RR station was destroyed in few testing. Don’t drink a soda (that doesn’t make any good to your laptop) when the volley comes down, you are certain to jump up in your chair, the sound is so terrific. It seems that all your plates in the kitchen are falling down. Let people around you, know about it, or put your earphones on (lower the sound!) About the last hour playing time: Things are not that easy to interpret. Considering one point of view, you are damned right and that was also my thought for quite few battles being fought and tested. Then I have discovered that I could change it, by mounting a counter attack and force a US surrendering, or at least end the battle, by a tactical move, negating their ability to keep on fighting for their objectives. Since I needed more time, I changed the duration from 2 hours, to 2 hours 30 and finally to 3 hours and a bit more. That longer time was necessary for trying to retake WN 2 and to be able to move a counter attack against the left US flank with elements of Kampfgruppe Bayerlein and with,if possible, all elements of Kampfgruppe Kessler. That C.A should rush through the bridge of la Meauffe road (in front of WN3), all the way up of the road and then, it should spread on the left and take by the rear the US survivors. Usually the game ends at that time. Don’t forget to check that you have some troops on WN3 to get points for occupying it. I did not do a counter attack at the beginning, looking and fighting mostly on the left of the German front, where things were sometimes on the verge of collapsing. That depends, naturally, of the move being made. As a matter of fact, the Germans should stay, mostly, in defence to avoid taking heavy casualties. Their only moves during the first two hours should be to retreat to new defence positions, before having too much pressure on them. In the last hour, considering the casualties being inflicted to the Amis and especially with the NebelWerfers, a counter attack can be considered, as written above. About the victory setting: The Minor victory can be felt as a stingy result, but believe me, it is not if you are putting yourself in the boots and better in the mind of a German officer of that period. Having for quite a number of them fought on the Russian front, they were accustomed of inflicting huge casualties to the red army both in men and in materials to no effect. They had to retreat once more, again and again, nearer and nearer to Germany’s boarders. Therefore, we could only consider a total victory, if the grounds being regained could be kept. That was almost never done, for most of the battles, that is, for most of the last war 44’s, 45’s year’s battles. In the scenario’s briefing, we are informing the player that the Germans should retreat in order, the following night, to new defence positions farther back, after having delayed the US forces. The orders at the time, in Normandy, were to delay the US advance, sometimes at all cost, while inflicting heavy casualties. But a wise officer knew that the order at “all cost” meant the annihilation of its combat forces and that a tactical leapfrogging retreat preserved its combat forces and afforded a costly advance to the enemy. Therefore what is considered like a minor victory in the German side is actually a pretty good victory, considering the amount of casualties inflicted to the enemy in men and materials. However, the impossibility to keep the ground against the Americans, having the possibility to replenish their materials and their men losses in a matter of days and therefore having the capability to renew their advance, meant that the Germans had only one option, that is to retreat to a prepared defence position for a new stand, before a new retreat in order once again. Needless to say, each time, the German combat forces (in the scope of a Battle of Normandy scenario) were less than they were before and finally evaporated being replaced by an had hoc battalion, made of only 2 or even one company and or of a kampfgruppe made of disparate elements of remaining infantry and tanks. They were only able to prevent the crumbling of the area To summarize: That last hour, if all the Amis forces are destroyed and or unable to move anymore forward, should be employed to mount a counter attack against them. The front being stabilized the Bayerlein and Kessler Kampfgruppen should be used to do it. That way a mopping of the area can be envisaged and it will end very quickly the battle. About the US artillery A.I : I have been amazed to discover how effective it has been at some moment. La Rondehaye village was pounded through all the length of its street in order to neutralize a StuG III, I had moved there. Believe me it was not a mortar barrage. At the beginning of the game, the smoke curtain that can be seen masking the Amis advance, give sometimes good results and not that many at other times. Sainteny town hedges were pounded and houses destroyed. Units lying nearby were in shock later on. One or two Pak 40’s teams were forced to leave their gun being hence destroyed and or abandoned. About the main bridge disaster: The US forces along that axis, have a helluva time. However depending on the German reaction, quite a few elements are able to cross it and slip away, along the berm road parallel to the RR yard. I agree that they won’t be able to mount a dangerous attack. But they are a sting in the German front. However, they are able to move forward again, if the Germans are moving some of their remaining forces over there away. I think that the counter attack could be brought against them. Not frontally and or on their flank, but from their rear as explained above. Beware about the tanks on top of hill 30 –WN2. They have a perfect LOS on that area. ************************Spoilers end**************************** In conclusion, I can say that the A.I has made considerable progress and that this scenario could not be what it is without these improvements. Battlefront really deserves credit for it. If I had a wish I could ask for, it will be to have one day, some specialized triggers for actions to be done at a defined elapsed time from their triggering. That way a retreat and or a counter attack could be defined at a set time after having been triggered. This is a designer dream. But when we are looking back to the first Combat Mission : Beyond overlord, the dream might become reality in a lesser time that it took to offer us Battle of Normandy. Finally, I would like thanking all of you for your impressive scenario downloading. If I design scenarios, it would not be the same if these were not played and enjoyed like it seems they are. Every time, I am trying, the best I can to bring them to you and believe me, if you were not appreciating them, how could I. Cheers

Here are some shots from my helmet hessian camo, WIP, for the follow up of the 82-101 camo painted uniforms. http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1444 More hessian of different tones will be added in the release to come. The helmet without the first aid dressing pocket, particular to the airborne could be used with the Army uniforms. Cheers

That link is not working : New file at the Repository: Airborne 82-101 camo painted uniform (2011-08-14) Use that one : New file at the Repository: Airborne 82-101 camo painted uniform (2011-08-15) Here it is: http://www.battlefront.com/ihttp://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1444ndex.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1444

Thanks for noticing Erwin. V2 is rightly put in Uniforms. That not working link was for V1. My previous answer was wrongly responding to the link in the forum not the file link in the repository Cheers

Within the post, to open the link, you have to order, to open it in a new window

Well it works from Words, but not from the forum ??????? Someone has an idea ?

That is the link I have just checked. it works. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=99788 Cheers

Here after some pictures showing camo painted airborne uniforms as well as tankist jackets in a 2nd division medics unit. That practice was not however widely done. Usually it was observed at squad and or platoon level. Another practice, besides applying stains with oily rags (rubbed on vehicles dirt) was the reversing of the field jacket of the Infantry to avoid its shining fabric gloss. To Erwin: You are right; I have forgotten to tone down the eagle patch. I am doing it in the V2 mod. BTW it seems that the uploading is not in the repository, besides the DONE having been shown at the end of the uploading. I’ll shall do it again, with the V2, later this day.

Here is the 101st Screaming Eagle shoulder patch. The mod should be uploaded within an hour. Cheers

Here after are some shots from a mod I have just been doing. It is intended for the 82nd Airborne paratrooper and also the 101st . The uniforms are painted in order to diminish the more or less shining glare resulting from the tissue fabric. That was observed on quite a few uniforms at the time. On the mod not all uniforms will appear with such a paint camo. Some uniforms without camo will have slight stains of mud and grass. The flag on the right sleeve and the 82 patch (All Americans-AA) on the left one are a bit dirtied with a muddy effect. Some helmets have some paint mud effect added. Since that it is the first mod, I have been doing up to now, I‘ll appreciate all comments about it and particularly the ones, that could help me in improving what is new for me. The mod, with the 82 nd and 101st shoulder patch will be found in the packed mod. After dezipping the RAR file, you will just have to put the BRZ file either the 82 and or 101 in the Z folder existing or that you will create in the DATA of the game Folder. The mod will be uploaded at the latest tomorrow. Cheers

:DYou are right saying the curve wasn’t very realistic. That curve took me more time than you can figure to make it badly. Desperate, I decided finally to go along with it. I thought that it was too bad to remove it after all the time I had worked on it. If BF can provide us with different curves on a latter patch up game, I give you my word that I won’t do anymore the same mistake. Here after a full view of the railroad station and of the yard, for those having not seen the scenario map. Another picture makes a zoom on the implicated curve and show what I think would be a better curve radius, if it could be done. BTW at first, at that curve emplacement, I had thought of doing a circle and embranchments from it to simulate a rotating bridge for a steam engine depot, but it was not possible to recreate it. As for your mantra, I have the same feeling than you have. If a map is not realistic, how the rest could be? Cheers

To AKD Thanks for these most useful indications about the Spotter C2 links. They will be of a great use to many players wondering, after having read the manual, what they ought to do in order to call fire with efficiency.

AKD : For sure the texts are confusing and the results are that we are making different interpretations . But it does not matter if the problem is on the asset side and or the Spotter one. If as you said rightly, there is a break along the line, the order is not going to be transmitted. When the battle is fought, we don’t have that much time to think, who is the one responsible for the break in the line?. If it works, it is good enough. If it does not, well we are going to suffer since the assets won’t worked. At least, some of them.:cool:

AKD quote : C2 for an on-map firing unit does matter, and without C2 they can show as "out of contact," but this is on the firing unit end NOT the spotter end. Spotters are never unable to access support assets because of their own C2 status, however bad C2 can affect their efficiency, thus IDEALLY the spotter should also have good C2. Well that is not so sure . Here after to clarify that C2 status are some explanations from the B-N manual about the assets states, as seen from the spotter side: BUSY – the Asset is used by another Spotter…………………….. DENIED – is shown if the Spotter is not allowed to use the Asset for some permanent reason. (e.g; a platoon HQ trying to call regimental artillery) OUT OF CONTACT – is shown if the spotter has no C2 link to that asset NOT POSITIONED – The mortar and or field gun is not deployed As can be read, from the manual, Spotter can be unable to access support, if the C2 link doesn’t work for some reason (that is not permanent and might be resumed) or is destroyed (there is then no way to contact the asset, besides voice range or a leader having C2 and being within voice range) More quoted from the manual about radios: While the US forces made a deliberate effort to try to provide radios usually at least down to the platoon level, many German formations only possess a radio for the main Company HQ or have one reserved for specialized Forward Observers……. Without a radio nearby, that group of on map mortars is pretty much limited to only firing at targets within sight. As a matter of fact, when I made the test of “Die Amis Kommen” I have had all sort of problems with the mortars, from out contact, denied, not positioned ……. I found out, that not positioned was mentioned, when the tubes were not deployed. The leader was unable, till the tube was deployed to have it fired by the team. In the heat of a battle you don’t necessarily think about it. The denied mention was more difficult to resolve. However, using another Spotter, a FO rather than a leader helps. The FO seems to have a better access to artillery. I learned pretty much during the testing and was able to have the mortars and artillery working the correct way. But it was very challenging and took some time. As can be read, the use of assets depends of voice range and also radio link if the team leader has neither one near the tubes they simply won’t fire if they don’t have a LOS. For the off map a radio link is necessary.:cool:

To be more precise and to correct my post after the right remarks of AKD : Snake eye Quote: From what I have seen, while trying to use a F.O and or a Team leader to call some fire plan, here are my experiences: For on map assets For mortars and or field guns, they are DENIED: If, they are not deployed. If the team leader is out of voice reach of the tubes If the FO and or another leader calling for fire : Is out of voice reach of the tubes team leader If he has no radio link to the team mortar (Field guns) and or platoon leader from its observatory position If the team leader and or platoon leader has no radio to receive its call. If the team leader receiving the radio order is out of voice reach of its tubes AKD wrote :"DENIED" is a specific status caused only by the selected unit not being qualified to call for the support asset. None of the above play any role, but rather are examples of situations where support assets would be listed as "out of contact," "out of position," "busy," etc. In my previous post you should effectively read OUT OF CONTACT instead of DENIED. Besides naming it wrongly, the rest is mostly what happens in the game snake eye Quote: For off map Mortars and or Artillery : The FO, Platoon and company leaders must have a radio link. If for example a platoon leader has no radio functioning, since it has been destroyed during the fighting, he can not call anymore off map assets. AKD wrote: This is not correct. Access to a radio does not affect the spotter. Any unit qualified to spot maintains access to support assets regardless of C2 and equipment. In the case of the latter, most likely the qualified observer (the platoon leader) has also been destroyed Well, I don’t think that this is right. Radio does affect the spotter , if the spotter is out of voices range and has no link to the tubes and or a leader having contact to them. Here after are quotes from the B-N manual: “Without a radio nearby, that group of on map mortars is pretty much limited to only firing at targets within sight. Without a radio, that platoon commander who loses sight of his company CO is effectively out of the loop with higher ups” “C2 links : Iideally the spotter should show green connections to all superior units. The spotter also needs a connection to the firing unit in order to be able to call on it to fire. Units without a communication link to the spotter are shown as – OUT OF CONTACT - in the support roster” “Match up rating: Depending on how urgently Support is needed, the Matchup rating, may be critically important. The matchup value reflects the difficulty a specific Spotter has in getting in touch with a specific asset and securing permission to use it. A Platoon HQ will have difficulties reaching a Regimental howitzer battery, for example. In fact, in some case such requests may be outright denied. If this is the case, then DENIED is shown in the support roster on the affected asset Thanks to AKD for having pointed out my wrong appellation. I would not like to be responsible of a “sabotage” with your artillery and or mortars use in a scenario.:cool:

From what I have seen, while trying to use a F.O and or a Team leader to call some fire plan, here are my experiences: For on map assets For mortars and or field guns, they are denied : If, they are not deployed. If the team leader is out of voice reach of the tubes If the FO and or another leader calling for fire : Is out of voice reach of the tubes team leader If he has no radio link to the team mortar (Field guns) and or platoon leader from its observatory position If the team leader and or platoon leader has no radio to receive its call. If the team leader receiving the radio order is out of voice reach of its tubes For off map Mortars and or Artillery : The FO, Platoon and company leaders must have a radio link. If for example a platoon leader has no radio functioning, since it has been destroyed during the fighting, he can not call anymore off map assets. In one scenario –Counter Attack Ladenstadt -I was unable to use the FO for no apparent reasons. However, I think that I missed something in the heat of the battle. So, I used a platoon leader close to the mortars tubes and at voice reach to order a mortar barrage.

Sure, it can be made to look good, but you have to make numerous tests to get the one that seems the best looking. Sometimes, that is to no avail and you have to reconsider totally, the topography of the area where the bridge and or overpass should be. :cool: More, if the levels are not done correctly the behaviour of the vehicles and or troops crossing them, might be in some instances erratic. A test of the crossing facilities is primordial, without it, the designer A.I plans might be in jeopardy. About the railroad tracks, sure it is not perfect for the radius of the curve, but B-N is not a Railroad simulation. If you are making precise and correct railroad tracks simulation on TRAINZ you will see immediately the difference. Anyway, the map editor doesn’t allow you to make different radius curves that would look realistic. So, the best is to make it look good as much as we can, for the time being.

Bridges either R R and or road ones are very challenging when it comes to get them in the right place and at the right elevation. It is as a matter of fact, more difficult to do it when it is an overpass either on a road or a railroad track, than a river. The ground level at the bridge entry, is the more delicate thing, I have been confronted with, to this day. Since, you can not make it level with your mouse, you have to travel back and forth in the editor, between the map and the 3D view to see the results. More than often, they were not to the standard I wanted. I think that they are still not up to it. But that is the closer I could get to what I wanted. BTW, to get cars, halftracks and tanks to move on them, you have to move them at a slow speed or have a wider bridge to get through it at a higher speed. Otherwise, the tank will stop, resume, stop and it takes a long time to see it on the other side. If you have some answers to these, I’ll be glad to read them. Cheers Here are some shots from “Die Amis kommen !” scenario. You have on it numerous bridges. Road and RR types as well as a destroyed RR bridge. Its RR tracks falling toward the river is like the ones that can be seen on 1944 era pictures.