Combatintman

1 If you are 'not allowed to discuss them' then why do you insist on talking about CIA, DIA, WNINTEL or classified sources in your posts? Likewise - if you cannot discuss certain topics in your defence, why are you able to refute via PM? 2 It would have been preferable if you had reconstructed the incident before posting. 3 I don't need the thought model - I swore an Oath of Allegiance to HM the Queen in 1984 - I get it more than you ever will. 4 Why would HM the Queen speak in the first person plural in this context? Also, why didn't HM the Queen object to Birmingham being nuked in the original version of the novel? 5 The publications you mention were not marketed as fiction. I am well aware of the extent of the British Government's willingness and ability to clamp down on 'unpleasant' matters. An example from the 1980s and relating to national security matters would be Spycatcher rather than your example. 6 To call General Hackett 'the glory of the nation' is a stretch. I don't recall him being accorded a state or ceremonial funeral upon his death. 7 General Hackett's writings were so influential that UK defence spending increased following the publication of the book? 8 Don't waste your time looking because your assertion was fiction.

I'll put it another way then ... 'it is not true'.

Forgive me for my impertinence but what is your source for this? Why on earth would HM the Queen be even remotely interested, let alone intervene in the storyline of a work of fiction? Added to which, given that the book was published in 1982, I am sure she and the rest of the country was more interested in the unpleasantness in the South Atlantic than the ending of a book. Given the context, you can see why I'm asking.

Bill, thanks for the informative annotations - this is a really hard one to track without them.

Just replied to your PM about setups and unit numbering in the editor.

Schloss Bayerburg ... the gateway to East Prussia

Love the map in post 72.

After much fooling around in the editor - I have decided to dip my toe in the CMRT scenario design pond. More to follow.

You probably need to be more sophisticated than that. I would use at least three elements for the Russians. One to fix the Germans frontally and the other two to conduct the envelopment - although you could get away with a single fix element and a single envelopment element. For the Germans you will need at least two elements again - how you dice it up is up to you but your two elements ought to retreat by bounds (one firm and one moving - rinse and repeat). While you could do the withdrawal as a programmed AI plan - triggers would work well here.

Downloaded, played and feedback sent.

Another avenue you might try is to hit up LLF - he was working on a Dien Bien Phu mod for CMBN. I don't know whether he got as far as voices or not. Thread is here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=106770&highlight=Dien+Bien+Phu

No worries - from memory both blue and red have stock phrases and I know that at least some of them were cross-decked into the WW2 titles so I reckoned you could at least give the Syrian sound files a try for some Arabic voices. Hope it saves you a lot of work.

I wonder if the Syrian voices in CMSF could be used to solve your problem ... worth a thought.

John - that is all well and good, but pretty much everything you cite has been triggered by the current crisis which has been explicitly stated by BF on numerous occasions is not the backstory to CMBS.

Oh you've gone and done it now ... some comedian is bound to set up a test range in one of the WW2 titles and fire 37mm guns at boulders and claim that the modelling is inaccurate.

Have replied to your PM which I hope you find useful.

Don't go and see the Fury film at the pictures then ... I was expecting them to be strafed by the Millenium Falcon based on the laser like tracers that were winging around.

From memory ... no. As I don't have any more context, it is difficult to offer the best solution to your dilemma. The way I would crack this would be: Don't even bother with the AI fires option unless you want rounds down if the first 5 mins (I have never used the AI fire plan option in the AI part of the editor). Identify where and when you want the rounds to fall. Make sure that you have an observer with 'eyes on' Arrange for your indirect fire assets to be reinforcements that arrive about 5-10 minutes prior to when you want the bombardment to start. So if you want to shell an area at around the 40 minute point, have the tubes arrive as reinforcements at the 30 minute point. This guarantees that your indirect fire will not be squandered in the early turns of the game. Now ... there is still a lot of ... if you forgive the pun ... hit and miss with this approach but if you playtest enough you can refine it to the point where you should get the results you want more often than not. Remember that with CMSF 'Spy Forward Observers' are a force pick option. These guys are harder than many to spot so they give you a lot of flexibility. PM me if you like and I can perhaps offer a more nuanced solution.

For those still lurking around this forum, I have just completed the first full test run of this. Unfortunately it needs a fair amount of tweaking as it stands but there is nothing disastrously wrong with it.

Stalingrad ... really? Given that building interiors are abstracted in CM and that your options for splitting squads and doing FIBUA/MOUT are not optimised in this game engine I would doubt very much whether it would be a satisfying gaming experience. Likewise ... Leningrad ... from memory it lasted from 41-44 and was a siege. Granted there were a few manoeuvre battles over the course of those years but the operative word is 'few'. The scope of TO&Es alone means that it isn't going to be a module and a siege isn't going to attract much interest IMHO. There may be a point at which BF come up with an engine that can cater for these battles in the manner that you would expect them to be played out but if CMSGRAD came out tomorrow you would be complaining about your inability to assault buildings realistically and if CMLGRAD came out tomorrow you would be equally underwhelmed by the sameness of all of the missions or a campaign of 12 missions where 8 of them involved just sitting around ducking the odd artillery barrage.

Yep weta nz's solution should work 9 times out of 10 - I would also check how you've set your Allied and Axis friendly directions in the 'Data' screen in the mission editor as this may have an influence on facing.

Discounting the terrain and buildings issue, each iteration would still be a massive undertaking. Speaking from the POV of someone who has done TO&E research and formatting the data so that Charles can convert it into 0s and 1s in a way that works in the game it is something that takes a considerable amount of time. So even if BF said that they were going to do 41/42/43 I wouldn't expect to see it/them any time soon, particularly as their announced projects are still WIP.

Sorry ... can we not write the Brits off on the basis of one BBC documentary about Afghanistan. The simple facts of the matter are: The Brits are members of the UNSC. The Brits hold many key appointments within the NATO Command Structure. The Brits deployed a battlegroup to Poland in October: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-secretary-visits-troops-deploying-on-training-exercise. The Brits still spend more than most of NATO on defence. NATO Defence Expenditure 2013: Albania 182 Belgium 5257 Bulgaria 749 Canada 18428 Croatia 848 Czech 2148 Denmark 4547 Estonia 479 France 52250 Germany 48718 Greece 5669 Hungary 1210 Italy 25173 Latvia 291 Lithuania 354 Lux 248 NLD 10313 Norway 7398 Poland 9077 Portugal 3316 Romania 2602 Slovak 997 Slovenia 518 Spain 12746 Turkey 14365 UK 60283 US 735154 Source: http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_topics/20140224_140224-PR2014-028-Defence-exp.pdf Denuded they may be but the Brits remain capable of deploying a minimum Bde-sized armoured/mechanised ground force which I'm sure in the fictional World of CMBS would be a very much appreciated contribution to the CMBS International Coalition.

From memory you have to zip or rar files to upload them to the Repository so .btt and .cam extensions would only show after downloading and unpacking.

If you want any help just PM me - I'd be glad to kick the tyres on the scenario around if it helps you get it out of the door.