Wengart

Hcrof I always saw the X% = unit destroyed as the end of effective organized resistance of the unit. They may continue to fight on but it would be on a more individual basis rather than as a cohesive unit. For example, a platoon takes 50% casualties. The platoon would then cease to resist in an organized matter and the only resistance would be from individual squads fighting on without any or very little overall command and control structure.

Undead Reindeer Cavalry, I have started a FAQ on a word doc but it really just amounts to this: • Foxholes and fighting emplacements will have FOW • Trenches will be visible at all times except during the set up phase • Battlefront is currently considering an option for command delays in WEGO mode • Area fire delay will not be added • Moving through windows will not be added • Foxholes and fighting emplacements will be subject to borg spotting?? and I am not entirely sure about this one ^ although, that is all I have found in the few minutes since I decided to try and make a FAQ. Also, I will only be able to edit it within 30 minutes so I was hoping for a more substantial list.

Well you would know in advance whether an entire squad can fit into the foxholes. Since the fox holes will have a 1:1 representation if there are less fox holes than men then you have a problem. However, if the foxholes are spread out over several action points, as a general rule, your men will occupy positions in their current square and those squares connected to it. Disclaimer: that last bit is from my experience playing the game and has not been thoroughly tested. And, if you have any problems being able to judge if the foxholes are close enough that should work itself out in the first few hours of play.

So I would be correct in presuming that CM: Normandy will be E License only no matter what form it comes in?

Oh, actually with the whole flying on our magic carpet stuff. Would it be possible to allow an option for camera restrictions where you could not move the camera farther than X Meters horizontally and like Y Meters vertically from the unit you have currently selected. I hijacked this idea from the Total War games, since they have a camera option where you can not go a certain distance from the commander of your army.

I would just like to say that if the defenses are large enough FOW becomes a smaller problem than if the trench is only a few meters in length. Just as an example of this, in the scenario A Bridge too Far there is a fairly extensive trench system that was still able to cause serious problems; especially, because the trench system could of fit a much larger force. And this probably wouldn't work at all but could you make a terrain piece that consists of a hedgerow with a trench inside of it? Alternatively, since All that really needs to be done is to make the trenches kinda hard to see at long and medium range. Possibly putting actual camo netting on to the terrain piece would obscure it enough? Even if we could see a bump on the ground it would be negligible when the player is observing the game in flying carpet mode.

Ran out of time to edit my last post, but the current copy protection seems to be enough to prevent casual pirating. However, if more protection is needed CD Keys would be an added boost to protection, or using EA's copy protection Securom(?) since well a lot of people already have EA games. Starforce is one of them that would probably be needed to be avoided. I remember when Ubi stopped using it after some pretty big backlash against it, and I, for one, would not purchase any game using Starforce. Even if the newer versions are supposedly fixed its like the Nazi party sayed hey guys we stopped murdering millions of people you wanna join us now? And the use of dongles would also be discouraging. It notches up the entry level of the game and may scare away possible new customers. Also I kinda agree with Dillweed Combat Mission has a fairly small audience. However, I think the larger problem is lack of a awareness on the part of the consumer. As an example, Stardock's games seem very niche at first but have made quite a profit, and Gal Civ 2 was one of the top selling games at Wal-Mart for a while. Which I attribute to the amount of attention it got pre launch. However, I found out about Combat Mission by reading an old article in the magazine Games for Windows, formerly Computer Gaming World, called Tom Vs Bruce.

As far as I know Stardock doesn't use any copy protection, and their games have been selling pretty well.

Its like a Bren carrier just without the Bren and they finally got a cab on the thing.

From what I heard in the WW2 thread, the 60mm mortars that are currently being used have a much greater range than their WW2 counterparts.

What is all this talk of fox holes in CM:SF? Did I miss something, or is everyone talking about the little holes made by mortars which, from what I gather, are called shell scrapes? Also, Steve, wouldn't the cost of a trench be simulated in the number of points required to purchase them? So it would be like buying a squad of rifleman or a trench type deal. You will have to excuse my ignorance of the purchasing system as I have only played CM:SF.

Actually, I would also like to know if our troops specifically target parts of a vehicle. For example, some Opfor guys are attacking an Abrams front armor, and lets say they can't penetrate the front armor with their current AT weapon. Would the Opfor troops attempt to get a mobility kill in that case or just not fire at all? I would like to add, that from my experience they do not but that is only observing AFVs, such as the Bradley, firing against other vehicles. Also, in reply to Chainsaw I would think it perfectly reasonable for troops to fire at certain parts of a vehicle. Although at range their accuracy would not be great it could still be done, and especially at ranges closer than 100 meters.

Actually, as soon as I read "Follow the Marines as they attempt to take down a rogue Army General and his loyal troops in Egypt." I instantly thought of Apocalypse Now, which I just finished watching.

I found out the hard way that shells would penetrate vehicles. I had a squad get wiped out, as they were taking cover on the side of a building, by a T-72 shell going through my BRDM. Oddly enough, the BRDM was fine and promptly drove off. Little details like that, that you wont notice right away, make me love the CM series. Also, seeing the wear and tear on the tanks would probably help with the generic feeling that burning vehicles have. Oh, quick question, will men be able to ride on top of our tanks yet?

Oddly placed ditches?

I mainly use it for scout teams in wooded areas where they wont get more than a ? contact helps avoid them opening up when there not supposed to but, a move to contact command, would be appreciated, especially in terrain where the enemy is not so concealed as they are in a forest.

I would just be happy if my BMP gunners would stop reloading the AT-4 mid battle.

I saw Hearts of Iron 2 on Steam today, and it got me thinking, why isn't CM and well the rest of Battlefronts games on Steam.

I was wondering, is it possible for tanks to push destroyed vehicles out of the way or does that also run a high risk of destroying the tracks? I only ask because of a case in CM:SF where my T-72's were stopped by a destroyed BRDM.

The Hunt command along with target arc could currently be used as a move to contact command. Instead of a move to hull down command a topographical map like CMx1 had would also help with infantry movement. Actually, I am not sure what was used, all I remember was that the map had different colors to denote high and low ground. better yet why not include both

I would get marines however I don't have the correct credit card. Also it seems to me that only the Marines use the M16 in mass as I was under the impression that it was the basic weapon for both the Army and Marines.

I will say you have done a great job with the Qb's since I last tried them. However I did run into one small problem on a city map I had everything on random but its the one with a mosque and two other control point on either side of it. And the attackers start on the opposite side of a highway and they only moved 3 squads into the city, however I am pretty sure it was the fact that I was camping that highway with a tank company that caused them not to try to advance.

I always presumed it was a mix of sound contacts and previously spotted units. Also as your boyz are the one that spotted them I just guessed they would pay more attention to those areas but I have no way to confirm any of this so heh.

I ran into a problem during a QB today where a squad ran out of RPG ammo while the squad next to them had 5 rockets left however their AT soldier had been killed while moving into position and therefore could no longer use it. Well anyway is their a way to trade ammo between squads? Also I have had problems with squad members doing buddy aid to the squads AT soldier and not picking up their RPG is their anyway to make sure they do?

I was just wondering im having a syrian Infantry platoon leave a forest and rush across an open field and well without IR blocking smoke the strykers are just gonna tear them to shreds. Ill go ahead and test it out and see if it works.