Paulverisor64

Would this still be true if the targetting originates from the clear ground waypoint and not the attacker's starting point? Once again this is a little puzzling. If this presumption was correct wouldn't it mean that every single spot that was waypointed and then targetted was taken from the vehicle height? I'd really like to believe this is true but when you are waypointing from the vehicle it only sees a clear area because of the fog of war. So I don't understand how this waypoint would pick up the vehicle height from that clear area square? That is a very good point. I never understood the "reverse slope - no aimpoint" before. This is certainly something I will look for from now on. Thanks for both your's and Vulture's help. I'm still hoping someone might clear up how the targetting tool from the waypoint of the suspected target works.

I'm playing in a PBEM game where my opponent has decimated my armor due to line of sight and line of fire issues. We're playing on a map with a lot of open space. The defending side has the higher elevation. There are slight height contour variations. Just in front of the village there is a raised contour that overlooks most of the map and slight dips that reach for quite a distance. There is a raised portion of the hill leading towards the top of the defending side. In doing targetting checks I see that the view is obstructed in many places in targetting towards the top of the hill. Too many times in this game I've seen this sense of security evaporate when my opponent's Tiger comes out to rest on the perch of the hill. I find myself with nowhere to retreat as all the surrounding hill is of the same contour. I've repeated this mistake on many areas of the map. My enemy always emerges as I am positioned in harms way. I've essentially lost the game already, but I'm really hoping to find a way to do better in the future. From what I understand the targetting tool only picks up the visibility from the ground of the area square that is the beginning and the ground of the area square at the end. Even a slight contour can break the line of sight. An object 5 feet off the ground at the beginning or end might actually be seen in reality. This has been a plague to me. Is there any way to get an accurate idea of the true visibility that might be seen from vehicle to vehicle height? Besides using the targetting tool I have hit the Tab key to focus in on mine or the enemy's vehicle but haven't been able to derive an accurate visibility from this. If there isn't a good way of finding this out; the type of tool that would be very helpful would be a contouring type tool that would map out what could be seen from a specific area square, at a small elevation above the ground. I believe someone else on the forum suggested something similar to this at one point.

I can understand the justification for pricing the way that it is, but as noted above some of the relative values don't seem to add up. Just out of curiousity; has there ever been a study made with the actual manufacturing costs in comparison with QB point values? Perhaps the harder to manufacture tanks should demand a higher QB point value.

This would not be a game breaker per se; but in certain circumstances such as this it would break James chances of winning the game. If you run into enough of this type of game changing bugs it does become a game breaker. I've also discovered that destroyed vehicles do not give any cover. Once you find out you adjust but it does take you out of the game immersion somewhat. It would seem that the developers could find some kind of a technical solution to the issue that James has run into.

The default path that comes up for me is C:users/(user name). I've always just let the game choose it's own path.

I think it is. Simas and I tried a quick exchange of QB turns by suggested forces and there was no 5% bug.

That's great! Thanks for your help everyone.

So this must mean this app has passed Amazon approval? http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=291&Itemid=502

This is truly missed. Would love to have it back.

I'm thinking about purchasing a Kindle Fire. If this game was to come out on Kindle Fire it would seal the deal. Any word on whether this app will be available on Kindle soon?

I'm crossing my fingers that when Market Garden does come out that there will be a bundle option to go with Normandy 2.0 disk. What would even be better would be all 3 titles available in bundle on 2.0 disk. I'm just hoping that if there is a bundle option that the disks that are bundled will be upgraded to the 2.0 level.

I'm going to give myself a bump.

The briefings as is for the most part do a good job of describing and displaying the scenario. I do wish for 2 things. 1) Larger text size to be easier on the eyes (widescreen scaling issue) 2) Description in each scenario of which side is the most difficult to play.

I too give "Face" orders prior to "Deploy". This is given to the tail end of my waypoint(s). The tutorial established this order so I've stuck with it. I'll have to try some experimentation. Perhaps I do need perpendicularity even with elevation.

Womble:Thank you for your observation. From your experience you see that your MG will fire through a short wall given the facing is correct. The facing I've struggled with is "near" perpendicular, yet the elevation is higher on my side of the wall. I wonder if that is throwing things off. The biggest issue to me here is that that sometimes the bullets go through and some times you can't even spot a target.

What is aggravating is that sometimes a unit as in the above picture will fire through a 2 foot thick stone wall, and other times it won't fire at all. To make this an even playing field either; 1) all low tripod MG's should be able to fire through low stone walls (assuming that they were placed on top of the low wall) 2) no tripod MG's should be able to fire through low concrete walls. 3) or preferrably; the MG's could be mounted on top of these walls. In getting a lot of playing time into the game I'm seeing some quirks I didn't catch before that don't add up. In the above case I can fully understand being able to fire through a thin walled building such as a barn, but firing through a low thick wall should be all or nothing.

Here is an example of the HMG that wasn't impeded by the wall.

I've been playing a PBEM game, and in this game I've been observing a couple problems which have been driving me nuts. I'd rather not post this as I am in the middle of the PBEM and I'd rather not reveal more than necessary about my deployment. I have however let him know of these issues. The game which we're playing is "Lemon Hill". I am defending as the Americans. The 1st issue I'm running into is that my Howitzer refuses to fire. The howitzer is manned, it is deployed, it has ammo. It has been silent for perhaps 15 turns. It is under moderate suppression. Sometimes the men cower, sometimes they are spotting. There is only a 2 man team left, but it fired rounds with only 2 men. The 2nd thing that's driving me crazy is that I've not been able to get line of sight with my MG's and other units. My initial deployment seemed to have the line of sight I was after, but the game has revealed this isn't true. I've moved these units around trying for better line of sight. The Target tool shows line of sight in the area I need prior to the move. As soon as I get there or get there and deploy the line of sight is gone. Part of this of course is that the MG tripod can be lower than the wall. However I see that the Italian HMG seems to have no trouble with this as they just shoot through the thick concrete wall. I do have line of sight trouble even if the wall doesn't appear to be the issue. In real life wouldn't the MG tripod just deploy on the top of a wall? Can anyone offer any help for my 1st issue and perhaps look into a solution for the 2nd issue?

I've lamented about this in a thread quite a while back. It's too bad the vehicle itself can't have a Load or Unload command that waits at a waypoint until the action is performed and then moves on.

In some games you can view game behavior characteristics within game data files. It seems as if there should be a series of numbers to coincide with some of these effects but I certainly don't see it within this game.

Just a guess here. It is possible that you are only filtering "Saved Games"? At the bottom of the interface for opening saved games it can be filtered 3 different ways. "Saved Games", "Saved Games and incoming e-mail" and "incoming e-mail" check to see that you aren't set up to just open "Saved Games". If that isn't it I'm curious whether the incoming 002 turn has any file size to it?

Perhaps it didn't actually save in the incoming email folder. I find that if I don't do a "Save As" and then make sure it's in the proper location that it will find another location to save.

I already have purchased the 2.0 Normandy upgrade but I'm holding off buying the Commonwealth game until everything comes out on a 2.0 full version disk. I'm hoping to eventually get these 2 games and Market Garden to add to the steel collector case I bought when CMBN 1st came out. I believe I read somewhere that Battlefront will be selling both the original version CMBN (with the lower price) and the fully upgraded 2.0 version. Perhaps this is when the original version sells out, I'm not sure. Perhaps all 3 titles will come out with version 2.0 in a package deal. If this is the case I'd like to do this even though I've already bought CMBN. What is the timing looking like for releasing full version 2.0 disks?

Great clip John. Didn't expect the ending.

What is this? The Italian Brokeback Mountain Division?