A co

Andrew H, I agree it is a very cool effect to have in the game- provided the modeling is being done with BF attentive to fuses, amount of explosive, etc.

I don't know how sensitive the fuses of AP with bursting charge were, but it will be good when it is modeled consistently.

Thanks, ChrisND. warrenpeace, I have seen, in CMBN, a shell go through a Marder, then strike and kill a very unlucky Landser, though as I recall it didn't burst.

Warrenpeace, I agree with you there. My concern is that hitting a tree branch will end the AP shell's journey, while hitting a tank will not. Doesn't make sense.

All the above responses are consistent with my (admittedly speculative) thinking. Perhaps we will eventually hear a word from BF on this.

Here are a few anecdotal observations on AP shells in the game. It seems that an AP shell will burst if it hits a tree or any type of foliage. It seems odd then, that if one hits a tank and ricochets it will not burst until it hits the ground. I'm also surprised at the lethality of these AP shell bursts at range. I've seen them take out men 30 to 50 meters from the point of hitting the ground, two out of about four times. (85mm but still, not an HE round.) Maybe a couple of outliers but I'm wondering if others have got a similar impression. Am I seeing this wrongly? Does anyone know more about the logic of these things?

Thanks for checking it out, sburke. If the gun's behavior does turn out to be corresponding to expectations, then I guess it's the posture of the crew, 'walking' animation as I recall, that surprises me. But then gun crews in the game do a lot of moving around that's hard to interpret.

I suppose it's part of the routine which allows any moving unit occasionally to fire at enemies it spots. I will accept it as an effect of my superior tactical ability- but if I saw my opponent do it, it would be an abomination!

I just had one of my AT guns fire at an enemy tank while the gun was being moved by its crew. (It hit the tank at 1200 meters, too.) The gun was not limbered. This was fun for me, but I'm guessing it was an oversight in the programming or a bug. I can provide a game file of the turn if needed.

I practically never give a tank a covered arc of less than 180 degrees (and extending to the map edge), usually to keep the turret front armor toward the enemy while moving. A wide angle like that might have prevented the problem depicted in the video. Next time you will get him.

I like the new red 'casualty' text. I find it a lot quicker and easier to grasp, and to trace the casualty's weapon.

Great collection of photos!

Not really a selfie, but taken from the bombardier's position in the Tupolev SB-2. For what it's worth.

I haven't used them yet, but I bet the 45mm guns are pretty effective and hard to spot on these big maps. Dangerous to anything but the big cats, I expect. Small, cheap and numerous.

Perhaps that is because the rotation of the hull would spoil the gunner's aim?

PM sent. (with link to dropbox file.)

Tailgaters beware!

when you can stow it...

Hey, did anybody notice what happens when you click 'target briefly' two or three or four or five times? Very cool! And, no I did not read the manual, in case it's in there.

Love the golden domes on the Churches, all the new building skins, the birch trees, etc, etc. And the game runs very fast and smoothly on my antediluvian computer.

I've been watching the Mobelwagen 37mm Flak vehicle in a battle recently and it occurs to me that the crew sure gets those big 20mm thick shields up fast when they feel threatened. It hardly takes them longer than a tank commander does to close his hatch. Maybe it's sort of the same 'close hatch' routine in the programming. But really wouldn't the gun crew need, say, a few minutes to lift up and hook up those four shields? (Which were only used during transport, if Wikipedia is correct.) Granted, I suppose BF included the vehicle only because it is a cool machine, not really because they believed it was meant to fight like a tank. But I think we should note that it's survivability in a ground fight is greatly exaggerated by the 'pop-up' shields. Maybe in future iterations of the game they should be made permanently lowered?

I suppose it is mainly useful for stealthy movement in concealment. The unit would stop, get down, and hold fire when enemy (who might spot them) is spotted outside the arc. Good for scouting. For the purpose you were trying to achieve, it is clearly less useful.

Maybe this has something to do with the recent change making vehicles take longer to spot infantry close to them? Not the intended result, doubtless. I've also seen a Puma fail to spot a jeep that was about three meters in front of it on a road.

Also they are far more useful on certain maps than others. I'm thinking of some of the Hill 112 scenarios, where the map is large and not densely filled with units. As said before you can scout, set up ambushes, even conduct quick raids. They're a lot faster and more nimble than half-tracks, so you can use them more spontaneously. In a current game I'm going to try to use them to quickly withdraw small picket/ LP/OP teams from hedgerow lines, which otherwise would get steamrolled.

That kind of result happens occasionally with various types of weapons. I've seen it happen with a 3 inch mortar round, for example. I think it's supposed to be that way. The 7.5 cm LIG is kind of an interesting weapon- it seems to have a small flash and sound signature when it fires. I had one in an orchard which got off about six shots against nearby enemy tanks before being spotted. None of its HEAT rounds penetrated the Sherman's front armor, though, so it is probably throwing a pretty unimpressive shell.