Kolyanich

hell yeah got it - thanks

possibly f..up my installation when i installed Z mods. dont have Scenarios folder. Only have three: Data Misc Mod tools none of the has scenarios folder

In which folder do I save user made scenarios?

you inspired me to have my first one. PBEM request is now posted on opponent finder forum: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98982

Looking for a PBEM opponent for a medium to large scenario. Can make up to 5-7 emails per week – with more than one per day on the weekends. Below are the larger scenarios which I have not yet seen: A Delaying Action.btt Bloody Dawn.btt Huzzar.btt TWC Purple Heart Draw.btt Vierville.btt -if you have not seen any of these yet (or have seen only one side) or have any others in mind choose your side drop me a PM or post here.

medium size assault playble H2H with a good combintation of armour, infantry and art. good mixture of terrain with village, woods, plain, hills and without bockage. Example: closing the pocket from the demo.

As one of the British officers from Napoleonic wars described the routing of his regiment: “Advance to the rear in force”

a message poping out after you hit "Go" button, asking whether you want to move to the next turn

Autosave!!!

it was a major disappointment to me and my hotseat opponent when after 22 turns into “its just a bridge” scenario the PC got frozen and we had to abandon the game as no autosave was available. Even when playing against the AI , from time to time I hit “done” button by mistake before commands are issued. Not sure if this has been escalated to Battlefront already but it would be really helpful to have autosave and a promt screen requesting the confirmation to advance to the next turn. Any ETA on this? PS. Also I consistently come across off-map artillery barrage not hitting the target even with the spotter has a clear LOS but gives “fire for effect” command even though spotting rounds do not hit the target. I believe this has been acknowledged already and included in patching list.

Played this scenario in hotseat this weekend. The parameters were: WE GO, Veteran skill. (have to say hotseat was incredibly painful – I hope WE GO TCP/IP will be enabled in a near future) Americans attacked with all their forces through the open ground on left flank without knowing that there is minefield there and sending one platoon to harass the Germans on the right flank. Two Stuarts managed to get through the mines while the other two got immobilized. Thanks to the sheer firepower and Stuarts which broke through the minefield, the bocage behind the minefield was cleared from Germans by turn 22. Subsequently, the farm was taken after preliminary bombardment by 81 mm off map mortars. From H2H perspective, we felt that German player has very little chance to stop Americans. Firstly, the Germans are low quality and heavily outnumbered (which is fine as long as its historically reasonable) but more importantly, the German player is significantly restricted in his initial set up zones - which effectively force him to deploy all his heavy weapons in the trenches on the left flank and which become useless as the enemy attack is very likely to come from the right flank, especially that American player is not aware of the minefield during his set up. Changing the set up zone to allow the German player to deploy his heavily outnumbered forces as he wishes might lead to a more balanced game I think. PS. Can someone recommend a good small to medium size scenario for H2H with a good mix of armor, artillery and infantry?

I have the same issue. Added CMBN to exclusions from scan on my Avast but it does not help - i have to go to task manager to restart it.

Did not have time to read the whole thread but just would like to say that it was my biggest disappointment so far which made me to reconsider my excitement about the release and the future modules. I am unlikely to spent more than a few weeks against the AI and since multiplayer games are not a real option now (as you said PMEB are ridiculously slow) and TCP/IP with no pause and WEGO is just a joke. Unfortunately, I pre-ordered the game back in March but unlikely to spent any more $ on add-ons etc. My 10 year old CM journey seems to be over unless BF implement TCP WEGO in future relases. Total disappointment.

Guys, Thank you for clarification – as long as “'poor-excellent' rating is just a very rough guide” and the real calculation is happening behind the scenes you made my day. Having played WWII CM series since 2000 I have the feel what each vehicle / gun is capable of but I will have a trouble explaining this system to by girlfriend (she signed up for hotseat games with me)

No, this is under assumption that for example SPW series of halftracks having up to 14.5mm of front armour (page 181 of CMBN) with some sloped armour plates should hold themselves against small arms in MOST cases and not having the amount of threat at "BAD". This questions the rationality of having a very simplified and overgeneralised 5 grade armour system of (BAD-POOR-AVERAGE-GOOD-EXCELLENT). For example as of now, in case of halftracks (SPWs for that matter) , the frontal threat is at “BAD” for 14.5mm of frontal armour – but it is also “BAD” for sides and the rear where the armour is as low as 5.5mm. As I said I do hope there are much more complex calculations behind but we do not get to see it in CMBN. We have an abstract “threat” which in my view might be good for modern warfare but a lot less helpful in WWII environment. The same goes for the threat itself (Anti-tank rocket- Large Caliber-Medium caliber-small caliber). For example, Soviet early 57mm can be viewed as small caliber but its penetration power is more superior than “large caliber” 76mm ZIS. In short I will be missing the detailed information of the vehicles/guns we had in CMBO and CMBB /AK.