Dr.Fusselpulli

It's not something I need to have resolved, but it's definitely a bug, Battlefront should be aware of. I don't know how it works ingame, if it is possible to have two players, let's say do a PBEM, and they have maps with different elevations. Not sure how it would turn out in combat with LOS. But if you have a fresh start, the map looks like it is supposed to look like.

The elevation changes if the 3D preview is used several times in the editor, up to the point, that the game crashes consistently at some point. So there must be some sort of memory leak or something, adding up RAM with every load of the map.

The TOO in CMCW includes an "Infantry Batallion (BERLIN)". It's somewhat different - from this forum post I gather that the somewhat odd composition is due to peace treaties.
I'm in the process of setting up a QB with an opponent and we're looking into setting up a 'fight for Berlin' QB. Since playing a PBEM battle can take weeks, if not a month or two, I'd like to put in a bit of effort right at the start to make sure the scenario we play is somewhat in the realm of 'that could make sense, in a way'.
So I've been thinking about why and how a battle for Berlin would have been fought, but my ideas are layman's ideas at best. I can't really find much info other than what units were in Berlin and when. So I wonder what the good people here think about what the battle for Berlin would have looked like? My thinking is along these lines:
In the scenario where the Soviets are the agressor, I assume that they would have to neutralize the NATO forces in Berlin to not allow a sizable enemy contingent behind their front lines. If you're going to take Berlin, you'd have to do it right at the start of WW3 when you have the element of surprise. The goal of the NATO troops would be to just survive and hope to survive until the war in Western Europe is over. So taking ground is never a goal for NATO in Berlin; holding on to well defendable locations is. I imagine artillery support would be limited because who knows how long you have to make the stock piles last. After a few days of fighting (drawing on recent events here) you might even find a T62 or two with an American flag painted on it...
How would that translate into a CM QB? Probably by selecting terrain that is well defendable, but making it an 'assault scenario' to give the Soviets overwhelming numbers. In the thread linked earlier Combatintman pointed out that defending Berlin would be an NVA job. My opponent figures this means motorized/mechanized infantry and T62's. The deployment area for the Soviets would depend on what day since the invasion the battle is set - on the first day the deployment zone would likely just be one side, after a few days the Soviets could deploy on several sides/ access roads.
I'm interrested to know what others here think a battle for berlin scenario would look like. What role would the Berlin wall play, with its mined areas? What units to expect from the Soviet side (NATO side is the Berlin batallion...). What role would artillery play? Would it just be NVA? Why not just surround and bottle up NATO forces in West Berlin rather than going on a urban military expedition which is always incredibly costly for the attacker?
 

Solving this could benefit all titles players. I fantasize to run a program that imports the btt then exports a topographic map file/image for my battle. This could be saved as an image or modified with text and typical map features and sent with the scenario. 
Can we assemble a team to tackle this? I volunteer. I offer my time, curiosity, persistence, sense of humor and bartending skills (virtual). 😉 

1) intuitively I dislike the content 
2) I also don't like the idea of banning everything what I or other people dislike

 
 

"Leibstandarte" (Personal Guards/Personal Banner) please, not "Liebstandarte" (Lovely Guards/ Lovely Banner)
 
 

The M113 can't shoot to the back. Driving forward to escape and shooting to the back isn't possible. The Gunner also seems to always face the front, only the Turret rotates.

Sorry, I can´t take Chris Pohl serious.
Why not post the original, which is better and fits the 80s timeframe.
 
 

That's only possible with tanks who fire a cannon, machinegun or autocannon right now. Not with ATGMs, as ATGMs will only be fired, if no waypoints orders are left for the vehicle. If waypoints are given, vehicles will not fire. So if you give a reverse order, this will not happen.

I definitely want them to cover the current time period in as much depth as possible before they start expanding it out. Depth before breadth. At a minimum get most of the NATO and WP roster filled out for the Central European front. Getting Scandinavia in there as well would also be nice.
When they do start expanding the timeframe I'm hoping they will extend it into the late 80's, up to 89. 1989 is an interesting setting to me because that is the year that World in Conflict is set in and it was WiC that first got me interested in the Cold War. But I would also be very interested in a 1962 setting.
In 1962 most of the equipment of the current setting would be present, but it will be earlier variants of everything, all shooting less modern ammunition. The M60 would be as new as the Abrams is in 1982, and the M48 would be sporting the good ol' 90mm gun. I've always been curious how a classic M48 (A3 or earlier) would fare against a T55. US infantry would be armed with the M14, giving them barely more firepower than they had in WW2 (there might be some XM16s with 20 round mags kicking around). Soviet infantry would have the classic AKM. The era of the ATGM would not yet have begun, with the Sagger only entering service next year. The AT work will instead be done by recoilless rifles and old school AT guns. It would be an absolutely fascinating period. If the current setting of CMCW is a perfect midpoint between the WW2 titles and CMSF, then 1962 would be a perfect midpoint between the WW2 titles and the current CMCW setting.
And of course once British forces get added in we will get to see the Centurion in action as well, which is something I would be particularly interested in (I chose my username so long ago I don't remember if I was naming myself after the tank or the Roman leadership position, but if the latter I'm happy enough to retcon it to saying that the tank is my namesake (yeah I know my account on the BFC forums is only a few months old, I've been using this name for everything for much longer though)).

For your further listening pleasure, JD in their classic punk and pop phase:
"You think they give a damn about their bills in Russia?"
(The life of a CM modder's always intense!) 
And B52s is always great video arcade brain chewing gum....
...And while we're diving down the New Wave teen synthpop rabbit hole (this was my younger sisters' playlist not mine at the time, but it grew on me...)
 
 

"Oo d'you 'fink you are, the Lone Rainger?" (...flash little twerp!)
The Buggles!
OK, this is late 80s, but the bass bops along
...and I never saw it coming / only saw it fade away

+1.   IMO it would be very useful to have mine roller vehicles in game for both NATO and Warsaw Pact.  Breaching obstacle belts were often trained and planned for.  Many real world NTC rotations featured obstacle belts.  Maybe a similar game mechanic as already exits in CMBN with the flail tank could be used.  But with rollers or plows or whatever would work best instead of the flail.  @Geoff-Ludumpress It would also be cool to have some type of mine clearing vehicle in CMRT.
To a certain extent obstacle belts and FASCAM can be made to work now with creative use of the scenario editor.  However mine clearing vehicles would make these scenarios much better.  The four CMCW Kriegsburg scenarios feature FASCAM minefields and obstacle belts.  The FASCAM and obstacle belts appear in different locations depending on which AI plan loads.  This is accomplished by assigning the mines and wire to AI groups.           
Paraphrased from the CMCW Kriegsburg BluFor briefing:
FASCAM MINEFIELDS:  The Soviets have deployed an artillery deliverable FASCAM type minefield.  The mines are generally deployed in high traffic areas and choke points.  The minefields are both anti-tank and anti-personnel.  3rd Battalion Intelligence advise there are four possible locations where the Soviets deployed FASCAM minefields.  The locations are marked on the map (the location of an active FASCAM will vary with the AI plan).
Paraphrased from the CMCW Kriegsburg RedFor briefing:      
OBSTACLE BELTS:  The US will often employ obstacle belts to slow or channel attacking Soviet units.  The obstacles belts generally consist of wire and mines.  They are approximately 50 meters deep with four rows of mines and two rows of wire.  They may be up to 600 meters long with the ends tied into restricted terrain.  The obstacle belts are covered by both direct and indirect fire.  Often a lane is left through the mines to be used by US scouts conducting reconnaissance.  The wire is closed but the lane through the mines is still open.  Engineers can locate the lanes allowing friendly vehicles and personnel to breach (cross) the obstacle belt.  Location of obstacle belts will change with the AI plan.         
In the scenario breaching an obstacle belt is simulated by breaching the two rows of wire (or crushing with tracks) and then finding a cleared lane through the mines.   This is as close as we can get without mine clearing vehicles.   
Below Soviet scouts locate a US obstacle belt blocking a Soviet Avenue of Advance (this was on scenario author test mode so the mines are all visible).  Now the Soviet commander must decide to breach (find the open lane) or take a different Avenue of Advance to the objective.  So recon also matters in the Kriegsburg scenarios.    


The flail tank mechanic (below) but with rollers or plows would make the breaching of obstacles much more realistic and interesting.   

Nato had several mine laying devices to delay a Soviet attack and deny an area. The Scoprion Mine Laying Vehicle of the Bundeswehr for example, with 300 vehicles taken into service in 1981/82. But minefields can also be prepared by artillery or helicopter. None of it is part of the scope of a Combat Mission scenario, but the mines which would have been in the area are, and we have them available in the game.

Which we don't have is Soviet counter equipment, Tanks with mine rollers to deal with those mines, and prepare a still dangerous, but somewhat safer route through a minefield for the following vehicles and infantry. Can we get tanks with mine rollers later on to fill this gap?

I could not agree more.  In CM1 we had a "Shoot and Scoot" order which I found useful.  However, the CM1 order had a fixed time pause for the shoot bit.
For a long time have suggested CM needs an improved "Ambush" order which would functions thus:  "Move to a position, wait in ambush until a target is acquired and fired at, then immediately displace to a 2nd position (chosen by player)."
This would be very useful for snipers, or any unit that is trying to ambush.
Currently, ambushes are not very effective.  Either the unit has a pause that is too short to acquire and fire at a target before it moves away.  Or... the unit fires at the start of a turn, and then sits there for the rest of the turn and gets killed by return fire.

What I would like is a new movement type of "Firehalt", being a "Quick" move to a waypoint and then stops there with "Firehalt", a special type of "Pause" until the main weapon, either the cannon or an ATGM got fired.
This could be used for tanks advancing forward for an attack, if the tanks are old WW2 tanks, or soviet cold war tanks, to shoot with maximum precision while on the move.
It would also be useful for perfect shoot and scoot maneuvers. As you could order tanks to move into a fire position, the tank would pick its target, fire, and then reverse back into a hidden position, if this is where a follow up reverse waypoint would be headed.
There could also be a "Firehalt 30" type, to switch through. To "Firehalt" until the main weapon got fired, or continue after 30 seconds, if it did not got fired. For example, if the expected enemy did not show up, is not spotted, or destroyed by another unit. The 30 seconds would give the vehicle some time and a chance to spot, but it would then continue to advance further, if it is in an attack, or go back to the hidden position, if it would be in a defense.

Nato had several mine laying devices to delay a Soviet attack and deny an area. The Scoprion Mine Laying Vehicle of the Bundeswehr for example, with 300 vehicles taken into service in 1981/82. But minefields can also be prepared by artillery or helicopter. None of it is part of the scope of a Combat Mission scenario, but the mines which would have been in the area are, and we have them available in the game.

Which we don't have is Soviet counter equipment, Tanks with mine rollers to deal with those mines, and prepare a still dangerous, but somewhat safer route through a minefield for the following vehicles and infantry. Can we get tanks with mine rollers later on to fill this gap?

Yeah, but sometimes 10 seconds are not enough. And sometimes the tank shoots immediately, and then waits for several seconds on the spot. I know, that similar behavior can be simulated already, but it isn't optimized.

I am actually finding the medium sized scenarios to be quite manageable on this one and I don't really know why compared to the other titles.  I don't usually do large as it starts to get to be too much micromanaging for me too and I get lazy and start to make mistakes.  But on CMCW all the medium battles I've played so far play better than even the small ones.  I really love the balance I'm seeing in this game and the pacing too, which directly ties in to the battle sizes for me.  Everything about this game hits the sweet spot for me, I absolutely love it.
 

works again
Thanks to @Dr.Fusselpulliand @Vacilllator I got the campaign but it is 512mb with the mods folder and too big for my db right now, will look for a solution but if one got free capacity you´re welcome

Yeah, I don't appreciate my oppo having X-ray vision 😨

I would also be interested in this campaign. @Aquila-SmartWargames would like to put it on his Dropbox folder, available for everyone, if possible and if storage space is needed.

Shoot and scoot maneuvers are possible to some degree. ATGM vehicles do not fire ATGMs if waypoints are still available. So you can not give the order to drive from a hidden position into a hull down position, give a pause order of some seconds and then go reverse into the hidden position, as the vehicle will not fire ATGMs from the paused waypoint. At least not as the game is done right now, because of engine limitations.
But there is a work around, if you give a pause order in the hidden position first, then drive up to the hull down position, so that the vehicle will stand there for about 10-15 seconds, before the turn ends, then it will shoot, as there are no following waypoints ahead. You can then drive reverse into the hidden position in the beginning of the next turn, to perform a full shoot and scoot maneuver.

I was not aware of this, explains some things in an ongoing PBEM QB I am involved in. I will stop shouting at my computer now
MMM

Shoot and scoot maneuvers are possible to some degree. ATGM vehicles do not fire ATGMs if waypoints are still available. So you can not give the order to drive from a hidden position into a hull down position, give a pause order of some seconds and then go reverse into the hidden position, as the vehicle will not fire ATGMs from the paused waypoint. At least not as the game is done right now, because of engine limitations.
But there is a work around, if you give a pause order in the hidden position first, then drive up to the hull down position, so that the vehicle will stand there for about 10-15 seconds, before the turn ends, then it will shoot, as there are no following waypoints ahead. You can then drive reverse into the hidden position in the beginning of the next turn, to perform a full shoot and scoot maneuver.

Shoot and scoot maneuvers are possible to some degree. ATGM vehicles do not fire ATGMs if waypoints are still available. So you can not give the order to drive from a hidden position into a hull down position, give a pause order of some seconds and then go reverse into the hidden position, as the vehicle will not fire ATGMs from the paused waypoint. At least not as the game is done right now, because of engine limitations.
But there is a work around, if you give a pause order in the hidden position first, then drive up to the hull down position, so that the vehicle will stand there for about 10-15 seconds, before the turn ends, then it will shoot, as there are no following waypoints ahead. You can then drive reverse into the hidden position in the beginning of the next turn, to perform a full shoot and scoot maneuver.