A Canadian Cat

Hee hee. You should not regret anything. It's a good thing that some people are coming up to speed.

Excellent - a fun scenario. Yes, I took advantage of this the time I played. My opponent was convinced I had two tanks because it made quite a few trips along that back road.

That list seems right. I am not sure if anyone has done formal testing but we do know that rifles are preferred over SMGs. Also note that the game also simulates a chance that the weapon is damaged and not usable. That one I didn't know and I don't know if I have seen that. Do you have an example? Do they stop using their LMG or just switched to the SMG instead of their pistol when moving. A tank crew member with a pistol will do that. Likely the same for an officer armed with only a pistol too. Any tank crew organically armed with an SMG or a weapon they already picked up will behave the same as anyone else.

LOL I missed that you already said that. Nice response there. We'll done

Sounds good - you could get very creative with that. And some might never be used. Hint, even if what I just suggested above is not true maintain that it is and put it in the briefing. That table is for interpreting the intel the player gets when they encounter those defectors *not* for people to read ahead and form opinions on what is to come. The fact that the timing and location are in the defector's names means reading the table has limited value. If you add to the player's mind that not all of them will be used that leads them to focus on the actual intel they get and not try to guess from the table what is up. Hint hint. I recommend saying that the above suggestion was already your plan and is already implemented - thanks for idea that I already had Ian - sheesch.

And if you do see about adding it to the scenario depot so I can get it listed here: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/FortressItaly/Campaigns/index.html

Slap a label like traitor (or collaborator or enemy combatant) on someone and you can get away with all kinds of Ill treatment. Assuming your population is gullible or oppressed enough.

Channelling your inner Ken ( @c3k )I see

Oh this looks good. And not just because of the icons you are using

Some things can be fixed though. I remember right after movable way points were added some of us discovered that you could take a on map mortar team and give them a target at a way point and then move the way point and the mortar could still hit that spot just like it had direct LOS to the target. It meant that you could hit any location with pin point accuracy nearly instantaneously. All it cost you was a short move and the setup time. Oops. That's why when you move a way point any target command attached is discarded. I was asked to stop talking about that "feature" while the patch was assembled.

Yes, that is Steve from BFC's profile. But honestly I would recommend sending it to this Steve @sburke: He will likely get on it quicker and his mail box is probably not full

Thanks for that very interesting post - especially this part ^^^.

Hee, it has been a while though. I think we might be due. Or perhaps I have put all the likely culprits on my ignore list so I haven't noticed Yes for sure, I totally get it too.

LOL. I don't dispute you math. I don't dispute that a lot of people here would like it. But I will add that an equal or perhaps larger number of people here would complain about it and find room to criticize anything that they did post. Add to that that the total number of members here is but a small percentage of their total customer base (most customers don't spend time on these forums). Throw in consideration for "what part of the job do you enjoy doing" and "why exactly would you spend time doing something you don't enjoy that would not satisfy a majority of active posters anyway" especially if spending that time would take away work that would benefit paying customers who are not active forum members. And you might reach a different conclusion - namely that those are not hours well spent at all. Please not I am not presuming to speak to what BFC might enjoy or not enjoy just pointing out some additional considerations that you omitted from your initial analysis.

You can sort campaigns and scenarios by author on my list here: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BattleForNormandy/Campaigns/index.html Once you are looking a the table just click on the title of the "Author" column to sort it. You will find that some entries do not have author information but most do. If anyone know who authored a campaign or scenario where that information is missing you can PM me and I can fix it. Just looking at this I notice that Paper Tiger is not listed as the author of the Scottish Corridor - oops...

Nap, definitely a nap.

Not that he will admit too anyway.

What @RepsolCBR said. I do recall someone doing tests like that but I cannot find the link. My recollection was that it did have an effect on troops on nearby floors. I would take the shot

However many times as it takes. That's what it means to care about quality.

Well to be fair a MEFP (multiple explosively formed projectiles) detonation would be pretty similar to a cloud of shrapnel. Sounds like the pattern would be more consistent and controllable, at design time. It is not clear to me how the way the cloud of metal is formed would make any difference in stopping KE penetrators. Isn't the limitation there with tracking and targeting?

Yeah, what @sburke said. Tanks spot like crap in the WW2 games - as they should. Clearly they are not helpless and are dangerous but they are usually the last units on the battle field that figure out where the enemy is.

It has a difficult name "ScAnCaDe" You can find it here: http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=5186

If you give the team a face command at the end of the movement orders then that will cancel the cover arc. That's how it works way back to v1. Now if you are not adding a face command then that would be a bug. If you need them to face a certain direction then give them an arc in the direction you want them to face an then after they are settled switch back to a circular cover arc and all will be well. If you have an instance where the orders did not include a face command (or a target command) and the cover arch was dropped then save it and share and someone will get it logged and fixed. I do this frequently when playing and have not seen a problem. I will watch carefully over the next few days just to be sure.

When it's ready

I just remembered that I have a link on the FAQ page to where Steve explains it. Check out Steve's comments on this thread (there are other things going on in the thread but this is covered here):