A Canadian Cat

If variety is what you want then CMBN with all the modules has the most stuff. The way the CM2x titles have been developed has been to start with a core game and add modules to it over time. So to see something close to CMBB you would need to look at a game and all of its modules. Even that will be different because the stated plan for the eastern front is to do four games and one or two modules pergame. So there will not be one title in CM2x that covers the same time frame as CMBB did. That's the down side. The upside is that the detail and variety in the 2x games is quite a bit greater. I do not recall seeing a comparison between CMBN and CMBB but Steve did do one between CMBN and CMBO and CMBN (with all its modules and packs) now has more variety of gear and orders of battle than CMBO did and CMBN does not even cover the entire time frame that CMBO did. So with the Cm2x titles it will cost more and take more time to get all the variety they stuffed into the CM1x versions but once you have it you will have even more. The usual advice it to pick the theatre or time frame that interests you the most. If variety is what you crave then CMBN takes the cake with CMFI coming in second. However getting that variety will cost you a few $ since you would have to buy the upgrade @Bud Backer mentioned plus two modules and two packs to get all of CMBN and a new game and a module to get everything from CMFI. It is going to cost more than the CM1x days that is for sure.

A good suggestion. It as been discussed internally a few times so they are aware.

@Erwin don't let your self become confused. There has been no change to the game. Small arms below .50cal still does not cause friendly fire casualties - for the vast majority part. What @Bulletpoint discovered is that the no friendly fire casualties from small arms only holds true if the firing unit actually sees the friendly unit. He noticed some surprises in low visibility situations and investigated to make the discovery. Since there has been no code changes to the game, in this area, nothing has changed we just know more. The majority of the time when we play and have area fire close to our own troops everyone on your side can see each other. I think that will remain the majority of the time. We just now know that in those situations where visibility is poor friendly fire from small arms might rear its ugly head.

Yes, new features have been released to the older games as they are added. So getting the v3 upgrade for CMBN will give you the up to date engine with features such as hit decals (but lots more too). The one major exception is CMBN did not get tank riding added in that upgrade due to the amount of work it would take. Steve did not rule out adding it in the future but he also did not commit to doing it either. We'll just have to wait and see. The way they have been working is as new modules or games are released fixes made during the development of the new game or module get patched for free back into the other games. If a new game or module adds engine features the the older games get an upgrade that costs $ to add those engine features to that game. Right now all the newer games are at the same engine level (v3) but the latest patches from CMFB have not yet made their way into the others. Mind you I don't think there is anything earth shattering. The quality level is very high for all the games.

Ah OK got it. Reading it again I see. All the zeros are because infantry don't carry 20mm etc. Duh!

Given how much APS is available in this fictitious theatre I would rather it fire both at the same target. During testing the salvo fire at M1s managed to occasionally get the second one through cleanly and even when the APS caught the second missile it was usually very close to the tank and caused all kinds of damage to important systems. But you are anti APS guy so I guess in your games 2x targets would be better Good example of a damn frustrating event that does not mean the game is broken. I have the impression that ATGMs are streaky - meaning if the first couple of shots go wild it feels like that keeps happening. I have no real idea if that is real or my perception. I guess the other thing it could be is the lay of the land. By that I mean if the LOF is tight with trees and ground close to the flight path that will probably mean the next shot will likely be perilously close to the edge as well. Like others have said I have had some very good experiences with Khrizantema-S and some really bad ones too. In First clash there are some really good spots to set these guys up and they do a pretty good job. My QB experience with them says they are better when you can set the up at long range.

I think the impression you guys have is because the stock skins for buildings match fairly well to its toughness. Which give our brains the false sense that there is a causal link to how the buildings look and how strong they are (after all in RL that would be the case). The stock skins for the barns look like you could force your way through a wall with the butt of your rifle - and they are easily destroyed and offer little protection. While the stock skins for the larger buildings, including churches, look very robust and they are not easily destroyed and offer pretty good protection. Someone made skins for barns in CMBS that looked like concrete block. I declined to install them just so my poor brain would not get confused .

LOL no that would not have been me. I am a decidedly below average shot

Looking good - I like the Brits around the wrecked 88.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. I often give tanks cover armour arcs so they don't get distracted by infantry when I know there are tank threats around. This is a good reminder to keep all threats in mind.

You can find out the map used by displaying the briefing (Menu | Briefing) in the game (if you have a save). I had a quick look and have a question. I believe you said those numbers were ammo used numbers correct? Several units have ammo expendature but have a note "Did not engage". How is that possible?

I am sure Steve has commented on this before a few times but I could only find this: The bottom line is in the WW2 titles the sniper teams do not by default represent soldiers who have received extensive special training. So, if you want to represent that you need to use the appropriate soft factors.

And the advice tank crews of the day had to live by too.

That is a very kind way of looking at things. You are a good guy to have around. We'll see if he takes your assessment to heart. Everyone else can learn from your example.

Unbutton the stug. Your only hope to not fire on the Sherman is cover arcs. But as you saw your crews sometimes decide it is a threat. It was SOP to fire on enemy tanks when they were spotted and not obviously destroyed.

Wow. Awesome writing and great screen shots!

Do you mean the camera location when a player first enters the 3D world when playing your scenario? If so I believe the answer is you cannot. It might be tired in some way to the friendly map edge property but I am not even sure about that. During design entering the deployment mode seems to remember where you where last but I do not believe that gets used when the scenario is first started.

Yeah many people would like to be able to abandon and re crew AT guns etc. It would be a good feature. The basic problem is it is a can of worms programmatically which means the effort would take away from other things that are higher priority. From Steve: "The desired behavior would be to have your crews be able to take cover within a couple of Action Spots of a gun (be it a HMG or a Pak43), but no further away than that (good discussion here about why not). Unfortunately this runs into major technical obstacles which, for now, we do not feel worth spending the time overcoming." Full post here (warning this thread is really big and covered a bunch of topics around AT guns):

The Blitz is running two scenarios this month. Sign up for the July scenario of the Month has started over at the Blitz. This month the scenarios are: CMBN: CW Normons (requires the CommonWealth module to play) CMFB: Drive them out The form post on theBlitz for sign up.

The Blitz is running two scenarios this month. Sign up for the July scenario of the Month has started over at the Blitz. This month the scenarios are: CMBN: CW Normons (requires the CommonWealth module to play) CMFB: Drive them out The form post on theBlitz for sign up.

Oh man that is hilarious. Note to self: always ask my son where he is going when he borrows the car. On the other hand he is actually pretty good about filling up the tank himself.

LOL yeah the briefing pretty much spoils the whole thing. That was the TacAI just doing its thing.

Ah, not a pixel wide gap, very make-able shot and since it was a JzIV camera level one is pretty much gun height so I could see what the gunner saw. It was a great moment.

Interesting I was just wondering about that. I just had a case where the enemy placed his Sherman perfectly to fire through a human sized door in a high wall. It was firing the main gun through the door at my advancing infantry and firing the .50cal over the top of the wall. My Jadpanzer IV managed to spot the tank and its second shot went right through the door and holed the Sherman (first shot was high). The third shot hit the wall to the right and knocked it down and the fourth shot hit pretty much dead centre. That certainly could have been just luck but it sure felt like the gunner aimed through the doorway. Of course the next shot felt more like the dummy was just doing as you suggested so who knows. Sample size = 1 means nothing. It was pretty cool though.

So, does that mean that sometimes things are OK and other times not?