A Canadian Cat

Ah my guess because your first post was pretty over the top. The US tanks are able to manoeuver quite nicely. They pull back behind the edge of the ridge and move around and pop back up where ever they like, rinse and repeat. That was how I did hold of the Germans for quite some time actually.

it is the only way to be truly sure of the other guys identity - just ask any dog.

Yeah this and a discussion on theBlitz suddenly solidified it in my mind. I always got what was going on in CM but I finally realized why so many people have trouble with it - aside from people hate to get their asses handed to them - that we are so used to hex games where if your unit has LOS to the enemy your unit can see the enemy and can fire on the enemy. Thanks to @Panzer Lehr for putting up the graphic that made it all fall into place in my head and @weapon2010 for doing a better job than I did at expressing it (over at the blitz).

Yes absolutlely. I think @ChrisND has already said that kind of thing will happen with the Italians in CMFI.

Agreed. Yes, it can be challenging. But it is oh so satisfying when you catch the other guy under a barrage. Mind you with FOW you don't get to see all the mayhem. Yeah, compromises there. There is some effort in the code for soldiers to avoid each other and go around vehicles. For instance if a vehicle is stationary and infantry move past it most of the guys will go around it and you can see them taking detours. Same with vehicles passing other vehicles and same with soldiers passing soldiers. But BFC did not go whole hog and try to cover every case and every situation. I think I recall Steve saying that the effort involved would be quite large and they think they have struck the right balance. I would agree but it is what it is. Vehicles can sometimes look odd and appear to temporarily merge too but the key thing is there that a destroyed or immobilized vehicle can totally block a choke point so the appearance might not be perfect but the effect is correct.

Are you talking about spotting or LOS? I really really really do *not* want spotting to be dumbed down. Just because a unit has LOS to a location does *not* mean they should automatically spot something that happens to be there. That distinction is key to this game. We, as war gamers, are far to used to LOS = spotted = LOF. The fact that CM has broken the link and modelled the possibility of humans to not notice something is such a good thing in this game. I'll grant you that sometimes we hit some situations that are hard to square - especially at close ranges but I'll take those happening to me five times a day before I would want that feature dumbed down.

Sorry not buying it. My TC's get nailed from time to time but they duck down and button up more often then they get taken out. Half track gunners too - at least after the recent patch that set them to a lower stance. The key is the distance to the enemy. HTs especially should not be close in - if you stay more then 300m away with infantry a head of them you will loose much fewer HT gunners. Ditto with tank commanders. Now you can make the argument that some of the TC open stances are to exposed. We should probably go through the vehicles and report those that we think are too exposed. I just lost a PzIV TC this morning - hey it happens - but I was noticing that his stance was pretty good with not much of him exposed.

It is nothing like that

LOL yeah that could happen too.

I don't think he needs the demo - he has the main title. Not me - but I agree there is something difficult to pin down that feels very different. It think it is the accumulated difference in technology - the sum of the parts are greater than the whole. Right now I have as many CMBS games going as I do the released WWII titles. What I have noticed is my track record. My PBEM track record is quite a bit above 50% and my track record in CMBS is below 50%. So apparently I suck at handling the modern forces . Then again I have always managed to have fun when loosing.

or a black mark depending on who Lori is and if she finds out.

LOL, I played that secanario from both sides against humans both times. I found it loads of fun. Sorry you didn't enjoy it. Sometimes it is fun to put up a despareat fight against the odds. Spoiler alert I lost

Oh the conflict here. I love canister rounds and I love that little 20mm auto cannon too. I am so glad I get to watch both and not be on the receiving end of either.

Thank you for the double check.

Which picture are you thinking about? There does seem to be some odd interaction with the ground and the fog in places - which I believe is a known issue - or at least @c3k and or @Baneman can report.

Brilliant stuff. I am sitting here laughing at my monitor. Sucks that you have a vehicle immobilized already. Wait did any vehicles get immobilized in the battle between @Bil Hardenberger and @Baneman? What are the ground conditions?

Excellent you got a picture of a mortar firing from the HT. Oh now that sucks.

LOL, got it. Yeah people look at me funny when I do that too.

Correct - back then Open GL was not an also ran but looked at favourably (to simplify things). Yeah, Open GL has lost a ton of steam since then and many games are Direct X only - of course this varies a lot and I'm not a big gammer so just my impression. Steve has mentioned (not an announcement just mentioned) Unity before which is an engine that uses (currently) Direct X on Windows and Open GL on the Mac. The idea is they port the engine to whatever is best for the OS they support and you write your game to their API and you don't have to worry about handling the different low level graphics API and you can run on many different versions and OSes. That's how I think of it at least - no actual experience with Unity though. oh yeah for sure big.

Ah got it. Yeah there was hate for sure. Honestly I was not around by my impression it was the vocal minority + pain from so many bugs. It is hard to get into a new way of playing / new detail in the sim when bad stuff keeps happening. So, I think they have improved their execution over the years and the really bad and tons of bugs part is not likely to happen again. I hope

Thank you I get it now. While it would be nice I think Steve has rejected it before - too much information / too gamey / computationally a concern if I recall correctly.

Headed in the right direction? I'm not sure what are you getting at those are the ? icon category as determined by the game. As those are using my icon mod the contact icons are just the game's contact icons dressed up differently I did not change them. As for the spotted ones those are a version of the German tactical symbols (some I had to dream up and technically the Germans did not use these icons for individual vehicles or units below the size of a Platoon). Or are you suggesting that I make a single small vehicle icon and use if for trucks, armoured cars, half tracks and light tanks? Right now trucks and armoured cars get one ? icon and half tracks and light tanks get another. I think that breaks down along wheels vs track lines already.

I thought they did already? Or am I just thinking about the effect as seen on armour slope.

OK I took a stab at categorizing them (specific comments [inline]). There are a few need more info and or clarification but the good news is only one bug and it is on the radar internally - I think - I'll double check that. Enhancement requests Working as intended / that is just the way it is / been asked for and rejected already Need more info / not so sure Yeah sounds like a bug While I certainly do not represent BFC I have been around these forums for a long time and I feel pretty confident that is how those ideas would break down. Any one feel free to point out the error of my ways.

You worry to much man CM1x was great and CM2x is better why wouldn't CM3x be even better? I know there are no guarantees but these guys are doing a damn find job making better and better games IMHO. Mind you I agree they can keep going with CM2x engine for the foreseeable future as far as I am concerned.