A Canadian Cat

Note to self: Never phrase a yes / no question with double barreled phrasing if Moon might answer it.

But you could do that with the current victory point system too. There is only one occupy objective - just the church. Nothing else. Now whom ever occupies the church wins. No wordy land marks no nothing.

Yep, when that kind of leadership is working there are often more volunteers than needed.

Good to know. My friend and I are starting with "The Main Event" we figured it was a good idea to take the town before fighting off the counter attack:) I quite like the idea of a little series of related scenarios. We only just started so the only comment I have right now is - holy cow those fields are wide open. Closing to contact is going to be fun (not). He says as he calls in the smoke...

That made me LOL - which is bad because I am at work:)

Yes. Select the unit and press the deploy button or its short cut key. If you do both the first one will deploy it and the second one will un-deploy it (if you will allow me to invent a word to emphasize the symmetry). When it is lit up the unit has been asked to deploy its weapon. What I do is select the last movement way point and set the facing I want and the press the deploy button. I am quite certain that the target LOS *is* being calculated from the selected way point. However that can still be confusing because the dark blue / red indicator of LOS blockage is pretty hard to interpret since it does not follow the LOS from the way point. Also I think you are seeing one of the problems of the target LOS tool. It is basing its calculation on an assumed height of the observer which may or may not match the height of the guys once they get there (standing, kneeling, prone, riding a vehicle, looking though a gun sight, standing and looking out the top hatch etc. are all different heights). Plus, to have visibility (from the tools point of view) requires that you can see the center of the target action square. These combine to lead to all kinds of "hard to guess what will happen issues". When you guys get their and lie down they cannot see anything at all. Or when you get there they cannot see the ground at the action square but they can see the tank sitting in the square. The target LOS tool is really only a guide.

Wait a second! Can't we get this feel just by setting the scenario duration? The defenders need to delay the enemy for 30min. Create occupy or touch objectives towards the "back" of the map and set the scenario duration to 30 min. If the attackers get there before the scenario runs out the attackers win. If the defenders can prevent them from getting the objectives before the scenario time runs out the defenders win. I think we can already do "defenders need to delay the attack for 30 min" type of scenarios.

Thanks for the clarification - I thought I was missing cool combination of victory conditions. Actually that might be kind of cool - touch objectives that are only available for a certain amount of time. After 30 min they disappear so if you cannot get there in time you cannot get those points. That might work.

I cannot speak for throwing grenades from buildings but I have seen it happen twice now with infantry outside. Both times I lost the tank to multiple grenade hits - on the engine deck sides and underneath.

Good call and thanks for the update. Also, that reminded me, I read that the Lynx is not selectable in Quick Battles. If that is true is that fixable in a patch as well?

Ah the classic programming problem. Show me a design that is idiot proof and I'll find you a better idiot. Of course I usually don't phrase it that way when customers are around:)

The look does not really bother me either - until... The other day I had a tank supporting infantry as they assaulted across a field. The tank came through an opening in the bocage and stopped just inside the field. I ordered them to fire and move at several points along the bocage. The first fire order came at the end of a quick movement and the gunner was all ready to go when the tank go there. He fired just as the rocking tank nosed down a bit. The result was instead of hitting the bocage where the enemy was the shell landed about half way between the tank and the opposite bocage - right into the middle of one squad's advance. Four blue on blue casualties later... Firing on the move - my fault. I am now very careful with how I get my tanks to support my infantry and try to make sure there is a segment of slow before giving the target order. So far so good...

+1 to that - it is in my top 20 too (at number 3 in fact) Excellent - while I have not personally seen some of the problems others have reported I am super careful about placing way points on each end of the bridge and avoiding any bunching up because of those reports. It is in the list of fixes - not sure if anyone has re-run any tests. I have to get to that... Frankly I would not give it another thought and play like it is fixed. Eh? The CW module applies the patch as well as the CW content when it is installed. The free patch only install has not been released yet but it is due soon.

Can you elaborate please? If the defender has exit zones then they can win by just rushing off the battlefield couldn't they? How do you reward him with points for holding on for x minutes?

How did you do? I have been cheering you on - quietly:)

Quick or Fast. Eliminate Hunt because your guys will stop and forget the rest of their orders when they make contact with the enemy. Which means if your assault team is approaching the door and the see the target enemy in the building they will stop outside and engage them. Or worse if some stray bullet comes from another building they could stop and engage that previously unseen enemy. Eliminate Assault because in this context you have already suppressed the building's occupants with other fire teams. All Assault will do is split up your squad and leave teams behind to provide covering fire for your entry team. But if you already have assets providing covering fire you don't need the squad doing the entry to provide its own covering fire. I think in most cases I would go with Quick. Men moving fast get tired faster and the see less as they run hell bent. Quick covesr the ground pretty well and allows your men some ability to be observant.

No, there is no special order for using hand grenades. Troops will use them automaticly. They have to be pretty close though. I see them using them a lot in the woods and buildings, or when assaulting a bocage line. Rifle grenades on the other hand will get used if you use the Target command but not if you use the target light command.

Me to. +1 to that

Not sure what happened there... http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=314&func=fileinfo&id=1121

If you want your hole platoon to move together then start them off in the formation you want and then use the same movement command Fast, Quick, Move or Slow and the will all stay together. As you have seen Assault does not keep the formation and Hunt will not either. With Hunt when a squad encounters an enemy unit the will stop but other squads in the platoon will keep going. However Hunt might be what you want in this case. The big problem for the attacker in the woods is creating the superior fire power you need when you cannot see very far. What often happens is on squad meets the enemy and get pounded. What you want is to have multiple squads meet the enemy. With Hunt your lead squad will stop and get pounded and the other squads will keep moving until they make contact to. I have not tried it that way. I usually do the scouting ahead technique and then decide how to hit the encountered enemy after they are found.

They probably should not have upgraded without consulting you. And given that it is easy to have both an un-patched and a fully patched game installed along side each other there really is no need for them to go all in like that. I suggest respectfully suggesting that they replay their last turn back in the old game. I have one opponent who has declined upgrading our current PBEM and I am fine with that - I have both games installed and my file management program is happy to manage files for both games. So right now I have three games going using the 1.01 game and two with the 1.10 game.

Tanks shells and small arms can "go though" trees but they also get stopped by trees too. Direct hits on tree trunks stop rounds. Gunners will adjust aim when they see that happen and multiple hits on the same tree will destroy the tree - next shell will hurt. Your tree display settings have no bearing on this at all. Those are just to help you view the battle field they do not change what happens to rounds. So for some examples. Tanks: Parking tanks behind trees can be an effective way to block shots - for a while. I have had several times when a tree stopped the first shot and allowed my guys to return fire when otherwise the would not have had the chance. I have also watched my gunners see their shots get blocked by a tree and tweak their aim and then put their next round on target. Infantry: If you have guys in the cover of woods you can often see rounds striking tress and bushes in front of your guys. The volume of rounds that make it through the cover is lower that what came in. Also when your guys fire out sometimes rounds don't make it out. You can see little explosions where the rounds strike obstacles.

Well I have to say that I just do not see any irony here at all;) But as you know, being Canadian, I could not tell anyway.

I don't split by default instead I split when I need to. For example - to create scouts, to get a small AT team and most commonly to put a squad in a building (each team on its own floor). Most of the time my squads are unified.

Well the third picture in this post looks kind of like a Dalek http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1346622&postcount=214