Rokko

That and I remember having read in Kurt Meyer's "Grenadiere" that both Waffen-SS and Fallschirmjägers were quite likely to be shot when they tried to surrender (that was in Normandy!). Now I'm aware that "Grenadiere" was written with a certain intention and that Meyer is definately the most reliable source, but since I've had seen other accounts as well I considered it credible.

Btw, what did the allies have against German paratroopers? Whenever you read orders or accounts about killing German POWs it's directed against Waffen-SS and paratroopers. I haven't ever read about war crimes committed by them, though?

Where would that have been? Soldiers beeing executed weeks after they'd been captured? Also for all I care it doesn't matter a lot if you murder someone how's just trying to surrender or wait until you've captured a bunch of soldiers and kill them then. Besides, I have read accounts for both also for the allied side. I for example remember having read about the remnants of a SS-Batallion (about 200 men) beeing murdered after they were captured by American soldiers in 1945, or think of the Dachau massacre, although that's a different situation. When judging the SS imho you have to understand that it makes not much sense to talk about "them", simply because there were so many reasons to end up in the Waffen-SS for people of about a dozen of nationalities (I believe all in all only 40% of the men were Germans). Look at the command level: You have some die hard nazis, fanatical and merciless. Think of Theodor Eicke, CO of 3rd SS "Totenkopf", the guy who had founded Dachau concentration camp. Or Sepp Dietrich (1st SS), who had been a party member since almost the beginning. There is a documentation on YouTube (sadly only in German) about Walter Krüger, who was the CO of an SS reconaissance batallion and pretty much qualifies for beeing called a "fool" and nazi fanatic. But then you also have some who didn't give much about the specific SS ideals and not even about nazi politics like Paul Hausser and Felix Steiner and even the highest Waffen-SS commanders would defy direct orders from Hitler if they were stupid and suicidal like the order hold Kharkov in early 1943. And look at the lower ranks: There were those who joined the Waffen-SS before the war, for whatever reasons (believing in the nazi cause, wanting to belong to the "elite", wanting to wear a fancy uniform, etc). Then, from 1941 onwards, many ethnic Germans from Hungary, Romania, etc. who could not be drafted by the Wehrmacht (besides, the Waffen-SS did not really have better access to replacements, it was actually an ever increasing struggle to get more reserves from anywhere possible). And from 1943 onward, when volunteers didn't suffice anymore to fill the ranks, many were also drafted into the SS. I don't really believe that someone drafted would be more fanatical than anyone drafted into the Wehrmacht? And then there were of course the many foreign volunteers, who, again joined the SS for many different reasons. Some probably wanted to search for adventures, Balts had pretty good reasons to fight the Soviets, although the Germans probably wouldn't have granted them independence either, although I know many recruitment officers promised just that. Maybe they believed in the "European idea" Hitler proclaimed, although he didn't really think about sticking to it. But I admit, with all the propaganda (both in favour and against the Waffen-SS), myths, gloryfication, and so on it's really hard to see the real picture and I don't claim to fully do. As for war-crimes, which is something the Waffen-SS is especially infamous for, I believe this is an issue which can be mostly tracked down to the "real" die-hard nazis at command level. Also one mustn't forget the Wehrmacht doesn't have a white west at all and neither do the Allies do, although the (Western) Allies admittedly did never conduct any massacres against civillians, at least none I have heard of. For the French campaign I do only know of 3 massacres, and all were committed by the Waffen-SS, to of them by the Totenkopf division, which had a really bad reputation until about 1942. Then there are of course the very well known Waffen-SS crimes like Oradour or Malmedy, but one should also remember Wehrmacht crimes in Italy, on Kelafonia (1st Gebirgs Division killed some 4000 Italian prisoners), in the Soviet Union of course. One last thing I wanted to mention: The fact Waffen-SS divisions were stronger in their TOE is mainly due to the fact, that they didn't have anything at corps level until 1943, so the single units had those support units directly, while in Wehrmacht they would be at corps level. Also the fact, that the first 3 SS-Panzergrenadier-Divisions had two armored batallions instead of only one was simply a naming issue and they were actually renamed little later, other PzGren divisions like the 17th did only have one I believe.

But there was the designation MP43/MP44 for the StG44 to decieve Hitler. At least that's what I remember, cause Hitler didn't like the idea of a assault rifle, while troops on the frontline liked them alot.

Hm ok, when you said "AT rifle" I thought you meant, ... well AT rifle and not AT Grenade.

No. They aren't in CMBN anyways, are they? What about the argument, that the AI probably won't handle this restriction well? Or does it? I can't know, but I imagine the AI works pretty much the same way as in CMSF, and the image of a German squad packed with 4 Fausts placed in a building by the scenario designer watching helplessly as a Sherman advances closer and closer comes up in my mind.

I believe they were made of wood and placed on trucks then or were pulled around by wires. The makers didn't have access to actual American tanks back then. I actually thought they looked somewhat like oversized Stuarts, but I am in no way an expert on American armor.

Interesting question, I'd like to know, too. I also never understood why the Tiger was designated Ausf. E, then H and then nothing I believe...

You may also want to watch this at 8:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSiV4JEeLug&feature=related (I know its just a movie) But I think it should be allowed to fire AT assets from inside buildings, since I assume the TacAI is just not capable of handling it well. It would be ok if the AI would automatically send one guy with a PF to the house's door and fire it if possible. The way its now I suppose you'd have to split your squad in the building, send the element with the AT weapon to the tile in front of the building, wait till they finish setting up in that tile (like in CMSF), let the aim at the tank (which is probably not more than 30m away!) and then send them back into the building (imagine doing all this in WeGO). Somehow I think they would get shoot up in the first seconds...

I don't know much about programming nor the Combat Mission engine, but wouldn't it have been possible to make changes in the terrain mesh after the battle starts also FOW-relevant? That way either shell holes and fox holes would only appear to player when a unit sees them. Anyway, its obviously too late now, but it would have been an option I guess.

When you look at the tanks in the Quick battle AAR you'll notice, that they do not have identical camo schemes. Is that because they are different types (early and late Panzer IV H) or does the game feature different schemes for each vehicle? I think this would be really cool, especially if modders could add more schemes and the game would select them radomly (quite like in the ragtag mod for CMSF I guess).

So there's a Barkmann's Corner scenario although there's no Waffen-SS in the base game?

Thats what I said, but why not make them for all icons in the user interface, can't be that much effort behind, and it increases user-friendlyness, especially to those new to the game who want to find stuff out by themselves instead of looking into the manual. And, I already mentioned it, tooltips for rank icons I would personally consider usefull, since right now, they don't mean anything to me, since I do not know each and every rank in the US or Syrian army plus the module armys. And in CMBN there will be Wehrmacht, US army, then Waffen-SS (if they use collar tabs for rank icons), Luftwaffe (same here), Commonwealth army, etc. Not something of real importance for the game, but actually knowing what ranks your units have helps with immersion I guess.

Something that when I first played CMSF confused me alot of time was the widespread lack of tooltips throughout the UI. There are a lot of graphical symbols, which are indeed explained in the manual, but why not implement those right into the game? I mean when you put the cursor over the squad's weapons, it shows the name. But many other symbols like the ranks, the different means of communication, etc. are not given tooltips in CMSF. Ok, when you're a little into the game you know most of the icons, but for newer players I reckon it can be very confusing. Is this different in CMBN? I would especially like tooltips for rank symbols, since I'm not eager to learn all those different symbols for each army by heart.

oops, yeah I confused MRTVs for MRAPs, with which I meant those Nyalas. edit: and I guess I didn't mean MRTVs either, but MTVRs, well that happens when you try to sound like a military buff...

No not really, I installed my Paradox retail version, applied the all-in-one module file, installed 1.31 from the Battlefront homepage. I changed from German to English language and shifted some files from the German language folder I think, because not every scenario and campaign showed up. edit: I have now reinstalled the game, but the CTD still occours in every newly started game (in that specific scenario). As soon as I expose one my platoons in their MRTVs to pretty much LOS from every possible enemy position something goes wrong and the game crashes. Could it be that there is "too much going on" for my PC to handle or something like that? But it's not like I have a super outdated machine at all. I've set everything to either Balanced or Improved.

Very interesting thing, I just tried it out. I started a suicidal attack on the town over the bridge right after my reinforcements arrived (which I was hestitant to do earlier for obvious reasons) and guess what: Within less than 3 minutes after their arrival the game crashed. The platoon arrived at about 55:00 and the game crashed at 52:03. The same platoon I would normally dismount at have advance on foot without anything happening. And again, normally I would not move my mobile element before 30:00 and the game never crashed before I did that step. The training campaign went on like a charme right to the end. Can anyone who has played that battle confirm this to me? I will try reinstalling the game and the modules, I remember I strangely had to do some file shifting before some campaigns at the NATO scenarios showed up in my game. I'll also try updating my driver to 11.1

Hi everyone, I'm new to this forum. Yesterday I've bought this game (all modules) and installed them over the Paradox retail edition. After playing the training campaign and some quick battles I randomly chose NATO Ambush at Dashkur as my first real battle. I was then mighty pissed when after a few 2 or 3 tries in that mission I made it 30 minutes into the game and it suddenly froze... I tried everything, reloading, creating a new save file, saving again. At one point I couldn't get the save game much farther as the game froze after about 5 seconds without any error message. Well so I started all over again, but after 30 minutes the EXACT same thing happened. There is no exact point when the game freezes, but I noticed that it only happens after I move some of my MRTVs out of cover to provide support. Since it happened twice I assume theres a problem with the scenario and not a random bug? I have Vista 32 bit, ATI 3800 series with Catalyst 10.7 I play in real-time

Can Vehicles with armor skirts like Panzer IVs in the screens loose individual skirts due to enemy fire or driving throug bumpy terrain and actually reduce the armor protection? It definately looks like it in the pics.