LemuelG

Out of curiosity I was having a read through my great-uncle's (Sherman commander, NZ 19th armoured reg) memoirs to see if he ever wrote of firing while moving, which he didn't (not counting the once point-blank at a screck-holding German), but I did see this passage: "We had not been left to our own devices. German mortar-men, with uncanny accuracy, had seen to that and the frequent bursts of machine gun fire ensured we kept our heads down. A burst rustled through the cypress tree under which we had parked, then followed a more accurate and prolonged hail. I dropped through the turret hatchway onto the shoulders of my gunner in a shower of chopped-off foliage..." For what it's worth

It seems obvious, until you realize OP's 'problem' is that he just wishes it were more like CMx1. Suppose BFC did change 'hunt' back, what then? It would be a load of threads complaining: "my hunting tank engaged a zook team, who cowered and vanished, the tank moved on, but the zook rallied and shot my tank in the rear"; "my hunting tank engaged an enemy ATG and wounded some of the crew, the contact vanished in the shrouding smoke and the tank moved on, but some of the crew survived, rallied and shot my tank through the smoke, fix it now!". I doubt BFC made this design change without reason, I think it is appropriate. Why not work harder to find targets and firing positions before you move, is that not wise? You can even dismount crews to scout for themselves when there is no friendly infantry around, hardly an unrealistic tactic. As it stands 'hunt' has good value as move-to-contact, and 'slow' works great as an old-style 'hunt' for infantry. Infantry must halt to fire, and when tanks are 'fixed' to do the same, 'slow' should work for them too.

Well it's hardly like jumping a motorbike across a canyon. OP asked me a question which I thought was innocent (not actually a troll to set up a "oh no, how it was in CMx1 was better" thread) and I gave my opinion, which I blatantly stated as assumption. Carry on.. bring back the real 'hunt' etc.

At the risk of feeding you bad info (I haven't operated any SPGs yet) I would say yes, at least I would be confident it would. Try it out.

'Slow' move is what you want, any contacts and the unit will halt and engage, if the contact vanishes it'll move on.

It's become a theme in my campaign for the last surviving German to be their company commander... resolutely holed-up alone in his original position, blazing away with his MP40 at any passing Doggies. I picture him a bit like some kind of Commando Comic villain, his contorted face lit by muzzle-flash as he cackles maniacally with one jackboot perched atop a pile of bodies; grrr, I'll get him yet.

The bocage will soak most of the bullets you fire at them, while the bullets they fire at you will be unimpeded. The best way to play is to constantly scheme on shooting your enemies in the butt; it sounds flip, but this is the true path to success.

I think you are in error; I'm all for blowing your heavy stuff at the start of a battle, but (almost) never the platoon's 60mm mortar sections; if you aren't 100% certain you'll be dropping them right on someone's head they are utterly wasted. I'd also add that careful timing is key for pre-planned barrages, maximum value is achieved when your troops arrive at the position right on the heels of the barrage to take full advantage of the suppression effect on the enemy. A fool-proof method is to set it at 'maximum' length, and cancel it when you are ready (i.e. when your vanguard is in grave danger of eating shell-splinters). Artillery is not a substitute for boots on the ground, and close-range bullets in the enemy's black hearts - but if the player doesn't learn to leverage it properly they'll get whipped, particularly against a human (the AI is incapable of responding on-the-fly to player tactics; will not reinforce, reposition, withdraw or counter, and in my experience quite inept at using it's own artillery assets). Light mortars are one (to avoid unnecessary argument ) of the most influential infantry weapons on the field, and people new to tactical gaming should think about that, and examine their play-style with it in mind. Being hassled by an ATG? Light mortars. Pesky HMG holding up the advance? Light mortars. Targets in the open? Light mortars. Tanks to fight and no AT assets? Light mortars, why not? Might disable or damage it somehow. A few well-aimed mortar rounds can turn the tide of battle, and their use should be one of the player's primary concerns.

Indeed. If a crew had to bolt they'd dismantle the firing mechanism and take off, if they came back they'd re-install the mechanism and are good to go. (57mm gun at La Fiere bridge being a relevant example) Not something that has come up in regular play for me, but if it did I'd rage a little.

Seems appropriate, buildings should if anything amplify the effects of HE by providing a large amount of extra shrapnel. I would also like to echo DieselTaylor's concern - tanks (with maybe the exception of M4s) simply should not be firing on the move, let alone hitting anything when they do. A definate case to be answered there... I do not expect a fast-moving StuG to be able to one-shot a moving Honey. Not something I'll ragequit over, but not even the other player was proud of that moment. Of course, in SF that would not raise an eyebrow. Not anymore, I think this area needs looking at ASAP.

Rushing your car >100m away from the support of his closest friends (straight up to a house which turned out to contain enemies) he got engaged by the better part of an armoured infantry company and suffered righteous consequence. The only surprise to me when I watched that replay was the amount of rounds the car's hull actually managed to turn. Patches to the game will not fix your errors in judgement.

The 234/1 missed (edit: failed to spot) a half dozen vehicles zooming over the field to his right, one sprayed him with .50 to good effect; then the 234 spots the HT going past him at a more convenient angle and fires a full magazine of 20mm, but didn't really get a decent lead on him and every round missed the 'fast'-moving vehicle, the other US HTs are still going to town with their MGs. The 234 crew never seems to reload the 20mm, they tracked the other vehicles and fired the co-axial MG, got another 4-5 kills and then received an almighty dose of .50 which polished them off killing two of them and disabling the car. About 30 seconds elapsed between main gun firing and vehicle death with no sign of a reload. Keep in mind the car was parked about 30m away from an enemy occupied building at the time and taking heavy fire to it's side. Overall an excellent lesson in how Not to use mech inf. and recon vehicles from both sides.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say no - your field is larger, and looking downhill, the war-time field is looking uphill. But yeah, a field's a field, as they say somewhere. Maybe.

Mine arrived Auckland NZ today, the 7th - mildly broken, but just the cheapo plastic catches which keep it shut.

My great-uncle (NZ 19th armoured reg., Italy 44-45) wrote glowingly of the 'Arks' (bridge-laying Churchill) and Crocodiles - in his memoirs there are neat photos of Arks being placed one on top of another to enable crossing of deeper channels, and of one placed by a river, with a camouflaged Sherman driven on top of it in order to fire over the stop bank. They were highly useful. Maybe one day we can have these interesting things in the game too (Fire! Bridging, meh ).

I'm not privy to the actual mechanics at play, but surely a hull-down tank is much harder to spot due to a far smaller profile. I'll take the first two shots over any other factor. As a general rule, I try to avoid taking any fire at all - hits invite damage, once your hull-down spot is identified, reverse out and move to another - if your gonna sit around exposed then the best you can hope for in this game (against a human at least) is a few pin-point light mortar rounds coming your way, you certainly want to avoid a scenario in which you can be sniped with AP rounds. Even in a Panther.

My guys gunned down a handful of prisoners - some flanked Germans who found themselves in enfilade surrendered, but there were still hostile teams directly behind them and they got gunned-down in the crossfire. And yeah, the icon should change, or even disappear, or something... this has confused me more than once.

I like the way you can park a jeep next to your mortars and send them missions through it's radio.

I play on warrior difficulty, and it usually holds a team up for at least a couple of turns. I'll also do things like split squads and leave a team behind to clean up while others keep moving. When you start playing for your men as much as (or more than) your objectives, the game takes on a totally different dimension. I'll admit that my play so far amounts to the campaigns Task Force Raff and roughly half of the Road to Montbourg (? Suddenly dyslexic), and the carry-over of forces between battles gives plenty of motivation.

Do it just like that and you will never fail, after the blast order you can move them anywhere, even double/triple blast the same spot. There I am doubling-up just to make sure the hole is large enough for my tank to get through when he charges across the road. Just move to a point one square away from the desired blast-point and plot a blast move into the hedge square directly adjacent; a couple of guys will poke their heads up and have a look through the hole, but they never go through, and quickly carry out whatever order is next in line. I am never disappointed with this technique.

WeGo primarily, I can go RT - but not having replays for the big battles pains me.

Buddy aid is a part of my rules, efforts are even made to get to guys stuck out in the open in sight of the enemy (usually a major team effort). It's just the right thing to do. It really feels great to be able to do something for my wounded; it's probably one of the biggest game-changers for me personally, a huge shift in my virtual-tactics has been made and I love it.

Every battle in which significant off-map support is called I spend some time on the 'review map' screen adding together all my individual teams' kills, then subtracting the total from the total enemy casualties, what is left is a satisfactorily approximated number for off-map weapon kills. Of course, there should be some sort of algorithm for this chore, and it doesn't take into account friendly-fire or mines. But if your reasons for wanting to know this figure extend beyond whimsy, it is well worth doing.

Sounds like objects are getting in the way, try disappearing the trees and changing your viewing angles.

Me too. Nothing yet, I expect it to eventually arrive after an indeterminate amount of time being used as a seat-cushion in the van of a 100kg Courier Post driver.