Georgie

Good idea. Here is the link. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1301021#post1301021

Take a read in the Tech Support Forum concerning the OOM problem. It looks like it is a serious problem and will take some commitment and time for BF to solve it. So those of us that like very large scenarios need to voice our concern as it may affect the amount of resources and time that BF uses to find and correct this problem. Yes the cup is still three quarters full but we like it running over.

Hello Holien, I have done a lot of testing of independent building strength against small arms fire and have found out that the strength of the buildings vary from a minus protection to a fairly good plus protection. The problem is how do you tell the difference before you put it on your map and when playing the scenario how do you tell unless you commit troops to either attack it or occupy it. Maybe it would be gamey to be able to tell before hand but it sure would be a lot more fun. Maybe if BF hears enough requests from us they will implement some sort of method to supply this information on screen when playing the scenario and in the editor when building the scenario or map.

I hope you are correct but no mention of it in the patch. Could it be an Easter egg for us?

Was this also the case before the patch or has something changed with the patch?

What about scenarios that were made before the patch will the AI be affected in those scenarios if you have the patch installed when you play them? Do all of those scenarios have to be retested?

Hello everybody, I've been following this thread with interest and here is my slant on the accuracy of "snipers". I think that the shooting accuracy of the man using a sniper rifle should be much better at long range than if that man was using a non scoped rifle. It should be better enough that it would be "fun" to utilize him in your game play. This is a game and I think that there are a lot of things that go on in this game that weren't that way IRL. BF maintains a good balance between "IRL" and "fun" and I don't think that an effective regular grade "sniper" will upset the balance of the game. It would just be more fun.

Hmm, no response yet. Lets sweeten the pot. The prospective modder could leave his trade mark on the heavy buildings much like an artist sometimes leaves his sig entwined in the portraits or scenes he draws. It would be much like a surety stamp of a quality product. Or lets do this - beg beg.

I've learned something about HEAT rounds and am busy eating crow because I didn't myself observe the firing on buttoned tanks. I'll be in touch if I do though.

Ok the AT rocket was used against soft targets, with how much effect I don't know. Remember it wasn't an explosive projectile it was a HEAT projectile so if it didn't have some thing to hit like a bunker or a tank then most likely it would expend most of its energy into the ground in front of the enemy position or behind it ,so didn't the AT rocket teams know this? It seems that the tube guy would have been of more use if he had picked up his Garand or carbine and used that. AT Grogs or their acquaintances welcome to reply. Secondly: If a trooper did pop up out of concealment and start pinging away at a buttoned up tank 200m away with his Garand then he would have most likely been quickly subdued by his squad mates if they could have gotten to him. This firing at buttoned up tanks with small arms may have been Russian doctrine and maybe even Russian practice but I doubt that it happened often enough on the Western front to be even considered anything other than as a rare occurrence performed by a shell shocked trooper or an idiot. AT Grogs or their acquaintances welcome to reply.

From the screenshot that you posted we, the observers, are looking through the canopy of the trees whereas the tank commander is looking through the trunks of the trees and there appears to be no undergrowth. Take a look at the loading page in the game that pictures an Elephant parked in what looks like a managed pine forest and you can see that there is quite good visibility for several hundred meters.

CMBN does not indicate in any way that I can determine whether or not a building is "heavy" or "light". Would it be possible for a mod to be created that would some how mark the building type on the building? Maybe a little more subtle than a big "H" or "L" on the roof but non the less a mark of some sort. In a primarily rural battle it isn't too important to know the difference but for a large village or town or city battle it will be very important to know the difference in order to set up an effective defense or attack. I haven't even been able to tell the difference in the editor unless I run a test. Am I missing something?

May be BF will incorporate building data in CMBN the same way that they did in CMX1. The structure type "heavy" or "light" was noted at the terminus of the LOS or LOF line so there was no clutter as it was only displayed for one structure and then only when that structure was at the terminus of the LOF or LOS line. Sure would be good info to have.

I think that CMBN is a great game, hard to learn and play but worth the effort. There are a few bugs and some things that don't seem right like infantry firing on buttoned up tanks for instance but those things will probably get worked out in the coming months. Meanwhile I'm playing with the editor and trying to get some action on some of the things that I feel is wrong in the game. I've held off on installing the patch until the next one comes out because of its teething problems. I'm in no hurry, already waited four years or so.

I have completed testing of all of the individual houses and have found that some of them do indeed offer good protection from small arms fire and I suppose that the rest of the structures are also a mix of light and heavy construction. But the question for me is which ones? This info, as someone has already pointed out, needs to be made available some where on the game screen. This info is needed in order to plan an attack or plan a defense. You need to know which structure you need to assault , which structure you just need to machine gun and which structure to occupy for defense. Maybe all this info wasn't available IRL in real time but if you see that the enemy has occupied a stone house you know that its gonna have to bypass it or bring up a tank to get them out of there and you would also know that that same stone house would be good for defense. One question that I still have is why some of the brick houses in the game offer less protection than fighting in the open on a grass field? I could maybe understand this if the house was a modern day wood or stucco wall and the occupants were standing upright. I think that an adjustment needs to be made in order for the game to be more realistic. All of the CMX1 games had this info and they were the hallmark of war games so why not have that info in CMBN. We really need some "Building Grogs" to chime in.

Hello Childress, that sounds like there is still hope for urban battles. Try it with allies and axis forces the same experience level. I ran mine with both "regular" because I noticed a difference in the outcome when I ran tests with both sides outside and prone. May be the "vets" can shoot straighter. Also you might try a test with no buildings but the same forces facing each other. The 9 man Grenadier squad fire power at about 100 to 150m I found to be about equal to the 12 man US squad.

I ran a series of simple tests comparing the protection buildings offer compared to being in the open and prone. I used a US 12 man squad and a German 9 man Grenadier squad for comparison. With both squads in the open,prone and 150m from each other.The results were consistent with the out come a draw with very few casualties on either side and neither side panicked or suppressed. I ran each test for 3 min. Next I set up two 2 story houses, the 3rd one in the list in the editor. I split the US squad and put them in the houses on the bottom floor and 150m between the US and German squads. The US squad started suffering casualties in the first or second min and vacated the premises out the back door about the 3rd min each time the test was run. I repeated the tests by splitting the German squads and putting them in the same model house on the 1st floor. The results were the Germans started taking casualties in the first or second min and vacated the premises out the back door about the fourth min or so each time I ran the test. It looks like its better to stay out of this type building even if no other cover is available. Also it looks like we won't need tanks to clear out houses, just a few machine guns and a squad or two. What a disappointment, I wanted to work my tanks forward and do some shelling to drive out the stubborn defenders. When I get some time I will do some testing on the modular buildings and the barns.

I agree, a modified version of CMSF was probably imported but it wasn't modified enough to match the 40s era Normandy buildings. A little more modification needs to be done. I was under the impression that BF was going to address this and other building issues in the first patch. In my opinion it would have gone a long way towards making CMBN a better game and more fun to play.

Is the impact angle of small arms bullets impacting the side of a building calculated? If it isn't then that could be one reason that we see buildings being made into Swiss Cheese by small arms. I doubt that buildings IRL were assaulted at a 90 degree angle if there was a way to get at it from a better angle. If the angle of impact to a building isn't calculated now, I am guessing, it would be a major code update to calculate the effect of bullets striking at different angles. So maybe a simulated result could take that into consideration. To me the protection of troops in buildings is the only remaining problem that affects game play in a significant manner. The way CMBN portrays fighting from a building now makes urban fighting unrealistic to me. CMX1 portrayed it very well in my opinion and made for some very entertaining, absorbing and tense battles. I'm sure some of you remember having to bring a tank up to shell a building or to wheel an antitank gun into position, much to its peril, to shell the building.

Hello womble, My experience in the game has been the opposite of yours. My troops have died like flies in buildings, even through the side with no windows and I was able to do likewise through the same wall to enemy troops. How they could see each other, much less shot each other, I don't know. Do you know how you can tell in the editor which buildings offer the cover that you have described? I want to make sure I include a great proportion of those in the scenario I'm making. I thought that their exposure in buildings was simulated.:confused:

I didn't see anything in the patch that addressed the lack of protection in buildings. As it is now there is no reason to assault a building, just machine gun it and you will kill or wound most of the occupants. There is also no reason to occupy a building either except maybe the upper floors for spotting. The buildings of Normandy were, to my knowledge, very substantial. Maybe a trooper is going to get hit pretty easily if he is standing at a window shooting out but even then he should have the same or close to the same protection as in a foxhole. If the trooper is cowering in a building then he should have very good protection against small arms fire. Hopefully this is still being worked on for the next patch.

What I have noticed is that it takes a lot of hits from small arms,even machine guns, to get the TC to button up. Only after a "penetrating" hit have I observed the TC to button up. The "penetrating" hit I would imagine is a hit on the rim of the hatch which ricochets into the open hatch. It seems to me that a TC would button up as soon as the first volley hit his tank.

Thanks RockinHarry for the reply. I use the highway tile because its the best thing that I could find in lieu of a dedicated sidewalk/curb tile. Seems like an oversight that a sidewalk/curb tile was not included in the editor. We have some big buildings to use in city maps but no sidewalks?:confused:

Thanks RockinHarry, I tried using highway tiles and it produces a side walk of sorts on one side at a time but still no curb. I'll just have to stick with villages for now. Strange we get a 7 story building to work with but no sidewalks or curbs. Oversight ?:confused:

I'm trying my hand at making a map. So far so good except I can't find a way to make sidewalks and curbs. Anybody know a way to do this?:confused: