Glubokii Boy

Apart from the eastern front i'm actually longing back to Normadie...
Hopefully we will see some new scenarios and campaigns depicting the Normandy fighting that take advantage of all the modules and the vehichlepack...as well as all the improvements that has been made to the editor and gameplay...
It is currently quite a different game compared to when the original Normandy stuff was made...
Could be intresting 😁

Apart from the eastern front i'm actually longing back to Normadie...
Hopefully we will see some new scenarios and campaigns depicting the Normandy fighting that take advantage of all the modules and the vehichlepack...as well as all the improvements that has been made to the editor and gameplay...
It is currently quite a different game compared to when the original Normandy stuff was made...
Could be intresting 😁

Okay so I got distracted by my game in progress which is Myth of Invincibility by Kari Salo (hope Kari is around here).  Great battle, very nice map with some decent assets (Axis of course 😉) and challenging opposition.  So far so good, and I just got that lovely radio 'scratch' and this:

Love it ❤️.

If you are comparing the stock scenarios that comes with the modules then it should actually be the other way around...
Early CMBN scenarios did not have the bennefit of triggers and only half the amount of AI groups compared to RT...
Further improvements have been made over the years...SF2 and RTV also benefits from added AI options like area fire, withdraw and face commands as well as more AI order slots...
All games have since been updated to the latest standard so they all have the same features for use in future scenarios...

If you are comparing the stock scenarios that comes with the modules then it should actually be the other way around...
Early CMBN scenarios did not have the bennefit of triggers and only half the amount of AI groups compared to RT...
Further improvements have been made over the years...SF2 and RTV also benefits from added AI options like area fire, withdraw and face commands as well as more AI order slots...
All games have since been updated to the latest standard so they all have the same features for use in future scenarios...

Getting kills with hand held AT weapons is always nice 🤓...
And I actually LIKE the Stummels...like you said...if you can keep them alive they are quite useful...its a nice challange to try to keep them from dying.
What i fear...larger assultguns would be one...😱

Leaders in CM1 had a much more obvious effect on troops.  In CM2 the leadership benefits are so subtle that one rarely notices (even tho's statistically they are supposed to have an effect).  It's as if CM2 mitigates the effects of outstanding leadership so as to create squads and platoons that are more cookie-cutter.  Have wondered if that reflects the modern philosophy of armies - perhaps they do not want to depict anything too outstanding - "everyone is trained the same, therefore everyone acts the same" like automatons.

One of the best parts for me was how stealthy some weapons could be. You could have anti tank rifles or even MGs sometimes when firing at long range with a leader with a camouflage bonus remain just sound contacts for a long time. And you had to get rather close to spot them, unlike now where it is rare, it happens but it is rare, that a shooter is not located after a minute or two.

A few more reasons...
- CM makes it somewhat more difficult to properly judge LOS/LOF compared to RL.
- Inability to areafire at certain areas of the map because of some terrain feature...that IRL only would provide minor problems.
- Difficulty to get the supporting weapons to use linear or area...areafire. It's pretty much only point...areafire.
 

I think if you compare the whole force and not simply one vehichle vs another then the difference might be somewhat more noticable...hopefully 🤓
 

I find myself nodding along to many of the posts you make Bulletpoint, but here I must disagree. By this logic, all we need is a single Combat Mission title since it's all basically the same.
Speaking for myself, that's certainly not what I am looking to do, though it would be nice haha. It's more down to the equipment and especially the armored vehicles. Panzer Is and IIs, BT-7s, T-26s, short-gunned Pz IIIs against T-34s and KVs, doorknocker AT guns, maybe the return of command delay? Far less lethal, far more interesting, for me anyway. The heavy armor and big guns of the 1944-45 period we have, or are getting, is less compelling than the brand of combat that 1941-42 would serve up.  Duels are more asymmetric, which is appealing to me in any wargaming scenario.

Really disagree.  Early war was a testing period for what we now consider modern weapons.  The Germans had to learn tactics to overcome the (on paper) much better French tanks and the Soviet tanks like KV's and T-34's.  It wasn't one shot one kill as it generally is in late war.  If you ever played CMBB from 1941 to late war the difference in challenges and gameplay experience was clear.  Currently, all the late war WW2 titles play about the same and are getting boring if one has been playing them heavily for 9 years.

PERSISTANT MAP-DAMAGE might be a good cure for this decease...😁
If we could use large maps and play several shorter battles on the same map might make it somewhat easier on the AI...

Getting kills with hand held AT weapons is always nice 🤓...
And I actually LIKE the Stummels...like you said...if you can keep them alive they are quite useful...its a nice challange to try to keep them from dying.
What i fear...larger assultguns would be one...😱

PERSISTANT MAP-DAMAGE might be a good cure for this decease...😁
If we could use large maps and play several shorter battles on the same map might make it somewhat easier on the AI...

Yes, as someone who never plays quick battles, this would be interesting. My guess: A Russian campaign in Berlin and / or the Seelow Heights and a German campaign with heavy tanks in Hungary. At least that's probably what I would do if I was in charge.

Getting kills with hand held AT weapons is always nice 🤓...
And I actually LIKE the Stummels...like you said...if you can keep them alive they are quite useful...its a nice challange to try to keep them from dying.
What i fear...larger assultguns would be one...😱

PERSISTANT MAP-DAMAGE might be a good cure for this decease...😁
If we could use large maps and play several shorter battles on the same map might make it somewhat easier on the AI...

Make that two! 
With persistent map damage, we could make some remarkable things.....Consider the possibilities of @LongLeftFlank's Ramadi, @Macisle's Kharkov, or @benpark's Berlin, used as a Master Map in the manner of a CM-1 'Static Campaign'.  Just imagine what those maps might look like after ten or more heavy battles! 
It would be (IMHO), fekkin awesome! 

PERSISTANT MAP-DAMAGE might be a good cure for this decease...😁
If we could use large maps and play several shorter battles on the same map might make it somewhat easier on the AI...

PERSISTANT MAP-DAMAGE might be a good cure for this decease...😁
If we could use large maps and play several shorter battles on the same map might make it somewhat easier on the AI...

Lets make it more simple, Any map design feature would be nice to do in the 3d view, I hate the time wasted in imagining what it looks like from imput in 2d- then verifying in 3d, then having to go back to 2d to try and correct it. All main features should be functional to change and add right in 3d . That would make a huge difference in map making time.

I can understand that the guys that is associated with BFC in one way or the other at times gets tired with the pretty frequent complainig but...
When reading many of the replies in the various threads asking for improvments one could get the feeling that these guys have the opinion that NO improvements are needed...and NO further work SHOULD be done with the editor...
I hope...and belive that this is not true...
But it kind of sounds like it at times...
Come on ! 
It's not like we are asking for a fully functional cure for cancer or something...many of the suggestions in the various threads would likely not require more then some UI changes to the editor...
It ought to be doable without BFC having to put everything else on hold for a long, long time.
Some request are obviously more demanding though...and perhaps not realistic...or even desirable...
Fine !
 But this everything is fine attitude..."if you dont like it then stop playing" is somewhat strange...
I mean...the severe shortage of community scenarios ought to be an indication that everything is indeed not...all fine
Yes...some of the more experienced and skillfull designers can design very good scenarios...but at what price ?
Hundreds and hundresds of hours...maybe even 4 didgit numbers...that is fine if you have the time and intrest in spending most of your free hours for many months doing this...some will...and that is obviously great...but many more will not. 
I for one still hope that many improvements will still be made to the editor...both big and small. Hopefully these will make the editor accesable to more people...increasing the amount of community scenarios being made...
As well as also improving the quality of the scenarios...EVEN FURTHER 😊
 

This topic is why I'm often on the board talking down the notion of maxed out map sizes and maxed out scenario times. The AI functions admirably (1) if the scenario designer is sufficiently adept to make it perform logically, and (2) if the the scenario is within the game's 'sweet spot'. Event the best scenario designer is at sea if he can't anticipate where the opponent is likely to be on a  4km map after 3 hrs 30 minutes of gameplay. You may have noticed the occasional huge scenario show up with the tag 'Play (X) side only'. That means the designer's given up on formulating offensive AI plans. It may be difficult to max out map and force size in the game but its pretty easy to max out the scenario designer's ability to orchestrate events.

Got a point 🤓