Father Ted

This really. We can argue til the cows come home about the best computer wargame out there, but only CM provides those three things. I would say that makes it subjectively my favourite, but I wouldn't presume to say objectively the best.

The crew should never expose a member - partially or otherwise.

I'd just like to thank...

Like Freyberg, I'd say that/those scene(s) were about depicting how war had dehumanised the GIs rather than an attempt to demonise their enemy. I did think the film was militarily highly suspect though.

My take: as a thriller with an interesting chronological structure - yes: as a war film - not so much. And the improbably-gliding Spit definitely jumped the shark.

A similar option - and one more in line with CM - would be Command Ops 2. On the micro-management issue I have to confess that I quite enjoy the setup phase of a big battle - forming a plan, working out who is best fitted for each role in that plan, and then re-arranging everybody in their jump-off positions, whilst also optimising C2. The subsequent near-identical multiple move orders are a bit tiresome, I agree. But as others have said, it's only the lead scouts and FOOs who need detailed plans in the initial stages. In terms of use of infantry, I think that one of the hallmarks of a great videogame/simulation is that the player adopts real-world tactics in order to succeed in the virtual one. For example I've been playing through a FB campaign as the US. My armoured infantry and armour kept getting zapped by Fausts and Shrecks hidden (until they fire) in any of a multitude of positions of cover. Early on I used cheap units as bait to try to tempt the buggers to reveal their position and then nail them with direct fire from tanks, but as the campaign ground on I got fed up with putting people in harms way. Now I just flatten any likely-looking spot with mortars or off-map arty, send someone in to poke amongst the rubble, before letting the precious Shermans rumble past. It's not particularly fun from a gaming point-of-view, but it works and, from what I've read, it seems to have been what the Allies did. As for realism, at one point I actually felt a pang of guilt when I called in a strike on a row of Belgian cottages which I merely suspected of housing some Germans.

I know this isn't quite what you're talking about, but I often find that I use tankers as ad-hoc FOOs - usually with better results than the designated unit.

Well, if it is unique, there should only be one case.

To me the green berets represent the Royal Marines. Commandos had knitted hats - but I'm basing that on the old Airfix box-lid source. Actually also, from memory, on a statue in Fort William - anyone have pics? So knitted hats - watch caps - would be a cool mod

Maybe the rationale here is that hiding is an active behaviour rather than just resting?

*cough* he said WW2 games *cough*. BTW Erwin I just got a voucher from Matrix, so I now have "DC Barbarossa" on my HDD. Looking forward to firing it up.

Well, I'd say Command Ops 2 is a very good game (haven't played the other two). It's a real-time game played on a 2-d map, with the units represented by counters. That sounds a bit dry, but it's the way your units react to your orders which makes it interesting - they take time to get them, process them, and then act on them, so you have to factor that delay into your planning. The game's other selling point is that your AI subordinates can make their own plans of attack, which allows you to play as a proper on-map "boss". By this I mean you concoct a general plan, select points of assault, lines of defence, etc, but have to rely on others to do the detail. Of course, this sometimes means that the game can seem to be playing by itself (and you can choose to micromanage if you want more control), but it does give a different flavour of command. And there's a free demo, so it's worth a look.

Ironcross, you mention RO2. If you like that, you should check out Darkest Hour - a free, western front mod of RO1. You get to play as US or Brits (infantry, paras and armoured) or Germans (Wehrmacht, SS and armour) on maps in Normandy through to the Bulge. It's "realistic" - no crosshairs, radar or revival, and you're generally one-shotted (as my kids would say). Sure it's a bit old, graphics-wise, but it does a much better job than RO2 when it comes to tanks and bigger maps. I always think of DH as the wargamer's FPS.

FWIW I have recently come across the same problem ("Breaking the Panzers" scenario)

I had a similar issue with a US armoured car. They'd run out of 37mm HE and refused to use their 50 cal on some distant infantry I wanted rid of. I figured out the unbuttoning thing and ordered them to do so. Immediately some hitherto unseen infantry opened up on the AFV and plugged the commander. I suppose that when buttoned-up the SA of the car is not too good, and also that the enemy infantry knew not to bother shooting at it until they had a soft target. The moral of the story: take care with the unbuttoning command.

This is just a small issue, but anyway...The ambient sounds I am hearing are of early summer (insects buzzing, birds singing, small arms, HE), whereas I would expect those of midwinter (just small arms and HE, really). As I say, not a big deal, but I would hope easily fixable.

It just so happens that I'm currently playing this scenario as the US v German AI. My conclusion is that, despite me managing to get a decent base of fire with two squads and get the mortar into play, there's no way I have sufficient fire-superiority to attempt to rush the ford. Incidentally, IIRC, the briefing does give me a get-out clause - something about not risking too many casualties for the sake of the ford, but I doubt I'll get many VPs if I give up now...

I'm a CM enthusiast rather than a veteran/expert, but what I'd suggest is learn the mechanics of the game and then explore the tactical techniques. Personally, I get my kicks out of these games by trying to use my own learned/intuitive abilities to solve the problems. What CM does really well is allow you to do this - once you've learned how the interface and orders and so on work. What I'm suggesting won't lead to you "winning" scenarios straight away, but I think it's more interesting to try, and, perhaps, fail, and to learn from that experience, rather than follows others' methods. It's just a thought really, akin to a sort of dead-is-dead or role-play approach to being a WW2 commander, rather than treating it as a game to be beaten. BTW, your avatar - is that taken from the cover of an edition of The Naked and the Dead?

Those screenies make it look like this is happening at the edge of the map. Could this affect the vehicles' behaviour?

This is interesting because CMBN is the only game I play against the pooter. Multiplayer is the only way for me to get a buzz out of FPSs and combat flightsims, yet I am wary of taking on a real person in CM. I guess that there is a degree of anonymity when you join a server of 50 people, but H2H is pretty up close and personal when you're worried about your level of competency. On other forums I'm exhorting people to try MP, yet here I'm one of the ones who needs convincing

Damn, I think I need to move...

I'd just like to echo that - this is a lovely piece of work. I tried similar things with the CMBB map editor, and using actual terrain (I used the contour lines from OS maps!) as a template produces a much more realistic geography. The roads then follow a natural line and the buildings nestle into the landscape. Though the addition of props and so on help, it is in the underlying topography that the real battle for realism is won. Just to go back to the OP, I think that BF took a bit of a risk with this title. The risk is that, from what I've read, the fighting in the bocage was a morale-sapping grind, and an accurate simulation of that is not going to be too much fun. I think we generally agree that they have produced a pretty accurate simulation of WW2 tactical combat. Therefore, because it is a good game in terms of representing what what on at the time, it might not have been a popular game since what it represents was not much fun.

We tried to emulate "Little Wars" as described by H G Wells. We had the die-cast model cannons (Britain's 4.7" naval gun) and some Airfix Napoleonics. Perhaps not proper wargaming, but a gateway to more "serious" stuff.

Well, we didn't have any choice! My final phase of table-top gaming was in my mid-teens with 1/300 WW2 miniatures. I loved painting the tanks, making the scenics, creating a landscape and setting out the forces, but the actual gaming was often a disappointment. There was no way to simulate concealment (without getting a third party involved), there was all that dice rolling and measuring, and moving... So when CMBB came out I was blown away - here was proper miniatures gaming! All the immersion-killers are taken care of and you can watch your "model" tanks and men do their stuff. You can even make the scenery! CMBN (I skipped SF as WW2 is where it's at for me) seems to be moving the series more towards a sim of actual war (at least visually) rather than a sim of miniatures gaming. Of course this is no bad thing, but I did enjoy the charm of CMx1. Oh, and 47

A more "gamey" tip: make sure that your infantry advancing to contact have a short, 360 degree cover arc - this makes them less likely to open up on the first enemy they see, and get mown down in response. You want them to see the enemy, but not have the enemy see them, and muzzle flashes are a give-away. This is specially important for high-value elements like HQs. You want them to be in place to rain down HE, not have a few potshots with their sidearms and hence get demolished. Also, check out the quality of your pixel-troops at the planning stage and assign the better ones to the more difficult tasks.