Badger73

Agreed.

Tres bien!!!!

I'm going with joke. Good one!

Right, but not on ring mounts which could be swiveled to face forward from inside the cupola as you originally suggested. In hindsight, the Sherman tank Cal .50 auxiliary AA capability was not initially designed with enemy ground targets in mind.

Not always, Ma Duece was fixed-pintle mounted atop the Sherman's turret on some models. I just can't recall which ones at the moment.

+1! That would be molto bene indeed!

I thought @Josey Wales demonstrated that firing effectiveness is not affected by fatigue, condition, nor leadership. I didn't take that to mean spotting was not affected as well. Good point. We should ask him.

Agreed. Demo charges are your very best friend in city fights. In CMFI, Italian Gustatori and American Rangers are very good Urban Combat units. Otherwise, beef up your assault infantry with all the combat engineers / pioneers you can muster.

I disagree. You assume those are not factors without thoroughly investigating whether they are or not. Less experienced, fatigued, or more nervous troops will and do take longer to react and are more likely to hesitate and freeze. Time and weather may or may not adversely affect them as well. I agree that the game has limitations which could be improved. Willfully ignoring the factors @Bulletpoint and I asked about diminishes people on this forum from understanding the facts your presented sufficiently well to objectively assess the reasonableness of those specific outcomes and the validity of your conclusions.

Also what is the experience level and motivation state of the troops involved?

That seems counter-intuitive to current trends. Would you mind elaborating your thoughts on this? Thank you.

Most things code related are always do-able. It always boils down to the coding skills of your staff, the time available, and whether doing something is commercially worth it or not. This proposal might be a good way to approach designing a particular kind of new game. However, retro-fitting language specific legacy code is always a labor intensive burden and a major effort to test. You need to produce a substantively convincing cost/benefit analysis which shows a Return On Investment far superior to spending equivalent time and effort on other game improvements instead. "Wanting" and "Needing" are very different things. When money must drive your business decisions, "Needs" matter first. I personally would not care for this feature.

Note that http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/ calculates using a "flat on" or perpendicular 90 degree impact against the armor thickness described. It does not account for angles nor slopes. Still, it shows good stuff. CM2 penetrations depend on many of the factors the site cannot account. I agree with @butler69 that CM is about as realistic as a game can get for this.

Merry Christmas indeed, @Mord! Merry Christmas indeed!

I think the Hapless Stavelot AAR's do a nice job of showing Combat Mission game mechanics and processes. While I like his Air Support, Indirect Fires, and Armor parts, I do not think he shows effective infantry tactics. His whole approach to securing his right flank was too lackadaisical for my tastes. I suppose that helps show how overwhelming this game can be in Huge battles at Battalion level. However, I think its a mistake for any player to underestimate or neglect the importance of closely managing your infantry in taking and holding ground or using it to deny ground to the enemy. Call me "Posh" (or any other "P" word which suits you ), but I agree with the comment which observed that it is unfortunate when the number of expletives constantly exceeds the number of casualties. Hapless's AAR shows a lot of time and effort. Kudos for that. I just wish it were more suitable for a younger and general audience. The Josey Wales vid's are exceptional.

That's a wonderful anecdote, @Freyberg. Thank you for sharing. To @Erwin's point, some designers want to develop historically realistic scenario's too. In those cases, though, the description or briefing should make that intent clearly known to you because they may be unbalanced and grueling. Seems you and your father can be proud of each other. Cheers to that!

While CMBN and CMFI are my favorites, they do not allow tank riders. CMFB is the only West Front game which supports that feature. Just sayin' in case it matters to you.

Excellent explanation! Thank you.

As also were the Panzerwaffenfarbe for the Wehrmacht, although I suspect they would have more likely called it "rose" instead of "pink" . . .

My two cents: Could - yes, of course Should - no, not worth the efforts to do so I opine that if that particular innovation were a truly cost effective force multiplier, more would have been made of it by contemporary tank designers and and greater efforts would have occurred for field modification kits to retrofit.

Already discussed here . . . Not really embraced by community nor supported by Battlefront

@dragonwynn - will you be posting this to The Scenario Depot III? http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/

As does Bandicam - https://www.bandicam.com/