Freyberg

I hesitate to complain about the map designers, because the maps in this game are fabulous in my opinion, but looking through photos of bocage, there are many that show sections that look impassable, and others (most even) that have earth ramparts a tank couldn't cross, but are not so high or solid as to be impassable by infantry. Others look even gappier. The bocage tile in the map designer only represents the toughest of these types. I remember a couple of very good user-maps from CMBO, in which the hedgerows were made up of some bocage tiles, and some heavy-woods tiles, with little gaps here and there. They looked great, played well and I thought they were probably quite realistic. I hate bocage anyway, because it usually beats me, so there's a grain of salt.

Infantry close assault was a common and effective tactic by the Soviets and Japanese. That there are few accounts the Allies in Normandy (or none that I can recall, or that came up in a quick Google search) probably had more to do with the high risk/suicidal nature of the tactic, and the relative abundance of infantry AT weapons, rather than it being an impossible undertaking for troops of the Western Allies, as well as the fact that both sides were aware of the vulnerability of isolated tanks and made an effort to ensure their armour was usually supported. Isolated tanks should be vulnerable to any and all infantry. WWII tanks had open vision ports and their hatches didn't lock, and infantry were trained in the various vulnerable points on particular tanks. Specialist equipment wouldn't have been needed to knock out an isolated tank with limited visibility at close quarters. If it didn't happen historically it's probably because such a vulnerable vehicle could be KO'd by one of the many infantry AT weapons each side possessed, without the need for such a risky tactic. But as we all know, in CM we love to use crazy aggressive tactics the real commanders didn't use. US, British and Commonwealth infantry were not typically expected to undertake suicide missions, but if the CM commander orders them to, it ought to be possible. If we want to play like Soviets, the game should allow that. Close assault is still relatively difficult, particularly against a human opponent. The AI will often obligingly leave an unsupported tank in a position where infantry can sneak up close to it, but a good human opponent is unlikely to make this mistake. The only infantry tanks kills I've had in H2H play have been by engineers or AT weapons, and they've been hard to pull off, risky and usually resulted in the death of the assaulting infantry typically by those über tanks crews). It's probably one of those things that BF will tweak over time, and I'm open to being persuaded that it's a little too easy now, but I'm glad that changes have been made to the game engine to allow for close assault. The whole bocage thing is another issue of course...

I was sceptical about this one - the über crews - but I've experienced it half a dozen times since the patch made it easier for infantry to knock out tanks.

I don't mind the little grenade animations. It's always possible to imagine something better, or a variety of animations, but I wouldn't want to have no animation at all.

The vast variety of ways infantry could attack a tank, with all the multiple interacting variables that each involves, sounds like an impossible thing to model without abstraction, short of having an AI that can model a real human mind. I'm cool with abstraction - the important thing is that tanks will die in close terrain without infantry support (hedges or no hedges), which is the realistic outcome.

You have to get lucky. Basically, your opponent has to make a mistake so you can take out at least one of the Stuarts. Then you're in with a chance. Placing the AT gun in good cover is essential. You need to check that visually, just putting it in some trees isn't enough.

I think having tanks invulnerable to infantry at close range is much more unrealistic than the situation being described. A WWII tank would have been extremely vulnerable to infantry at point-blank range, buttoned-up or not.

Yes. Exactly.

I'm pretty hard-core about this game, and the little bugs don't really worry me...

And has anyone else noticed the bug where the crew of an AT gun (I noticed it with German 75mm) are positioned apart from their gun (by 50m or so) but the gun still fires?

As far as camouflage, AT guns just need a bit of range, get 'em in a scenario where they have reasonable cover and a decent killing zone at ranges 700m and more, they're deadly and extremely hard to spot.

I like Iron level for its immersion, but I'd prefer to keep the little red crosses, and my other favourite, the little white flags.

If I can have a bob each way, I love the 'professional' scenarios, and try and play them against human opponents, so as not to waste them, but I also like playing quick battles against the AI. It would be super if people didn't mind making little 'quicky' scenarios - semi-historical, small to medium, nice forces. No need for a complex AI plan, just setup the defender's forces in an intelligent way (which the AI often struggles to do). The kind of thing that could do for a QB between human opponents to overcome the cherry-picking thing that happens in H2H QBs.

I read the briefing very carefully and followed its general advice, and I found that gave me a slight edge A brilliant map too, with very subtle elevations that made the game quite challenging.

No spoilers. I just wanted to say what a fascinating scenario this is. I played it H2H as allies, and I have to say the allies had a slight edge, but it was a great scenario long and engaging with a lot of interesting tactical challenges. Well done to the designer.

I designed a bunch of scenarios for CMBB/AK, nothing spectacular but reasonable. I've been working on one for CMFI-GL, and, though just as much fun, the time required is significantly greater. Having said that, I second the comment about the Proving Grounds - that was a great site - and MikeyD's "don't let the best be enemy of the good"

Well spotted.

1940 Western Front would be fascinating, as was CMAK.

Yes please to themed maps !!

Can we have the ability to indirect fire, without the whole chain of command and associated delay, if called by the immediate HQ unit within voice or visual contact?

Free French forces and British Commandos !

In CMFI-GL, I had some engineers kill a StuG in a vinyard. The two remaining crew immediately surrendered. White flag same move.

It's just a hypothetical scenario supposedly set around Monte Cassino, featuring New Zealanders (naturally). The AI stuff is just window-dressing. The main feature is quite a difficult entrenched German position, supported on its flanks. Still testing, but even knowing all about it, I've found it quite a challenging attack on the NZer's part. It should play OK - I did a number of scenarios in the CMx1 days, and they weren't all completely terrible.

Love everything by Tolkein - especially the Silmarillion and LoTR - though the movies were a disappointing bore, despite their stunning New Zealand scenery.

I just watched a documentary which included mention of a British tank crew who were killed in a firefight after exiting their knocked out tank - the commander was found dead beside his tank with a pistol in his hand - so the incidence of uber-crews clearly occurred occasionally in real life. Does it happen too often? I personally haven't noticed it, though I haven't played much CMBN-MG yet.