Bulletpoint

It's actually easier for the computer to just find the shortest path between two points than also to factor in bottlenecks and total travel time. So no need for SOP (for this problem at least)

Yes, this is why I suggest that it be coded that troops will always enter the building from the nearest door to their starting position, even if that means a bit of a traffic jam. The jam can be prevented by the player not forcing too many troops through the door at the same time - it can be managed. But unexpected running to the other side is often suicide.

The risk of bogging from terrain comes only from the type of terrain you pass over, not from the speed of the vehicle. So if you want to avoid getting bogged at roadsides, you must plot in a thousand waypoints to stay on the zig-zag road. That's one of the major issues with these games, I find. Especially playing bigger battles, moving columns of vehicles up to the front.

The myth is the bit I underlined: That one should drive SLOW over some terrain - like marshy ground to reduce % of bogging/immobilizing.

Use FAST all the time, unless you need to HUNT. This is one of the evergreen myths of Combat Mission. A bit like that the idea that the world is flat, some people keep believing it no matter how much evidence is presented against it So full speed ahead.

Most of you probably saw this happen: You move a team up to a house. There's clearly a door on the side you're on. You then order the team to enter the house. They for some reason decide to run around the house into the street to enter the front door. Getting shot in the process. This issue has been in CM for as long as I remember. Any chance of getting this changed so that teams will always enter through the door on the side they start on? (Also there's a separate issue where doors are not on the side they are shown graphically - many examples found in the otherwise excellent Aachen campaign in CMFB)

In CM2, there's no AI that sits and thinks about the overall battle in any way, so if it understands what dust implies is the least of our concerns

+1 for your observation, but could it be that it's the smoke from the exploding HE that obscures the gun and loses the spot?

Seems like in GTMF, Anti-tank-guns dominate much less than in CM. Maybe partly because of longer engagement ranges, but it also seems tanks spot the guns and return fire and more accurately in GT than in CM. This observation only based on watching youtube videos - I don't own the Graviteam game

Even if the conditions in the scenario are not muddy? Because what I'm seeing is that the turret of a Panther gets the modded texture, but the hull doesn't. Neither is tagged with [muddy]

Problem being that the game shows "penetration", meaning the bullet should be going straight through, but in fact the bullet doesn't continue.

I'm genuinely interested And the comments under the video mainly consist of people discussing how long it takes to change the barrel, and one guy boasting of having an MG42 in the bedroom. Not sure why. Maybe he expects to be burgled some day by the Red Army.

What is it in the video you link to that you have yet to see in the games?

I force them to run back and forth under fire, reciting health statistics about the dangers of a sedentary lifestyle. If there are any survivors, I take away their cigarettes.

Insteresting and strange. They don't seem to work for me. But maybe it's the CMRT mods that do the trick?

You're very likely correct I have my own file where I note some basic details about the games I play, but nothing like your spreadsheet. I doubt I play enough games to really make the statistics features really fly, but will try it out. Thanks for sharing.

I think it's more likely that either it's just somebody inputting the wrong protectiuon value for glass, or that the glass material was carried over from a CMSF1 hummvee. It seems to happen with all kinds of jeeps. I have not been able to find any evidence of bulletproof glass used in jeeps in WW2. @IanL is on the case, and I'm looking forward to hear his conclusions based on the test scenario I sent him.

I've done a test and sent the scenario to Ian, but that is only testing for how protected the passengers are. It would be great if you could set up a test to show if the engine/hull is too well protected too.

How did that go?

Better nutrition also plays a role, though.

It's some time now since i programmed the AI, but as far as I remember, you might be able to deploy the enemy in HIDE mode, and then make them change to ACTIVE mode when the player reaches a terrain trigger? EDIT: Just got curious and made a little test scenario. The method works.

I forgot to say that if you are using a TRP, you get the option for airburst at any point in the battle - the TRP counts as preplanned artillery. Also, you can plot an airburst mission during setup and then select a delay to make it arrive up to 15 minutes into the battle.

As far as I can see, the winter fighting just means that the ground is white instead of green. Troops don't seem to suffer from the cold or the snow in any way I have been able to detect. Spotting, accuracy, stamina, etc. I've noticed no effect on gameplay.

Yes. In CMBN, that means timed airburst, so you can only select it during the setup phase. IN CMFB, there's also the VT fuse so you can use airburst during the mission.

I believe it also highlights the firing unit like if you had selected it, when you click on the icon in the artillery tab. So if you zoom out the map a bit, it becomes clear.