Bulletpoint

If they wanted to deemphasise aircraft, wouldn't it be more logical to make AA guns stronger rather than weaker?

This issue is currently my number one reason not to upgrade.

Currently, it's quite difficult for the player to actually benefit from having a tank with a turret, in that there is no dedicated turret facing command. This means that if you want your tank to drive forward while facing the turret towards a threat on the right, you need to do a covered arc command. This makes the tank turn the turret, but it also forbids it from firing at anything outside the arc. So if you mis-estimate where the enemy tank is, just by a tiny amount, then it could end up outside the arc, which means your tank is just going to sit there for up to one minute without firing at an obvious target. Even if you get it right and you destroy the enemy tank, there might be an AT equipped infantry squad close by (but outside the target arc), which makes it likely that your tank will not engage them. In short, I think the reason the Panzer IV is cheaper than the Stug because it has worse armour, higher profile, and because its turret is not a major advantage (in this game).

I like this feature, and discovered it only after playing for years ! Unfortunately, the crew still need to crawl about for some time before setting up the gun, so a bit of the rapid move advantage is lost..

I have been thinking about the exact same thing - would be interesting to try to recreate it. I thought I was the only one crazy enough to consider it. Actually I did some google maps searching for the locations, but eventually I felt it would just be too weird having Polish voices for Danish soldiers Also, I don't think the famous Madsen machinegun is included in the game?

I believe it does require that action - but the pack up / redeploy phases are just nearly instantaneous for short distances. Outside of buildings that is. Inside buildings, the 4 minute penalty is still applied.

Did you play the Scottish Corridor campaign? In that one, if you lose scenarios you get much more time in the following ones (3 hours for each battle I think). The campaign is tough though.

I think the problem is that when you get the MG to deploy in a building, issuing a facing command makes the team pack up the MG, change team facing, then start to deploy again. And since it takes several minutes to deploy a MG in a building, by repeated facing commands you might never see the gun deploy. Also, a related problem is that sometimes, the team will decide to change facing on their own. Usually to engage a new target. Since the LOF from the gun is calculated from the exact window it's deplyed at, it seems if the team spots an enemy that the gun cannot target, they pack up to relocate to another window. Which means that your carefully placed MG is out of action for about 4 minutes, and when it finally redeploys, it won't have LOF to where you originally intended.

All good questions that I have been wondering, myself.

Just did some testing, and it seems it depends on how much ammo is in the vehicle to begin with. With a regular US jeep, the minimum number of .30cal I get to acquire is 50 rounds. For .45cal, I can acquire a minimum of 10. But when I acquire from a halftrack that has almost 4000 rounds, the minimum I get to take is 1000, as @Erwin says. Never noticed this before. After grabbing 2000 rounds off the halftrack, I then try to acquire again, and this time I am allowed to take just 250 rounds. I grab 1000, and next time I am allowed to take just 100. Eventually. There's just 7 rounds left, and I am allowed to take 1

I think the minimum is 200 or 250 rounds actually. But we agree it's much too cumbersome to acquire ammo.

I think that as you gain more experience with the game, you will come to the opposite conclusion. Since there is no AI in this game, the enemy only does what the scenario designer has told them to do. The game can be very challenging when attacking against a fixed defence, but that's because the scenario designer has made a challenging map and enemy force deployment. To truly see what this game is about, you need to find a human opponent. Then you will have a true challenge

There is no AI in this game to make enemy troops move (apart from fleeing when under heavy fire). When you see enemy troops move, it's because the human scenario designer has chosen that the unit should move to some determined point at some determined time.

Just thought he has a funny way of pronouncing that. The video series is well done tough.

"Grosdoucheland"

Ah, too bad it requires the Market Garden module. I only have the Commonwealth Forces. Looks very interesting and ambitious though

Would be nice if mortars could just fire off a couple of spotting rounds and then 3 shells on target, then stop until given another target order. I think this is how they were often used historically (and maybe still are?). It seems like the current in-game mortar targeting system is meant to be used in real time play, where you can just cancel the order when you feel the target has been saturated. In WeGo mode, it often leads to either no shells on target or pounding the rubble needlessly, eating up ammunition.

We completely agree. I did not share this gamey tactic because I like that it's there. The opposite actually. I was playing a difficult scenario when I discovered it, and after I realised this trick, I was able to win with ease by placing my panther in the right spot - to my somewhat disappointment.

I completed the campaign, but if I remember correctly I did not win the final mission. Still, the campaign ended in a win overall. I don't save/load all the time; if i screw up I stick with it or restart the mission completely (loading a save before the mission starts so that there's a chance the enemy will deploy differently if there are different AI plans included). I highly recommend this playstyle, as I really feel it made me a better player. Especially for H2H where there's no save/load to fall back on. School of Hard Knocks was a mission I also struggled with, but later I came back to it and to my surprise won it without too much trouble, once I realised how to go about it.

I beg to differ. I found that if you're in Panther, you should avoid hull down at ranges up to 500m, since the hull armour is stronger than the mantlet. Against basic Shermans, a Panther is nearly invulnerable as long as it is not hull down, but if it is, it will often quickly be taken out by a turret hit, usually disabling the main gun. At ranges longer than 500m there's an increasing chance that the enemy tank will not hit the turret, but at closer ranges it's nearly assured. Rule of thumb: At close range, only go hull down if your turret is stronger than the hull, or if you are at long range (at least 500m plus).

I'm fine with how it works currently, but an idea would be allowing you to switch crews around as long as it was between the same type and model of vehicle. So you could buy two tigers, one green and one veteran, and switch the crews around as you pleased, but the end result to you would be the same. This would also represent crews not necesarily being familiar with the different controls of a different tank.

I don't doubt your design decisions, because I'm sure you know more about this than I do, but just out of curiosity - I thought VGs were often basically conscripts?

What experience level are the Volksgrenadiere set at in this campaign?

Thanks for your thoughts on this. You're usually very sensible, so I'll take it into consideration. I do actually. Both my scenarios have quite a lot of AI work, but most of it is never noticed by the player The new retreat order is definitely something that would come in handy.

This is currently what's keeping me from upgrading. I think such behaviour should only be seen with conscript troops. Even lowly motivated regular og green troops should prefer to hide into their foxholes when under shellfire, rather than to try to run away. Unless they completely panic of course, but I don't think that's the issue here.