Bulletpoint

Reminds me of the old quote that Einstein supposedly said: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”

I don't think their military leadership believed for a moment such a plan would ever work. For the simple reason that they knew the other side also had plenty of nuclear weapons. But they were told to make a plan, so they made a plan.

Actually now that I look at it again, I'm thinking it might be the same bug I reported a long time ago, where contact info is not shared if the enemy unit moves. I tested it with tanks, but it seems it maybe also happens with infantry. What happens is: An enemy unit is spotted, and info on its location is shared with friendly teams. The enemy unit then moves, but the updated location is never shared. Notice how all teams in your example have an infantry contact marker in the distance. That's probably the same unit that the HQ unit is now actively spotting in a different location. Here's the thread talking about the bug:

Many of the people posting on this forum are beta testers. They can report bugs, but they need to be aware of your post. @MOS:96B2P has a sharp eye for this kind of stuff and he knows a lot about how the info share system works. So I hope he will take a look at this and see if there's anything we missed.

Haven´t tested that in particular. Generally I stay clear (or try to) of any enemies potentially wielding HEAT ammunitions at their combat ranges. I´d be equally concerned sitting in a Panther vs. Zook or PIAT than I´d be sitting in a Sherman/T-34 facing Schreck and Fausts. Well, in the game at least, a Panther is much safer against a bazooka than a Sherman is VS the German RPGs. I believe the front plate can deflect a hit, and the skirts definitely work, too.

At least it was the case back when I tested it a bit some years ago. I did a 2-player hotseat and ran my troops around behind and to the sides of the Greyhound, and while buttoned, it never knew a thing.

Yes.

Some vehicles don't have those and are completely blind to the sides and rear. The buttoned M8 Greyhound for example won't spot infantry behind it.

It used to be that if you sent infantry through forest on hunt orders, they would sometimes just stop and go prone for seemingly no reason at all. No contact marker, no shots fired. Then if you told them to keep moving, there would in fact be enemies very close by. So that matches your idea that units can be aware of enemies without getting a contact marker. However, I think this behaviour has been changed for infantry. They seem less likely to stop hunting now, and also often don't stop even when taking fire.

Yes, it's official. The delay is there to represent the difficulties of a tank to elevate or depress the gun enough to hit infantry close by. Also, tanks seem able to detect infantry close by quite easily if the tank has a cupola. At least that is my experience.

Here's something I found on Wikipedia: "An analysis by British staff officers of the initial period of the Normandy campaign [...] also found that once German tanks had been fitted with armoured skirts that detonated shaped charge ammunition before it could penetrate the tank's armour, the weapon became much less effective." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIAT

The skirts in the game already protect very well against shaped charges. I've seen many Pz IV and Panthers survive bazooka flank shots on their Schurzsen.

Tanks are programmed with a delay before they can shoot at infantry close to them. I think that's what happened in this case. But it spotted the infantry quite quickly. That's why it started to turn towards them.

I don't understand why people keep talking about Fulda Gap as if any real fighting could ever have taken place there before the whole area was obliterated by nuclear weapons.

Strangely, the tank had no trouble spotting the infantry in this fog.

Interesting. I think I read somewhere that it's about the diameter of the charge - that the depth of penetration is roughly equal to the diameter. But I'm no interest at all in this stuff. Also, yes, it's true that it's not a scientific test. I was just surprised it didnt go through more paper. Also, I thought the paper would be burnt or at least discoloured from the heat - but it seems the damage is much more like a physical punch than a burning molten stream.

Here is a video I found that might interest people interested in shaped charges. How many packs of printer paper does it take to stop a shaped charge? Fewer than you might imagine. I'm thinking maybe those sandbags on the tanks had at least some effect after all.

Thank you for the detailed reply. I'm wondering if it is not only the extra distance, but if the combination of just a bit extra spacing and the metal cage might help to break up the shaped charge jet? That it breaks up the symmetry of the situation just a tiny amount? It seems unlikely to deflect the power of that molten jet, but then again, it also seems unlikely that a mesh screen could do anything to deflect AT rifle bullets..

Yes, agreed. I had the same problem several times.

I haven't played this scenario, so can't comment on it, but in general I'll say that there's always a dark temptation for a scenario designer to start thinking he is in a competition against the player, and that he wants to win. That doesn't lead to an enjoyable experience for the player.

In that case, it looks like a bug to me.

What do Osprey base that claim on? Were any tests ever carried out? I've read several times that the hollow charge physics were not fully understood at the time, but I still find it difficult to believe that the Germans would not be smart enough to do a couple of tests to find the optimal standoff distance for their shaped charge warheads? Also, I could imagine the purpose of the springs would be to prevent the fuze from triggering - a bit like a modern RPG cage.

My guess is that you are playing on Iron and it's too dark for the rest of the platoon to see the SL, and just a bit too far away to hear him.

If a scout team is able to get into the trigger zone, that means the AI group is not longer able to control that ground, so it's good that they fall back. In my scenario, the AI groups were very small, down to individual teams at times.

In one scenario I made, I did it a bit differently - I painted trigger zones that would make enemy teams fall back if the player is close to occupying flanking positions, or if the player approaches the enemy positions to a certain distance. This means that enemy teams that have been thrown back will get a chance to retreat before the player takes those hedgerows and guns them down in the open.