Warts 'n' all

Me neither, probably explains the question.  Google is a little vague on the matter...
Okay I found this:
The first construction of a bridge over the Elbe near Lauenburg took place in 1878. This was blown up by the company's own troops at the end of World War II to prevent the advance of British troops.

In the Commonwealth of Nostalgia Magna we forge our own history.

Huh, so it's from some other title I got the idea that low bocage could be plowed over by vehicles. I couldn't figure out why it wouldn't work in CMBN a couple of months ago.

Ah, the Commonwealth.  Ian will appreciate that I'm sure 😉.

I have a very vague recollection of reading that CMFB would only have two types of hedgerow, "Hedge" and "Low Bocage", and that for movement purposes they would be treated the same, unlike in Battle for Normandy. Obviously, now that I want to find it in the manual I can't.
So I just ran a quick test with a Locust and a Jeep. Both made short work of the low bocage.... 

I always thought all hedges in CMFB were passable, despite looking similar to the "low bocage" from CMBN. Perhaps I shall have to re-read the manual.

Thanks Ian.  In my mind I thought I'd done that, but I suppose I might have been a bit sloppy about it.  Minus 1 Pershing is the result.  Such is war...

My understanding is that the low and high bocage blocks movement in CMBN. CMRT and CMFB both have low bocage (but not high) except it does not block armour. Having said that if you want your armour to cross it you need to place a order way point just on one side and the next one just on the other. Otherwise the pathing system might decide to go around or through a gap some distance away. 
When i am trying to get vehicles to cross any obstacle I always place a way point around 5m away from the obstacle and another way point 5m or so on the other side. That tells the TacAI "I want you to drive through / over this". I do this for streams, hedges, walls, bocage etc. So, also for jeeps, trucks etc. not just tanks.

Yeah, its an abstraction that covers field phones. It, clearly, looks goofy in your situation though. 

well that actually makes some sense , the hypothetical field wire , but it makes zero sense for  a tank crew 100m from their destroyed tank

Sorry couldn't resist.

The Final Mission - This was one tough pussy. .. 
 

so maybe it's fuel related or just not from the same unit?

I read it the same.  No need for any more personal 'digs' but I am ever the optimist.

I'm not sure I understand your question? A) Are you saying you've played 2 hours and nothing has happened? The scenario is 2 hours long total, and I'm pretty sure there are AI plans for both sides.. There is a 105 battery at the start along with a bunch of on map mortars, and you get more in 40 minutes, plus a 155 (which is actually medium artillery, and 105 is light artillery but that's just words. All artillery is good). For the ones currently available I was able to select any of them with a HQ unit.
B ) Same comment. Selecting a Tiger tank, for example, no fire support available. Select a HQ and I can call from a number of mortars and a 105 battery.
[edit] There are AI plans for both sides. I went back and checked the play testing notes, because I only played this one from the Soviet side.
Dave

Don't think the Scheldt estuary clearing operations have been touched on yet, these are in the timeframe of Final Blitzkrieg (autumn 1944). Shame we didn't get any amphibious vehicles like the 'Buffalo' in the expansion.

I believe that German light infantry guns can also perform indirect fire missions on-map.

Ah, wouldn't have heard that. I only play the WW2 titles.

That was brilliant. It's a shame that "Chewin' the fat" isn't on the BBC iPlayer. It's also a shame that BFC didn't get someone from north of the border to do the voices for 15th Inf Div.

Unfortunately, there is no concrete way of knowing unless the designer has put it in the briefing.

So where did the list come from then?  There is at least one air battle.  How does CM model that?  And at two of the operations were a large scale across large fronts with separate battles from those operations on the list also.  One of the operations you listed was a broad reorganization of recon units and wasn't a even a battle by itself.
I'm still not sure why you would link to empty wiki pages to make your case.  Couldn't you have linked to something that laid it out?

Nae a west coaster - wee bit more like this:
 

Yeah, come on George. Give us something like this.... 
 

That's exactly what I wanted 😉.  I'm from 'up north' don't forget, just not as far as you.