postfux123

Thats a tough one, but extremly entertaining to play. I tried again and this time put some effort in holding the objektive. I took one casuality like before - exactly the same soldier, must have been a bullet with his name on it. Nailed the TD again, stabilised the flank and actually repelled the attack. I left a LMG team of three man and a team consising of a sniper and a rifleman to cover the approach and keep the Germans running. 3 armor down, 38 killed, 37 wounded vs 2 killed 3 wounded (did some buddy aid after retaking my lost position). Now it was a tactical victory. Guess I am ready to watch the video .

Took one more casuality and decided to give up the position, worked beautifull. Got the TD, killed some more germans and got everyone out, Turnbull last. 30 killed, 39 wounded, 2 tanks and one tank destroyer out of comission vs 4 killed 1 wounded amounted to a tactical defeat. I didnt get points for enemy casualities and he got 500 for the objektive.

Great answer YankeeDog, thanks a lot. I dont think i can force a surrender. Guess I see if i can hold the line a little longer before pulling everyone out.

Thanks for your answer. Do you now if the left behinds are considered dead in further missions and whether its wise to abandon the ATGs and exit the crews for this reason?

Thanks for the link. I will watch it when I have finished mine. Dont want any spoilers right now. Right now I have 4 casualities, a bit more than 10 min on the clock, knocked out 2 tanks and lots of german pixeltroopers are lying around or running in the wrong direction. More are coming, I know. I have a good chance to stabilise my right flank after a plunder of mine that led to crisis and did cost the life of 3 valiant paratroopers. If this fails its time to get out. Even if I hold the position I should get points for retreating so I wonder how this is done well campaign and mission points wise.

In the 4th scenario my paratroopers have to defend some positions for some time and retreat afterwards. Since there is no transport for the ATGs I ask myself wether it is wise to abandon the guns and retreat the crews. I am also not sure what happens if some guys stay in the fight to cover the retreat. Are they considered dead only for calculating the scenario outcome or will I miss them in the rest of the campaign. Might influence my decision who gets to stay behind. Any input on that?

The cover arc should work like in CMx1. I think that the hide command does more than to just reduce visibilty. Your spotting will get worse and your troops will be more reluctant to open fire. I stopped using the command except I really want my guys to hide and cant offer any more insight than that.

Just for my understanding. They were buttoned up and the riders were mounted when the enemy opened fire and the remaining riders were still on the tank when they unbuttoned? Seems rather reckless.

If the crew buttons up and dont slow down for the riders to dismount they should hope none of them survives.

That would be a great thing implemented in transport vehicles in the game now and more important than tank riders in my eyes. Some scenarios are more or less broken because AI troop that are arriving in trucks end up in an appaling motorised dance of death.

I like to see that there are unattended wounded guys because for some reason I cant stand having pixeltruppen lying around forgotten in their agony. Its much easier to find everyone now. I agree that its not very appealing graphically. On the other hand I wouldnt want it gone as a source of information.

I guess it started with "I bet you cant...".

No we are two. Nobody has to buy anything. Just as nobody has to develop anything. If BF would not make new stuff available for CMBN nobody would be complaining. That is why in my opinion complaining is - sorry - stupid. If you are succesfull BF will just stop to put this effort into the game. So for the sake of us who are willing the spend $10 on a game we spend hours playing please dont buy and dont complain if you think it is not worth the money.

If you adopt my opinion I might forgive you.

100% support from me. They might not depict historic situatiosn well and such, but were extremly entertaining to play. What I would also love to see: Artillery plans (preplanned shifting of fire) and walking barrages. Preplanned arty only in certain scenarios. Organising on map assets in batterys (less spotting rounds, coordinated firing). Reworked fortifications. Bunkers not rendered unusable by MG fire and sacrosanct to the enemy. Mixing covered arcs and area fire. Vehicles less reluctant to fire at a highly visible, deadly threat outside a covered arc. Platoon ambushes triggerd by HQ. Handing AT weapons picked up to the squad AT guy. Merging teams under certain circumstances (once had a surviving AT guy with a tube and another with rockets standing side by side discussing what to do) or more efficient ammo sharing (giving unneeded ammo to someone who can use it). No expansion in micro management via acquire. Precise MG placement!!! Reorganising your battered force in campaigns like merging squads, promoting someone to platoon leader reattaching support weapons. Picking up SMG .

I think that the time limit is already some sort of abstraction for the sake of playability. 40 min to decide success or defeat seems to be a very desperate situation. Also 2 hours for some bigger operation isnt too much time. The result of this is that assaults have to be if not rushed than at least executed very efficient without unnecessary pause. I am happy with the demolition charges as it gives some tactically flexibility many maps would be very predictable without. You are surely right it is not historically correct but neither is pitching two equal forces in a fight to the last man except on rare occasion. It would seem alright for me if infantry could dig cover in lets say twenty minutes beeing highly visible doing it and exhausted afterwards. I just dont think that would be a great improvement to the game. Automatic digging in would annoy me for some reason. Changing position still is the best way to avoid indirect fire on the CM scale.

Mine also managed to blow theselves up, but what really frustrated me is that i didnt manage to clean the bridge (wanted to not get some pathing issues with mortars coming in). They even blew up the wall providing some cover against direct fire without any appaerent reason.

I think a real world WWII tactics would be called "recon by explosion" preferably done by an armored car and not a sherman. I dont know what i did wrong with my engineers but they blew up anything but the wire. I utterly failed to remove all of the wire from the bridge. Edit: Scouting worked, spotted two guns without a hit.

Dont know if this is considered gamey but get some eyes (wih binos) up front and use one Sherman to scout by dashing out of cover and moving back. These ATG are firing at great distance. Chances are you might not loose a tank. Have to admit I gave up on this one because the barbed wire on the bridge was bringing me to tears. Perhaps I am the wrong guy to give good advise.

Well I got it issued in my impressive compulsory service (I am not as old as you might think now ). And had to dig in soil and snow. 40 min is in my estimation no timeframe to dig a serious cover even without hitting stones or roots or breaking the shovel. Even if you have the stamina to do so you will be terribly exposed and completly exhausted. I have no knwoledge what real soldiers can accomplish in that timeframe.

One of the most interesting war memoirs I ever read was from a guy whose name I forgot. He was one of Cortes soldiers. This gang of about 500 mercenarys landed on an unknown coast finding a strange and in some aspects savage culure. They challenged an empire fielding a standig army in the tens of thousands and the ability to mobilize hundreds of thousand. In the end they conquered the capital, built in a lake lying above 2.000 m and beeing the third largest city of its time, built in a strange and fascinating architecture. This resulted in the destruction of a whole civilization and spanish control over Mexico. Cortes himself failed to find a place in this new world showing a surprising lack of understanding of political power. Our hero sat down and wrote a book about this campaign which is great to read once you get used to the language, thanks to his rather modern style of storytelling. The latter prompted a visit of the Spanish Inquisition complaining about the perspective of his storytelling as beeing too centered on the views of a single soldier. Surely Gods working did play a much greater role, completly ignored in the book. also his majesty in Spain doesnt get the credit he surely deserves. Our valiant Konquistatore heraing their complaints stiffened slightly, leaned forward, unblinkingly fixed the chief Inquisitor and silently, but well audible and only slightly threatingly said: "Listen, Buddy. I fought more battles than Ceasar. If you want me to change my book, look in my eyes and call me a liar." They were talking about the mexican climate afterwards and the inquisition guys after hastily finishing their Drinks left for good. Mr. big cojones still feeling some pressure inside sat down and added a chapter to his book about the visit of the Spanish Inquisition. I guess this meeting happened in a veterans settlement in Mexico and not in some village on the Spanish mainland. What did I want to tell with this completly unconnected and slightly meandering story? Right! Luke, you remind me of the Spanish Inquisition.

Must have angered the CM god by complaining. I just set up a HMG this side of a hedgerow and it cant target a single spot on the other side of the hedgerow. :mad: Visually the MG seems to be perfectly set up on top of the embankment. Edit: Found the reason. The gunner was cowering. I think that should not prevent from area targeting.

I always thought that firing behind the hedgerow means firing in the cover while firing in front of the cover means, well firing in front of it which should be less effective.

No didnt try that. I thought firing in front of the hedgerow wouldnt be off much use. Will try it next time, thanks for the hint.