sttp

I realize I posted this pic before in another thread, but... I'm wondering if some of us have the wrong idea about how vulnerable the sides of that JagdTiger are? (And I am 100% open to the possibility that it is me who has the wrong idea.) But I bet there were 3 dozen + hits to its sides here -- it's from a ChrisND YouTube preview, BTW -- and this beast survived just fine. And those AP rounds weren't coming from piddly little Stuarts or whatever, either. Any reason to believe the JagdTiger's side armor thickness in-game wouldn't be very close to its real life number (which is about 80mm, AFAIK)? That's not too shabby for the sides.... It'd also be interesting to know how many rounds the Panthers and the JagdTiger come with. That could easily be a factor at these long distances. Bill mentions limited or "short" LOS's in his terrain analysis, yes, but on a 3km map that seems like it could still end up being a pretty good distance.

Me too! Shhhhhh, don't tell anyone, but... I'll often nudge the scenario time up by a few minutes, save that version as a copy, and play that one instead of the original. (Unless the scenario time limit is explicitly mentioned in the briefing as a fundamental part of the mission, then I wouldn't, obviously.) But the extended time often makes it more fun and relaxing for me, and... well... it's my damn game, so I'll use it however I want!

Is that actually possible, to have the game change a tile's terrain type during a battle? That would certainly open up some interesting possibilities for scenario creators. Gives me a few neat ideas. If that's not possible now, maybe it'll be added to the list for CMx3. (A list that must already be a mile long.) You also mentioned, in a different post, a "Heavy: 50m deep (minimum)" felled tree obstacle, as outlined in the real German manuals. Just wondering if anyone has seen any examples of those? (Yes, I know that they mean 50 meters "deep" in the horizontal, on-the-ground sense....) The engineering side of me would just love to see one as used in practice. It seems like it'd be more work to construct one of those than it would be to just create other types of barriers, other types that'd probably be more effective, too? I guess, though, there would've been times when no other options were available. Very interesting info you've provided. Thanks.

Yeah, no problem. Glad it helped someone. I was 6 months into the game before I realized the darn shortcuts even existed! I actually used to kinda dread constructing my forces -- it seemed kinda tedious, really -- but the shortcuts (if you can call 'em that) have made force selection downright fun for me now.

Yeah, good observation. I thought about that too. But I ultimately concluded that, since the battle sizes in the game are so comparatively small, there's really no other way to simulate how armor and infantry would mutually support each other. (Or does anyone here see a better way to accomplish that, using different formations and/or organization schemes?) Either way, what Baneman has selected is definitely not too far out of bounds for an interesting and entertaining battle -- one that's appropriately demonstrative of some of this great new CMFB equipment, which is one of this battle's primary purposes, as far as I can tell. I'm really looking forward to this DAR. (It's the first one I'll get to follow as the action unfolds. Yahoo!) Anyway, good luck to both Baneman and Bill, and thanks for taking the time to do this.

Should be a really interesting battle. I'm wondering if Baneman's tanks are going to be able to engage at the kinds of ranges those tanks would ideally want to engage at? Bill's terrain analysis makes it sound like there are very few places where you'd get to use JagdTigers and Panthers at those long distances. Could mean that Baneman's tanks might end up being a little more vulnerable than we'd normally expect. And without them... yeah, true, that's a lot of infantry he has, but... Bill has a lot of tanks. Who knows how it'll all end up though. I just know it's sure gonna be fun to watch. Edit to add: now that I go back and think about it more... this map is over 3km long. So a 'short' LOS on it is still probably a pretty good distance. This makes me worry less about Baneman's tanks than I was before. As long as there's plenty of tank ammo and he plays it straight, I think his armor will be okay. (I wonder how many rounds that JagdTiger comes with?)

One more vote for Option B.

A side note on this topic of picking forces (and I'm embarrassed to admit that it took me way too long to realize this): you can purchase formations by simply double-clicking on them, and you can deactivate sub-units on the right with the Backspace key... i.e., there's no need to ever use the mouse and those "Purchase" and "Delete" buttons (that seem so small and so very far away, especially at super hi resolutions). 90% of the people here already knew this, I'm sure, but for the 10% who don't, it can eliminate what was always kinda a minor PITA to me. I still see people on their YouTube vids purchasing and deactivating the 'slow' way -- not sure they know of the keyboard shortcuts? -- and it makes me wonder how I ever lived like such an animal. (LOL)

When I started playing (almost exactly 1 year ago), I found Games Pusher's "Monster Combat Mission Normandy Tutorial" video to be both helpful and enjoyable. It's here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbE8795rt2s -- a good passive source that you can watch as you're going to sleep or whatever. Also, Armchair General's Tactics Tutorials helped quite a bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ6dDlqye9Q For true depth of knowledge, though, there's really no substitute for the manuals. Sounds boring, I know, but they're all very well written and are densely packed with useful info. For more obscure issues and tips about how the AI 'thinks' or whatever, the best source of knowledge is undoubtedly the veteran forum members here. They've been tremendously helpful. So I'd say just start with the very basics -- the move and targeting commands -- and then jump right in and play and experiment. Do a forum search when you have major questions. (Note that a google search with site:community.battlefront.com appended to the end has some advantages over a standard forum search, IMO.) And when that's not helpful, just ask. Some people have been playing this game and browsing the forums for nearly 5 years, and they'll answer you without biting your head off even if your question has been asked before.... Good luck and have fun.

LOL. That has yet to happen to me. That I've noticed, at least... though I do spend lots of time rewinding between turns, so I think I would've. It's got to be infuriating. But like someone else said, pretty cool that the simulation is rich enough to allow for these kinds of rare incidents. (Who'd have it any other way?!)

Yeah, at least 10 panzers. Look how many shots these things can absorb! (This was taken very soon after it was knocked out. It's a screen grab from one of ChrisND's YouTube videos.) How many points to buy one of these monsters?

I've never been that into comics, but this... this is really well done. Thanks for your efforts. These set the mood for the new game in a way that not much else probably could. Can't wait to get my hands on this new title.

Just watched DAR #1 on The Few Good Men's channel, and that's a really nice looking map. Interesting objectives, too. Look forward to giving it a go.

Wow. The snow is up to the soldiers' shins! Looks incredible. I hereby volunteer to be the first customer. (You know, to help BFC test download speeds and such....)

Not sure about the language on the purchase page being "misleading"? I guess you could argue it could be a tiny bit more precise, but... seems clear enough? I suppose they could've explicitly stated "To get the 3.0 upgrade, you must purchase it separately for $10, but we've taken that $10 off the bundle price so that you're not paying more overall." Could be said a thousand different ways.... I don't think you'll be disappointed by CMFI. It has a totally different 'feel' and flavor to it. It's my favorite of the three games, personally. The Niscemi Highway mission is a real standout, IMO, and Catch a Tiger is also on my Top 10 list. Keep of Majella was also very intense -- use your explosives wisely! -- and is also probably a pretty good prelude to the upcoming Bulge game. (Snowy environment, and there's a well-defended bridge you've got to get across....) Gosh, all this talk is making me wish I could have another "first time" with them. Have fun with the new game.

Had no idea you were doing the sites as a kind of side thing, basically as charity. So thanks for that. Interestingly, a few weeks back I subscribed to receive updates when new scenarios are posted at TSD, so I now get a WordPress e-mail every time even an 'old' scenario is transferred from the repository to your site... and it's very obvious you're working your butt off to get all those files (several hundred, I guess) moved over. Will keep those facts in mind before offering suggestions or criticisms.

All else being equal, if troops or tanks are left on their own, with just a 'bare' FACE command, are they just as likely to fire as if they'd been given an actual TARGET ARC? (I'm talking about a target inside the hypothetical arc, of course.) It seems like setting up a target arc would compel them to fire when they otherwise wouldn't, like with low probability hits or when it'd be less effective suppression, but... after a little bit of testing in the editor, I can't seem to tell much of a difference? Does that match other players' experiences? Has anyone done some kind of thorough testing on this?

Wow, sorry to hear this. The community really benefits from you, Phil / Kohlenklau. Hope you're good as new soon, up and having as much fun around here as you always seem to be.

Very nice. Yeah, I thought I must've been missing something re: the search feature. I guess I was expecting it to be over near the jump list and top downloads and all, so sorry about that. The site(s) seem great, so keep up the good work.

What will the game's official name be, actually? Just "Combat Mission: Battle of the Bulge"? The other titles in the CMx2 series seem like they wouldn't have been obvious/predictable, so... just wondering. I guess the answer will be just one more surprise.

Yes, it was KIA x2, no wounded. I ultimately moved the survivors to a different action square, and then they did start grabbing their dead squadmates' equipment. Took about 1.5 turns. Womble said the action square to use is the one "where that outflung leg or arm is," and that turned out to be true in this case. It sure looked like those KIA's were a bit closer to my original AS, but I guess not. However... I feel like I've seen squad members move 2 or 3 AS's to help the wounded? Am I mis-remembering that? I guess it could be different for KIA vs. WIA, a crucial distinction that others above have mentioned.

Or rather, are there ways to nudge or "encourage" a wounded soldier's remaining team members to start the medic process more quickly? I did a forum search on this, but surprisingly didn't have much luck. A few scattered remarks here and there.... Obviously, I put/keep the hopefully medic-ing soldiers into the wounded soldiers' action spot. That part of the battlefield is now safe, well masked by terrain. I've tried pointing these teammates directly at the wounded (with a FACE command). I've also tried it via cover arc, so that they know their mission right now is to not be shooting. My remaining squad members really, really need to get those stens and especially the binoculars off of their fallen comrades. But it's been three turns now and they still won't initiate the medic process. Must the future medics be placed on the exact same action spot their team members were killed or injured from? Because the wounded are in the middle of four, about equidistant from each, and I don't remember precisely which one I had them assigned to back when the bullets were flying.... II don't recall ever seeing any pixeltruppen so hesitant to help (err... pickpocket) their buddies. Ideas or suggestions?

Just DL'd it. Sounds very interesting, especially the trigger use. And who doesn't love a good mystery!? Thanks.

I agree as to the cause of the Battle Pack delay, and I think maybe I saw someone (a 'someone' who I thought would probably know) hint at exactly that? Somewhere. I really don't want to be involved in mere rumors, though, so I'll try to find that reference. Re: Bulge, yeah, it'd be great to at least get those AAR's going. But I guess BF will wait 'til a time when they feel they can do it right. I can definitely respect that. Unfortunately for them, it's probably one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations....

I really like the way they're headed with the Scenario Depot and Proving Grounds, overall. The one big thing I don't like about those sites, though, is that there appears to be no search feature? (How could this be? I'm missing something really obvious, right?) Anyway, what's your scenario's title? Normandy, Italy, or Red Thunder? I'd be happy to make yours the next one I play, so long as it's not too big. I'm a micro-manager, so don't have the patience to spend an hour between turns, LOL. Also, it could easily be a week or two before I could start. Due to the holiday, plus I'm only ~10 moves into CMFI's "Keep of Majella"... a beautiful map, BTW, so kudos to the scenario designer Kari Salo. (An added plus is that its snowy conditions are really getting me into a Bulge state of mind....) Oh, last thing: one of the problems right now with The Scenario Depot is that the BF Repository's files are still not all transferred over. So I've mostly still been downloading things from here. Not sure if that issue would be applicable to the Proving Grounds, but I suspect most people won't make the true switch in their minds until every file has been moved there.