General Liederkranz

Thank you, IanL, for clearing that up. At least I am not alone. Huge frustration. I worked on my two scenarios for the best part of a year. I hope they manage to clear this soon. It may be cosmetic, but to have your FJs properly configured but looking like ordinary Landsers just doesn't fly in my book.

My mistake.....I was thinking of the several reports of the same issue in CM:FI where it does appear to be a problem:

 

Following a long period of really not knowing what to do, I decided to upgrade CMFI to Eng 4 along with the remainder of the CM Games.  The Crucifix issue has been resolved,  Its gone, thought it was worth mentioning.  Also following the download of the patch to Eng 4 the game has improved hugely.  Best Wishes to all. 

it sounds a bit like that partiular PB got some damages before and it was now the time for internal damage meter (which is invisble to the player) to go full tilt and let the crew bail. Sometimes I had the feel that the game engine sort of "anticipates" a PB´s final destruction and let the crew bail prematurely so to say. Plain crew morale/suppression reasons from my experiences NEVER lets a crew bail. But got to test the new patch for any possbile changes I might not know about ATM.

I still maintain the biggest differentiation between RL casualty rates and in game rates is now *we* play. We keep going when real force commanders would pull back and break contact. We move much to fast a lot of the time short cutting on scouting, forgoing the 5min wait for supporting fire etc. Defenders stick it out when they would really elect to preserve there force and withdraw. Attackers keep trying even as they have lost so much.
A great counter example is the recent AAR for Shock Foce by  @Bil Hardenberger and me:
Bil's force broke contact after my force inflicted a significant number of casualties. But Bil is special most of us would have pressed the attack and racked up massive casualties and I would have tried to hang on to the last man. How would that have been realistic? If the majority of battles were conducted like this one, we would not be having a conversation about realism and casulties.
Period.

I saw some division equipment lists. Usually tables don't have separated column for SVTs, only for rifles in general. When it has - in the best case division had hundred or two of SVTs. Some examples from my notes:
143 rifle division, 22.02.43: 4059 rifles, 155 SVT, 103 lmgs, 549 smgs, 15 AVS (rare weapon!)
243 rifle division, 18.06.43: 3776 rifles, 181 SVT, 1007 smgs, 196 lmgs.
2-3 SVT for a platoon. I can post document scans for 2 cases above. SVTs weren't produced since 1942. (1 million in 1941, 200 thousands in 1942) It is fun that despite this in organizational charts till the end of war weapon of a rifleman was SVT. (letter "a" in "weapons" column - autorifle) This may confuse researcher.
 

The trouble with quick battles is that they're not based on anything. It's not simulating an actual military engagement, it's merely throwing a bunch of troops onto the map and letting the player muddle through as best they can.
That's a recipe for casualties no matter what you do, and that's never going to change.

Minute 33-32 AOA 2
AOA2 was my first thrust against the fascist aggressors, and unlike AOA1 it was not without cost. I dropped 192 rockets on the houses and trees behind them several minutes ago, and I have no way of confirming their effectiveness. My units made their way through the woods along the eastern edge of the map, which was, of course a predictable course, as it is the only avenue to the objective that offers almost continuous cover.
My men faced panzerfausts, which destroyed two of my three armoured cars. I ran into ambushing troops and my opponent even placed a minefield to make me cautious. I had Tankodesantniki scraped off their T34s in a rush toward the houses. They appear to be cleared now, at least, but as my earlier post indicates, one platoon is down 75% and the other 18% so the losses were somewhat severe.
You can see a breakdown of the squad numbers below.

RU129
With no enemy immediately in sight I set out to move my 1/1 and 2/1 squads out of the minefield. I’m not sure how large it is, so I am careful to move around to each side to clear it. Accompanying them is 1/1 T34/85 to provide fire support if they get engaged from the treeline beyond the gully. These are the most intact units I have on AOA 2 so I need to take good care of them. 

RU130
It looks like my opponent has not abandoned all the buildings after all. Heavy fire that sounds like an HMG fires at 3/1 squad. The Nearby T34 can’t get a good angle from their current position to fire on the enemy. I want to displace it but…
Also a new contact appears, a HQ apparently. That unit…

RU131
...Opens fire from the treeline, nearly missing the 1st Tank Platoon CO.

RU132
Despite buttoning up, the T34 fires an accurate shot…

RU133
...That takes out the shooter.

RU134
My infantry, despite being suppressed, spots the MG 42 firing on them. I order 1/2 T34/85 to advance to the abandoned foxholes and to blast HE into the building to drive the HMG crew out.

RU135
There are contacts that I believe are from fleeing, long-departed enemy units near those foxholes, but to be sure, I have 1st Tank Platoon CO’S T34/85 perform area fire in the vicinity to protect the other tank.

RU136
Despite all the action nearby, 1/2 squad, 2/1 squad, and 1/1 T34/85 skirt the minefield unmolested and eye the distant treeline, waiting for the inevitable order to advance. For bounding overwatch I have split both squads, hence the A/B designation. 

RU137
2/1 T34/85 hangs back. Despite the trees, it has fairly good vision all the way past the gully to the distant treeline, as you can see in this demonstration. It’s able to overwatch the advancing infantry and its sister tank. From its position it can see the wrecked Marder. Impressive to see the 85mm shell passed entirely through the enemy vehicle. 

RU138
In the distant tree line a solitary German soldier is spotted, but he vanished before he can be fired upon. My opponent is shifting forces around. I’m not entirely sure what to make of some of these movements. It may be part of a unit that was supposed to provide support for the now-dead Marder nearby. In any case, I think unit shifting is a good sign: it means I’m not where he wants me to be and he has to adjust.

RU139
Now, I must admit his infantry worries me - a lot more than his armour, which so far I've seen only two Marders. Knowing my opponent well, I can surmise a few things:
He likely did not buy heavy armour. So I don't expect any of the big cats. While a Marder or Panzer IV can easily knock out my tanks at this range, my tanks have all the advantages, if no cats are present: heavier armour, bigger guns, faster speed. He has radios, and most of mine don't, but with so many infantry and tanks concentrated in a small area, I am confident that what one T34 doesn't see another will.  He doesn't have a lot of (any?) Anti-Tank Guns - or else they would be protecting his HMGs, which I have been able to blast at stand-off ranges with my tanks. I can't discount a surprise or two in the town but if he had serious firepower I can't imagine he's waiting for me to be right in the town to use it.  My opponent favours infantry. So I am expecting a fair bit of it, as much as he can afford, and that includes panzerfausts. Other games I've played made it clear they can take out a T34/85 at beyond 100m range - I thought that is almost a freak shot. I’m not looking forward to moving into the town with my tanks... but I’ve succeeded in bringing a fairly powerful force to his doorstep. If my forces on AOA1 can advance into the town, and I'm able to provide heavy HE support with my tanks, my SMG troops are well suited to this kind of warfare.  and I don’t think it’s a fight he can win. 

CMBN 4.0 Patch Has New QB Maps.  They are easily identified by "2019" in the Map name.  I took a good run at the bocage maps and personally enjoyed the game play with them.  There are a few maps devoted to the Rhone Valley of Southern France. So river crossing and Hills. 

I don't understand why people say these things. If you're playing against a human opponent in a single scenario, then you can expect to recieve and inflict heavy casualties, because you are playing a game that has no consequences beyond winning or losing. Thus, neither player is under any obligation to agree to a ceasefire, or surrender, if they take a sufficient number of casualties. In fact many players, myself included, will drive their pixeltruppen far beyond human endurance if it means securing a victory in a PBEM.
If you are playing a single-player scenario, then there is no excuse for incurring massive amounts of casualties. I've made it a point to provide such object lessons as "How to Avoid Needless Casualties" with every single scenario I play and record. Sure, my run through 'Gog and Magog' was inconclusive at best, but I certainly didn't lose more than ten percent of my force before realizing I couldn't win without incurring the insane casualties you speak of.
I think the question of casualties comes from an incorrect assumption on the part of the player that every single scenario is capable of being won with a total victory, or that one needs to simply hurl human bodies at the enemy with enough frequency to guarantee a heroic result.

I had grew a bit dissatisfied with aspects of co-coordinating my forces when playing the AI so now I follow these self imposed rules. Now that I have written them out they seem much more complicated than I would have thought but if you are at all interested in practice they are not as difficult to play with as they look below. I do not use anything outside the game interface, no writing stuff down etc.

This started one day playing in a campaign where I was area firing at stuff that a unit hadn't spotted, felt really dumb doing it and vowed that I would never do it again. But then situations presented themselves when it didn't seem dumb so I made some exceptions. Over the next many months the following guidelines grew exponentially from there.


I played real-time for a long time but nowadays play turn based in Iron mode. I have only ever followed these rules while playing turn based and I am not sure how following these rules would work in realtime. Battles feel more real and so much less gamey for me now in that my forces are no longer a giant amoeba with the right units always in the right spot. The rules rely heavily on the information sharing model that Battlefront built in and some blinkered vision from myself as I play. These rules attempt to separate out the roles of different units and place limitations on how responsive and co-ordinated your entire force is. C2 becomes more important as units that are in C2 tend to move faster and get help quicker.

I typically play campaigns but the rules should play out reasonably for any size battle. The model basically assumes there is a Company Commander overseeing the battle who broadly issues a plan and changes the plan as he goes along. The subordinate Plt Leaders then implement the plan and are viewed as the leaders specifically issuing the move orders to the rifle SQDs.

---------------ATTACKING
----------SET-UP
Artillery - Prebarrage no limitations. I do normally try and prebarrage, especially if I have suspected positions already marked out.
Infantry - A plan is given to each platoon and a rally point is designated. Depending on the plan the unit is either moving:
* "In formation" with an "assault" attitude
* "In formation" with an "move to contact" attitude
* "In formation" with an "recon" attitude
* "subformation" with a "move to contact" attitude
* "subformation" with a "recon" attitude
An "in formation" move is when Sqds are moving together as part of a platoon at a single objective and is expecting to be in command constantly/frequently with the Ptl Leader.
A "subformation" move is when a unit or smaller group of units is sent off by itself and will not be in contact with it's parent unit as combat mission sees C2. This would be typically be something such as a Sqd or scout team sent off solo to investigate flanks or a HMG team planted somewhere to provide covering fire.
Armour - A plan is formed. Sometimes this is for a platoon of tanks and at other times individual tanks get there own plan. A rally point is given. I do not deal with armour like infantry above. Nothing feels right to me as the more detailed rules for infantry above so they get their basic plan and off they go.
Support (HMG, mortars, trucks, jeeps) - A plan is formed. No rally point is given. What on earth are you doing that these guys needs a rally point?!. Just joking. They get a rally point too. You never know.

-----Attaching Support Units to a different formation.
Most commonly this is incorporating support units into a rifle Plt. For example attaching the HMGs from a weapons company to individual rifle platoons and leaving the mortars in a safer rear area. In these situations I make a mental note of this. Typically these units will never be "in command" as per the "green light" in the user interface as they are leaving their parent formation behind. For the purposes of these rules they are in command if they are within 50m or have a 70m LOS to the CO of the unit they are attached too. I am not sure if this is gamey or not but as I try and play Campaigns I am loathe to risk my mortars near a frontline so this often leaves me in a situations where HMGs are never in a position to fight unless they are attached to another unit. I still try and not do this. Another similar use for this is splitting pioneer SQDs and have them trail tanks or infantry platoons.

----------Combat Turns
The mission commences and each unit follows it's plan. Plotting long groups of orders assists with remembering plans but after playing this way for a long time it is automatic for me now. I have never written anything down to keep track. The initial plan gets followed until one of the change/completion/abandon plan criteria below kicks in.

-----Company Commanders Orders Change of Plan.
As long as a Plt Leader is in command with the higher unit a new plan can be issued at any time but both the Coy Co and the sub-ordinate getting the new plan do nothing for 1:15 minute. There is no restriction on the number of sub-ordinates that a can get a new plan at the same time. To keep within the spirit of the rules it is important that the new plan is in the realms of what the Cpy Co understands is happening. Selecting the Cpy Co and zooming out to the highest level is a nice indication of this. For example if a Plt that is in command and is advancing nicely down the right you may want to stop Plts advancing left and redirect them to follow the unit on the right. Conversely there will be situations where you can see a formation heading into trouble (often tanks unaware of AT guns that infantry have spotted). In these situations the tanks follow their plan until the unit itself becomes aware enough to change it's own plan.

-----Giving Units Orders.
These are actual quick/move/slow/hunt etc orders.
Infantry moving "In Formation"
- Withdraw button can be hit anytime/any situation.
- Withdraw button can be hit anytime/any situation then "dragged" 2 actions squares with a 10 second pause.
- HQ units can give themselves orders at anytime/any situation.
- A unit can always move one action square anytime/any situation.
- A unit that is in C2 can be issued new move orders at any time, although the orders should be based on their current plan and what the unit/Plt leader is seeing.
- A split SQD that is not in C2 may be issued new orders if the other half of the SQD is in command and within 50m. Both units suffer a 30 second delay (the out of C2 split sqd is being yelled at by the in C2 sqd).
- A unit that is not in command cannot get new orders except to preserve itself. This means the unit remains stationary, moves a single square or retreats to preserve themselves or declares themselves "lost" see below. This remains the case until C2 is re-established.

Infantry moving "Subformation". A subformation is a unit or group of units that are operating independent of their leader. As the in-game C2 system becomes irrelevant in these situations I attempt to keep groups that are operating as a subformation within a 70m LOS or 50m distance of each other.
- Withdraw button can be hit anytime/any situation.
- May be issued new orders at any time, the orders should be based on their current plan and what the unit/Plt leader is seeing.

-----Units Abandon their plan.
Infantry
Units will abandon their plan if any of the following criteria are met.
- An infantry unit with a "recon" attitude will abandon it's plan after spotting an enemy unit with 200m of it's objective or taking fire that changes it's morale state past nervous. It will observe the position (varies based on situation) then fall back from it's current position and take cover. If it is in command it will await a new plan. If it is not in command it will either rejoin it's parent unit/company commander or send a runner back to it's parent unit to obtain new orders.
- An infantry unit with a "move to contact" attitude will abandon it's plan after coming within 200m of an enemy (or thereabouts). The unit will attempt to stay in it's current position, destroy the enemy contacted and send runners back to it's parent unit if it is not in command.
- 3 casualties in a rifle sqd or 6 casualties in a platoon. Maintain position and obtain a new plan. This can be hard to monitor, especially with SQDs that are understrength. I DO NOT micromanage or track this closely. Basically if a sqd gets really hurt or two SQDs get dinged this kicks in. NOTE - at one point I tried using the CM user interface morale states but could never find a happy medium. Platoons either were too tentative or I was feeling compelled to follow bad plans that wiped out SQDs. This seems to work best. Also most of these rules were set before the 2.0 MG suppression upgrade.
- Spotting a threat it can't effectively deal with. (eg Infantry can see a tank on it's objective). Withdraw to a safe distance or maintain position then request a new plan.

After reading these you can see that only units attacking "in formation" can be relied upon to push home attacks hard. As the most aggresive posture a subformation can adopt is "move to contact". This results in tentative moves as even though they will attempt to hold position and defeat the enemy in front of them they will have to spend more time reporting back to their CO and getting plans than an "in formation" unit "assaulting".

NOTE - when I play there is nothing wrong with reissuing the same or similar plan after one gets cancelled. The above criteria are just a forced pause. For example a Rifle Plt "assault"ing a position would only have it's plan cancelled by either casualties or discovering a cluster of tanks on their objective. If a unit takes casualties it will undergo the enforced pause of 1:15 but the Cpy Co can still direct the Plt to attack anyway. The casualty count gets reset at this point and off they go again.

Armour
- Any high calibre rounds hits or near misses a tank (not smalls arms) or there is a crew casualty. My understanding from several memoirs is that AP shot had a very specific sound when passing and that tanks get to take defensive action even if they do not know where the shot originated from.
I found it difficult implementing a structure as detailed as the infantry model that was workable so for armour it is very simple. No restrictions on orders. Form a plan then plot a long string of orders and try not to deviate from the orders unless the unit(s) in question has spotting contacts that would alter their behaviour.

-----Runners
Runners are a method I use to share information or establish a command link outside the CM game interface. They typically are used when you use subformations that aren't in the normal chain of command or radios get smashed. If a unit wishes to contact it's parent and radio isn't an option then you must move a unit. This runner is typically a scout team running back to the Cpy Co. A runner simply moves to where ever the Cpy Co is and spends 1:15 in the same or adjacent square. Getting back close enough (ie 80 metres away) for long visual contact isn't sufficient enough to convery a new plan for me therefore moving in close is required. NOTE also that this time is typically long enough for the Combat Mission information sharing model to kick in so the Cpy Co would now typically have contacts for everything the runner knew. Conversely the Cpy Co can also send out runners to subordinates that it cannot contact. The runners going out and coming in follow the same movement method for "lost" units detailed below.


-----Lost Units
Sooner or later you will find a unit that got left behind or has fallen out of command and doesn't have a realistic chance of establishing it again as it can't move and the CO is too busy doing other things to chase them up. I decided that I can declare a unit "lost" at anytime. Once you decide that a unit is lost it can do the following:
- Withdraw button can be hit anytime/any situation.
- It can always move to preserve itself with a 10 second delay but cannot be given orders that will increase it's immediate danger.
- It will try and re-establish contact by moving either to it's rally point, the last known square of it's CO, or the last known square of the Cpy Co. This can sometimes be difficult to remember (the UI will show "?" for friedlies in the video phase but not currently in the orders phase as all friendlies are specifically marked) but not knowing exactly isn't critical as anything loosely close will serve the purpose. A command delay of 1:15 is given at the start* and at the last waypoint of the orders. *Exception would be if the unit is in danger and needs to go straight away. Then as soon as possible the "first" 1:15 delay is given.
- Each turn the unit is not in C2 it plots a new string of orders to their CO, each time ending with a 1:15 delay. This will lead to units taking longer to find COs that are moving around. As I cycle through every unit each orders phase lost ones are obvious.
- If the unit arrives at the rally point and is not in command then it can set out to either the current/adjacent square of the CO or Cpy CO again with a 1:15 delay.
NOTE - if the leader is moving around you find that most of the lost units journey is done in the last couple hundred metres which does feel a bit odd. This is an oddity I accept as it is the easist to manage and still serves it's purpose.

-----Requesting Support
Having Pioneers run from hundreds metres away to blow a hole in bocage for a unit not directly in it's chain of command and who it most likely was completely unaware of always felt dumb to me. If it was always planned then the Pioneers should have already been on their way. This can still happen of course but with these rules there is a slight delay. I treat this as a change of plan for the support unit. If a Plt is in command with the CO it can ask for support. After 1:15 of the CO unit establishing contact with the support unit (if it wasn't already in contact) the help sets out. Exception - if the CPY Co isn't in command is doesn't necessarily have to move itself. It can send a runner such as an XO to do this task. As per runners above moving to the same/adjacent square of the supprting unit then pausing both for 1:15 delay signifying the new orders is expected. This support request broadly covers requesting HMGs/mortars to come up and direct fire on an AT gun, an FFO come up to put down artillery on contacts it isn't necessarily aware of, trucks moving for resupply, pioneers to do their thing etc.


-----In Command
I have already mentioned a couple of excpetions but this just restating when a unit is in C2
- Using the game interface a unit is in C2 if is has a "green light" to it's immediate superior.
- Using the game interface a unit is in C2 if any of the "voice", "visual" or "radio" icons are present in the display. This is typically support units being near an officer of some sort or any unit not already in command being near a Cpy CO. As this is not an ideal chain of command so a 30 second delay is imposed on orders issued.
- A unit is in 50m of it's immediate superior. Battlefront have given a 50m radius for voice contact (very generic, fine in some situations, impossible in others) but some units such as jeeps/trucks don't establish voice contact and units that are hidden have the voice contact range reduced to 20m therefore for the purposes of these rules the unit is still deemed in C2 if within the 50m. The thinking here is if a PLT leader can be heard 50m away then I don't think a hiding SQD that gets yelled at from 30m away to advance is allowed to whisper back "Ssh we are hiding".
- A unit is in command if any other part of the unit is both in command and within 50m of the unit. A 30 second delay applies for both units. This rule usually applies to a split SQD with one half in command and the other half not. Another situation where this rule commonly kicks in is for some motorised units. A CO is sitting in a halftrack and has radio contact to several subordinate halftracks so everyone is green in command. In these halftracks there is often split SQDs. If a SQD alights from the halftrack the CM command structure will go to a red cross which doesn't feel right. This sort of behaviour also occurs when towed AT guns set-up. Again the 50m rule applies with a 30 second delay.
- Support Units (jeeps, trucks, ammo carrying halftracks). I have found these units are a little chronic for never being in command. I typically try to follow the above rule but be more generous. If anyone anywhere near them has any idea what is going on they may move with purpose. This is usually covers clusters of jeep or trucks relocating.


-----Information Sharing
With these rules using the information sharing model built into CM becomes a much more integral and fun part of the game for me. Plt Leaders under these rules find themselves running around a lot more to establish contact to kick their SQDs along, particularly if you spread your SQDs out. A unit that can see many more contacts gets to make better decisions also.
Units automatically share information with nearby units and also up and down their chain of command as part of any normal CM game. Playing with these extra rules encourages you to force this to happen. The classic example is infantry spotting AT Guns and everyone else being oblivious. With no command layer rules such as these the most likely end is artillery (from an FO who may not have spotted it) falling on the AT Gun while tanks (who are oblivious to the AT guns location or even presence) actively hide from it. In these types of situations if a unit is aware of both (ie is aware of the AT gun and can see the friendly tanks) I move the unit to the tank platoon leader. It takes time but eventually this knowledge will be shared and the tank platoon can operate with this knowledge. This also highlights the advantages of having tanks come under the same C2 structure as the information is normally shared quite a bit quicker (thinking the Kampfgruppe Engal campaign here).


-----Resupply
For scenarios that have trucks, jeeps or halftracks that can supply ammo I have some fairly basic rules similar to lost units that I follow.
- The CPY Co always knows where the resupply units are. Anything else was too awkward.
- If a unit is in command to the CPY Co they may move to wherever the supply units are and get more ammunition.
- If a unit is not in command to the CPY Co they may move to either the rally point or the last know position of a CO as per a lost unit.
- If a unit is at it's rally point it can then move off to get resupplied (this is working on the assumption that there are support staff etc not represented in game that can direct them to the resupply). I often have my rally point and the resupply in the same location so this is usually a moot point.


----------No-no Commands.
These are things that I do not do mainly to reduce gameyness and to even up what should be more even fights against the AI.
-----Hiding
Infantry do not get to use the hide command to avoid rifle/MG fire from enemy infantry after a firefight has started. If you wish to maintain a low profile issue a short covered arc or move. This is mainly to prevent using the hide command to avoid incoming fire in the middle of a firefight. The AI simply does not area fire enough so in some situations it is too easy to hide for a turn then start fighting again when the situation improves. Hiding to protect from tanks or artillery is fine. Exception is casualties. If a unit has two casualties then it may hide for buddy aid purposes.

-----Area Fire
Unless you can specifically see a unit or contact marker you cannot area fire at a square. Also if there are multiple contacts in an area you cannot fire first at the one you know is the greater threat if there are other contacts that are more recent for the unit in question (the spotting contact is a darker shade of green (allies) or grey (axis)). The first area fire must be directed at the most recent contact.
Exception 1) Immediate superior has spotted something and is in voice/close visual. In these situations the commander is essentially telling a unit to fire at a spot.
Exception 2) Everyone else is shooting why can't I join in. This is basically when adjacent units are firing but a unit still hasn't spotted anything. The most common example that pops up for me is a Plt of infantry shooting at opposite bocage with a tank in support that has not a single spotting contract. In these situations I use a 2 to 1 rule. You can area fire but the first shot cannot be on a target that is known to other units and not to the firing unit. The second and subsequent area fires can be wherever you please. This way you still get to shoot but it isn't unerringly accurate, ultra-timely or quite as ammo efficient support that would normally be produced. Exception to the exception, a tank can never ever area fire at an AT Gun that it does not have a contact icon for.

-----Artillery
Similar to area fire the FFO needs to be aware of the situation before calling in a strike. Also I incredibly rarely cease fire unless the spotting unit can see friendlies moving close. Never ceasing fire also rules out gamey behaviour such as calling in long duration, low rate of fire strikes in on targets such as AT guns and ceasing fire the second it is destroyed.

-----Firing From Waypoint as an LOS TOOL.
I don't do it. I happily move around the map looking at things but don't do this. If I want to get specific LOS from a location I move a unit there. Furthermore if I plot a shoot and scoot to fire at a spot then find I can't see the intended target I still move there and give myself a 10 second pause and either don't fire at all or target somewhere else.

-----Dodging Artillery
I suspect most players with experience see a spotting round fall and know who most likely got spotted and is about to have arty drop on their head. I don't have any sort of feel for how this played out in real life but I feel very gamey sprinting the unit in question to safety and everyone else staying put.
What I decided was allowable is-
- the unit threatened AND everyone that is part of that formation (eg. entire platoon) gets to Hide.
- the unit threatened AND everyone that is part of that formation (eg. entire platoon) gets to move then Hide. Typically by hitting the withdraw button unless it is an awfully silly result.
I grappled with this and the above typically feels better than doing nothing and at the other end doesn't feel as gamey as doing the ideal activity for the threatened unit and nearby units continue on unaffected.



---------------DEFENDING
As these rules are specifically versus the AI and it is not really possible to design scenarios where the AI attacks well with anything but overwhelming force the defense options are very basic. From experience in the game you are very strung out when on defense so basically command is usually chucked out the window.

----------SET-UP
Artillery Prebarrage no limitations.
Infantry - A plan is given to each platoon and a rally point is designated. Depending on the plan the unit is either "last stand", "casualties", "fighting withdrawal".
Armour - A plan is given to each platoon and a rally point is designated.
Support - A plan is given to each platoon and a rally point is designated.

----------Combat Turns
The mission commences and each unit follows it's plan. Typically this involves sitting still and retreating after contact is made depending on their posture.
"Last stand" units attempt to hold the position and repel everything and only move back when running low on Ammo or morale becomes broken.
"Casualties" units attempt to hold position and only move back after 20% casualties are taken.
"Fight Withdrawal" units will constantly fall back. Typically spend 30 seconds in contact fighting then shift.
If a unit is ever broken it must observe "Fighting Withdrawal" behaviour.

The rest of the rules are the same except the time limits are reduced. The 1:15 delays are all reduced to 45 seconds and the 30 second delays are reduced to 15 seconds.

Units in C2 can be issued aggresive orders such as moving forward.

Units not in C2 may not fall back if they are ignorant of being flanked. This means if enemy units are coming around their sides and the unit is not aware of this they do not to get fallback. Exception - Combat sounds within 200m. There are situations when combat can be taking place quite close to troops but they do not get a spotting contact. When very close (ie within 200m) you can assume they have spotting icons and act appropriately.

The house rule I've been playing with is:

""Units cannot area fire into a location where they do not have a contact marker, unless *no* unit has a contact marker in that location"."
The point being that speculative fire is fine, but if you know something is there (and the firing unit does not) then it's cheating.

I've been mulling over nixing pre-battle bombardments entirely. TRPs are fine, and can do the same job.

Hi guys!
Good suggestions! I also like command friction and the idea that units should not react to occurances they don't know of. I have no idea myself how it could be translated into a system that could be managed by the game/pc though.  
In my opinion many realism-aspects affect the context/setting of the typical CM match: 
Night battles. People often underestimate how many attacks were carried out at night. (This is also linked to point 2: If the enemy is in defensive positions, you don't want to engage in daylight, as it will be easier to detect your appraoch and stop it - by means of MGs and artillery, usually) Play fewer meeting engagements as this would be an extremely rare situation. Play scenarios with clear attacker and defender roles. The big problem here is that CM lacks the fortifications that would be neccessary to portray such an engagement (lack of proper trenches & dug-outs). The trenches we have right now don't provide sufficient cover against artillery and small arms fire. In most cases, a defensive line can simply be "bombed out" instead of requiring a capture by fire & manoeuvre.  Many maps are a bit crowded. Of course it depends on the historical region (--> bocage in Normandy is an exception, obviously), but there is a lack of more open maps that allow heavier weapons and some defensive assets to play out their advantages.* For example, this is also true for the bunkers which are available in the game right now: In order for their cover to be of any help, the distance to the target need to be really big; otherwise, too many bullets will hit the bunker's opening. Also, MGs were preferably used at ranges at which ordinary rifles could not return fire and at which it was not so easy to pinpoint the location of the MG nest. Because of the short lines of sight (= high lethality of weapons) that are so common in CM, I feel that spotting is more important than it should be, requires you to fiddle around and micromanage a lot, and it also adds randomness to the game. Another factor related to map design is that in many terrain features (e.g. woods) have a rather small footprint or are cut off by the edge of the map which turns them into an "obvious" position that can be neutralized quite easily. It's very easy to saturate a clump of trees with arty or HE. By contrast, a 1x1 km wood is a bit more difficult to neutralize. Generally speaking, from a realism point of view, Combat Mission matches strike me as way too bloody. The amount of casualties is insane. The reasons for this are probably a mixture of the things listed above: the typical CM engagement is an engagement in daylight at very short range with no proper means of defence for the defender (trenches, dug-outs). The one  (BIG) advantage that the defender has is the short range of the engagements which enables him to trigger devastating ambushes (spotting the enemy first, destroying him before he can react).
This is what I've described as a lack of "soft contact" in Combat Mission games. You usually only get "hard contact", with one asset getting out immediately after being spotted, with few if any chances to react. In some cases, it can be extremely frustrating to play under these circumstances. 
I'd also prefer if an infantry unit that gets fired upon while moving with the standard movement-order would go prone immediately, not run to the next waypoint.  
------------------
* Once I've finished my Catania scenario for Command Ops II (https://forums.lnlpublishing.com/threads/the-battle-for-catania-primosole-bridge-sicily-july-1943.5326/)], I will continue my work on a large map (http://community.battlefront.com/topic/133505-thats-one-vast-valley-hard-edged-realistically-scaled-map/).

Just joining the chorus in the hopes something will be done about it fairly quickly: I'm also seeing this "fleeing towards the enemy by way of the nearest hedgerow gap" behavior in CMBN.  Disappointing.
Waiting 2.5 years for a patch to fix highly questionable infantry behavior under fire only to see it introduce ANOTHER form of highly questionable behavior?  Geez-o-man.  Between that, the CMFI patch zapping the Fallschirmjaeger uniforms, and complete silence as to the alleged upcoming modules for CMRT and CMFI, 2019 has so far been a rough year for BF and its fans.  I truly hope the year ends on a far better note. 

Attached is a Bocage Panic Test Map.zip  Unzip and place in scenario game files.  It is playable as either side.  I suggest you first play as Allied Attacker on your normal game style (iron-basic...whatever).  I will be interested in what your results are.  Save files can be sent to me : markDOTezra3591ATgmailDOTcom
 
2019-Bocage Panic Test Map.zip

On the contrary:  It helps point the beta tester in the right direction.
What we think we know is
1.  Not across the game platform but localized to CMBN
2.  Activity often happens around Bocage.
3. Happens when the game is patched to 4.01
Beta testers continue to look at this.  

I'm seeing this too.  Fallschirmjaegers are not using their own uniform skins in any scenario or campaign.  How did that get by the testers?
It's not a game-killing bug, but it is an immersion killing one.  I really hope we don't have to wait 2.5 years for it to be corrected.
 

@Bulletpoint discovered the following which I'm paraphrasing:
 If the shooting unit does not spot the friendly unit, small-caliber area fire will kill friendlies. Try it out in a night battle, order your tank to machinegun some distant field and then send in some infantry. If the tank doesn't spot the infantry, the infantry will take casualties. Then order your tank to fire machineguns at friendly infantry that are very close in front of the tank. The tank can fire away all day without causing any casualties.  It also works with rifles.
Not sure if that's what happened in the above case.  I'm just putting it forward as a possibility.  
 

I don't know why that tank was targeted, as it seemed sort of off-course from the enemy team, but I know that ricochets *will* harm friendly units.
Whatever that MG was shooting it, I'm fairly certain the tank commander died from a ricochet in the cupola.

It's the literal title of the bug report I submitted to BFC. Charles apparently cut and pasted it when making the patch notes to save time. The number is just a comparison of how many dudes each weapon could kill in 60 seconds in the particular test scenario I ran.

I much prefer having my troops "cower" as they did when the game was originally released, than running out into enemy fire in a blind panic as was happening with engine 4 before the new patch.
And, of course, I'm glad that I am now able to use BARs and Brens properly again.

@Falaise I think you should absolutely download the patches for all games you own.
The thing with the broken "retreat" behavior was that good troops in good positions (trenches, foxholes, etc...) would flee from safety to dangerous open ground regardless of the conditions. Even an inaccurate light mortar barrage could trigger this behavior. Now, troops can still flee, but in logical conditions.
Also, you have to consider the broken firing patterns of allied LMG's. Depending on the scenario, an American or Commonwealth player could find himself without any automatic firepower beyond 150 to 200 meters. Now Brens and BARs happily let it rain!

Also keep in mind that the two behaviors mentioned totally broke some scenarios/campaigns, leading to some puzzlingly lopsided victories.

Now that makes the story even more interesting. 
IMO the C2 part of the battle adds minor missions within the larger mission and makes the battles feel more authentic and interesting.  It's made me add alternative methods of C2 to my orders / unit tasking form that I maintain on a Word Document.
Example: On order 2nd Platoon will attack east into the town of Xxxx in order to support 1st platoon.  Alternative signal for 2nd Platoon's attack is a red flare.  Then when it is time for 2nd Platoon to attack and if 2nd Platoon is out of C2 the Company command team can pop smoke (simulating a flare).  2nd platoon can now attack.  If the backup plan for the flare was not included in the orders / unit tasking form on the Word document then the flare can't be used.  2nd platoon can't attack until C2 is established or a runner is used etc. 
Lots of cool things can be done by the player to add interest and immersion to the game.     

My US infantry just got shelled to death in place.....WooYay! 

BARs & Brens