jonPhillips

An enemy minefield will always be un-marked until you find it (usually the hard way). 
Red sign with a skull and crossbones = Active non-marked minefield.
Off white sign (yellow in CMBS) with a skull and crossbones = A marked minefield. 
Green sign with a white X = Neutralized minefield (all mines detonated)
 
Just some additional information on the topic: 
 
Engineers can most reliably and safely locate unidentified minefields using the Slow command.  
Marking a minefield substantially reduces the chance of triggering a mine for infantry traversing the minefield.
Antitank minefields can be marked but there is no effect. Infantry can traverse them without risk and vehicles don't benefit from marking.
Friendly mines will destroy friendly troops and vehicles.  
Mines cannot be placed on bridges.  They can go in the river bottom under the bridge but have no effect on bridge traffic.
Minefields can be neutralized by heavy artillery (150mm+), if it scores a direct hit.
Minefields can be neutralized by a blast from a demo charge if there is a blastable obstacle (wire) in the action spot.
Anti-personnel mines have a cumulative effect on vehicle mobility. ie: Number of Action Spots a vehicle can generally cross in an AP Minefield before immobilization: Armor= 2 A/S, light Armor= 1 A/S, Transport= Destroyed.

I rarely use 'Target' for area fire for just this reason, 'Target Briefly - 60 seconds' gets you the same result, but it saves you ammo & work too! 

@danfrodo Please keep your superb progress reports coming...

I must admit I didn't have the patience to listen to this.
But I think there's a general tendency to assume that since the Germans lost the war, their tanks were probably not all that good, and since the Russians won, their tanks were probably really good. And since everybody knows Panthers had good armour, people think some grand explanation is needed for why the Panthers didn't sweep away the Red Army, and then they start getting myopic about final drive problems.
In reality, all WW2 tanks had their advantages and disadvantages, and mechanical/design problems of different kinds. Some tanks were obviously better designed than others, but it's not the tanks themselves that win or lose wars; it's resources, production, logistics, strategical decisions, etc.

Battle continues.  0430 hours, advancing along forest track through forest, no maneuver options, just have to follow the road.  But it's dark and surprise is still on my side as the Amis probably think it's some american units approaching in the dark.  I am guessing they are half asleep, cold, wet, miserable and have no idea Germans would be coming down this crappy road that goes nowhere.

Scouts forward, don't want to blunder into Ami position. 

Someone yells "KRAUTS!  Hundreds of them!!".   The bleary eyed Amis stare in shock for a second, then let loose with their rifles & BARs!

A couple mad minutes of night firing ensues, I lose a few but knock out the platoon in the foxholes and the house.

The column moves forward, knocking out any opposition, but taking more infantry casualties that I probably can't afford.  And on to battle #5, as Spitze group tries to skirt past Honsfeld.  Again in the pitch dark.  At a road junction, the column collides with some US vehicles entering the same road out of nowhere.  The jeep is destroyed but the fire lights up my vehicles, which immediately take fire from M8s positioned nearby.

The M8s are taken out, but I lose a tank crewman and a 75mm SPW is immobilized.

Every burning vehicle creates a potential death zone of light around it, so I try to avoid those areas as best I can.  I am confident there's no one in the houses ahead so I don't send out separate scouts, surely anyone there would've fired by now -- how many times must I do the same incredibly stupid thing before I learn my lesson??

and the cost of stupid:

What an excellent campaign, just feels so much like what I've read about those first days of the offensive.  Bad terrain, small groups of nasty GIs, a constant whittling down of my infantry & vehicles.
 
 
 

I tend to just let my troops get on with it themselves. They know what they are doing with their weapons better than I do.

This method works well.  However, if in a hurry, try adding an immediate FAST move back out the way the blaster unit entered.  Have found that the enemy often will not react fast enuff to cause casualties.  (Possibly cos of all the smoke, it takes some seconds for an unsuppressed enemy unit to even see the blaster unit.)  
When available, it's good to have an AFV start firing into the blasted wall (esp if it's a building) as soon as the blaster unit has FAST moved out.  That will kill or suppress the enemy inf in a building, even if they are behind a 2nd wall - a cunning defense tactic used by clever designers.
PS;  The more experienced and less stressed the blaster unit, the faster they will deploy charges.

Let’s stop the hyperbole train because it really just derails any serious discussion, ok?
I agree that that pricing of some units feels off, including the StuG and the Panzer IV. I also think the Abrams is too cheap in CMBS.
But I don’t think you can argue that the PZIv is too expensive because it can be killed with an M8’s 37mm. So can a Panther or JagdPanther. Shall we suggest then that they should cost perhaps the same as a Sherman? Or perhaps that the panzerfaust, since it can take out a Jumbo, should cost 400 points? I think few would find that sensible.
Is the Panzer IV most costly because it has better long range capabilities? I don’t know. Balancing these costs is very tricky, as there can be many arguments for shifting that purchase price up or down and they would be quite reasonable propositions, depending on specific circumstances. And it’s those circumstances that have to be gauged and weighed for probability of occurring. Yes, the M8 can take out a Panther. How often does that happen if people of reasonable competence are playing both sides? Should the M8 be bumped up to cost 300, 400 points on that basis? I think not. Certainly the Panther user could present an argument to do so.  But I think if we genuinely try to be fair we can see that it’s not a truly comfortable argument to make.
Regarding strafing aircraft, they (I believe) are fairly inexpensive because they are simply not incredibly effective. I’m sure we have all lost a few men to them, but a strafer causing serious harm on a regular basis? I remain unconvinced that that is true. 

There'll be someone along shortly to tell you that
it's realistic because the Allies had a lot of planes you can just agree with your opponent not to use those If you're getting strafed then you're clearly playing the game wrong.

This little gem of a scenario represents all that’s best about playing vs the AI, a great example of a deeply frustrating tactical puzzle – but only if you play as the underdog Free French. I’ve played this three times now, a Tactical Defeat, a Minor Defeat and finally a Minor Victory... and I felt I’d really earned the latter...
I haven’t tried going after the high ground yet, maybe I’ll give that a go next time out. I’ve tried various ways to attack the town and yeah, it’s a bit 'gamey' but try pushing a couple of infantry-loaded Deuces (don’t forget to acquire the Bazookas and ammo!) with a couple of Stuarts *really fast* to grab yourself a foothold early on and then it’s a slow grind.
You have plenty of time, ammo to burn and whilst you don’t have the auto weapons that the Germans do, the Stuarts can run rings around the Marders - just manoeuvre for the flank shots whilst keeping out of PF range of the infantry.
And don’t forget how deadly the Canister is. Get a couple of Stuarts into the town, covered by some infantry and this will shred the Germans, more than counterbalancing their MGs.
This is great tip – but I’ve used this to slow the Germans heading for the buildings, rather than worry about the high ground. The high ground in this scenario hasn’t been key in any of my games, it’s always been a slugfest for the main VPs of the town.
I think this is a great scenario for solo play – a real challenge like you only usually get vs a human opponent. In addition to it being a proper challenge as the FF, there are so many different approaches to a possible win.
I wouldn’t consider it as a HtH scenario, because the SS are a bit overpowered, but if you want a multi-replayable solo game, with lots of tactical options – on what is a also a great map – this is a total winner. Playable in less than 4 hours too, so if you have an evening home when the SO is out and you’ve finished with P**nH*b, give this baby a go.
Thank me later 😉

This little gem of a scenario represents all that’s best about playing vs the AI, a great example of a deeply frustrating tactical puzzle – but only if you play as the underdog Free French. I’ve played this three times now, a Tactical Defeat, a Minor Defeat and finally a Minor Victory... and I felt I’d really earned the latter...
I haven’t tried going after the high ground yet, maybe I’ll give that a go next time out. I’ve tried various ways to attack the town and yeah, it’s a bit 'gamey' but try pushing a couple of infantry-loaded Deuces (don’t forget to acquire the Bazookas and ammo!) with a couple of Stuarts *really fast* to grab yourself a foothold early on and then it’s a slow grind.
You have plenty of time, ammo to burn and whilst you don’t have the auto weapons that the Germans do, the Stuarts can run rings around the Marders - just manoeuvre for the flank shots whilst keeping out of PF range of the infantry.
And don’t forget how deadly the Canister is. Get a couple of Stuarts into the town, covered by some infantry and this will shred the Germans, more than counterbalancing their MGs.
This is great tip – but I’ve used this to slow the Germans heading for the buildings, rather than worry about the high ground. The high ground in this scenario hasn’t been key in any of my games, it’s always been a slugfest for the main VPs of the town.
I think this is a great scenario for solo play – a real challenge like you only usually get vs a human opponent. In addition to it being a proper challenge as the FF, there are so many different approaches to a possible win.
I wouldn’t consider it as a HtH scenario, because the SS are a bit overpowered, but if you want a multi-replayable solo game, with lots of tactical options – on what is a also a great map – this is a total winner. Playable in less than 4 hours too, so if you have an evening home when the SO is out and you’ve finished with P**nH*b, give this baby a go.
Thank me later 😉

"I don't think defensive missions are necessarily a strength of this system".
Well BFC did do a rather lukewarm job of defending themselves when you called them "Mother****ers", but perhaps they didn't want to descend to your level.  

Yes, locating your ATG's and other primary weapons so that they can ambush the enemy from the enemy's flank as they roll by.  That will help the ATG's stay alive long enuff to kill a few things. 
The worst defense positions are ones where one sets up to fire directly at the front of an advancing enemy.  It doesn't matter if your weapon can kill the enemy frontally.  Since an attacking enemy (who knows what they are doing) will have more firepower, your defenders which are in direct LOS will get KIA very quickly as soon as they open fire.
 

When setting up a prepared defense I generally try to do it in the following order: Heavy weapons, Medium weapons, Rifle platoons.  Identify keyhole positions.  Position heavy weapons to fire from the keyhole positions.  Then build strong points around the heavy weapons (with the medium weapons and rifle platoons).
 
CMRT scenario Fester Platz Polozk by @PanzerMike.  That was a cool urban battle.  I often take a few screenshots of a scenario, label them and add them to my PC screen saver slide show.  Below are two from the scenario.  


In the above urban scenario setting up strong points that could fire down streets perpendicular to the OpFor's advance worked well.  
 

I played the campaign twice, and as far as I remember, that particular defensive mission is not as difficult as the previous ones. The key is to make sure you don't go head to head with the Panthers but rather keep your Churchills out of sight, use infantry screen to figure out where the enemy amour is going, and then jump them with your tanks at a place and time when it's to your advantage.
Infantry in CM have magical ears that can detect and pinpoint the exact location of an enemy tank at hundreds of metres of distance, even in the middle of a town with several blocks of buildings in between. So if you just place a few forward observation posts, you'll know exactly where those tanks are. If you have a visual on them, you'll also know which way they are pointing - then you can do the "Maxwell's Silver Hammer".

This. I just love these tac advice threads, especially when everyone chips in.

I saw the first words of the title of your thread and mistook it for my own initially! 
 
In addition to what others suggested above, I would recommend trying to find keyhole positions. In case you are not familiar here is one of @Bil Hardenberger’s excellent blog posts about that. 
 
https://battledrill.blogspot.com/2017/06/battle-technique-keyhole-firing-position.html
 
The idea here is that you as much as possible try to position units so that they can only be fired on from a narrow angle that required the shooter to expose themselves in order to do so. Your field of view may be narrow, but if it is well sited, it may reach some considerable distance across the map, which enemy must cross and have limited resources to engage you with.

I second this. I was formulating a post just like that as I was reading your request and then there it was the very advice I was about to give.
I have on so many occasions watched my guys deliver some hurt and then get lots of return fire and I have said to my self I'll leave them there just a couple of more minutes. Now I don't do that because it rarely ended well. The corollary is that when you setup your defence think about their avenues of withdrawal and what their secondary and tertiary positions will be.
Some basic advice is to setup so that your guys have some cover and concealment and their kill zone they are covering has some restrictions on the attacker. What you want is to maximize the number of times the attacker has to expose small percentage of their force without having support nearby friendlies. That may mean not using some positions because while look good the entire attacking force can bring fire on your position - don't use positions like that. Or use them only OPs that you abandon as soon as you have some intel on the enemy.
In a city or village that could mean having your guys in the second row of buildings not in the first. That way your enemy has to actually enter the town to engage you and when they do they loose the support of the entire rest of the attacking force. In a forest similarly stay back from the edge - other than some scouts to keep watch. Also look for elevation changes where you can position forces to hit the enemy coming over the hill without exposing your guys to the rest of his force.

One misstake i did when playing a Great AI attack scenario...festungplatz podolzk Or something simular it was called iirc by PanzerMike...
Was to get to 'gready'...not pulling back my troops from their defensive possitions until they got totally overwhelmed by the advancing enemy...
I wanted to kill'em all 😆
On my second  playthrough i had learnt to not remain stationary as long...
But rather to pull back my guYs to New possitions before then got annilated...
This allowed them to continue the fight  from  their New possition 😎
It worked much better !
This was a city fight...
 
 

This. I just love these tac advice threads, especially when everyone chips in.

This. I just love these tac advice threads, especially when everyone chips in.

Hello it will be a year now that I discovered CMBN and this forum and  is time to intervene to say thank you
I'm not the only one to do it but the repetition is good
Since my childhood I have a dream, a desire, to see with my eyes this battle that has rocked my childhood, imagining to travel the battlefield like a drone.
I was born in Falaise in 1970 and my family suffered the battle : 4 killed, the house bombed, the exodus on the road, the strafing of the bomber fighters, the artillery, the fighting but also after the battle, the destroyed houses, the burning vehicles and corpses littering the battlefield were all family meal conversations. Here in Normandie this was an important trauma.
It always impressed and interested me, in a word: fascinated. I constantly asked for clarification and to question civilians or soldiers who had experienced these events.
All the film reports on the subject, I watched them. I think I have seen ¾ images known from the battle.
 I never stopped walking the battlefield, collecting vestiges and remaining some hours to imagine the events.
I used every means to immerse myself in this battle and the battles of the second world war in general. Movies, books and even games
Squad leader then Close Combat  that I practiced  a long time.
But although this battle has become my daily life because I have made it my job (I am a guide of  museum and even considered as an expert of fighting led by the Poles during the Battle of Falaise pocket), the time passing my imagination has declined. and little by little the image of these fights in my mind was becoming more and more abstract. I ended up consoling myself by telling myself that if I go to paradise there I  will can achieve this wish
i was not counting on CMBN
What a shock and even if it remains a game, my imagination work and as in my childhood events come to life in my head.
 After a year of practice my enthusiasm is not blunted my dream is somehow realized.
So for that:
thanks for this formidable game
thanks to the moder who improves even more are aspect,
thank you to  persons who animates this forum
thanks to the battle designers (for the anecdote I live on a map of the game !)
I'm begining to smoke again and  to say some nastiness on my neighbors, paradise has lost its appeal !!!

I would like to see realistic modeling of the sponson gun and turret on the Char B.
I would also like to see a Char B.
And it should be included in a '39-41 early war module.

While people have experimented and created movement charts for various terrains (you'd have to do searches on these forums) it's more fun to learn thru experience. 

The game is so dynamic a chart would not be practical.  With experience playing and reading these forums you will be able to understand some general rules for what works, when it works and then adopt those rules for the specific tactical problem you're looking at. 
In March of 2017 I did a test where infantry on Hunt traveled faster than they did on Move when in open terrain but slower than Move in light woods. (One example of why a chart might not be practical.)
Something I found interesting when I discovered it: A lightly wounded troop (yellow base) will often lag behind the rest of his fire team when moving causing the entire team to wait on the yellow based troops arrival at a waypoint before continuing to the next waypoint.      
In addition, below is something @c3k posted in June 2015 that I found helpful.  I paraphrased it and saved it in my notes. 
Each waypoint creates a game-mandated Pause until all the troops are present, then the unit goes to the next waypoint. Fewer waypoints mean fewer delays. Fewer sub-units mean shorter delays. For the shortest possible delay use one team, one waypoint. This means the most heavily loaded troop may be some distance behind. (Every item is allocated to a specific troop and weight carries a penalty.) An un-split three-team squad waits for all 3 teams to arrive/congregate at each waypoint before moving again. I split my squads and use Quick as my default move order.     
Below is a chart @axxe created in March of 2017 that you might find interesting as a general point of reference. I'm to lazy to look for the link but there is an entire thread associated with the below chart.