Howler

1 FO = 1 Mission. It's baked in. There's a partial exception for pre-planned missions. For those, I use the most useless shot caller which in some titles could be an infantry team.
Any missions needing to be managed (pre-planned or not) are parceled out to the best FO for it on a 1 to 1 basis.
I haven't tested (in years/previous patches) whether a mission proper (aka not pre-planned) in the Firing Phase is also adjusted when another is initiated (Prep/Spooting). The game does a good job within the limits of the (dated) UI to indicate when a spotter is busy.
Anyhow, it sounds like some are trying to exploit pre-planned missions to allow FOs to adjust/control more than 1 mission. The workaround is to use PL/CO leaders for the pre-planned stuff in order to reserve your FO proper for the in-game missions.
Not casting aspersions...

You could reload and hope the bridge was clear next time but this is kind of an interesting tactical problem (I guess it could also be frustrating).  
Your units should still be able to cross.  The problem is your vehicles will slow  and might turn back & forth exposing side armor etc as they cross.  This might be what you were referring to above when you said your units were slowed. 
Maybe you could get infantry across the bridge first and expand the bridgehead so your vehicles could more safely cross.  And/or use smoke.  I might also check for a ford nearby.  Sometimes the necessity to cross a single bridge in a scenario can ruin the scenario if the one and only bridge (means to cross) is destroyed.  So often scenario designers will place a shallow ford in the general area.  I always check for fords anyways but I might double check in this circumstance.       
  

+1  True    .  I would get a lot further with scenario design / game play if I didn't keep stopping to take screenshots.  There are just so many cool things that go on down at ground level with almost every fire team and every vehicle on every turn.  Its very cool that in WEGO you can rewind the action and follow a different fire team / vehicle.  But before you know it you've spent 20 RL minutes watching one minute of game play.      

The trick is to apply a Face (default G) on the last waypoint before the Blast command to orient the team perpendicular to the obstruction being blasted. I've either been lucky and this works as I've had no issue since adopting this approach.

I think its always been there but rare compared to this bocage problem.
This morning in a FB urban battle a single soldier hiding behind a tall wall ran towards the enemy and my artillery barrage. He panicked when a shell landed on the other side of the wall ran towards the enemy stopped in open ground and was shot by the enemy.
There was another time where one of my ammo bearers in a two man team just ran straight at the enemy in a RT battle even though he was under no duress. Similar to what you have described.

I have to be careful because of the NDA. But essentially it's that units in real combat during WW2 did not provide a continuous play-by-play on the position and status of every single enemy unit they can see to every friendly unit they are in contact with. If they can actually see an enemy the enemy can at least potentially see them back, so getting on the radio to tell Lt. Scrub "you know that Panther that was parked next to the barn? It drove 120 meters to the southwest, stopped and killed 3 of my men. Thought you'd like to know" would usually not be a priority.
If course that doesn't mean that sort of information was never shared in the heat of battle. A dismounted squad of Soviet tank riders that was just in LOS of a German tank is certainly going to tell the T-34 crew all about it when they mount back up. But the game doesn't do that. Personally I think the current model is too conservative to be of much use but that's just me.

Wouldn't we be better off simply adding a replay/rewind function to RT mode? The only reason I haven't bothered with RT play single player is the lack of re-watching the action. It would be nice to pause and skip back a minute or two to see the action... This playback buffer wouldn't need to hold more than a few minutes of elapsed play.

My apologies. I wasn't implying that I was not able to draw way points of 100's of meters in distance.
I was responding to a post where the various movement commands where listed and the poster seemed to want some way for units to fire on the move. I've had some success by using a combination of shorter way points and pauses.

I believe placing a limit on the number of QB points is a way of ensuring the game won't crash and be overloaded by the additional processing/RAM power required (CPU and GPU). However, I  can not think of a sensible reason for why the game does not allow players the complete freedom to just manually determine the precise number of points each side should have in a QB.
Anyway, I was somewhat inspired by your telling of how you try to use the QB battles to configure battles to play out various battles in a user run H2H campaign, and have updated/enhanced my previously released "Bull's CM QB RATIOS" table (discussed in the thread QB Battle Force Points tables/charts) to Rev2.
I have now gone the final extra few yards and have now tabulated every possible combination of QB battle that is possible from CM QBs in one consolidated table, listing the QB force points allocated to both sides, the total of those points, the resultant force ratios, and of course all the QB parameter setup information required to achieve the battle of choice (battle type, size, force modifer).  Of course you need to be able to open the file in Excel (or equivalent) to filter and sort the table as you seem fit to find the battle setup you want.  Column values are colour formatted from smallest possible (green) to largest possible (red).
eg.  Preview of top of table sorted by force ratio (note: although only the five ME battles at the top of that list precisely give both players "even points" to spend ie. force ration of 1).  However, you can see that there are other battle setups which differ in points allocation by only a few percentage (ie. ratios between 1 and 1.1 (or between 0% and 10% points differential) which players may agree to consider irrelevant in setting up an otherwise "balanced points ME", if that is what they want.

This table alone should provide anyone everything they need to know about what is and what is not possible to achieve with the CM QB parameters, and how to achieve them.

I can understand that navigating through and selecting the right QB settings can be a bit of a nightmare. I've had a bit of a look at all the options and found that it is easier to "find what you are looking for" by probably looking through a chart that lists all the possible player 1 and player 2 QB force points combinations and ratios.

Note: if you apply the attacker force modifer in the QB settings in CM, the resultant points you see is/might be slightly off what you would mathematically expect. The values I work with are mathematically calculated and hence can be off by +/-20 pts in some cases.

CM has a very odd way of letting players control the size of their QB battles. They arbitrarily get you to pick the battle type, then the battle size, which fixes the force size for one side (the designated "defender"). It then gives you fixed % force size adjustment modifiers to increase or decrease the points for the other side (the "attacker"). The use of the terms ME, probe, attack and assualt are pretty much meaningless and so arbitrary when all you really care about is the actual points for each side (and associated ratio).

Given the way CM determines things in QBs, it is porbably best to first start off determing the appropriate points (and hence force size) to give the defender for a given map, as these are limited in choice. Once that is determined, determine the appropriate attacker: defender points force ratio is appropriate for the map. Note that the ratio table does not feature "attacker:defender" ratios of less than 1, even though CM QBs literally can allow the "attacker" to have less points than the "defender". To fully utilise all force size posibilities in a QB, it is more important to get the side1:side2 force ratio correct (and overall points for each side) regardless of what the game considers the "attacker" and the "defender" and then do what you need to do to make sure the QB/QB map sets up the right players in the right deployment zones etc.

For example if you think that maybe a force size of around 3500 points for one side defending on a map is suitable, we can go to the chart of ratios and search for a "defender" force size close to 3500. There is 3399 (large attack) and 3620 (large probe). You can then filter the chart (if you have Excel) on the attackers side for LAT and LPR. A bunch of "attacker" force size ration posibilities are shown.

PS: Manually download the chart above as a JPG to better read the numbers as this thread does not show image at 100%.
Bull's CM QB RATIOS.pdf Bull's CM QB RATIOS.xlsx

MikeyD might be overstating it a bit, but I have watched videos of players playing a scenario who say nothing when they get the drop on the enemy but complain bitterly whenever the enemy gets the drop on them - sometimes within the same minute of action.  It's just the nature of the beast - selective memory.

Yep and I was reading the summary and found this:
So, it will not have an effect on an OpenGL game like CM at all.

I turned off FXAA in nvidia panel and it fixed the menu.

Good tip! 👍
The default post-processing in the game is way too blurry. I use Reshade with the LumaSharpen filter to achieve a similar effect.

It's not a simple yes/no rule - it depends on a range of factors, so it's not very predictable. Experience, motivation, type of threat, and especially distance all play in to the decision to engage a target of opportunity while doing an area fire order.

Play the US side progressing from smallest to largest. Once you have a good feel for the capabilities then play the UKR/RUS. No side spots as well as the US and this will flatten the curve as you come up to speed...

Yes, I play against several people using CMH. Since both programs copy files to and from Dropbox there is no conflict if opponents are using different programs.
I have a new version coming that will also support chatting with CMH. 

Since a lot of people have more reading time than usual right now, Osprey is giving away 5 free eBooks a week for the next 4 weeks.
Take a look here

To be clear, WEGO is REAL TIME, but with fixed pauses at 1 minute intervals.  We all play this way because we can watch the replay of that one minute from anywhere on the map.  In regular real time, most of the action in large battles is missed because you can't be in two (or four) places at once.  w WEGO, if you have multiple sectors you can watch everything that happens in each sector.

There are demos for all of them. Try it.

Yup. This is problem with most points-buy systems in general though.
Interesting alternatives include DBA's system, where instead of army lists you have all armies consisting of exactly 12 units, and the composition is what sets them apart.

An easy option you could do alongside CM right now would be to co-opt something like the Combat Commander Random Scenario Generator tables.

For CC, you roll for things like Year and quality of troops, and then can choose from a now-limited selection of formations, one, two or three platoons worth. These formations have attached equipment appropriate for them.

The less you spend, the more likely you are to be the defender (so it's a blind bid, essentially). After choosing, the low bidder can then spend points to make up the difference from period-and-quality appropriate tables (say, artillery support, fortifications and assigned weapon teams). If the lower bidder goes over the high bidder's limit, they get the same opportunity.

There's a little more to it than that, but that's the main thrust of it. It helps with balance that there's no armour in Combat Commander either.
 
 

If it was me, I would have spent those 20 minutes using Target Briefly with two of my King Tigers on random buildings. 20 buildings in town, 20 turns worth of 15 second target briefly commands, probably about 20-30 HE rounds used, would still leave plenty left for the assault. As I recall, a King Tiger carries something like 50+ rounds of ammo?
Lever a round or two of HE into a building, and see what comes out. Next turn, send more HE into another building. Recon by Fire as it were, but if you've already used up twenty minutes, you might as well start rolling in. You're not going to spot enemy infantry in buildings unless you either bait them into opening fire, or you flush them into the open.
How much time is on the clock?

I pass regularly in the middle of this battlefield and you also probably if you came to Normandy because it is on the road between Caen and Falaise.
I love this scenario I take this opportunity to take you there with me
seen from canadian line





Metallic wire mesh seen on this view is called "american wire mesh"
This is the grid that was placed on the runway of temporary aerodrome  in 1944
it is still in use today to close the fields in many place in Normandy!!

Le Noyer

now there is a 4 lanes !



watching toward Tilly La Campagne




watching toward Verriere




Le Noyer


Seen fron Tilly la Campagne

the railway becoming a road
I really have to go wash my car !!!!



Here are the monuments crossed during this little report
the Trotteval farm back from the position of the sherman in the scenario

Verriere



Tilly la campagne devant le Noyer

really a great sccenario with a  lots of suspense
Merci Jon 'JonS' Sowden
if you don't play
https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy/cm-battles-for-normandy/le-noyer/
 

It's across all titles while evading in close terrain. It's not apparent in BS/SF2 because things die fast. It's more apparent in BN. We tend to excuse troops rushing towards known enemy position in built-up areas. It's more flagrant in bocage and occurs  too often to chalk it up to a "war story" .
FI has such diverse content that you could overlook it there (aka good war story). I don't have FB or RT so YMWV.

Don't. There's a bug where your guys do suicide runs towards the enemy. Wait till that gets fixed.