Oliver_88

IIRC one reason for removing the turrets was that have them an lower profile, and am sure thats also an benefit in CM right, easier to hide them and more places can be used for hull down positions, exposing just that crewmember and not the entire vehicle?

private message sent sburke, also copied battlefront steve in

okay, videos just uploading now was concerned what to do as I doubt an patch would come quick to sort out and so maybe better to not let this become public, but then again something similar happened in another game and those that knew about the exploit continued to abuse that knowledge for their own gain, and would be surprised if others have not realised this problem so also thought maybe better that everyone knew about the thing http://community.battlefront.com/profile/36389-battlefrontcom/ this the profile to private message steve or there an more personal one to use?

Right I've known about this for an little while now, sorry for the delay. Seems there's an limitation or bug in an game mechanic that enables you to discover where an enemy unit is even though you cannot see them. I've not done any PBEM though I imagine that this could be quite an issue for those that do. I've recorded something to explain and show whats going on. But question before doing so is I'm not sure what would be better to do, either post the recording here or private message someone involved in development/testing instead.

At least when playing quick battles I sometimes delete such vehicles that are provided with the formation, and replace them with the same vehicle but from the single vehicles category. Because those are provided with their own gunner, enabling the vehicle to continue to be fought and provide the section that have departed them with support. Downside being that they are more expensive, and also some vehicles provided with the formation are given additional equipment so its important to know which ones lest you swap them out and loose that equipment. Using the Carrier Platoon in the Infantry Battalion [Lorried], tend to delete and replace 2 Bren and 3 Bren in their sections. I leave 1 Bren as that provides them with an PIAT and radio. 2 Bren would also be providing the sections with an mortar but as acquiring that's broken at the moment does not matter. Same thing for the Scout Troops in the Recce Regiment. For their Assault Troops tend to delete and replace 2 Halftrack, 3 Halftrack, 4 Halftrack and 5 Halftrack. And again I leave 1 Halftrack as that provides them an PIAT.

apparently been fixed for inclusion in the next patch whenever that is

I think they were used in US, I am sure I remember seeing that they used them in aircraft at least. EDIT: I may just be remembering this from the movie Memphis Belle however.

That's an good and interesting thought. The hedges restricting them to elevations that are high enough to clear them, thereby restricting their max range possible at the time down to below 55 meters, but then the mortar cannot elevate high enough to shoot any closer than 55 meters anyway? Can they fire the smoke further if you try target in the opposite direction to the hedge or etc. Not really simple and straight forward seeing as do not quite understand that. If your saying the explanations because that mortar had an minimum range of 60, then you might want to look at the original post again. As he is being shown "out of range" when targeting beyond 55. The game and his screenshot even shows the usable ranges for the thing in game as being 55-2400 also.

Armoured (check) Fighting (check) Vehicle (check, sorta) About the only thing in them that can put down any automatic fire at distance right now.

nope they looked fine in your scenario also

I am not seeing the same (just tested through deployment on scenario editor) with that IVH in the Panzer Company [Ad Hoc]. Though seeing as the thing in your video changes as it gets closer I would suspect something wrong with the model and lod namings on your machine. I can get the same to occur through taking the bunker-axis-pak36r.mdr and renaming to pz-ivh-late.mdr, in game when up close the bunker appears but at distance where an lower quality models needed I believe the game then uses pz-ivh-late-lod-2.mdr or pz-ivh-late-lod-4.mdr and so the tank looks as expected. But without mucking about with the games files my installations not seeing the problem. EDIT: Just seen you uploaded something, will have a look at that too.

Not quite sure whats being said there. Though are the “it said they could dismount” and “said thier guns were not deployed” refering to things shown when purchasing them? If so they are options for you to choose. For example with the Infantry Battalion [Lorried] that are available for Great Britain you can toggle its Platoons betweeen “Mounted” and “Dismounted” when purchasing. And thats an toggle between providing them with thier trucks. As though they have dismounted and left thier vehicles behind before the scenario starts. Another thing to question would be what category have these troops been chosen from. Infantry Only and Airborne Only rather annoyingly remove any vehicle from the formations. Though should not remove guns, just vehicles.

Battle Size ≠ Map Size The quick battle options provide dropdowns for both those. As I am sure I read in the manuals, Battle Size is about the amount in purchasing points assigned, Map Size is about the size of the map to be used. So which are you saying you set to Tiny? An tiny battle size with random map size can indeed provide you with an Huge map with an Tiny amount in purchasing points.

noticed and tested this back in november, yes it is the case when passed through visual also, its also the case for friendly contact information in iron mode the age of the contact is being updated but not the location it also seemed to be the reason you sometimes see contact icons darting between different locations when no units are selected but I've presumed its just an user interface problem and that behind the scenes the units are aware about the new location improving the spotting time anyway

I've not seen Fury, might watch should it happen to be on television when am bored. I only saw Hacksaw Ridge for the same reason. The scenes with the bar gunner carrying an torso as an bullet shield before tossing himself an grenade. The scene with the medic swatting grenades away in mid-air. They did not work for me and just seemed more comical than gut-wrenching. Not sure about the story either, gibson wanting an religious viewpoint on everything I guess. Dunkirk I went to see. As the subject matters more interesting to me. I thought was alright film I guess. The sound was great, every time they are shot at scared the crap out of me. The messing with the timeline was confusing at first until you realise that each story/timeline are merging together to become the same story/timeline towards the end. Some things grated on me though, to try and keep it short; The germans are being kept back from the beaches by an perimeter that seems to be about two streets away? The Andrew appearing to be fecking powerless in the whole matter. But the smalls ships appearing are Christ reborn. They have an boat loaded with soaking wet and oil covered troops but sail down to fecking Dorset rather than return them into Ramsgate like everyone else would have? The director I believe said that using an French post war destroyer rather than CGI should not be noticeable unless you know what an British destroyer from the era looks like. Well I do know, so was rather noticeable to me. I echo Warts also in remembering the BBC's Dunkirk being rather good however.

cheers, understood, waiting out

Ah interesting. I was wondering about getting an Buffalo in CM, though would that pack for CMBN just provide them for the Americans? Given the dates that separate CMBN and CMFB? And that sounds similar to the Boase Bangalore indeed. I've not been able to find any actual images for you showing them on an Churchill unfortunately (just this and this). Do not know whether they were ever used and worked in anger against any soft french sand dunes either, but Tony Younger mentions that tests with them succeeded and they became part their equipment.

Got an link? Though I think the most dangerous thing about that situation may just be falling from the ladder to be honest. Not to ruin the fun in that image for you though. Though from what I have read (sorry to say have no professional experience) in some military engineering manuals (both modern-ish and from the war) state TNT as being rather insensitive to shock/impact. And need another small bang to occur first in order to make them in turn go bang, hence the use of detonators and blasting caps. ETA: But here's me presuming the fun in that image is it being some perilousness situation, dropping the TNT from the ladder and etc. And me there giving some kinda boring lecture that could just amount to "suck eggs". When the fun is probably rather about the size of the bomb and that they've got to get up an ladder just to put the explosive into the thing.

As for the acquiring the 2 inch mortar from vehicles. Has anyone else managed to obtain them? Here is the video showing me trying to obtain them. What am I doing wrong?

Cheers for that, just an couple good new bits and dits though to be honest. "Was it an successful design" someone asks, well had it been an complete failure I doubt we would have continued to field AVRE's in our armed forces up to the present day. I've read Major-General Tony Youngers book "Blowing Our Bridges", theres an small chapter about the invasion, he commanded 26 Assault Squadron. During an exercise they assaulted some beach on the Isle of Weight and destroyed the sea wall there (turn some of it into rubble so they could mount it and drive along and exit the beach that way) and later after the war some civil servant sent him personally an bill for the repair work to the sea wall. Another attachment that the AVRE could use was named the Boase Bangalore, according to the book was invented by Dickie Boase who was at the time of the invasion the commander for 3 Troop of 26 Assault Squadron. Jimmy Henry was the 2 Troop commander and Ray Mare was the 4 Troop commander. I would rather like some more attachments the AVRE in game, such as fascines for crossing small gaps, bobbins laying down mat on soft terrain to improve vehicles chances against bogging down. To be honest anything that gives my Sappers (armoured or not) more tasks sounds good to me.

hahahaha, sorry, I've figured out what's gone on now regarding the airborne mortar, no bug there, the parachute section do not indeed have any high explosive for their mortars, just smoke, so took the same team (loading an save from an turn before the video posted above) and wasted the smoke rounds, no other 51mm rounds remained in their equipment, the reason he was firing high explosive was simply that he was managing to leach an single high explosive round each time (so staying below the grenades in his ammunition list) from the platoons standard 2 inch mortar that was outside an nearby building, should have realised that before keep your 2 inch mortar detachment away from the parachute sections if you do not want the rounds to be wasted on germans that are close enough to be dealt with from small arms and prefer to use such rounds as an mortar

Am aware how to use them. And also aware about that limitation on the ammunition lists. But the thing is that the ammunition lists are displayed in order from most ammunition to least (for example take an unit that shows 150 x .303 MKVIII , 50 x 9MM, 5 x 51MM WP and acquire them another 150 x 9MM and the list then changes order to display 200 x 9MM, 150 x .303 MKVIII, 5 x 51MM WP). So that given that the team shown in the video has so far fired 7 rounds (2 in video, 4 afterwards) that ammunition should have been shown in the ammunition list, but its not. So what 7 rounds have they been firing? And I believe both the airborne and standard 2 inch mortar are available through the Commonwealth Module also, as they are detailed in the manual for that module, which also states "The airborne 2-inch mortar (located only in the parachute rifle sections) can be used for direct fire only (i.e. cannot fire into defilade), similar to rifle grenades. However, the airborne mortar has only smoke shells." It's an good thought. Would make sense. Unfortunately I am trying to acquire the weapons for their own men, and neither the Carrier Platoon nor Antitank Platoon have any multi-team units. With both I will give an test under "laboratory conditions" and post another video to remove some doubt.

I've just been doing an quick mission and am using the independent parachute company. I've done an quick search and could not see anything relevant to this. So sorry should this already be reported or queried somewhere. In this video I've recorded below you can see the soldier firing what appears to be high explosive from an airborne 2 inch mortar. What is going on there? As I believe the airborne 2 inch mortars meant to just be supplied with smoke rounds, and no high explosive are being shown in their equipment (fired seven so far so would have been high enough on the equipment list to be seen if they had them). Think this might be an bug or something? Also there any trick to acquiring the 2 inch mortar that's available in the Carrier Platoon and Antitank Platoons vehicles in some formations? I can obtain the ammunition but whenever I try to obtain the weapon it just disappears into thin air?

Not sure whether this would count as being an relevant one for this thread, but would wish for the quick battles purchase screen to more closely match the scenario editor purchase screen, for most part because saddens me an bit that in the quick battles purchase screen (for CMBN) some formations are not available (for example Machinegun Battalion and Parachute Battalion for the British Army) and some cannot be purchased with their transport (for example Air Landing Battalion and Antitank Battery [independent] for the British Army). But also as I think in quick battles would be good/interesting to be able to choose formations from more than one Army be able to tailor the supply, headcount and vehicle status for my units.

Done it under fire now also. 17 minutes in and AVRE's from 1 Section, 3 Troop, 82 Assault Squadron have got the job done. I gave them better support than on last attempt. 5 Platoon from 4th Battalion, Wiltshire Regiment and an Cromwell managed to hold the Germans back from the bridge long enough for the Sappers to complete the task. 5 Platoon so far has lost just over an quarter of their strength in that time, 82 Assault Squadrons vehicles are now providing them some protection whilst they collect their wounded.