BornGinger

That's way they needed staues of Dedushka Lenin and Stalin to be reminded of their duty to do what they were taught and told to do. A shining statue of Lenin in every Red Thunder village would be nice.

There was no big difference but now the Tsar or Lord callled himself Partymember Official over the area or NKVD Officer over the area. Whatever his position the people was still treated much the same. Now they were working on a kolchoz where the production was not for the people working it to eat and sell but for the large masses of slaves to the system.

I think the Stug had a shorter barrel at that time and the PzKpfW IV might have had another kind of barrel too and I think didn't have the side skirt to protect the treads againts AT-rifles. But they existed, so they could probably be used in a 1941 mod.

I watched a youtube video about the Eastern Front and noticed this in a Russian or Ukraine village which the Germans walked through. Isn't that kind of large Lenin statue and other Leninist-Stalinist props something the game needs to really be viewed as finished? I wonder what the people living in that village thought when that statue was being put there. I guess they were hoping to be cared for properly by the government if they polished it at least once a month.

It would be more realistic if foxholes and trenches weren't as visible as they are. If foxholes were just holes in the ground and more scattered instead of being four together and if trenches were designed differently too and none of them had sandbags they would all be harder to spot which would make their existence more of a surprise. There wouldn't then be any reason to try to be a "smart designer" and fill the scenario maps with empty foxholes and trenches. I hope Battlefront will make changes to how foxholes and trenches look and work to have them do that more realistically.

I don't think you can get more ammo to your guns unless the supply trucks contain some of it. But I doubt supply trucks contain other ammo than for small arms and panzerschrecks/bazookas. What do you mean by OBA?

Maybe something in a patch given to those only having the base game is making it a requirement to get the new module?

That movie is nothing but a boring love story about a tank commander and his exwife who is fixing up damaged tanks. I haven't watched T-34 but am already certain that it's filled with SS-soldiers. Modern day Russian films about WW2 are usually filled with mostly SS-soldiers. Russian kids probably believe that there where three army groups SS-North, SS-Centre and SS-South attacking Soviet in June 1941.

I have watched a few CW-videos on Youtube. But it's also fun to find out about the weapon systems by playing the demo and reading the manual.

Thank you for a swift reply. I'll check the purchase page again in about two months' time.

The words above were written on 10 May. It's now almost a month ago and there's still no demo for this game on the purchase page. Is Battlefront waiting for the Steam release before a demo is available or are they waiting for something else?

You can kind of do that when you do the AI-movements for one of the sides when you make a quick battle. If you choose to place an AI-group on a spot with the order ambush 500 meter, or what it's called, you give that AI-group a target arc of 500 meters. The only thing you can't do is to decide which AI-group gets the AT-guns. But you could try to paint small squares on certain keyhole places on the 2D quick battle map and give them the order "ambush armour 1000 meters". And then when you choose the enemy's troops you pick a bunch of FO formations from which you remove most of the men and to which you give an AT-gun. That might work. You could try that and play the quick battle in Scenario Author Mode and you will be able to see how the AI placed those small FO formations with AT-guns.

When you choose "slow", they are crawling and searching for mushrooms and are mostly unaware of what's going on around them. When you choose "fast" they run and are not very aware of what's happening around them although they sometimes stop running to shoot after which they carry on running. So there is a difference.

I hope so. Or he's still struggling with that scenario.

The extra files to that scenario contain everything needed for the overlay map. But as that scenario map is huge it's quicker to convert it.

I think it would be. Someone apparently did that already. I unfortunately don't remember who it was. If I did you could have asked him. Now you just have to try and see what happens.

But if you use an overlay map which contain larger forests or smaller woods, you'll have to place trees if you want the scenario map to look similar to the overlay. Then you still have the tedious work of placing loads of trees.

The most tedious with map making is to place the trees in forests and woods. I wish there was the possibility to place a bunch of trees, mark them and copy to just paste them where you want more trees after which you could do a few necessary changes. Making forests and woods would go a lot quicker that way.

Why is it so necessary to win a scenario battle? If you play a scenario just for the fun of looking at the replays of how your units do its best whether you win or not then the difficulty to win a battle isn't so important. Unless you of course are the kind of person who must win. It's of course also a different situation if you play a campaign and must win a bunch of scenario battles to be able to finish the campaign. The only thing that is frustrating to me when playing scenarios is how some troops, both mine and the enemy's, are able to spot one of the opponents behind a forest from the other side of that forest which actually should block the view. And also how easy it is for vehicles to get stuck in little mud. But whether I win or loose isn't important.

I'm sure that is the case in real life. But in the WW2 games only the cannons give the players the choice to use either shells that explode on inpact, or close to inpact, which are the general shells, and shells that explode above the soldiers, preferably in the treetops, which are the infantry shells.

If you go to the editor you'll notice that among the artillery there are mortars, howitsers, cannons (artillery guns) and rockets. So although howitsers are cannons there is a difference between those and cannons (artillery guns) in the games. Howitsers have only general shells while cannons have infantry and general. Infantry shells are the ones that explode in the treetops and cause splinters from trees to harm the infantry together with the shrapnel from the shells.

It's always possible to request a ceasefire to end a game that carries on longer than expected or when the player feels that he's either already lost or won the battle. The AI will always accept a ceasefire request and the game will finish with the end result screen showing.

The only scenarios I've done which aren't based on a historical battle, one is uploaded some time ago and one is about to be uploaded, begin with the idea of a scenario. And then I pick troops which could fit for the scenario.

There are quite a few books/memoirs written by people from different countries that fought on the German side. Some are good and there are also those that aren't that good. How is it with people who fought in the Red Army? Are there any good books/memoirs written by Russians, Ukrainians and other nationalities who were part of and fought in the Soviet army?

A good thing to do, and a good way to learn about the AI, is to try things out in the editor and see what happens when you play the scenario in the scenario creator mode in which you can keep a close eye on the AI-troops. If things don't work the way you expected you just try something else.