chuckdyke

You need a combination and the 76mm M4 is the tank for the job. I think CM should be a little bit more transparant.

Artillery is the big killer of infantry, and MG's.

There are very few games in which an assault looks like a real assault. I can't make one and a good designer said to me once even to make a formation maneuver properly is a pain. I hardly play any defensive battles against the AI. When the AI defend they never fall back. Example MG fires at an formation of 5 Panther tanks just because one is unbuttoned. A real MG would never do that. Find somebody to play Hotseat which is my favorite mode of play. The example on the picture is how not to cross a road. All what the AI does is advance from A to B once a unit steps on a trigger. That is my expertise. The AI is tremendously handicapped it can't cease or adjust artillery missions. It can't fall back if you learn too much it stops being fun playing the AI. Kudos to the designer who still make some good battles in which you must attack or assault. Meeting battles, maneuver till contact and wait till the AI makes a mess of its maneuver elements.

It is a human player who plots the waypoint or an AI trigger.

The commanders cupola is open? If it was penetrated from the flank he wouldn't have been able to get out.

The AI is as realistic as the sandbox is and must be regarded as such. I suggest find a human player to share your talents with. The manual is clear about this.

Yes and naturally they will push for quotas under the guise of equal opportunity.

That were post ww2 production during the war it had only 27 rounds. Here is a very useful website. IS-2 Heavy Tank - Tank Encyclopedia (tanks-encyclopedia.com)

A lot of shortcomings here. Especially when we play other nations eg the Soviets. Their HQ's can communicate with what you call their FDC. In CM we don't use field telephones, flares, signals such as torches, whistles or bugles. I use instead the tentative network of the FDC in the came. Platoon makes contact but doesn't have a radio, instead calls a short mortar mission. Their official FO or Regimental HQ who have contact with the FDC can see by the "Go To Spotter" feature what is happening Once the adjust mission comes up, his HQ can cancel the mission and send reinforcements instead. The fact that there are no radios doesn't mean there are no other means of communications. Just a little protocol we call our house rule. The problem is when you play PBEM with somebody. Something for Engine 5 maybe. Regards

Take note it is easier to get an LOS with a mortar unit he may get an LOF on an MG but the MG doesn't get an LOS on the mortar. I give you a link to a YouTuber I follow. When it comes to mortars you are better off to use them in direct fire mode in CM but be careful how you position them. Mortars start around the 14:15 mark.

1 Yes it should be at least level with the PzIV 2 No if it is not by much. 3 No Pz IV with KwK 75 mm L40 equal to the 76 mm Sherman but has inferior armor. I would like to see that the purchase prices are suggestions only.

Conclusion from my simple test, 30 rockets don't have much of an impact. I plotted it at a forest area. It was a campaign scenario so my test was with a campaign I already played. Usually I do it on Hotseat playing against myself. You can't play campaigns on Hotseat wish they could changed that. Foxholes provide excellent cover but they quickly become visible in the game. It matters against a human player but not against the AI. Something for the Engine 5 Wishlist? Mathematics a square is 8² Meter a single trooper occupies 1² meter so a the chance is something like 2% to be hit by schrapnel even if schrapnel hits the occupied square. Just unlucky I can live with that.

300 meters away borders on the ridiculous. The modern versions can have precision munitions. I appreciate in WW 2 you need to employ them at the rear echelon. Right now no need to pot area fire they go all over the place.

A stray rocket actually took out one of my own troops. It is not a very efficient weapon.

How do you test something when you play on Iron? In test mode everything is visible so artillery strikes are very effective. I replayed the first mission of Hammersflank just to check how effective Katyushas were. I played it on Iron but I know where the MG42 position was. The rockets had little or no effect on the MG42. I suspected it had to do with the mode of play. All what you get with the Katyushas is some spectacular explosions but that is all. I can only write what I personally experienced. As it was a campaign I can't play on Iron against myself which is the manner I usually do my testing. Funny 30 rockets on the area of a known position have no effect. I don't experience it on Hotseat playing a scenario. My subjective observation was the AI somehow could be the cause. Testing area fire with an JS2 was no problem.

I play for the Devil's Advocate try to find out why the Stug III is expensive. Reason I established that the Hellcat had the same gun as the 76mm Sherman. That is where it stops. The Hellcat had HVAP ammunition possibly better optics and the crew received more specialist training in anti armor gunnery. The same could apply to the Stug III then I get the argument that the Stug III has a casemate fighting compartment. The Germans solved that problem by having what they called cannon fodder on the engine deck. To alert the crew. Stug III was more dependent of having infantry nearby. ***Spoiler***Example in FB first mission 'Knock them all Down the designer failed to do this. Once spotted the AFV is history, easily outflanked by a Hellcat. The designer could have used a Panther or even a Panzer IV in that scenario. This is another reason why the Stug III should be cheaper it depends on infantry in its proximity. Nevertheless I like using the Stug III makes a more interesting game. I appreciate there are players who like a game in which similar weapons should have the same point system. Possibly we the customers could ask that prices are suggestions only and we could make Quick Battle scenarios as we see fit. Happy gaming

I imagine suffering a barrage in a forest is like a barrage in the open by finely tuned proximity fuses. In Band of Brothers they were all in foxholes for a very good reason.

Except for historical accuracy for certain battles. It is a fine combat vehicle it destroyed more allied armor than Tigers and Panthers. Their crews were regarded as Elite they were not even regarded as tanks by the Germans their crew wore artillery uniforms. In regards their prices I can live with it, some guys support a petition to change prices. I would like to know how BF calculate their prices.

Title of my book according to them the Hellcat and the Sherman had the same gun. If you state something as fact you need to give references. I don't suck mine out of my thumb. THE 76-MM GUN M1A1 AND M1A2: AN ANALYSIS OF U.S. ANTI-TANK CAPABILITIES DURING WORLD WAR II Jose Cosme Jeff Ranu Shawn Spickert-Fulton January 2018

Way you can play QB differently you liked a scenario and like to replay against a human player. Go to the editor change the name of the map and save it in the QB folder. Do some research and buy the units as you see fit to play against a human player. People bought the game for different purposes. If you replay the game as is it will have spoilers but not if you do it this way. If you don't have Panthers at a certain location and time don't use it. To adjust if you think it is historically not correct rebalance the forces. I honestly can't see what the problem is of you guys. Your references please here are mine. U.S. ARMY ARMAMENT RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERING CENTER Munitions Engineering Technology Center Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey This report provides an analysis of the U.S. anti-tank technology during World War II. A ballistic analysis is used to corroborate the battlefield history and gain an understanding of the physical and technological factors that spurred the development of the M1 series 76-mm Gun and family of ammunition. The technical manual (TM) 9-1907 was published 23 September 1944, but it was missing performance data for the 76-mm hyper-velocity, armor-piercing (HVAP) shell and any information for performance of the U.S. anti-tank capabilities against the German Panther tank. Battle history indicates there was a technological capability gap against upgraded Panzer armor. This report attempts to use hand calculations and modeling and simulation (PRODAS) to fill in the information that is missing in TM 9-1907. The analysis offers the reader a greater engineering comprehension of the challenges faced between June 1944 and May 1945 and the circumstances necessitating the rapid fielding of the 76-mm HVAP shell after German capability upgrades were encountered in the European Theater of Operations from Normandy to the Battle of the Bulge (June to December 1944). 15. SUBJECT TERMS Ballistic performance analysis Historic tank ammunition of World War II Lambert-Zukas Thompson PRODAS 76-mm gun M62A1 76-mm armor piercing capped (APC) M93 76-mm hyper-velocity, armor-piercing tracer (HVAP-T) TM 9-1907 Tank Destroyer Armor penetration Panzer IV Panther M4A3E8 Sherman tank M4A3 (76) Sherman tank M4A1 (76) Sherman tank M18 Hellcat Tank Destroyer Limit velocity V50 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT SAR 18. NUMBER OF PAGES 55 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Jeff Ranu a. REPORT U b. ABSTRACT U c. THIS PAGE U 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) (973) 724-2733 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.1

If I may butt in without publishing a spoiler. Have infantry close by with one AFV unbuttoned or let some scouts on the engine deck. Their intel will be passed on to the armored formation.

Exactly and that is the reason I don't buy these games and stopped playing SF2. Fortress Italy will be my next purchase.

According to Wiki .It was the same gun as in the Hellcat TD the only difference the Hellcat had HVAP ammo TD stands for Tank Destroyer the 76mm had inferior HE compared to the 75mm Sherman. The pitfall of the 76mm. If you're right you will have no problem convincing BF and have your petition accepted. I think there is more than meets the eye. If you are crazy enough to duel with a Stug III with a Sherman 76 mm you come usually out as second best. I don't know why the Stug III is expensive frankly speaking I am not even interested I go by historical accuracy. Maybe it is expensive because it's role is that of the underdog. When you select a Stug III you know you're going to be outnumbered some people like these scenarios included me. Winning is also not the end all an enjoyable game is. Once I see it is only a Turkey shoot I usually quit. Kind regards and happy gaming

A personal experience is bad information? Most people test issues on testers mode but you can't test when the AI is on Iron and the Icons are invisible. Apart from replay it and check it out a few times. Katyushas are inaccurate and the odds that their shell goes in a Foxhole is extremely remote. I tested something else again this time with an JS2. Shelled a house where I knew a German sniper was. Sure enough the patrol found the died Germans. Sharing players experiences is not bad information. I never stated anywhere which was not objective. The editor can paint triggers which could cause enemy units to occupy trenches and outposts later in the game.

The adversaries don't take turns, the AI doesn't know a tactical withdrawal. Or if you play RT stop the game when you have made a blunder. See it as an enjoyable game. You come closer when you play H&H.