laurent 22

This has been reported.

This has been noted before, like here:
I also recall seeing pictures somewhere and even posted my own I think.

Bug report: PziiiG has several 3D issues. I searched this thread and saw that hatch issues had been reported. Adding to that:
1. for "open up", the pziiig commander's hatch rotates up and out about an axis outside the hull versus rotating about the hinge location axis.
2. the bow LMG tracks with the turret and rotates about the z-axis at the center of the turret along with the turret
3. gun mantlet seems to slide outwards and down like the jaws on the creature in the movie Alien. Space Lobsters prequel? It eventually hits and enters the 3D mesh of the hull.
4. As turret rotates we see through and down into the crew compartment where Hans is whistling the Panzerlied
Maybe somebody hired some new interns?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkDvHUrbHcc
Hi!.Have anybody seen this serie?.It's called "Valley of Tears" ( HBO) and it's about the fighting in the Golan Heights between the Israelis and Syrians during 1973 Yom Kipur War.It looks great.
Now that CW have been released it would be interesting to make an expansion about that conflict.I have read somewhere that one of the biggest tank battles ever took place there.I got some Osprey campaign books about the Israel-Arab wars time ago and I'm very interested in this subject.

The way building combat is currently modeled is certainly a huge abstraction. But I'd argue that it's probably necessary in order to avoid getting bogged down in getting that one thing working perfectly at the expense of everything else. For the most part I feel like building combat is "good enough". I seriously doubt the tac AI could handle realistic buildings anyway (could you imagine the current AI trying to pathfind through narrow hallways and multiple small rooms?), so an overhaul of urban combat would require overhauling the tac AI, which will require overhauling the entire game. There is no way they have the time or money for that.
It's a matter of balancing time and resources. No one has an infinite supply of either, so they have to pick and choose where they put their time and money. In this case they wanted a good general purpose combat simulator that could handle fighting in any environment in any period. So they chose generalization over specialization. They did every environment "good enough" instead of getting one environment perfect. For a game that took the opposite approach you should check out Door Kickers. Door Kickers is an outstanding example of urban/building combat done right. The way it depicts combat in buildings and houses is absolutely superb, because they chose to specialize in room clearing. But it could never represent a moderately sized field battle with multiple terrain types (for example: a small built up area in the middle, dense woods on either side, and open fields on the approaches) the way Combat Mission can, because Combat Mission chose to generalize in everything.
Maybe one day we'll get a game that does everything perfectly. But I'm not holding my breath (most games that get overambitious and try to do everything perfectly never make it into production).

Some longstanding advice on the best way to use buildings for cover is to get behind the building. Shooting at targets from the upper floor of a (non-cathedral) building is just asking for a hmg to turn that facade into a sieve or an RPG round to come in through a window. In building fighting, catch' em by surprise once then relocate ASAP. Its not the fault of the game engine if you keep your men in place too long then lose the gun duel. People complain that the casualty rates in CM are too high, then they do risky stuff that kills off their forces.

I recall a poster a few year ago relating a story about his urban warfare training. Something along the lines of the instructor saying 'You're now going to learn how to enter a building through a window. NEVER do this in combat.' If I recall the conversation correctly there was some concern about accidentally shooting yourself or a comrade while scrambling through the window, not to mention the risk of being shot by someone in the building while you're halfway through the window.
If you look close in CMSF2 you'll see a number of natural impediments to entering through a window. 
 

Been way too long ago to be able to say for sure why I enjoyed them. But with infantry not having Anti tank weapons to a great extent and still playing with mostly medium size armor. It was just fun dealing with the strength and weaknesses of units during the earlier time frame. Where every size gun has a chance vs your armor. but if you can mass your armor, steam Rollin infantry is a almost given.  But I recall that deciding which battle was ready for trying a massive breakthrough was part of the fun. There was battles that making such a decision could be costly.

I had great fun generating scenarios for CMRT Fire and Rubble this time around. Building scenarios is part of gameplay too. Now that I think about it, CMFI Rome To Victory let me build some mountain maps, which was great fun. The first time I've got to do that since CM: Afghanistan many years ago.

Note: Some of the items are only pertinent to modern titles and other items are relevant to all titles.
Re CMSF2 (so far): 1)  Spotting issues.  A two man scout team with no binoculars can spot enemy units at close to 3,000 meters much better than an FO (with super dooper optics tech) or an HQ with binocs.  Folks have opined that it's because one of the riflemen has a "Thermal Imager" attached to his rifle and that is why they spot so well.  However, if that is accurately simulated in CM2 then why don't all RL units have thermal imagers and scrap the expensive and heavy laser designators and other high-tech optics that seem so inferior in the game?
2)  Related to item 1) Once can have a scout team, an FO, an HQ, a Jav team etc all in the same location, literally lying on top of each other.  The scout team sees an enemy units - but even after many minutes the other teams cannot see it - they do not communicate.  There is something wrong with the C2 system.  Again... apologists say that in RL they often cannot see what their buddy can see.  However, since the Thermal Imager is so much more effective, wouldn't they simply borrow the rifle with the Thermal Imager so they could see for themselves and then line up their super dooper optical gear on the target so they could finally see it?
3)  The M1046 TOW Humvee crew can dismount and take the TOW launcher and missile with them.  According to the UI it takes something like 1.7 minutes to deploy the TOW and a lot longer to pack up.  But it never seems to deploy. 
4)  Related to item 2) It is very very hard to use any vehicle mounted ATGM in CM2 as "hull-down" doesn't mean that only the vehicle optics on the roof are exposed.  Instead the top of the vehicle is exposed and can be easily seen and fired at and destroyed.  Without being able to dismount the TOW in this example, it's usually suicidal to attempt to fire the TOW even from a hull-down position. (Not sure if this has been fixed in CMCW.)
5)  Same is true for the M707 Humvee and other "Arty Spotting vehicles" with Laser and other high hech on the roof.  All of these cannot be safely used in CM2 "hull-down" as they can be easily seen and destroyed.
6)  The M1114 AGL (Automatic Grenade Launcher) Humvee crew can dismount with the AGL.  However, it must be a spare from the trunk as an AGL remains mounted on the Humvee and can be crewed and operated by another crew or inf team.  Is it correct that the M1114 carries two AGL's?  (Note that the crew of the M1114 with the 50 cal can also dismount and operate it, but in this case the Humvee no longer has the 50 cal mounted.)
7)  UK HQ's in CMSF2 cannot spot for arty or air.
😎 Heavy arty falling on top of enemy troops often doesn't incapacitate them.  While it's true that shrapnel may miss, the shock wave of a large explosion alone is usually deadly as it can liquefy one's innards.
9)  Some vehicles carry ammo that seems to be available for resupply.  But, the crew cannot ACQUIRE any, and/or neither can any other unit mount the vehicle to ACQUIRE any.  Eg: The M1046 TOW Humvee) have quantities of regular ammo eg: 5.56mm etc.  But it seems impossible to acquire any of it.  The crew cannot acquire it, and if you dismount em and mount an inf team, they also cannot acquire any ammo.
10) LOS/LOF issues.  While CM2 is supposed to be WYSIWYG it often doesn't work that way.  One can get down to level one and eyeball a situation.  But, what one sees from a location often is not what a unit will see at that same location.  Eg: The AI can see pixel-wide gaps in what human examination considers completely blocked LOS.  A related issue is that one can eyeball a situation like a road in town and there is no obstruction down a street to target a building.  But one finds that when one places a unit in that location, it cannot see or shoot at the building.  
11) Another LOS/LOF issue.  Frequently we find that a crew served weapon can see and target an enemy only to discover that it's only the 3rd ammo loader who can see the enemy, not the main gun/gunner.  However, it is usually impossible to move the MG or gun a few inches to a position where it can see and fire the primary weapon at the enemy.  
12)  Finding Hulldown positions is often problematic.  Some folks seem to like the "Hulldown Assist routine" available in the game.  But, often it simply leave the vehicle with no LOS to the desired target and one has to waste another turn (in WEGO obviously) manually moving the waypoints to get a hull-down position.  So, one may as well do it manually from the start.  The additional problem is that it is common that vehicles go from having "No LOS' to "Partial Hull Down" with no "Hulldown" option being able to be located in between.  One can spend many minutes dicking around with moving waypoints the shortest possible distance in this, that or the other direction to find a hull-done position (relative to the desired target), but one can only find either "No LOS" or "Partial Hulldown" positions.  It's unclear if this is an issue with the map, (maybe the terrain is strange), or the LOS routine.
13) Some vehicles like Bradleys when targeted vs a building don't use the desired weapon - their cannon - but instead fire their missiles - which often makes no sense.  (Target Light makes em use their MG's.)  BMP's are similar vs buildings: Sometimes they use their ATGM's, sometimes their cannon, and sometimes their MG - even if one orders TARGET LIGHT.  There is no indication as to why the AI chooses a particular weapons system.
14) SMOKE and buildings...  Smoke acts as if there are no obstructions or walls and will drift through a building as it is made of wire.  This is actually very helpful when one is attempting to assault a multi-room building.  But, doesn't reflect RL.
15) When one orders a SMOKE artillery strike and run out of SMOKE, the battery obviously still has all its HE rounds.  However, if you first order HE, when all shells are gone the battery has no SMOKE rounds left - they seem to have been used up as HE.
16) Some SNIPER teams in CMSF2 carry 50 cal rounds, even though they possess no weapon that can use 50 cal rounds.  
17) Park your vehicle directly behind a small tree and any enemy fire that comes from that direction will hit the virtually indestructible tree and the vehicle may be 100% unaffected.  Unless the enemy gun/tank moves, it can exhaust all its ammo in this way.  AI controlled guns especially can be made useless by this trick.  It seems that trees are better armor and provide better protection vs AT rounds than steel. 
18) Attempting to resupply a squad one may split off a two-man team to mount a vehicle, get the ammo, then debark and run to where its squad is.  That takes two turns.  However, the teams may not recombine.  A turn later when one again moves both parts of the squad to the same spot, they may still not recombine.  To get the teams to recombine one has to split the larger squad team into two and then move all three teams to the same spot.  Only then will the teams recombine to the full squad and complete ammo resupply.  
19) Heavy HE barrage does not seem to damage vehicle/armor subsystems as much as expected.
20) Some vehicles like the WW2 era 8 wheeled German Rad recon vehicles are supposed to be able to move as fast in reverse as forwards, but in the game move in reverse much slower.  In the game, it may be that all reverse speeds are identical or % of the forward speed.
21) Crewing oddities.  BMP's usually benefit re spotting from an extra man or two in the vehicle in addition to the crew in addition to enabling the vehicle to "Open Up".  A BMP cannot "open up" if it only carries its 2-man crew.  If the BMP has lost a crewman, and there are no other inf being carried, it cannot TARGET - it becomes merely a transport vehicle.  However, sometimes, leaving an extra two-man team in the BMP will enable it to "open up" and TARGET and other times it won't.  Adding a two man crew from another vehicle to the BMP will still not enable this BMP to TARGET anything and the BMP still cannot "open up".  The extra crew are treated as mere passengers.  It's all irregular and unpredictable.  
22) Guns in CM2 aim for the center of mass.  So, even when at short range, the gun will aim for the hull even though it may have more chance of killing or damaging the target by aiming at a different part.  If the turret is less well armored than (say) the hull that can mean that a hull-down tank may be more vulnerable than out in the open, as the turret will be the target. 
23) Tanks can spot inf ridiculously quickly given what we know of tank's poor vision when buttoned up, or in poor visibility, like in smoke etc.
24) Inf is unable to detect a tank that is  a few meters away on the other side of a wall, or in poor visibility.
25) WW2 jeeps and trucks have bulletproof windshields. Often making the driver much harder to kill than he should be.
26) Some vehicles have onboard mortars that do not need to dismount to fire.  However, if one does dismount, deploy and fire, and then remount the mortars in order to move to another location, when one tries to access the mortars for firing, some if not all of the mortar HT's may say "Destroyed", while other mortar HT's are able to accept mortar fire orders normally.  Witnessed in a CMBN game.  Saved game file available.
27)  Special sniper ammo like "50cal" and "338 Lapua Magnum" etc. is not available for resupply.
 

My wife is heartbroken. So is her family. What a tragedy.
Just read that a woman, working for the Ministry of feminine affairs has been executed. Many will follow, no matter what the Taliban promises.

Come on Power Ball!

I think the thing about Fire and Rubble I did like along with RT in general was how non-combined arms many of the scenarios are. The Panzer Blitz style of design tends to obscure how often it wasn't possible to construct the stereotypical Tank-Infantry-Artillery triumvirate-especially when the frontline wasn't established and units were engaged in maneuvering. The Germans were generally able to show up with a Combined Arms kit in these circumstances-because they built so much organic support into formations at the Division Level and downwards. Thus the Panzer Divisions and Motorized Infantry Divisions were the ultimate "medium" formations of all times-ready for anything but not the best at anything either. This is why the Panzer Divisions tended to do so well in running campaigns and the infamous Blitz they were known for. The Allies seem to come off a little worse in these situations, all the cases of Russian Units showing up without infantry or without artillery but heaps of something else like 100+ SU-85s or T-34s. A toolkit imbalance, but this pretty much a result of the way the Allies fought-configured heavily around sieges and cracking a frontline. As long as the enemy mostly wasn't motorized it worked well but it could lead to infamous bloody disasters if your unit ran into say...a Heavy Panzer Battalion but how many of those do the Germans have? The Russians gambled a bit on that and answered "not many" and 1944-45 proved them right. 
Thus you had lots of cases of German units just being overrun by the infamous T-34 hordes that their luxurious combined arms kit couldn't do much about. There just wasn't enough of anything to stop the SCALE of the Eastern Front and this slope only got steeper from 1942 onwards. So that's what I like about Fire and Rubble, I think they got that a lot of the time the Russians show up to scenarios and seem really uneven-but that's because a balanced tool kit isn't necessary. Your tanks all have 85mm or 122mm guns and pray tell what on Earth could the Germans possibly have that is proof against those in a given scenario or map? 

In the spirit of improvement of the Combat Mission games. I thought I would ask a question similar, but narrower in scope, as the general "Engine Improvements" thread.
What new commands would you like to see added or added back to Combat Mission and why.  Also include a brief description of what the command would do.  If you see problems with a suggested command or improvements to it, feel free to add some constructive criticism. If you don't understand an aspect of the new suggested command please ask the author to explain what that aspect.
So I will start. Here is an example of the format:
COMMAND: Description & Details. Conditionals.
----------
FOLLOW: The unit is commanded to FOLLOW the selected unit at a speed that will catch it up to the unit and then maintain a reasonable distance from it so that the following unit does not have to constantly use the PAUSE command.  If the following unit is shot at, it will (stop or continue?) following.  Not sure which action would be best.  Maybe the algorithm could check the HIDE status to determine what action to take under fire. If HIDE is on then the unit seeks cover under fire.  If HIDE is off the unit continues to FOLLOW the selected unit.  If the followed unit stops the following unit stops and if the followed unit is knocked out, the following unit seeks cover.

For me it's CMBN. Partly it's due to the number and quality of the campaigns available, and partly due to the airborne side of things. Allied para operations in advance of the landings (and after it too) are endlessly fascinating for me.
As a campaign player who does little else, CMBN stands out. SF2 has a lot too, but the gameplay is not nearly so compelling. So CMBN gets the nod from me. The paras, the terrain, the historical significance of the operations and battles depicted, and the force/weapon balance of that brief time period all add up to make Normandy the title I have the most fun with.

I think Final Blitzkrieg has a great mix of infantry combat and vehicles. There are also a lot of great scenarios.
I think Shock Force 2 is easiest for a newbie. Tons of great small scenarios and using the US let's you make a lot of mistakes without punishing you.

I'm a CMFI tragic - I just love this title (with its modules) so much..! I play the others, but it's been my number one ever since the GL module came out.
The thing I love the most is that it has New Zealanders, my own little country, which can not be seen anywhere else - but there are other reasons.
It covers the widest period of time - going from '43 to '45 - so within each nationality, you can play through a real change of equipment and units.
It has the most varied nationalities. The Italians are an almost 1939-style army, or earlier, and yet they have their strengths. On top of this, you have a range of US units (including Rangers, Paratroopers), a vast array of Commonwealth (all with wonderful evocative graphics, such as the Indian Army), Free French (US gear but very different unit structures).
As Germans, it has Heer, Luftwaffe and SS.
It has a very wide variety of map types; the city maps in the GL release offered some of the best street fighting I've ever played; and there are mountainous, agricultural, rural, arid and forest - plus (shameless self-promotion) you can play on the maps in my Map Pack 😛 .
It has all four seasons - and with this and all of the above, you have the widest range of WWII combinations, in one of the most gruelling phases of the war.
---
Having said that - I've had huge fun with all titles (I play everything except Afghanistan), and apart from FI, I've particularly enjoyed CMRT (where I love playing Soviets), CMFI and CMBN....

For me is
CMBN, included CMBN MG cos there is a lot of choices of units, scenarios, campaings and, when we are finish with the Normandy atmospher, we can trying to jump of Arnhem and around, where personly, I have consacred a full installation independant as Normandy module, with a new UI view..., thanks to Juju mods, but also new buildings, terrains, units,  not only, Paras or Airborne or SS troops are presents, but also usual Commonwealth troops, again Reserve german, and Marinen troops, but also diverse reserve units like lot german shools reserve units, mixed bataillons..., without forgot the famous Frundsberg and Hohenstoffen Division, that with a little patience and knownledges, we can created with modtags... for me another atmospher independant as Normandy... I like also the
CMFB in general rule cos this is also a very interresting stuff, but I wish to see the new module that will drive us trough the Rhin, with for sure new vehicles and stuffs trough the famous battle phase of the Remagen bridge, and the Hürtgenwald, and more... The new 
CMRT FR is very interresting with his new stuffs and the awaiting partisans troops, that I am sure to see more interresting stuffs in the time, in differents periods including Vichy presence... Now that
CMFI Phill mods are on, with his famous CMAK2, really accepting from members, are seeing to day, I see the power and the possibilities, that have CMFI to let us travel to another period, in the name of travel, I would like to see also the early war, with invasion of the Netherlands Belgium Lux and France... The reworked 
CMSF take for me the less interresting period, (already that I dont like the modern periods wars), I dont like too much the conflict from Syrian, or perhaps when others "red" factions wil be include like, Tchethenien war,  Iran Irak war will be also very interresting, or differents middle east Arabs factions, but I think to see this and have a TOE more appropriated we have to wait to have more factions from CMCW, and created Beirut, famous 67, 73 and more conflicts Israel Arabs factions (but also and this is my favourit period the Yougoslavia in the 90 century), not sure that we can created something about these periods with CMSF but I can be wrong, I like more the battles of the past this is probably why i dont have so much interrest of CMSF.  The new
CMCW game is out I have fun to play it I wish only to see the Brit or West German, or others modules to include more factions, and also the reason explained above...  
So really I cannot make a choice, all the games have a beautiful sides, and this is without to know, what BFC reserve us for the future...
 
JM
 

- Animation and texture for shells falling in water (no dust)
- Snow cloud when shells fall in snow, especially on deep snow map (like dust cloud on dry ground, it could look like smoke bombs)
- Tracks of tracks/wheels, vehicles in snow and fields.
- Textures for vehicles and armored vehicles in flames or having exploded. Vehicle models destroyed.
- Sidewalks and stairs for cities.  Representation of emblematic monuments of Paris, Berlin, Rome. A more detailed representation of factory interiors such as in Stalingrad etc.
- Sound opening / closing tank hatches (as in CMX1). Sound rotation of the tank turret, possibly sound reloading of the shell.
- Animation of armor shell firing: in CM the tank locates a target but during the time taken by the shooter to calculate the distance and lock the target the gun remains in its initial position, then lines up and fires immediately (this is may be realistic in CMSF, certainly not for WWII tanks). The gun should line up as soon as the target is acquired, but the gunshot should not be fired immediately to better represent the reaction / action time which varies with the skill level and condition of the crew.
- Correct  bugs in the excellent campaign "Amiens tonight" of the battle pack CMBN (Amiens not Ameins, "Jellalabad road" on map !! It is not Iraq. In the third scenario absence of units, no officers or flamethrower team without flamethrower, cause: number of trucks problem).
- CMSF2 : ability to order the Bradley to execute a short shot at a building without using their TOWs.
- Sound artillery call for the Syrians.
- French army
 

- Animation and texture for shells falling in water (no dust)
- Snow cloud when shells fall in snow, especially on deep snow map (like dust cloud on dry ground, it could look like smoke bombs)
- Tracks of tracks/wheels, vehicles in snow and fields.
- Textures for vehicles and armored vehicles in flames or having exploded. Vehicle models destroyed.
- Sidewalks and stairs for cities.  Representation of emblematic monuments of Paris, Berlin, Rome. A more detailed representation of factory interiors such as in Stalingrad etc.
- Sound opening / closing tank hatches (as in CMX1). Sound rotation of the tank turret, possibly sound reloading of the shell.
- Animation of armor shell firing: in CM the tank locates a target but during the time taken by the shooter to calculate the distance and lock the target the gun remains in its initial position, then lines up and fires immediately (this is may be realistic in CMSF, certainly not for WWII tanks). The gun should line up as soon as the target is acquired, but the gunshot should not be fired immediately to better represent the reaction / action time which varies with the skill level and condition of the crew.
- Correct  bugs in the excellent campaign "Amiens tonight" of the battle pack CMBN (Amiens not Ameins, "Jellalabad road" on map !! It is not Iraq. In the third scenario absence of units, no officers or flamethrower team without flamethrower, cause: number of trucks problem).
- CMSF2 : ability to order the Bradley to execute a short shot at a building without using their TOWs.
- Sound artillery call for the Syrians.
- French army