TRP's

[WinOrLose]

I have played less than a dozen games so maybe not qualified to comment but I have found the TRP to be very powerful in PBEM.

They allow for almost instant un-spotted arty which I think is both unrealistic and not in keeping with the game.

I can understand the defenders having them but otherwise I think they are OP or far too cheap.

[SteveP]

The US army suffered more casualties from pre-registered mortar fire than from any other source during the Normandy campaign. If anything, the game is unrealistic in the general rarity of TRPs in scenarios and campaigns. However, people would probably complain.

TRPs for the attacker should be more uncommon and they are that way in the game.

[wokelly]

They should probably be more inaccurate for the attacker rather than rarer. Lots of attacks for the British/CW had calculated "TRPs" around objectives to aid in repelling counter attacks. Problem is that predicted fire tended to be pretty inaccurate (5% of rounds within 100 yards by 100 yards) in real life.

[Vanir Ausf B]

In head-to-head play I would probably only allow TRPs for the defender, if they are allowed at all. As noted above, artillery in CMBN is probably a bit overly accurate and flexible already, and realism aside it's no fun feeling like you were defeated by an orbital bombardment.

[CM1fan]

TRPs allow for almost instant un-spotted arty which I think is both unrealistic and not in keeping with the game.

Not quite "almost instant." I believe TRPs just reduce the wait for impacts by a minute or two. CM:BN grognards may have detailed info, which I'd like to see.

Those TRPs aren't free. They cost 150 points for five, about half the price of a decent AFV. I like them and buy them when I can, but others may not.