Which one to buy Fortress Italy or Normandy

[Andrew H.]

Check out my new sig.

Awesome!

Well i see your point about communication between infantry, artillery, and armored units, but if we were to simulate exactly how it was or how you think it was, who would play that game?

Oh, I'd hate it.

I don't think he would disagree with you on that. From my perspective he was simply pointing out that the nature of the game (almost any game) is you are all of the decision makers and therefore your decisions have a lot more consistency (one would hope, maybe not in my case) than would exist in the real world.

Right. And I've yet to see a game that would simulate the not-uncommon event of a company getting lost while trying to find the start line and showing up two hours late. (In CM terms the game lasts 2 hours and you keep walking toward a VL that keeps moving away from you. And you never encounter any other units...)

Mom's would also love it as you'd be calling them all day long.

My mom would. She has a kind of competitive streak, too!

[Vinnart]

1. Infantry cannot use AT rockets from the cover of buildings, even partially destroyed buildings.

2. Infantry cannot use building corners as cover to fire around.

3. Tank crews have instant borg communication. When one crew member spots a target the tank instantly begins rotating to target.

4. No gun elevation limits. Tanks can fire at targets straight above them and, more importantly, right next to them. Tanks can even if necessary fire through their own hulls to hit close assaulting infantry.

5. Tank crews are more reluctant to abandon a tank after penetrations than they should be. How much so is hard to say, but even BFC has said it's too optimistic right now.

6. Tank crews that take a casualty but do not bail out continue to operate without missing a beat.

7. Although hard to prove that it's unrealistic, tanks seem really, really good at spotting while moving, even while buttoned.

8. Tanks are more accurate while firing on the move than in reality.

1.As I understand it these weapons cannot be fired from buildings safely due to the back blast, but if they did ala cmx1 I would be fine with that.

2.That would be cool, but I am guessing that would have to be AI controlled programming vs player controlled since one cannot give a target order to something they cannot see. If BF could find a way to do that I am all for it, but sounds tough programming wise even from my little knowledge of it. In the mean time remember one can “shoot and scoot” with infantry, and not just with armor.

3.Since the tank crew is on intercom I would expect very quick communication between the crew. Also tanks in good C2 with the rest of the force will rotate to enemy direction on its own when enemy info is received.

4.I think the elevation issue is just one of those programming things I am sure BF would like to implement if they could. Just one of those things at this point we have to live with, but would create more limitations on armor.

5.I have had crews bail out quick, and other times not.

6.I haven’t experienced this often, but some crews seem to be able to carry on while others panic.

7.I don’t know either as I was not a tanker, nor have I ever been in one.

8. I don’t know how accurate tanks of the day were on the move while firing. I do know that gyrostabilizer units should be able to hit on the move, as that is what the gyrostabilizer is designed for. I have hit, and missed while firng on the move.

As others have said I believe the God view is a dynamic that is exclusive to RTS, so no matter how realistic there will always be this element since reality is reality, and games are games that must be playable. Some of the suggestions such as the inf being able to fire AT weapons from inside buildings would certainly make ambushing armor easier, but in the end I think it all comes down to force balance that keeps the playing field level. I can only recall one game where I was dominated by armor, and it was because I was not given anything that could take out enemy armor until some tank destroyers showed up late in the game. Other than that I have not been dominated by enemy armor as long as I have something that can take them out. Good force balance in having something to counter with is the key to keeping things even. After that it comes down to tactics, which is the way it should be. I would say I have lost more infantry to enemy artillery vs. enemy armor.

[Vanir Ausf B]

1.As I understand it these weapons cannot be fired from buildings safely due to the back blast, but if they did ala cmx1 I would be fine with that.

I won't rehash the lengthy arguments here, but there is substantial evidence that it is often if not usually safe. And there is almost universal agreement that buildings with large interiors would be fine, as well as buildings that are somewhat open to the air due to damage. In fact BFC has said that the current implementation is unrealistically too restrictive to infantry, but they felt an across-the-board ban was closer to real than an across-the-board allowance. Whether or not we agree on that point there is no question that infantry are currently getting the shorter end of the stick on this issue.

2.That would be cool, but I am guessing that would have to be AI controlled programming vs player controlled since one cannot give a target order to something they cannot see. If BF could find a way to do that I am all for it, but sounds tough programming wise even from my little knowledge of it. In the mean time remember one can “shoot and scoot” with infantry, and not just with armor.

Yeah, I don't really know how it could be implemented but I suspect you are correct that it may need to be a TacAI function. I would love to see something done since street corners are easily one of the most commonly used cover objects in real world urban combat.

3.Since the tank crew is on intercom I would expect very quick communication between the crew.

Quick, but not instant. Ideally it should be a function of crew quality, subject to degradation if the intercom system was damaged.

4.I think the elevation issue is just one of those programming things I am sure BF would like to implement if they could. Just one of those things at this point we have to live with, but would create more limitations on armor.

Yeah, unfortunately it does not appear this will be changed.

8. I don’t know how accurate tanks of the day were on the move while firing. I do know that gyrostabilizer units should be able to hit on the move, as that is what the gyrostabilizer is designed for. I have hit, and missed while firng on the move.

BFC has said that tanks are deliberately more accurate when firing on the move than in reality in order to give the AI a chance. This was toned down some in one of the CMBN patches but is still present to some extent and likely will be for the foreseeable future.

Good force balance in having something to counter with is the key to keeping things even. After that it comes down to tactics, which is the way it should be. I would say I have lost more infantry to enemy artillery vs. enemy armor.

I would not recommend an all-armor force to anyone. Infantry does have a critical role to play. Namely, to spot for the artillery and to flush out enemy units so the tanks can kill them