TO&E Bugs, Oversights, Quibbles, Opinions and Suggestions Thread

[DanonQM]

Bit the bullet on making a forum account to bring this up, because it's something I've been running up against more and more as I play more and start to poke around at making and modifying scenarios. Basically I've been finding some bugs, oversights and oddities in TO&Es and thought a place to collate and discuss them would be valuable, as I doubt I'm the only one who has found some, and documenting them all in one place might help players and scenario makers work around what is and isn't there, help the devs identify and rectify technical issues or consider alterations to certain formations/vehicles/teams and also just let some of us politely vent a little bit of frustration. Many of these issues are likely to be extremely simple, a matter of changing a number value in a unit's cargo load or adding something to a force selection list, but given the breadth and depth of content in CM, it's still worth reporting them because otherwise it is very likely that they'll continue to slip through the cracks, as indeed they have done until now. Of course, in an ideal world we could crowdsource solutions from the community rather than just feedback but sadly I don't think TO&E editing is going to be on the cards anytime soon.  

I'll try to break down what I've found so far into Bugs, Oversights and Quibbles: Bugs are things that don't work, formations that should be present in a given period not appearing for selection in Quick Battles and the like, where I anticipate something is supposed to be functioning a certain way but just isn't, Oversights are things that aren't there or haven't been appropriately modified for task or errors in correctly portrayig a unit's historical organisation, ala vehicles not being accessible in the single vehicles tab or having inappropriate cargo/ammunition loads, or the wrong vehicle being the command vehicle of a mixed platform platoon, etc. These are issues that likely were simply missed in the larger scale work of getting the game developed, and Quibbles are things that I just don't like, be it for reasons of history, gameplay/balance or a combination thereof, like the points costing or composition of certain units/vehicles, they will be a lot more long-winded as they require justification. The reason I'm putting these three, potentially very divergent categories all in the same thread is that I don't know BF's intent on each instance and thus can't say with absolute confidence what was a conscious choice that I just happen to disagree with and what was missed or didn't function as intended, so I'd rather none of them be wholly discounted as 'irrelevant to the topic' because their exact origin was not correctly divined, and I also particularly think there is still merit to debate on whether certain TO&E choices are the 'correct' ones (especially in relation to specialist teams, where things are considerably less cut and dry than the documentation backed and relatively rigid organisation of a formation). I'd encourage others who want to add to the list to use the same terminology as consistency will make the information easier to parse, and help avoid muddying the water. 

So, all that waffling out of the way, I'll get to the meat of things, though note that as I've spent most of my time with FI, and mostly the Commonwealth forces therein that's where the majority of things I've turned up are, but I'd like for this thread to eventually be title agnostic. 

--

Bugs

- Fortress Italy German Army Gebirgsjager Battalion is not able to be selected in Quick Battles even when it should be present, though it is available in the scenario editor.
- Fortress Italy and Battle for Normandy British Reconnaissance Regiments are only available in the Infantry tab and thus cannot be taken with their vehicle component in QBs, only scenarios, and vice versa, with a dismounted Recce Regt (a not uncommon occurence especially in Italy) unavailable in the Scenario Editor.
- Fortress Italy Brazilian and Indian forces cannot take any vehicles in QBs due to only having Infantry tabs.
- Battle for Normandy Commonwealth Armoured formations have a Recce Platoon option menu that has only a single entry, 'Stuart Tank', presumably this was intended to work similarly to the one in Fortress Italy British Armoured units where you can select between gun tanks or Stuart Recces with a dismount element, but I'm not sure if its current state is truly a bug or simply a vestigial feature that was cut due to the Stuart Recce being a vehicle pack entry for BfN.

 

Oversights

- Fortress Italy Canadians have no anti-tank gun Specialist Teams.
- Fortress Italy New Zealanders and Indians have no 6-pounder anti-tank gun Specialist Teams (they do however, have 17 pounder ones, unlike the Canadians).
- Fortress Italy British Airborne vehicles (jeeps and the Airborne Infantry tab Supply Platoon) have not had their ammunition loads changed to reflect the paras' use of 9mm at all, let alone their higher concentration of SMGs in general, with twice as much .45 as 9mm despite the only Thompsons in the airborne orgs being in the hands of mortar gunners.
- Fortress Italy and Battle for Normandy British Medium Mortar and 6-pounder ATG Specialist Teams do not come with ammo bearers, while their US and German counterparts do, and when taken in formations British Mortars and ATGs have ammo bearers (This one might be a conscious choice I suppose but that seems like a cruel one if so given the British reliance on supporting fires).
- The Bedford QLT TT truck is not available in the Single Vehicles tab for any Fortress Italy Commonwealth force, and as such can only be brought in lorried infantry battalions. It is available in the Single Vehicles tab in Battle for Normandy.
- The Lloyd mortar carrier is not available in the Single Vehicles tab for FI and BfN Commonwealth forces (Honestly the vehicle itself might be an oversight, as it's only present in anti-tank gun platoons/troops [2x Lloyds + 2x 'mortar' Lloyds per section], and contains ammo for 2 inch mortars, which the anti-tank gun platoons do not have and as far as I know the only use of the Lloyd in a mortar related role was as a transport for the 4.2" Heavy Mortar).
- Battle for Normandy British Armoured Car Squadron Car Troops have one of the scout cars designated as the troop HQ vehicle, which is contrary to the Nov 1943 War Establishments and what accounts I've seen of British AC units in action where the subaltern generally commanded from one of the two Daimler armoured cars.
- Fortress Italy Stuart Recces and BfN Stuart Kangaroos carry no additional ammunition for infantry arms. Particularly rough on the former on account of their organic scout teams.
- Fortress Italy New Zealanders have two different Morris CS8 trucks available in the Single Vehicles tab, one of which has 2" mortar ammo and one of which does not. The former is the only Morris CS8 available to any Commonwealth force in FI that has 2" ammo. 
- Fortress Italy and BfN dismounted carrier formations (Infantry Only Recce Regts and Inf Bat Carrier Platoons) lose access to their section PIAT and 2" airborne mortar entirely as they are stored in their vehicles and the game does not take into account those vehicles not being there in the way it does if one were to select the 'dismounted' option available for many mechanised/motorised platoons. It would be nice if these formations could retain those weapons when dismounted, and/or for the sections to be amalgamated into 9 man sections with a 3x3 structure, as dismounted they must act more conventionally as infantry.

 

Quibbles 

- 2 inch mortar ammo is bizarrely rare in both FI and BfN, despite the 2" being one of the integral platoon weapons of British infantry. The only places it can be found are Lloyd mortar carriers, Bedford QLD GSs (in very small quantities), QLD TTs, the aforementioned Kiwi CS8, and one universal carrier in each carrier section from a carrier platoon (though this ammunition is intended for the section's own airborne 2" rather than the resupply of platoon weapons). Not a single round for can be found in a supply platoon's trucks. This seems very odd to me especially when the 2" already comes with such a small complement of initial ammunition, often only enough for a single engagement. Admittedly, making the QLD TT available as a Single Vehicle in FI will mostly address this one.
- A specific quibble as an example for a greater, broader quibble. Daimler Dingo crews should have a rifle and a Bren gun instead of just revolvers, as the given stowage for the vehicle included a rifle, and the sum total procedure for dismounting the Bren gun on a Dingo was to lift it up out of the slot in the front plate. I often wish to use the Dingo crew to conduct stealthier, foot recce once they've reached the limits of where they can safely take their light vehicle, or used its mobility to get to an advantageous vantage point, but with only a pair of revolvers if they run into literally anything they can't generate enough fire to win or to disengage. This kind of dismounted work is both interesting from a gameplay perspective and historical, so giving the crew the necessary tools to look after themselves is I think fine. The broader quibble is that all recce/armoured recce vehicle crews from all nations should receive their proper allotment of stowed weapons for dismounted work, the Daimler Dingo's just a good example as if required I can post the stowage sketches and a historical example of crews dismounting to infiltrate and then hold a position.
- British Scout and Breach teams just kind of suck, and that's a shame because Specialist teams should be a way to flavour units and represent task organisations. Scout teams for everyone else are a combination of foot recce and assault team that can bolster the point squad in an attack with extra close range firepower. A German Scout team is three men, with three SMGs and a pair of binoculars for 28 pts (assuming Reg/Normal/+0, baseline ratings). A US Scout team costs 35 pts, but gets not just binos and a pair of SMGs, but a pair of demo charges, making it a more assault friendly Breach team, albeit with half as many charges. The British team costs 26 pts, gets one SMG, with a 20% chance of a second one and no binoculars. You might as well just grab a scout or assault team from a rifle section for recon or assault, it doesn't offer a tangential utility like the US team does, and at just 2pts cheaper than the vastly more effective German team it's not even good value in a QB setting. My proposition for improving it is simple: Scout teams represent a task organised or attached down three man foot reconnaissance element for an infantry formation. The British already have just such a unit that the Scout team could be modeled off: The carrier section dismount team, exactly the unit a battalion commander might assign to help scout for a probing platoon or to bolster their automatic firepower in an assault. Pump the points up (given an extra 2 SMGs and a pair of binos apparently clock in at 2pts and the cost of Bren detachment is 26pts, I can't imagine more than 30pts being necessary), give them an SMG, a Bren and a rifle with a 1 in 3 chance of getting a pair of binoculars (representing getting the section leader's team). 

For the Breach team, with no SMG they cannot be relied upon for one of their primary tasks, breaching into structures because they'll often bust in and promptly lose the firefight with people in the room or the next one down where your covering troops who can't follow them in for another turn cannot assist. Also, they get binoculars for some reason, unlike the Scout team. Now, I get why they have no SMG, the British were relatively light on automatic weapons for the most part and it's important not to overcorrect that in the name of gameplay and risk damaging the historical representation of these forces, but, I'm fairly certain there were instances where CW units' SMGs were task organised into concentrations in the frontline units, particularly for urban fighting, and I think a Breach team is a good opportunity to represent that. I don't want to make a concrete statement that it was done because I can't remember what sources I heard it from and in which battles (I want to say Ortona but I just cannot remember) but giving them a weapon distribution the same as the current Scout team (1 SMG with 1 in 5 chance of a second) or just a pair of SMGs would go a long way to making them a bit more fun to use.
- FI and BfN British Motor Platoons should probably have a chance at a second SMG in their first section and the platoon commander should have a higher chance of a rifle or SMG than a revolver. Motor platoons had 7 SMGs in their war establishment per platoon and 20 rifles. 15 Rifles in the sections, another 3 for the mortarmen and HQ, that leaves two 'spare' for 2 of the drivers, and similarly, 5 SMGs are drawn by the HQ, Mortar team and similarly, 2 are left for the drivers, nominally. However, given the job of a driver, I've some pretty hefty doubts that the Platoon commander was happy to leave a functional rifle or SMG in the trunk to saunter about with his revolver, but this is conjectural because I've yet to find much of anything detailed written about the motor battalions.

--

Well, if you made it through that godawful meandering novella of a post, thank you, feel free to chime in with your own TO&E discrepancies if you've run into any, gripes if you've got them, or just to tell me I'm wrong, again my hope here is that this can be a bit of a ongoing thread for CM TO&E discussion and analysis. 

[Erwin]

Here's a list I started some time ago.  Ya have to be prepared for some push back as some folks here are very sensitive to any comments they perceive as criticism.

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 in the scenario am playing right now 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.)

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 apparently indestructible tree and the vehicle may be 100% unaffected.  Unless the enemy gun moves, it can exhaust all its ammo in this way.  AI controlled guns especially can be made useless by this trick.  

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)

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by Erwin

[DanonQM]

Ah, I should clarify as I think there's a bit of a miscommunication here, I'm specifically focusing on issues related to the games' force selection mechanics, the Tables of Organisation and Equipment (TO&Es): What units and kit a formation has, what teams and vehicles a faction can bring etc. rather than just bugs as a whole. I think keeping the topic just a bit narrower in this way will help keep the issues highlighted actionable, because they're unlikely to get into the weeds with things that might be mechanically difficult/complex to fix/implement, like artillery damage behaviour and line of sight stuff (not to say that I don't want some of those things improved, but probably worth giving them a venue of their own). For instance, your number 16 I think belongs here (probably as an Oversight), because it's a unit with the wrong ammo load likely because it was built off of the base of a .50 cal sniper team and someone forgot to delete the old ammo, but the rest are probably outside the scope of a thread on TO&E issues.

Speaking of such issues, I've had a couple more referred to me:

Bugs

- BfN British Infantry tab Vickers Specialist Teams aren't Vickers teams, they're 2iC teams.
- Shock Force 2 USMC LAV-ATs are apparently missing their crew commander.

Edited April 11, 2021 by DanonQM

[Frenchy56]

5 hours ago, DanonQM said:

Quibbles 

 

- 2 inch mortar ammo is bizarrely rare in both FI and BfN, despite the 2" being one of the integral platoon weapons of British infantry. The only places it can be found are Lloyd mortar carriers, Bedford QLD GSs (in very small quantities), QLD TTs, the aforementioned Kiwi CS8, and one universal carrier in each carrier section from a carrier platoon (though this ammunition is intended for the section's own airborne 2" rather than the resupply of platoon weapons). Not a single round for can be found in a supply platoon's trucks. This seems very odd to me especially when the 2" already comes with such a small complement of initial ammunition, often only enough for a single engagement. Admittedly, making the QLD TT available as a Single Vehicle in FI will mostly address this one.

I'd say the US suffers from that as well, with no way to resupply 60mm mortars.

[DanonQM]

9 hours ago, Frenchy56 said:

I'd say the US suffers from that as well, with no way to resupply 60mm mortars.

To a degree true, but when you bring them as platoon integral weapons (Armoured Infantry Battalions and Cavalry/Armoured Recce formations), they usually come with a substantial vehicle borne resupply and/or ammo bearers, and a larger ammo load than the 2" to begin with. That said not having any access to a single vehicle tab option that has any extra rounds for them at all if you've got an infantry battalion or the like is probably something that should get some consideration. 

[DanonQM]

New pair for the list have been referred to me, and I've confirmed its presence in FI and BfN at least:

Oversights

- BfN, FI and FB US Infantry battalion rifle platoons seem to have an incorrect allocation of Springfield M1903A4 sniper rifles. They should only have a single such rifle but thanks to high roll chance on each squad to receive one they often end up with 2 or 3. Seems like it would be pretty easy to move this to the first squad of each platoon like a PIAT in British platoons.
- BfN, FI and FB US Infantry battalion rifle squads have an incorrect allocation of M7 Grenade Launchers for their M1 Garands at only one per squad. For the FI pre-M7 establishments with a Springfield and M1 Launcher for firing rifle grenades a single launcher is accurate (though ironically the 43 rifle battalions actually do have a chance of a second launcher), however in NW Europe and late Italy once the M7 was introduced, the allotment was increased to three launchers per squad, and while it does seem unlikely using all three was commonplace, a chance for or option to select multiple launchers per squad would be a good way to correct this discrepency. 

[Jabble]

18 hours ago, Erwin said:

Here's a list I started some time ago...

This may not be what the OP had in mind, but a lot of that rings sooo true!  It maybe deserves its own thread at some point.

[Frenchy56]

55 minutes ago, DanonQM said:

- BfN, FI and FB US Infantry battalion rifle squads have an incorrect allocation of M7 Grenade Launchers for their M1 Garands at only one per squad. For the FI pre-M7 establishments with a Springfield and M1 Launcher for firing rifle grenades a single launcher is accurate (though ironically the 43 rifle battalions actually do have a chance of a second launcher), however in NW Europe and late Italy once the M7 was introduced, the allotment was increased to three launchers per squad, and while it does seem unlikely using all three was commonplace, a chance for or option to select multiple launchers per squad would be a good way to correct this discrepency. 

I've heard that G.I.s would get as many grenade launchers as they could without really following the TO&E later in the war, like the second BAR, but a maximum of three sounds like a reasonable number. The Joes really liked them.

Talking about the second BAR however, it seems that it shows up in an unreasonable amount in BN compared to FB. I noticed this change in one of the last patches for the game.

[DanonQM]

1 hour ago, Frenchy56 said:

Talking about the second BAR however, it seems that it shows up in an unreasonable amount in BN compared to FB. I noticed this change in one of the last patches for the game.

Mhm, it's just hard to say how often is too often with representations of unofficial equipment/task organisations like the double BAR, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was more common in the relatively supply rich NW Europe compared to Italy. 

In an ideal world I'd want to be able to select the number of BARs per squad at the company or platoon level, which seems to be where these decisions were made irl, with an option for standard, extra and none, the former sticking with the standard one and maybe a slim chance of a single additional in a squad (1 in 9 odds or something like that so you'll usually get one per company), the second being 1 minimum with good odds of a second and  increasingly small odds of more on top of that (there are instances of some truly ridiculous formations out there like 6 BARs in a squad) and the latter being none with maybe a small chance of one (one of the sources of the extra BARs irl was that some companies thought they were useless and traded them away to other formations). The benefits of making it a choice as opposed to the current dice roll system would be consistency for scenario makers and the ability to compensate for the different orgs with different point and rarity costs.

I know the equipment standard option is supposed to provide some of this flexibility but it frankly seems to not affect very many formations or at many times/places. 

Edit, found another one for the list:

Oversights

- Fortress Italy US Mountain Infantry Battalion MMG teams from the company weapons platoon's machinegun section have two ammo bearers with 200 rounds of .50 cal AP ammunition despite servicing an M1919A6 team, which obviously uses .30 cal, not .50.

Edited April 12, 2021 by DanonQM

[DanonQM]

Two for the oversight list today, and a semi-related quibble:

Oversights

- Fortress Italy and Battle for Normandy British Parachute Platoons have an incorrect allocation of Bren guns, as each platoon had a fourth reserve Bren that could be held at the Platoon HQ or used to bolster one of the sections. This could be rectified by either replacing the regular Soldier in each Platoon HQ with a Bren gunner, or adding a second Bren gun to one of the sections in the platoon (likely with a similar organisation to the PIAT equipped sections, turning the second team into a 1x Sten, 1x Bren, 1x Lee Enfield subgroup and moving the demolition charges into the 1st team with the section commander).
- Fortress Italy and Battle for Normandy British Airlanding Companies are missing their Company Bren Detachment, a 5 man unit with 2 Brens that could be implemented in the same way as the Parachute Battalion Bren Section, albeit with a 3 man a 2 man team instead of two 3 man teams. Can be simulated currently with a pair of Bren Specialist Teams but would still be nice to have in the TO&E as it should be. Irl they were supposed to operate their Brens from the tripods in sustained fire roles, but given the tripod was widely disdained and not used anywhere it was supposed to be and it's not implemented in CM I think just making them regular Bren teams is quite acceptable. 

Quibbles

- Battle for Normandy British Airborne prior to Market Garden (ie, representing the 6th ABD) should probably have access to Bren Carriers in the Single Vehicles tab, to represent vehicles from the 6th Airborne Armoured Reconnaissance Regiment. As an aside, really hoping the 6th AARR will make it into the eventual Final Blitzkrieg Brits module, and for the 1st Airlanding Reconnaissance Squadron to be added to FI if/when it receives another module, as the squadron was landed at Taranto and took part in the 1st ABD's Italian operations until the Division returned to England in late '43. 

Edited April 14, 2021 by DanonQM

[AlexUK]

Impressive! Lots in there. Hopefully, if confirmed, BFC will be able to make some changes either with Steam release or next update. 

[akd]

Please provide references when requesting TO&E changes to existing formations.

Edited April 14, 2021 by akd

[DanonQM]

2 hours ago, AlexUK said:

Impressive! Lots in there. Hopefully, if confirmed, BFC will be able to make some changes either with Steam release or next update. 

Thanks, I hope so too.

1 hour ago, akd said:

Please provide references when requesting TO&E changes to existing formations.

Of course, at first I refrained due to most issues primarily being ones of function/inconsistency within the title itself, but as I moved to more historical corrections I should've been more rigorous. I'll recap the ones I've listed so far and in the future I'll append sources as I go. So, for each historical issue in order:

On 4/11/2021 at 8:19 PM, DanonQM said:

Battle for Normandy British Armoured Car Squadron Car Troops have one of the scout cars designated as the troop HQ vehicle...

Armoured Car Troops having the commanding officer in one of the ACs, not one of the scout cars is corroborated by the Nov 1943 war establishment which can be found in digitized form here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160308230258/http://www.warestablishments.net/Great Britain/Reconnaissance/Armoured Car Regiment November 1943.pdf , examples of Lieutenants commanding from these vehicles in combat circumstances can be found in the 11th Hussars war diaries: http://www.warlinks.com/armour/11_hussars/11huss_44.php

On 4/11/2021 at 8:19 PM, DanonQM said:

Daimler Dingo crews should have a rifle and a Bren gun instead of just revolvers...

Daimler Dingo stowage sketches can be found here, showing the rifle clearly: http://daimler-fighting-vehicles.co.uk/DFV-File Part Ad- DSC Data sheets.pdf and a recorded example of Dingo crews dismounting to use a Bren in an ambush role can be found here: http://daimler-fighting-vehicles.co.uk/14 Days in September.pdf and another instance were a Dingo and DAC dismounted to hold a bridge here: http://daimler-fighting-vehicles.co.uk/DFV-File Part D001a-Houshold Cavalry 1939-1945.pdf (Lt Powell commanding from the DAC is also a further confirmation of above). Additionally both the war diary extracts above mention a number of instances of dismounted reconnaissance and the use of Stens by crew/officers. 

On 4/11/2021 at 8:19 PM, DanonQM said:

British Motor Platoons should probably have a chance at a second SMG....

The Motor Battalion war establishment, including the number of arms per platoon can be found here: https://web.archive.org/web/20161108184741/http://www.warestablishments.net/Great Britain/Infantry/Motor Battalion June 1943.pdf

On 4/12/2021 at 5:14 PM, DanonQM said:

- BfN, FI and FB US Infantry battalion rifle platoons seem to have an incorrect allocation of Springfield M1903A4 sniper rifles...
- BfN, FI and FB US Infantry battalion rifle squads have an incorrect allocation of M7 Grenade Launchers for their M1 Garands...

Twofer on this one as the US Rifle Company TO&E from 1944 details the allocation of both Springfield snipers per platoon and M7 grenade launchers per squad: http://www.militaryresearch.org/7-17 26Feb44.pdf

2 hours ago, DanonQM said:

British Parachute Platoons have an incorrect allocation of Bren guns...

Bayonetstrength has a wonderful rundown on the evolution of the Parachute Battalion organisation drawn from the war establishments (which you can also find the raws of on the archived version of warestablishments I've linked above but it's all laid out in the bayonetstrength pdf anyway: http://www.bayonetstrength.uk/BritishArmy/BritParaBn/Org of the British Para Bn 1941-45.pdf

2 hours ago, DanonQM said:

British Airlanding Companies are missing their Company Bren Detachment...

The Company Bren Detachment can be found referenced in the April 1943 War Establishment: https://web.archive.org/web/20190727204632/http://warestablishments.net/Great Britain/Airborne/Airlanding Battalion April 1943.pdf and Battle Order did an article on the Airlanding Company too, (though if I'm frank you'd have to ask Brendan where he got the 2x8 man and 1x5 man section org for the line platoons from): https://www.battleorder.org/uk-glider-1943

Edited April 14, 2021 by DanonQM

[Gkenny]

I did some more testing - It appears the LAV-AT vehicles in the LAR battalion have 4 men, but the LAV-ATs in the MEU formation are missing their commander, which is noticeable in the marine campaign.

[akd]

5 hours ago, DanonQM said:

Thanks, I hope so too.

Of course, at first I refrained due to most issues primarily being ones of function/inconsistency within the title itself, but as I moved to more historical corrections I should've been more rigorous. I'll recap the ones I've listed so far and in the future I'll append sources as I go. So, for each historical issue in order:

Armoured Car Troops having the commanding officer in one of the ACs, not one of the scout cars is corroborated by the Nov 1943 war establishment which can be found in digitized form here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160308230258/http://www.warestablishments.net/Great Britain/Reconnaissance/Armoured Car Regiment November 1943.pdf , examples of Lieutenants commanding from these vehicles in combat circumstances can be found in the 11th Hussars war diaries: http://www.warlinks.com/armour/11_hussars/11huss_44.php

Daimler Dingo stowage sketches can be found here, showing the rifle clearly: http://daimler-fighting-vehicles.co.uk/DFV-File Part Ad- DSC Data sheets.pdf and a recorded example of Dingo crews dismounting to use a Bren in an ambush role can be found here: http://daimler-fighting-vehicles.co.uk/14 Days in September.pdf and another instance were a Dingo and DAC dismounted to hold a bridge here: http://daimler-fighting-vehicles.co.uk/DFV-File Part D001a-Houshold Cavalry 1939-1945.pdf (Lt Powell commanding from the DAC is also a further confirmation of above). Additionally both the war diary extracts above mention a number of instances of dismounted reconnaissance and the use of Stens by crew/officers. 

The Motor Battalion war establishment, including the number of arms per platoon can be found here: https://web.archive.org/web/20161108184741/http://www.warestablishments.net/Great Britain/Infantry/Motor Battalion June 1943.pdf

Twofer on this one as the US Rifle Company TO&E from 1944 details the allocation of both Springfield snipers per platoon and M7 grenade launchers per squad: http://www.militaryresearch.org/7-17 26Feb44.pdf

Bayonetstrength has a wonderful rundown on the evolution of the Parachute Battalion organisation drawn from the war establishments (which you can also find the raws of on the archived version of warestablishments I've linked above but it's all laid out in the bayonetstrength pdf anyway: http://www.bayonetstrength.uk/BritishArmy/BritParaBn/Org of the British Para Bn 1941-45.pdf

The Company Bren Detachment can be found referenced in the April 1943 War Establishment: https://web.archive.org/web/20190727204632/http://warestablishments.net/Great Britain/Airborne/Airlanding Battalion April 1943.pdf and Battle Order did an article on the Airlanding Company too, (though if I'm frank you'd have to ask Brendan where he got the 2x8 man and 1x5 man section org for the line platoons from): https://www.battleorder.org/uk-glider-1943

Thank you.  Those are all my go to resources for checking things, particularly Commonwealth orgs.

Edited April 14, 2021 by akd

[DanonQM]

Oversights

- Fortress Italy British Stuart Recce III and Vs are often used as transports for small dismount teams (Tank Recce Platoons, Forward Observer vehicles) in formations, and in Motor platoons in one campaign (R2V's First Blood at Celleno) but this functionality is not available through the Single Vehicles tab. Having the Armoured Infantry and Infantry tab Stuart Recces possess the 1-2 man crew and retain 3-4 slots for transport would be a way to offer both versions. Would be nice to see this in BfN too but the Stuart Recces in that title in general are a lot less thoroughly implemented. 
- Fortress Italy British do not have access to Universal Carriers (that is to say, Universal Carriers without Brens or MMGs mounted) in their Single Vehicles tab, regardless of Branch, a shame as they make a good option for fitting certain support and command teams. 
- Fortress Italy and Battle for Normandy US Cavalry M8 Greyhound crews are missing their allocated M1 Carbines, as can be seen in the TO&E here: http://www.militaryresearch.org/2-27 15Jul43.pdf US cav were expected to operate and fight dismounted as required, and as such pistols were not the given equipment of armoured car crews, carbines were. This can be considered another facet of my quibble about the Daimler Dingo and its Bren gun in the OP. 

Quibbles

- Fortress Italy and Battle for Normandy British Armoured Car Squadron/Regiment Support Troops need to be reassessed for equipment and capabilities. The 11th Hussars 1944 war diaries specifically mention that the Scout Sections (their terminology for the sections of the Support Troop) were trained fire observers and could control indirect fires from the Gun Troop (with the M3 GMCs), there also appears to be strong implication from this and a reference to Scout troops conducting day patrols with WSs that the Scout Sections were each expected to possess a radio. The diary also contains a reference to 'Brens and Stens' at the Scout section level, and four man foot patrols possessing two Stens, a Bren and a wireless set, which I think makes a good case for increasing the armament of the Support sections depending on equipment quality. At least a Bren+Sten each seems reasonable on Good+ equipment, which combined with more accurate armaments for Scout/Armoured Car crews would help bolster their efficacy substantially, or if we're feeling really generous. Their 1943 diaries also describes the Scout Troops as initiall formed: "A Scout Tp of four sections, each capable of taking to their feet, protecting themselves with Bren guns and communicating on a No. 18 (Pack) set;" while this is dated to Feb '43 and thus represents an earlier unofficial establishment, I doubt such a capability would be deprecated beyond a potential reduction to three sections as per war establishment as a concession to manpower (though it's not clear whether or not 11th Hussars did reduce from four to three sections), especially not to omit the presence of a Bren per section given the wealth of extra Brens available to an Armoured Car formation. Also as of the current orgs one section per Troop (the one with the SMG) doesn't have binoculars for some ungodly reason, though the other two do, I think because the Sten section's commander is marked as an Assistant leader. Sources: http://www.warlinks.com/armour/11_hussars/11huss_43.php http://www.warlinks.com/armour/11_hussars/11huss_44.php
 

Edited April 16, 2021 by DanonQM

[DanonQM]

Oversights

- Battle for Normandy Canadian Infantry Battalions are short on Sten guns. A Canadian Army report from July 1945 states that as of May 1944 Canadian infantry battalions in NW Europe had an additional pool of at least 12 Sten guns to be parceled out to the rifle platoons at the commander's discretion. There would be myriad ways to represent this in game, as while spread out evenly it would yield just a single extra Sten per platoon, the intent was far more likely to be be to allow concentration of the weapons. The first option is to give Canadian infantry squads a chance to have a second Sten per section, though I'm generally not a fan of representing pooled weapons in that way as it leaves interesting orgs up to nothing but dice rolls. Influencing that dice roll, or better obviating at least some of them entirely by tying it to the equipment quality options in force selection is a better option, with higher equipment levels bringing in more Stens at the Section level to represent allocated weapons from the pool, to a maximum of an additional per section at Excellent. A third option is instituting an Assault Company formation option that can be chosen for an infantry battalion in force selection in the same way you select whether you want a Wasp Carrier platoon or the like, which represents the concentration of that additional Sten pool into a single one of the battalion's four companies, with an extra Sten per section (probably in the AT team) and for the platoon commander. The final option that comes to mind is bringing the choice right down to the platoon level,, in the same way you choose if you want a PIAT for the platoon, you can select 0-3 Assault Sections instead of the regular ones, which come at a slightly higher point/rarity cost, but get 1-2 extra Sten guns. Unfortunately, I have yet to find any documentation to confirm or refute this practice extending outside of the 1st Canadian Army, but given that 1 Cdn Army did have Polish troops under it, as well as the British I Corps, I do not think it would be unreasonable to also expand whatever implementation is decided on to British infantry battalions, albeit at either the next step higher equipment standard or a marginal points bump to represent the reasonable potential that this was implemented more widely than exclusively Canadian formations. Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20030302010024/http://www.dnd.ca/dhh/downloads/cmhq/cmhq141.pdf

[Cobetco]

Fire and rubble: 

panzer brigade (a) company HQ has one 251/17 instead of two 251/3's, this also means the 2IC has to walk everywhere, don't know if thats a bug or just TO&E stupidity

Stug III (latest) doesn't appear in the single vehicle selection.
 

[Artkin]

BUG: CMRT 85MM 52K heavy Anti-Air gun fires at the base, instead of at the height of the cannon. 

[Vergeltungswaffe]

22 hours ago, Cobetco said:

Fire and rubble: 

panzer brigade (a) company HQ has one 251/17 instead of two 251/3's, this also means the 2IC has to walk everywhere, don't know if thats a bug or just TO&E stupidity

 

Click on PzG Plt (Officer) and you'll see that they can be mounted or dismounted. Unless you select something there, you can get either or both.

So I would say that's not a bug.

[Cobetco]

9 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

Click on PzG Plt (Officer) and you'll see that they can be mounted or dismounted. Unless you select something there, you can get either or both.

So I would say that's not a bug.

I have been told its a known bug after I posted this, and is on the fixing list? also I think you misread platoon HQ for where the bug is, the company HQ.

[Bulletpoint]

CMBN: King Tiger missing from quick battle (apparently unless user has Market Garden installed).

[Vanir Ausf B]

On 4/26/2021 at 2:41 AM, Cobetco said:

I have been told its a known bug after I posted this, and is on the fixing list? also I think you misread platoon HQ for where the bug is, the company HQ.

Yes it's a bug. Yes it will be fixed. Soon. The missing Stug III (latest), also.

On 4/25/2021 at 10:02 AM, Artkin said:

BUG: CMRT 85MM 52K heavy Anti-Air gun fires at the base, instead of at the height of the cannon. 

Good catch.

On 4/26/2021 at 3:01 AM, Bulletpoint said:

CMBN: King Tiger missing from quick battle (apparently unless user has Market Garden installed).

If you mean the Porsche KT, it's on the bug list since I think that is a base game unit. If you mean the Henschel KT, it's there if you buy the module.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Vanir Ausf B

[Jace11]

I compiled a list of current (patch 2.03) TOE issues a while ago for CMFB. Linked below, reposting here as they were never acknowledged. 

https://community.battlefront.com/topic/137274-cm-final-blitzkrieg-v203-patch-has-been-released/?do=findComment&comment=1842239

[Bulletpoint]

5 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

If you mean the Porsche KT, it's on the bug list since I think that is a base game unit. If you mean the Henschel KT, it's there if you buy the module.

Both are missing. I'm ok with one of them only appearing if I have the the module, but both are missing in QBs, while one of them is there in the scenario editor.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Bulletpoint