New file at the Repository: CMBN - FAQ (2011-09-23)

[Battlefront Repository]

A FAQ for new and returning CMBN players, based on the CMSF original. Hopefully this will be a useful companion to avoid a lot of searching on the forums.Feedback is very welcome, if you have any corrections or suggestions, send stikkiepixie or myself a PM!

More...

[rocketman]

You could add pictures showing the difference between hedges and low bocage.

[RockinHarry]

"What is 'splitting squads'?"

Although an explanation on how it works in CMBN, it isn´t quite true for WW2 german combat historically. Germans abandoned the fire team/assault team concept directly after their experiences in the 1939 Poland campaign, after which the whole squad was kept intact (for movement and fire purposes) and the formerly applied team tactics raised to platoon level, with now the squad beeing the smallest tactical unit. However, splitting teams is currently the only means to counter bunching up infantry in single action spots, but if one takes it not too seriously using team (half squad) tactics, its valid to model small scale inner squad tactics, when the squads are more or less SELF DEPENDENT (no support available, from neighboring squads or heavy weapons).

"How do I fine tune the positioning of my infantry squads"

You may also note that as explained in the GM, "Face" relates to an absolute map (action) spot. The map spot clicked can be a ground tile, a 3D object (house incl. different stories, tree, ect.) or an enemy unit (its floating icon). Single soldiers then seek LOF/LOS vs. that specific action spot or an enemy unit within, as well as COVER within the currently occupied action spot.

"Do cover arc give spotting bonus?"

You may overwork by latest info given in this thread:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=100368&page=4

CA´s also try to "optimize" single soldiers placements within an action spot, to cover the selected area with all eyes available, unlike "Face" which relates to just a single selected action spot (or enemy unit).

[Erwin]

Splitting squads and having them roam all over the place independently is too easy for the Allies as well. (I regularly choose a depleted squad and split em to use as sacrificial recon all the time - sorry about that.)

It would be terrific if the system did not allow one to create waypoints for a squad or team that were further than (say) 100m from any other squad or team from the same platoon (and its HQ).

[BadgerDog]

Thank you ...

Appreciate the work putting this together ....

Regards,

Doug

[stikkypixie]

We'll take a look

[RockinHarry]

Splitting squads and having them roam all over the place independently is too easy for the Allies as well. (I regularly choose a depleted squad and split em to use as sacrificial recon all the time - sorry about that.)

It would be terrific if the system did not allow one to create waypoints for a squad or team that were further than (say) 100m from any other squad or team from the same platoon (and its HQ).

I actually like the split team feature, but some of the application is flawed. In example an assault moving german squad will send the support team with the LMG first, which actually should move last until it has covered the movement of the rifle team. Might be it is for US squads also. Didn´t have a look at them lately.

The application of the AIP is terrible, when it uses advance, assault and max assault movement modes (for infantry units). Cohesion of units is terribly ripped apart, with all its C2 and other problems, which makes the AI performing even worse. I now tend to use "Quick" more in situations, where the game manual suggests to use "advance" and "assault", as this keeps unit cohesion way better and gives an attacking AI infantry more punch in situations where you need it. Off course it all depends upon terrain moved over, but I figured a "Quick/Active" command set gives more chances of success, when assaulting an enemy postion in high density terrain (urban, forest ect.) Otherwise the AI gets its units shredded piecemeal, when using assault ect. with split teams sent forward one after another.

Also I dislike BFCs decision to make the german HMG teams not splittable. Beside the little efficiency of HMG units in the game, the 6 men crew is nothing but a large target for enemy fire and thus gets destroyed pretty quickly. A workaround could be, to have the ammo bearers assigned a different action spot behind the gunners internally, so they can be kept out of harms way in cover, when the gunner team (2-3 guys, incl. the team leader) engages the enemy.

[Wolfe]

Very nice! Thanks for this.

Pg.5 under Default Keyboard Input says Backspace cancels a fire order, but it's Delete. Backspace cancels move.

Some info on blowing holes in bocage might be useful (with pics):

Blowing Tank-sized holes in Bocage

Executive Summary:

* For N-S/E-W bocage with an existing opening, Blast Through is the best option. If there is no opening, Blast Along.

* For diagonally oriented bocage, always Blast Along.

- Chris

[sburke]

Splitting squads and having them roam all over the place independently is too easy for the Allies as well. (I regularly choose a depleted squad and split em to use as sacrificial recon all the time - sorry about that.)

LOL Your honesty will get you flogged.

I actually try to play ignoring the victory conditions per se and maintain some level of standard about how I use teams and squads. My crews from destroyed tanks are sent to the rear and away from combat (except if I am defending in which case they go as far to the rear as they can w/o standing around in the open). My ammo teams tend to stay with their weapons teams until the weapons team itself is wiped out in which case I will tend to assign them as reinforcements to a platoon. Platoons stick together etc etc.

Basically I enjoy the game best viewing it somewhat as a narrative and not as pieces in a game. I don't expect any such lunacy from my opponents. It is purely for my own enjoyment and if it costs me in VPs or even the game, ahh so be it. What matters is that I enjoy it and winning versus losing is not the standard that makes the difference.

[Erwin]

Thanks for the link Wolfe. Really useful to know one can (maybe) get a tank-sized hole using only one satchel charge. Never even tried blasting ALONGSIDE bocage. I wonder what that would do to a building or wall? Hmm...

And sburke... I really try to discipline myself to keep platoons together, honest... But, After nasty scenarios like "School of Hard Knocks" I found myself with several platoons with no HQ's at all.

AND their Co CO's did not give any C2 to the squads.

AND those platoon HQ's were never replaced in subsequent scenarios in the campaign.

So... given those squads were leaderless for what could have been days, weeks...? I rationalized that they decide to "do thar own thang" like Kelly's Heroes etc.

[stikkypixie]

Thanks, we'll work it into a revised version.