If you really want to do Partisans right the best way is, imo, to magnify their proliferation in reverse ratio to the fortunes of the invading power. Their appearance tended to increase in France, for example, following Allied successes and Axis reversals. Their was more subversive activity in 44-45 ...

I suggest that the Germs should be compelled to garrison the Russian front pre-Barbarossa at the risk of some kind of penalty. For example, at the expense of free Soviet movement within their borders or an earlier DOW option particularly in Human vs Human matches. One assumes this is abstracted now ...

After Germany and the USSR partition Poland do the Germans leave the new border with Russia ungarrisoned with no penalty? IOW, from what one gathers from the manual, Russia's entry into the war is not hastened by the absence of German forces on their frontier.

Yes, played around with the Barbarossa scenario and the Russians ARE tough. It seems to me that their morale ratings are a bit inflated for 1941, more like at '43-44 levels. Their Northern and Central fronts should essentially vaporize the first few months.
Against an equal opp, the Axis should ...

If the Axis player initiates a PBEM what is there to prevent him from storing up a library of successful opening moves? If so, shouldn't the Allied side initiate by default?

Clear them out. The current MP battle format is, for want of a better word, curious. And the opfire enhancements are important.

The Out of 8 reviewer was the one who gave CMSF an 8/8 on release. Though much improved now it was a buggy mess at that time. So don't take him too seriously.

I agree with his point about the MP experience, however; often there's no sense much of the time in attacking. The forces are equal and the ...

Should mortars really be able to bombard from within buildings? Also you can unload artillery into buildings, very problematical maneuver in the heat of a battle.

Hard to post a wish list as it sounds like you are complaining about a great game
Flail tank would be nice.

Better yet, Rhino tanks which where used to bust German hedgerow defences. If there existed a simulation of hedgerow battles in BA, in fact, the hedges are now just barriers. Your typical ...

I'm really digging the game, but I need to likely concur, the idea a stationary tank with Op fire available is being hosed by a shoot and scoot tactic makes Op Fire seem pointless if it accomplished nothing.

So called Shoot&Scoot was common practice in WW2, especially by the Allies who were often ...

About the only thing i would seriously like to enhance is the ability for fan created multiplayer scenarios to be uploaded somewhere where they can easily be accessed by all. I would doubt this is too difficult to do, and would involve little actual coding changes to the program, mostly just ...

1-You can chance in the suads.csv file, the "type" value from "artillery" to "infantry", so that they can be moved!

Right. But there's no walking animation, looks creepy.

2- Open "data" folder and "terrain" txt. file, chance the "COVERVALUE0" and "COVERVALUE1"!

This works. For one person who ...

Giving the Allies an extra man would be fine, but what do the Germans get in return?

A bit less fire power. US squads were bigger, twelve men versus nine. This had an impact on tactics and presents a little better graphically in my opinion. Not sure about the size of the British squads.

OK, I'll get his started. In order of desirability, off the top of my head.

1- Some movement capability- and animations- for MG and Mortar teams. Small arty pieces, like 37m, can be moved one square.
2- Additional protection for inf inside buildings and pillboxes.
3- 6 soldiers per German squad,7 ...

One assumes the the five pixel troopers represent a 9-12 man squad. The size of the average map measures, say, 6 miles square? But the range of the heavy guns seems conservative. For example, that of German 88 given clear LOS should basically extend the entire length. With a decent chance to score a ...

pipfromslitherine wrote:We found that it was too 'empty' when we didn't tell you whether your artillery etc had any effect - not quite entirely realistic to be sure, just one of those gamey decisions.

Interesting. And it makes perfect sense. In a Zen kind of way.

jomni wrote:

pomakli wrote: Anyway just pointing out that infantry can be very instrumental in battle.

I was more thinking of situations in which two adjacent inf squads, or inf next to an mg team, in stone buildings can shred each other's men rather quickly. I'd expect severe suppression, followed by an assault.

If the MG and Mortar teams can't run, at least they should walk (Move).

The Fog of War could be a little more thoroughgoing. When you shell a position without LOS, like an urban area, the game informs you of casualties, retreats and suppressions. The unit details are not provided however.

Does anyone get the impression that there are a bit too many infantry kills and not enough suppression? Maybe this is due to mostly playing the desert maps with less cover, but my grunts tend to get decimated over the course of a battle giving them less a weight as a combat arm. Even a winning ...