Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/21/2017 in all areas

  1. 23 points
    John Kettler

    Crater grogs rejoice!

    Brother Ed is happily making craters on a 3-D printer, and I unearthed this to help him. Turns out this is a blast from my past, in the form of a runway cratering study I used when doing a report on US rapid runway repair capability in my early days at Hughes. This is, in part, quite the tutorial on crater configuration from aerial bombs and addresses dimensions for a range of bomb sizes against both a range of runway types and against bare soil. It's called BOMB CRATER DAMAGE TO RUNWAYS and was authored by Peter Westine of the Southwest Research Institute. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/907456.pdf P.S. I give up! This post won't delete. Tried doing that after realizing I put it in the wrong place. Should be in CM GDF, not CMFB. Mods, please move it. Thanks! Regards, John Kettler
  2. 14 points
    Bil Hardenberger

    AAR - A Lesson in Defense

    This is a true After Action report (AAR). I played this game last year against one of my most skilled opponents (ScoutPL). The scenario was Green Hell, my goal was to protect the Farm and Cafe objectives, and if possible, try to take the la Madeleine objective. Simple no? This was the first time I had played this scenario and the scenario and sides were chosen by my opponent. I will give a general overview along with a quick and dirty METT-T analysis, then I'll get right into the action. A word of warning though, there will be no long range tank fights in this AAR, it will be a tough costly mainly infantry slug-fest for both sides. I do hope however that I can at least show my philosophy when on the defense. I will be honest, I struggle the most with the defense, I am very offensive minded and just can't help myself sometimes and overextend, right Baneman? MISSION The mission is simple, hold the enemy at bay and force him to waste his combat power on the drive to my objectives, so that when he arrives he will have a spent force. My main goal is to protect the two objectives in my zone, and preserve my force as much as possible. ENEMY I have been told to expect German FJ troops in unknown strength, though if I go by the tactical map above I can expect a combined force of infantry and armor. All I really know is that they should be entering around the a Madeleine objective area... if the tactical map above is correct. TERRAIN My force is sitting on a ridge-line, so I should have good lines of sight across the entire map. Whether that means I will be able to spot much is another matter. The map is also broken up by bocage lined fields. However they are easily penetrated, so will be easily flanked, also those fields will mask movement wonderfully, for both sides. TROOPS I command Baker Company, with a weapons company (Dog) in support. I will get into my initial plans for this battle in a future post. Initial deployments are shown below.. Baker is spread across the entire ridge-line and Dog has been broken up evenly to support Baker's Platoons. TIME I have 1 hour and 20 minutes to hold off the enemy. That is a long time, but will also mean that ammo supply could be the deciding factor at the end.
  3. 14 points

    The Night Before CM-mas

    Twas the night before CM-mas and all through the bunker not a 'truppen was stirring they were all down and hunkered The frags were all hung by the rifles with care In hopes that Santa Steve soon would be there The 'truppen a snoring and dreaming away of the hookers they'd met, on leave last May When out in the minefield there arose such a clatter, I sprang from my bunk, my skivvies all tattered. Away to the gun sites I flew like a plane, pulled back the bolt and steadied my aim. When from mod weary eyes I spied from afar, Some northern Maine dude with a brain in a jar, Santa Steve! I shouted with excitement and glee but in response, just some bitching about TO&E On Stragglers, on Sicherungs, Luftwaffe and Herr on Jagers and Gebirs, and others more rare He droned on and on as the brain kept a coding and I knew deep inside this was no normal foreboding For once in a while a reference to Syria and with that little gem I was sent to hysteria For amidst all that heavy WWII talking Toward Shock Force 2 I knew he was walking Patiently on the desert I'd waited and soon it'd be real and my lust would be sated Back to the sand! Nato, Uncons and pals but with 4.0 flare and friggin' hit decals! My head filled with war and the toys that it brings I was hoping I'd see it before G**D*** spring! Then brain in arm, he turned toward the west to continue ever onward the Combat Mission quest Teeth clenched and jaw set against the snowy wind he trudge into the night, a phantom again And as he passed by the bunker and out of our zone I chewed on the annual Christmas bone. Merry Christmas, fellas! Mord.
  4. 13 points
    That's kind of the direction I took it too. If you looked at my old Company at a few weeks into a gunnery/training exercise, we'd only be slightly better shaved (because the US Army is still pretty serious about that, although tanker mustaches wouldn't be uncommon), a lot of our gear would look pretty trashed (well worn, but also knocked around/we'd wear our most torn up stuff to the field). Simply a lot of dirt, lowered hygiene, some unbuttoned pouches doesn't make for a non-functional unit. The German solider has a highly inflated opinion of his own capabilities from my experience, but it's in the way they're within the realm of being "very capable" just they look around the room and believe themselves to be a few dozen steps above their peers because Deutsche! * but I'd still put good money on them in a fight if it came down to it. *Take his all with a grain of salt, but working with other countries: French: The most frustrating mix of very component and very relaxed you will encounter. Like I imagine a French pilot in a crashing plane would do everything reasonable to keep it from crashing, once that had happened mutter "merde" to themselves, shrug and have a smoke waiting for the plane to explode while the American would die trying to fashion a new engine from the gum wrappers in his pocket and some duct tape up to the point of impact. British: They're very tired. Like they're professional but they're really quite sick of whatever nonsense you colonials/continentals are rousted up about. It doesn't matter if the field itself was invented last week, somehow they'll act as if Wellington himself had an Electronic Warfare Company at Waterloo, and the British have been doing it forever. In the event they are incorrect this will rarely be acknowledged. Whatever kit you have is also entirely too much for the job. You have two radio nets available in your tanks? We get by with one. You have only one radio? Our tanks are connected by no 4 wire and a Lance Corporal or something. Poles: Less exposure, but they seem constantly a little amused. Americans have tanks? Who knew? These computers you have, they turn on when you want them on? Magic! Your food, has it caused anyone to explode. No, I don't mean in the bathrooms I mean literally, do not ask. Fascinating! May I have? You're never sure if they're taking the piss or actually impressed. Generally good dudes though, if absolute murder to get their names right. German: Thinks they're the legacy of the Prussian military machine that made Europe quake, is the legacy of social welfare state that has money for post kindergarten's omni-sex bathroom and masseuse for teachers, not for fuel for tanks. Japanese: Everyone is in total agreement with this plan we made two weeks ago for the operation we are committing to in two hours. The movements of the enemy are inconsequential to this fact, we are all in agreement, this is where we are going to go because we are in agreement (this is where I had to add in one caveat. The Japanese are aware of this, and getting a lot better at working on the fly, it's just when they're not a "good" unit they default a lot to "this is the plan we follow because it's the plan we agreed on" vs "this best meets the intention") Russian: I'm a spy. You know I'm a spy, I know I'm a spy, I'm going to pretend to be sneaky about this because we are playing a game about it, but we all know why I'm here. Yep, I just took out my camera and took some shots. Oh bother the Chinese guy is in the way again. Chinese: YOU STUPID AMERICANS DO NOT KNOW I AM SPY. I AM CLEARLY NOT AN INTELLIGENCE AGENT I AM JUST A CHINESE PERSON MYSTERIOUSLY APPEARING IN A PLACE WITH NO CHINESE PEOPLE. I AM SNEAKILY TAKING A MILLION PICTURES OF EVERYTHING YOU HAVE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO ME. I AM SO SNEAKY. I AM THE ONLY PERSON IN THIS ****TY AFRICAN VILLAGE IN PERFECTLY CLEAN KHAKIS, MY SHOES ARE NOT DUSTY, AND HAVE THREE THOUSAND DIFFERENT SENSORS HANGING OUT OF MY BACKPACK BUT YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO SEE ME BECAUSE I AM A SPY. HAHA DUMB AMERICANS WHY ARE THEY ALL LOOKING AT ME SO MUCH? Thai: WE ARE ALL GENERALS PLEASE DIRECT US TO THE ONE PRIVATE IN THE THAI ARMY SO HE CAN CARRY OUR BAGS. Korean: It's a lot of solid, squared away soldiers with a generous helping of weird people hiding out in weird corners (the ROKA captain showing up with a Gucci tote and an umbrella to a field exercise was a major wtf) and a dose of semi-subversive conscripts ("Hai, Mr American Captain Man, please allow me to tell you how terrible my chain of Command is and are you in needing of a KATUSA by chance?") Americans: WE ARE HERE TO HELP BY IGNORING WHATEVER WISDOM YOU MAY HAVE AND ATTEMPTING TO AMERICAN OUR WAY OUT OF ALL PROBLEMS WITH MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MONEY, EXPLOSIVES, OR BOTH WHICH WE WILL FLAGRANTLY LORD OVER YOU WITHOUT REALIZING IT ON ALL OCCASIONS.
  5. 13 points

    The patch?

    The whole communiction from the side of BF is a joke. People can defend it as much as they like, but their PR is not only very bad, it is almost non-existent. I don't buy nonsense like 'they must concentrate on their work', 'new information will only bring discussion and questions' and 'you can tell them how to do things once you have your own company'. Reading this forum IS like being stuck in a time-loop and the lack of information IS causing speculation. Utter arrogance. Technically not allowed to say that....
  6. 13 points

    just to say: MERCI

    Hello it will be a year now that I discovered CMBN and this forum and is time to intervene to say thank you I'm not the only one to do it but the repetition is good Since my childhood I have a dream, a desire, to see with my eyes this battle that has rocked my childhood, imagining to travel the battlefield like a drone. I was born in Falaise in 1970 and my family suffered the battle : 4 killed, the house bombed, the exodus on the road, the strafing of the bomber fighters, the artillery, the fighting but also after the battle, the destroyed houses, the burning vehicles and corpses littering the battlefield were all family meal conversations. Here in Normandie this was an important trauma. It always impressed and interested me, in a word: fascinated. I constantly asked for clarification and to question civilians or soldiers who had experienced these events. All the film reports on the subject, I watched them. I think I have seen ¾ images known from the battle. I never stopped walking the battlefield, collecting vestiges and remaining some hours to imagine the events. I used every means to immerse myself in this battle and the battles of the second world war in general. Movies, books and even games Squad leader then Close Combat that I practiced a long time. But although this battle has become my daily life because I have made it my job (I am a guide of museum and even considered as an expert of fighting led by the Poles during the Battle of Falaise pocket), the time passing my imagination has declined. and little by little the image of these fights in my mind was becoming more and more abstract. I ended up consoling myself by telling myself that if I go to paradise there I will can achieve this wish i was not counting on CMBN What a shock and even if it remains a game, my imagination work and as in my childhood events come to life in my head. After a year of practice my enthusiasm is not blunted my dream is somehow realized. So for that: thanks for this formidable game thanks to the moder who improves even more are aspect, thank you to persons who animates this forum thanks to the battle designers (for the anecdote I live on a map of the game !) I'm begining to smoke again and to say some nastiness on my neighbors, paradise has lost its appeal !!!
  7. 12 points
    I’ve been working on a new scenario for CMBS 4.0 called “Tactical Operations Center”. It is in Beta testing now and is intended as player vs AI. Below is part of the Designer Notes that gives an overview. Followed by a few screen shots. This is a fictional scenario that may take a while to load depending on your computer. The player takes charge of a Tactical Operations Center (TOC) located in a Forward Operating Base (FOB) for a four-hour shift. The player is responsible for the successful execution of the mission during his shift. The scenario was created with the idea of being a static campaign in a counter insurgency environment. It is a multi-battle scenario set on a large map (approximately 7.5 square kilometers) that, unlike a traditional combat mission campaign, shows persistent map damage. So, as the player maneuvers a Quick Reaction Force (QRF) down a roadway in response to actionable intelligence he can drive past the burning wrecks of a mistake he made earlier or the scattered bodies of a Separatist unit he destroyed. The scenario also provides three types of intelligence to help guide the decision-making process. The three types of intelligence are Human Intelligence (HUMINT), Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and Tactical Site Exploitation (TSE). HUMINT is collected from Separatist who defect under an amnesty program administered by the Ukrainian government. The HUMINT intelligence is in the name field of defectors and includes an intelligence code, grid coordinates and time. A quick glance at the intelligence code sheet (included in the briefing) allows the player to know what, where and when something will occur or where something is located. Some of this HUMINT is time sensitive. The TSE and SIGINT are provided by touch objective notifications at the top of the screen. This intelligence will be useful in bringing The Butcher of Belz (enemy commander) to justice and for disrupting Separatist operations. The grid coordinates are created by a pattern of grid lines placed on the map using a blue occupy objective. The grid numbers are displayed on the map edges using landmarks. A brief explanation of this modified military grid system and how to use it is provided in the briefing. The player can, if he decides to, launch an air assault during the setup phase. There are four different landing zones to choose from. Forward Operating Base (FOB) Apache has a Helicopter Landing Zone (HLZ) where reinforcements will arrive, and other units will exit from. The FOB also has a mortar pit that will be resupplied with ammo both by air and by convoy if the roads and HLZ remain open. Another feature included in the scenario is the ability to destroy base camps thereby preventing the Separatists from receiving their scheduled reinforcements. A Quick Reaction Force (QRF) mount their Strykers as 120mm mortars fire in the background as the FOB responds to assist an ambushed patrol. Separatists scouting for vulnerable infrastructure to attack. Separatist mod created by @pquumm. Street fight in the town of Belz.
  8. 12 points

    Thanks Steve :)

    Hello names Hector. i live in Puerto Rico and you may know what hurricane Maria did to our beautiful island. We have no power only 3 hours a day, and as a CM fan had really missed playing. I had a little problem with the game installation since they were downloaded (i had the cds also) and tried to contact battlefront but was hard with no internet so I managed to get on for a bit and found a phone number and called Steve whom I really dont know who he is but he answered. I want to say Thanks for the conversation we had. He offered to help and eventhough I got everything working offline after, it was refreshing to hear he was available to help. I really appreciate his gesture and will continue to support Battlefront knowing that behind this company are great and caring people. Again Thanks Steve . Hector
  9. 11 points
    Greetings! This is my first real attempt with the editor - which started out from this real-world Luftwaffe aerial shot I came across for the village of Golynki, west of Smolensk... ...which I stretched to fit more neatly into a CM-friendly grid, and came out with this map: It is a 2000m x 1792m map, covering a few types of terrain: a peat bog in the northern half, a wooded area and the near-pristine village of Tregubovka to the southeast, and the larger village of Golynki to the soutwest, which has been largely demolished and abandoned under the German occupation. The map is divided in half by drainage ditch running north-south (both it and a secondary ditch on the northeast side are passable 'shallow ford' throughout), and has a major rail line running east-west in the bottom quarter of the map. At the moment, I have no data on any actions that took place here - all I learned is that this area was recaptured by the Soviets in October 1943 (I originally thought it was part of the CMRT timeline in 1944, but it is not so). It's a very detailed, handcrafted map - it may still need a bit of optimization as I went very heavy on the flavour objects (so the frame rate might drag down in certain areas, depending on your system). On the upside, it's very pretty in places I'm trying to figure out what to do with it in terms of scenario - and since I have absolutely 0 experience with scenario building and AI programming at the moment, any help or advice would be appreciated! What would you like to see on this map? At the moment, there is no AI and all the parameters, objectives, etc. are placeholders only. It's only really usable in the editor right now. You may download my current WIP version of it here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1hA9cr80cdMmHkGK8mhhbNgZz_LAefsyH ...or in the forum attachment. If you have anything that you'd like to create on this map yourself, or use it or any part of it for your own scenarios - you're very welcome to do so (with credit for map given). Thanks for checking it out! CCIP - Golynki (v01 map only).btt
  10. 11 points

    The patch?

    This is a bad argument. They keep all relevant information (sales figures, cash flow, etc.) secret ostensibly to "protect it from competition." Just pointing to longevity is ridiculous, for all you know they could have been limping along for 20 years, it's literally impossible to know how successful they are. I'll tell you what's not a sign of a good company, releasing an update with a game breaking bug (I consider it game breaking because it effectively makes the single player unplayable, unless you enjoy effortlessly gunning down fleeing AI troops) and charge $10 for it. Then going over a year and a half without any sign of a fix on the way. Bonus points for the fact that the update to fix 4.0 will also likely require you to pay for it because BFC loves its customers so much that they nickle and dime them for basic bug fixes. But hey, I gotta give some credit to BFC, they've clearly mastered the art of building up a dedicated fanbase. Paying customers are demanding some action to fix their game, and we got @IanL throwing out terms like snowflakes, because screw them for wanting to be able to play their $60 game without using janky workarounds.
  11. 11 points

    A plea for a French Army DLC

    Hello all, As it's rumored that this game is expecting several DLCs, I take this opportunity to make a plea for a French DLC, or a LDC including the French. Why should the French be included in a DLC over other nations ? First, let's look at the setting. Game setting is placed in Ukraine, at the border of Europe in 2017/2018. France is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, it's the third world's nuclear power, and the first military power of Europe (if Russia doesn't count as Europe). Diplomatically, France has been at the forefront of the discussion on Ukraine, being at the initiative of the Minsk II agreements, and is as such very involved on this matter. Historically, France is a very active military power and has significantly taken part in all the majors conflicts since the end of the Cold War : Gulf War, Yougoslavia, Somalia, Afghanistan, Lybia, Mali, Syria, etc. Furthermore France is regularly (and currently) involved in NATO and bilateral military exercises in Eastern Europe which show its commitment to the security of this region. Lastly, France would probably be able to come very quicly into the theater with significant amount of troops having a very high readiness and being located in continental Europe. All those elements make it almost certain that France would get involved in a conflict in Ukraine. On a gameplay point of vue, we would get a ton of exotic toys. Most of French gear and vehicles are indegenously devlopped. It would be also very refreshing as French military very rarely depicted in the Video Game industry (at the exception of the Warhame series). French army is also very modern and would be balanced with US and Russian military. Interesting fact, French army is the only to have fielded operationally its future soldier system program. French army also has an orginal doctrine which differs from the US or Russian one: emphasis on mobility, flexbility, and initiative, even at the lower echellons, which comes from its exprience in irregular warfare. It influenced many of its military design, with, for example, an emphasis of wheeled vehicles. As such, many asks, how would this system fare in a more conventionnal context ? CM:BS gives us the opportunity to test it. Here is a link about French Doctrine https://wavellroom.com/2017/11/30/the-french-intervention-in-mali-a-lesson-in-mission-command/ Moreover, as I said, French armed forces are very rarely depicted in video games, and French video games market is very dynamic one with 4,3 billion euros of revenue in 2017. So it would probably attract many French players eager to play their national forces (even if they're not very vocal on english speaking forums) while also attracting players from all around the world interested in brand new faction. Lastly, French forces are the only major military power never depicted in a modern CM game. We had the US, Russia, Canada, UK, Germany, Netherlands, but not France. Operationnal structure : The basic infantry combat squad is made of 8 soldiers: 1 squad leader, 1 marksman, 1 300m fire team with 1 team leader and 2 AT4 soldiers and 1 600m team with 1 team leader, 1 minimi soldier and 1 light mortar soldier. There is 3 combat squad in a platoon as well as one support squad made of 1 squad leader and 2 Eryx teams, which can exchange the Eryx against M240 MGs. Lastly, the platoon is led by a 4 men command team with one platoon leader and its deputy, one radio operator and one medic. 3 infantry platoons are supported by a weapon platoon with two 81mm mortars teams and two MILAN atgm teams, those teams can also be armed with .50 calls or .30 calls. This makes a company. The French cavalry platoon is made of 4 tanks (Leclerc or AMX10RC) and 4 armoured scout cars (VBLs). There is also a recon platoon made of 8 scout cars with different equipments (Milan, .50, .30, etc) The compagny is the center of an infantry centric French operationnal Battlegroup. Then, it receives several reinforcements from other arms. Usually, a cavalry platoon, an artillery battery, a engineer platoon, a recon platoon as well as support elements (Snipers, JTACs, Commandos, Logistics, Transmission, Health and Oil services, etc). If the battlegroup is cavalry centric, then, its made around a Cavalry squadron, with the support of an infantry platoon, etc. There is also the possibilty of mixing it up with two infantry platoons and two cavalry platoons, etc. Those battlegroups are part of a broader battallion which can either use them dispersed or together. Usually it's made of 3 infantry compagnies and 1 tank squadron and the support elements. The proportion between tanks and infantry varies in the same fashion as in BG depending of the need. Nowadays, French troops are always deployed in Battlegroups or Battallions. Regiments, Brigades and Division are only used as adminsitrative command levels in metropolitan France. As of 2017, here is a list of indigenous French army armament : - Leclerc MBT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX_Leclerc ; http://www.military-today.com/tanks/leclerc.htm - AMX 10 RCR wheeled tank: http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/France/AMX-10-RC-RCR.php - VBCI IFV: http://www.military-today.com/apc/vbci.htm - VAB line of vehicles, including ULTIMA version with remote .50 cal, Mephisto version with HOT missiles, 20mm version, etc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Véhicule_de_l'Avant_Blindé - VBL scout vehicle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Véhicule_Blindé_Léger - PVP liaison vehicle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petit_Véhicule_Protégé - 120mm Rifled Mortar, its rifling permits to fire bigger shells (similar effect than 155mm shells) at longer ranges than regular mortars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortier_120mm_Rayé_Tracté_Modèle_F1 - CAESAR 155mm SPG: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAESAR_self-propelled_howitzer ; https://www.army-technology.com/projects/caesar/ ; http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1470.htm - 81mm Mortar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LLR_81mm - FAMAS assault rifle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAMAS - FRF2 and HECATE II sniper rifles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FR_F2_sniper_rifle ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGM_Hécate_II - MILAN 3, ERYX and HOT 3 ATGMs: https://www.army-technology.com/projects/milan/ ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ERYX ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOT_(missile) - Mistral MANPAD: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistral_(missile) - Tiger HAD and HAP attack helicopters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurocopter_Tiger - Gazelle HOT scout helicopter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aérospatiale_Gazelle - Rafale fighter-bomber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Rafale - Mirage 2000D bomber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_2000N/2000D France interesting bits of kit : - Rifle Grenades, both anti-tank and HE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AC58 ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APAV40 - Infantry mortars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance-grenade_individuel_Mle_F1_(LGI_Mle_F1) - BONUS anti-tank shells: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bofors_155_Bonus - SPACIDO precision fuse: http://www.nexter-group.fr/en/press/528-spacido-la-france-engage-la-phase-finale-de-la-qualification-du-premier-systeme-dartillerie-a-correction-de-trajectoire-de-nexter-munitions-et-junghans ; http://basart.artillerie.asso.fr/article.php3?id_article=1341 - FELIN system, with special optics and improved situation awarness: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FÉLIN - AASM self propelled stand-off bomb, with a low altitude launch range of 15km, which allows the plane to escape long range anti-air missile while staying out of range of SHORAD systems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASM Here are some videos where you can see most of the gear I talked about : In 2017 in Estonia, where you can how would look like a French Battlegroup in CM:BS : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9tzEyWL-zo& Combat actions in Mali where you can see VBCI, VAB, AMX10RC, shoulder launched Eryx, Rifle grenades, infantry mortar, Hecate II, Tiger, etc So, as you saw, lots of interesting and cool stuff could get added into the game with a French DLC. I hope it will convince you ! DOn't hesistate if you have any question. Here is a last video to convince you of the awesomeness of the French Army
  12. 11 points
  13. 11 points
    You are heartless recalled Waterloo in a topic opened by a french !!! More seriously, I live on the ground where the kampfgruppe Engel campaign is happening I can not help thinking about the game when i move on the ground ! Of it there is in particular a hedge where I lost my jagpanther or I sigh as soon as I pass there it's there....
  14. 10 points

    The patch?

    I agree, facts are a pain in the arse. One of the facts, that incidentally also is a pain the arse, is that is has been 17 months since 4.0 was released, and still no patch.
  15. 10 points

    Blast vineyard

    Don't know if this is common knowledge, but it isn't in the manual; engineers can blast vineyards. Pretty big holes for each demo charge. Can come in handy to make shortcuts through otherwise hopeless terrain that provides good concealment.
  16. 10 points

    The patch?

    Only stopping along the way to commit as many warcrimes as they could. Mad respect over here. Anyway, it took Battlefront 3 versions to add a toggle for music independent of the sound toggle. 1+ years to correct a real bug is in the correct ballpark.
  17. 10 points

    The patch?

    @Kuderian @slysniper If you watch this video and still think there is absolutely no problem, you're either high, delusional, or both. The fact is, there IS an issue, and Steve has already acknowledged it and said there will be a patch that addresses it. Again to reiterate what I've already said, I would like it if the patch was out sooner rather than later, but I'm not all butthurt that it hasn't been released yet.
  18. 10 points

    The patch?

    Thanks for stating it that way. I will say, as a beta-tester, coming to grips with this behavior has been difficult. The NDA prevents a lot of what I'd like say (and is a nice way to dodge ) but realize that the HE fleeing behavior was not seen as a deal-breaker before v4.0 was released...or it would not have been released. Think about the myriad of situations your pixeltroops have been in. Think about how often they do the right thing...and you don't even notice it. Think about when they do something wrong...and the situation which it took to get that behavior. Without giving too much (anything?) away, I follow two basic courses of investigation: there are areas I dig into to find stuff; and there are times when I get a whiff of something not quite right. In the first case, I start with a set of presumed behaviors and try to stress them to their outlying limits. In the other case, I happen to notice something in passing...and then the Eye of Sauron focuses upon it. There are fewer and fewer of each. And the gameplay effect of most are very minor. I can field multiple battalions and have total mayhem reign for four hours...and notice only a few odd cases of behavior. Most (all?) can be explained by men panicking under fire or other reasonable explanations. Think about the magnitude of that achievement: several hundreds of "men" acting realistically over multiple square kilometers whilst killing and being killed and trying to achieve a terrain objective. The HE behavior slipped through. Now, what if the fix is worse? Maybe men will stick in their locations, but then tanks reverse towards threats. But only if unbuttoned and the threat is known but out of LOS. And only on odd numbered turns. Occam's Razor: if the fix were simple, wouldn't you have it already?
  19. 9 points
    This was posted on FB, and should be of keen interest to many here, both for what CM games already are out and for the much wanted earlier period games. Regards, John Kettler
  20. 9 points
    The Steppenwulf

    The patch?

    I've got to admit I now have more than two games (as of this evening) on hold because of poor AI behaviour that have stopped play. When veteran troops (and +2), rested and OK are in cover behind bocage but come under pinning fire, they do not run out from the bocage into the exposed field of fire - unless they first panic or at least become nervous. Pinned does not mean panic, it means pinned! Infuriating stuff!
  21. 9 points

    The patch?

    Actually, it is quite good reasoning. I basically abandoned/put on hold my work on Ithikial's latest project (geared towards Single player) because 'fire few rounds of 60mm and HE, slaughter battalion of rats swarming in the open' was neither challenging, fun, or rewarding as a scenario designer to see. Before you go 'but you can plan the AI now and wait on the patch...' I've been waiting on the patch for quite long enough already, when I have other ideas I want to put down (such as my H2H scenarios in Black Sea) and it makes playtesting impossible, and functionally moving ahead also. I see no point in pumping out something that will be for all intents and purposes unplayable. Wasted effort. That's what the singleplayer and mapmaking experience is currently like in the series: un-play-able.
  22. 9 points
    John Kettler

    Soviet Tank Tactics 1945

    Found this on Tank Archives while trying to chase down something else. This is chiefly about MOUT and is essential reading if you would understand how the Soviets dismantled German defenses via CA tactics and organization. They were meticulous. http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2014/05/soviet-tank-tactics-1945.html Regards, John Kettler
  23. 9 points
    Sigh. My contention is this: We throw a wild party for Battlefront, and all of us are in attendance. We all get positively rip-roaring drunk, do stupid things. At the height of the party I'm demonstrating armor maneuver by going full sprint through the office swinging my arm wildly to indicate turret direction while screaming "Death before dismount." I certainly 100% do damage. However it's hard to separate the next morning what specifically was damaged by my "Thunder Run" vs what other parties did too. Sure there's my tanker boot treads all over the shattered remains of someone's desk...but I "ran" it over after someone else already kicked it down screaming "THIS IS SPACE LOBSTER COUNTRY!" I contributed my share to the massive pile of bottles yes....but I wasn't even the one who drank the most. Within the context of both fights, US artillery and aviation certainly did destroy things. This is a known variable. However pointing to the rubble of Mosul and chittering how it was all those damned Americans and their bombs, or Raqqah and placing all the blame on 18 heavily abused 155 MM howitzers is a bit disingenuous. ISIS vigorously practices scorched earth type tactics. Our "Friendly" and friendly forces all practice firepower warfare vs manuever (or they're going to shoot the objective with every weapon they have for an hour, THEN move to a closer firing position to repeat the same tactic, and then maybe five hours later, short on ammo move onto the objective). Both of those cities felt the full weight of a 3rd World conventional military attack, a suicidal bomb happy defender, and then some Western precision fires. Between those three, those fires certainly did their part in damaging those cities. But again the contention that basically, without those fires the attacks would have left either of those cities pretty much intact is very much a falsehood. Aleppo for instance serves as a really good example of what happens without the US precision fires, and with the opposition not being generally ISIS tier individuals. So. Again not denying there's collateral damage, but it's just idiotic to lay the preponderance of the damage at the feet of 18 howitzers while ignoring the effects of thousands of ground combatants, tanks, conventional artillery from both parties, IEDs in all guises all duking it out in close quarters.
  24. 9 points

    Armoured Infantry

    Shows what you know... Mord.
  25. 9 points

    Irratic Framerate Issue

    I ran the same scenarios as Hister using my system with the following specs: AMD FX 8320 3.5GHz 8-core (4 modules totaling 8 integer, 4 floating point, up to 4.0GHz turbo mode) 8GB of DDR3 1600 (CAS 9) MSI GeForce GTX 660 Ti - 388.00 driver Asrock 880GM-LE FX motherboard (AMD 880G chipset) Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD Windows 7 Home 64-bit SP1 (latest patches) Running at a resolution of 1920 x 1200. Using the default settings in CMBN 4.0 (Balanced/Balanced, Vsync OFF and ON, AA OFF) and in the Nvidia Control Panel I typically got about 6 FPS (measured with the latest version of FRAPS) in "Op. Linnet II a USabn UKgrnd" on the German entry side of the map (all the way to the edge) and scrolling right or left looking at the Americans in Richelle. In "The Copse" scenario it measured around 28 FPS behind the allied armored units at the start (scrolled around the map a bit). Messing around with Vsync (both on and off), anti-aliasing, anisotropic filtering, Process Lasso (affinity, etc.), power saving settings in Windows control panel, etc. didn't seem to have a significant performance effect on the low FPS of 'Op. Linnet II...'. I overclocked the FX 8320 to 4.0GHz (simply using the multipliers in the BIOS and turning off several power saving features there too, such as APM, AMD Turbo Core Technology, CPU Thermal Throttle, etc.). With 'Op. Linnet II...' the FPS increased to only 7 FPS. Turning off the icons (Alt-I) did bump up the FPS by 1 additional frame (the option reduced the number of objects to be drawn in this view) to 8 FPS. There are some Hotfixes from Microsoft that supposedly address some issues with the Bulldozer/Piledriver architecture and Windows 7 involving CPU scheduling and power policies (KB2645594 and KB246060) that do NOT come through Windows Update (you have to request them from Microsoft). I have NOT applied these patches to see if they would make a difference since they CANNOT have their changes removed (supposedly), even if you uninstall them. A number of users on various forums have stated that the changes made little difference to their particular game's performance. I decided to compare this to an Intel system that was somewhat similar: Intel Core i5 4690K 3.5GHz 4-core (possibly running at 3.7 to 3.9GHz in turbo mode) 16GB of DDR3-2133 (CAS 9) eVGA GeForce GTX 670 - 388.00 driver Asrock Z97 Killer motherboard (Z97 chipset) Crucial MX100 512GB SSD Windows 7 Home 64-bit SP1 (latest patches) Running at a resolution of 1920 x 1200. Again using the same settings used on the FX system with CMBN and the Nvidia Control Panel I got 10 FPS in 'Op. Linnet II...' while scrolling on the far side looking at the American forces in the town. In 'The Copse' scenario the FPS went to 40 FPS behind the allied vehicles at their start positions. The biggest difference between the GTX 660 Ti and the GeForce GTX 670 is the greater memory bandwidth of the 670 since it has a 256-bit bus compared to the 660 Ti's 192-bit memory bus. So POSSIBLY the greater GPU memory bandwidth in conjunction with the Intel i5's higher IPC (Instructions Per Cycle) efficiency and the increased system memory bandwidth (faster system RAM) resulted in the higher frame rate on the Intel system, but only by so much. I ran a trace of the OpenGL calls used by CMBN while running 'Op. Linnet II a USabn UKgrnd' on the FX system. This recorded all of the OpenGL calls being used in each frame. The trace SEVERELY slowed down the system during the capture (a lot of data to be written to the trace file). Examining the trace file suggests that CMBN is SEVERLY CPU BOUND in certain graphical views. This is especially true with views of a large amount of units and terrain like that in 'Op. Linnet II...'. What appears to be happening is that some views in large scenarios of CM involve A LOT of CPU time in issuing instructions to the video card/'frame buffer'. The CPU is spending so much time handling part of the graphics workload (which IS normal) and sending instructions to the video card on what to draw that the video card does not have a full (new) frame of data to post to the frame buffer at a rate of 60 or 30 FPS (Vsync). At 30 FPS each frame would have to be generated between the CPU and the video card within 33.3ms. Instead this is taking around 100ms on the Intel system and about 142ms on the FX system (resulting in the 10 and 7 FPS respectively). Some frames in the trace file had hundreds of thousands of instructions, some reaching near 700,000 instructions (each one is not necessarily communicated between the CPU and video card, only a fraction of them are), whereas sections where the FPS was higher might only have less than 3000 instructions being executed. The low frame rate is a direct consequence of how busy the CPU is and this can be seen with both Intel and AMD CPUs. So the accusation comes up, is the CM graphics engine un-optimized ? To a certain extent, it is. There are limitations on what can be done in the environment and with the OpenGL 2.x calls that are available. CM could be optimized a bit further than it is currently, but this involves a HUGE amount of time experimenting and testing. Working against this optimization effort is CM's 'free' camera movement, the huge variety, number and size of maps available and the large variety and number of units.These features make it hard to come up with optimizations that work consistently without causing other problems. Such efforts at optimization are manpower and time that Battlefront simply does not have as Steve has stated earlier. Charles could be working on this for years in attempt to get better frame rates. While this would be a 'worthy goal', it is unrealistic from a business standpoint - there is no guarantee with the amount of time spent on optimizing would result in a significantly better performing graphics engine. Other, larger developers typically have TEAMS of people working on such optimizations (which, importantly, does allow them to accomplish certain optimization tasks within certain time frames too). When CMSF was started sometime in 2004 OpenGL 2.0 was the latest specification available (with the 2.1 specification coming out before CMSF was released). Utilizing newer versions of OpenGL to potentially optimize CM's graphics engine still involves a lot of work since the newer calls available don't necessarily involve built-in optimizations over the 2.0 calls. In fact a number of OpenGL calls have been deprecated in OpenGL 3.x and later and this could result in wholesale redesigning of the graphics engine. On top of this is the issue that newer versions of OpenGL may not be supported by a number of current user's video cards (and laptops and whole Mac models on the Apple side). As for the difference between the GTX 550 Ti and the GTX 660 Ti that Hister is experiencing, I'm not sure what may be going on. The GTX 550 Ti is based on the 'Fermi' architecture, while the GTX 660 Ti utilizes the 'Kepler' architecture. Kepler was optimized for the way games operate compared to the Fermi architecture which had slightly better performance in the 'compute' domain (using the GPU for physics calculations or other floating point, parallelized tasks). The GTX 660 Ti should have been a significant boost in video performance over the GTX 550 Ti, though this performance difference may not be too visible in CM due to the CPU bound nature of some views. It's possible that older drivers may have treated the Fermi architecture differently or simply that older drivers may have operated differently (there are trade-offs that drivers may make in image quality for performance - and sometimes this is 'baked into' the driver and isn't touched by the usual user-accessible controls). I have a GTX 570 I could potentially test, but I would probably need to know more details about the older setup to possibly reproduce the situation and see the differences first-hand.