• Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:

      -showui

      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve

Apocal

Members
  • Content count

    1,790
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

2 Followers

About Apocal

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Converted

  • Location
    California
  • Interests
    Military History, Wargames, First Person Shooters, Simulations

Recent Profile Visitors

662 profile views
  1. The game already does this. If it didn't, trees wouldn't be able to catch rounds the way they do and artillery shells would have even patterns even on reverse slopes.
  2. I wasn't saying it was unwinnable, just it forces you to take losses in a stupid manner. I guess I could complain that it basically got the entire relationship of a successful river-crossing wrong; intact defenses overwatching the crossing points with ample and unsuppressed artillery available is basically the conditions for a bloody failure on the part of the attackers attempting to cross. But I don't care that much compared to the scale being like double from playable and other stuff.
  3. JasonC doesn't like scenarios where the player is railroaded (especially when he is railroaded in dumb ways), where the scale goes beyond a reinforced company, where the actual relevant tactics and techniques are distorted to make a scenario more action-esqe. Given the delay involved (~20 minutes) and lack of TRPs for the attacker, it was pretty clear the intent was to use the rocket battery as the player's personal prep fire, particularly since the ammo provided is somewhere south of half it's normal load. IIRC, the briefing said as much. But given that, it is lackluster at the task; even putting the rocket barrage directly on target doesn't appreciably degrade the totality of the defenses. Even if you inflict casualties, it isn't as if the scenario designer actually degraded the German personnel numbers in each team so what is fielded still has manpower depth enough to endure and stay intact. The suppression doesn't last longer than a minute or two, so it is basically irrelevant. Odds of a player arriving just after the fifteen minute mark (longest delay possible for a fire mission) in this scenario are very low. It's been years since I played it, but I think the mortars have limited ammo as well, even though you can't use them for prep fire since they are MIA at scenario start, only coming in at (I think) the five minute mark for whatever reason. At any rate, they are incredibly difficult to employ effectively, due to the lack of map-fire ability in CMx2 and basically no good overwatch positions, which means you're exposing a unit leader (or the singular green or conscript FO) to whatever nastiness you require mortars to deal with. The first mission a monster in size terms. Some people enjoy them, some don't. I thought that was a bit annoying in the stock campaign just because I prefer real time and it is well beyond anyone's ability to manage played that way. If you're into splitting squads to maximize infantry performance, it goes straight into near-unplayable territory even for WeGo; each turn for me took something like a half-hour of tweaking, especially once I realized it was a shooting gallery for one side if I didn't carefully echo-locate each of the backfield ATGs and try to hit them with mortars before they took out my supporting armor. The careful approach doesn't work very well; you cross right in sight of the deep German backfield defenses and a few close-in machine guns in some serious chokepoints, all of which have TRPs set on them. The end result is that the Germans get a free harvest of kills wherever you cross and if you choose a single crossing point, they get a series of them with their artillery, which out-matches the player's by a fair margin. So yeah, I didn't really like the scenario that much either. Whenever I replay the campaign I just hit cease fire during the setup phase and save myself the aggravation.
  4. More like any feedback at all.
  5. "Occupying" in the sense they exist somewhere. If you're doing a hit and run attack but take longer than a few minutes (maybe as low as five, possibly less) you might just get smoked, is what I'm saying.
  6. Not quite "losing the initiative," no. Artillery on-call doesn't care about who has the initiative. It's that lightly protected forces can't afford to occupy any piece of terrain longer than it takes a fire mission (or should I use the Russian term, fire strike?) to arrive. It worked pretty good in WW2, with limited comms, fire support that was considered responsive if it landed twenty minutes after an attack started, and a dearth of even the latter among many combatants. I'm not nearly so certain it will be viable overall (exceptional successes, sure) in modern times. Like, everyone has a radio and even Grad batteries answer calls with, "May I take your order?" Alternatively, you might just blunder into something like a tank company backed by two platoons of motor rifles. That would, if competently handled, run through almost anything light like **** through a goose, regardless of who was driving events. There is something of a meme or brainbug, what have you, that going fast with minimal armor is protection. I think modern military history disagrees with that idea. Firepower is protection. Armor is protection. Stealth is protection. Numbers, in mutual support, are protection. But none of them, except maybe the third, are especially sexy nowadays and they are either agnostic to or negatively correlated with going fast. But like I said, fine for light occupation and better than nothing in straight-up brawl.
  7. The SOF types also had first pick of uparmored vehicles in Iraq, once they started going home in bags from IEDs. The Rangers rolled in Strykers for the same reason. Running around light and fast works fine if you're barely opposed, but far less if you're facing someone competent who is completely fine with bleeding you over time. As for facing any sort sort of serious enemy combat fornation, the broad lesson learned had been dancing works until the very first time you make a mistake. Then you die in a fire, do not pass go, do not collect $200. Modern Russian formations, even medium ones, can absolutely mallet the hell out of anything the moves without serious protection, do it fast, and do it decisively without burning through their entire allotment of ammo. I'm thinking even if your light raid force gets held up for three minutes on an objective, it is already courting death by steel rain.
  8. Is there anyway to request my scenario be added as a candidate?
  9. Completely and utterly typical. Almost anyone with sense would sooner "purchase real estate" with bullets rather than blood. Plus infantry can be broken down into very small elements (two man scout teams) that still present a credible threat that forces the enemy to unmask himself to deal with. They don't do it for some elements of the defense against human players though -- for example, a smart human player will keep his HMGs further back and ATGs silent while tasking some small, non-critical element of the defense (typically a squad of rifle infantry) with dealing with the approaching scouts then enduring the resulting pain when their overwatch goes into action -- but the idea is that the enemy just can't hold fire everywhere in an effort to assassinate your key systems.
  10. In context of the thread, light motorized transport is a case of one eyed men being preferred to those who are cometely blind. The "better than nothing, but still worse than everything else" option in a serious brawl. Outside of serious brawling, go nuts, doesn't matter, except when/if you start finding mines the hard way.
  11. The guys who served in the more kinetic battles of Iraq said similar about entering defended buildings, "Main thing is to just poke your head around and make sure the attack-by-fire element did its job."
  12. Thats projecting too much. The Chadians beat Libyan combat formations, on the attack, once given MILAN. Whenever and wherever they showed up with ATGMs and French air support, the Libyans were stopped cold and hammered flat at that point. Rear area raids were something the Chadians pulled off semi-regularly before they got MILANs and French air. They just didn't do much good in stopping the Libyans any time they actually wanted to attack and mostly served in its final impact to help the Libyans when some of the best (relatively speaking; none of these guys were that good) Chadian formations were off in the deep desert instead of the point of contact when Libyan tanks and artillery struck. Seriously, that entire war was a bum fight.
  13. When I crack open an American AIB and select dismounted, I can choose from 0-3 bazookas and what type. I haven't noticed quality influencing small arms much at all though...? I'm fiddling with FJ and their squads all have double MGs with typical or excellent set for equipment. I think it should be possible to manipulate weapons directly though.
  14. Can't you fiddle with all the settings it (equipment quality) influences manually in CMx2 though?