• 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

IMHO

Members
  • Content count

    368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About IMHO

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  1. 5K Kcal is not that much. Half-marathon at descent tempo with no vertical gradient is 2K Kcal. Add this to baseline 2K Kcal and you're already at 4K Kcal. And that disregards low temperature / high humidity, mountainous terrain, additional gear weight and higher stress / faster metabolism / higher calorie consumption.
  2. @John Kettler, what about Michelin stars to MREs?
  3. I'm sure 100 of those will be produced sooner or later. So has it passed state trials by now? In your opinion have ALL systems planned for the vehicle complete FULL state trial before the vehicle will be called operational? PS Me anti-Russian... That's a new milestone of my forum life
  4. 1. Guns are the same. I don't know whether each is dual-fed or not. You should understand that BMPT has been a mere prototype developed with no requirements or tactical role from the Army. 2. It's interesting how a gradual realisation of how much a vaporware T-14/T-15 platform is at the moment gives birth to new projects.
  5. It's neither a vaporware nor a full-scale acceptance. UVZ was able to peddle a test batch to the Army. The reasons are: a) commercial; concept testing for heavy IFV. Theoretical assessment hasn't changed an inch - dubious applicability of this particular piece for its price. Out of two guns only one can shoot at a time - i.e. BMPTD is no more than an up-armored BMP-2. AGS-30 with very limited traverse, range and accuracy yet requiring two full crew members looks like a strange choice (to be corrected in the next version).
  6. Army surplus shops, obviously...
  7. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2Б23 If you scroll down to the greenish table - those are the mines. Lines under "Выстрелы семейства орудий «Нона»" are Nona's. Those below "Отечественные мины для 120-мм гладкоствольных миномётов" are "modern" standard ones. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/2С31#.D0.9F.D1.80.D0.B8.D0.BC.D0.B5.D0.BD.D1.8F.D0.B5.D0.BC.D1.8B.D0.B5_.D0.B2.D1.8B.D1.81.D1.82.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.BB.D1.8B Again scroll down to the greenish table. "Нарезные" are Vena's, "Гладкоствольные" are standard ones. Nona/Vena's HEFRAG weight is from 19.8kg for the Soviet mines to 26kg for the Russian ones. Soviet Nona mine contains 4.9kg of explosives. Standard smoothbore HEFRAG mines weigh about 16.1kg with 3.16 / 3.43 kg of explosives. I guess taking into account higher quality of modern steels Nona/Vena effectiveness must be even higher than the direct comparison of explosive weights.
  8. Oldies. Explosive contents is the second column from the right. Main HEFRAGs are lines 2,3 and 5
  9. We have enough concept graphics artists...
  10. Looks like Yerevan. Armenia.
  11. @Haiduk, you ought to put more trust into people checking sources before posting I have the report and that's exactly why I asked. The quote is not in the MB paper, not on the Web - just in CrowdStrike report and those guys have less than stellar reputation
  12. Can you elaborate? My reasoning is: Technical feasibility: MW radars: current and next generation of APSes have short detection radius. That's done not to overload APS processing with the task of discriminating between too many objects flying over the battlefield. So the tank will know the direction milliseconds before the impact not immediately after launch as in CMBS. LWRs: LWRs do not give you exact direction to the launcher - again current CMBS behaviour does not fit. UV/IR rocket motor spectrum discrimination by FLIRs: everyone's researching like crazy land-warfare applications but not even a proof-of-concept prototype. Real combat reports: Syria/Yemen - we see exactly the opposite to what CMBS demonstrates. Israel/Gaza - in a couple of cases Trophy was "even able to pinpoint the direction", launchers were engaged by arty not the tank. Again MW - too late for CMBS model. Israel/Lebanon - MW/Trophy was sometimes reported to point the direction direction and launchers were engaged by tanks. But certainly these were very isolated cases (if any) - we know there were multiple and continuous launches to each IDF tank hit. No sign of immediate destruction of ATGM after first launch. So I wonder why? @Battlefront.com?
  13. @Haiduk, no, 80% is from the annual IISS Military Balances. 15-20% is the quote from CrowdStrike's report and it attributes these words to an IISS analyst. I couldn't find any other source for the quote. CrowdStrike is far from being pro-Russian - it's one of the main PR force behind DNC hack story. But it has quite a controversial reputation in infosec circles for being PR-heavy and substance-light. I don't dispute 15-20% - just asking if you know another source. Then 15-20% would be quite valuable.
  14. @kinophile, it's easier to leave out some isolated behaviour rather than build it in. We know tanks react to ATGMs but not RPGs - a selector. We know not all vehicles react to ATGMs - another selector. My belief (though based on ****ing nothing ) it's a design decision rather than a bug. I guess if this behaviour is removed cheap RUS/UKR long range ATGMs severely limit the use of US armour. The combat may basically break down into battle-taxiing grunts safely then conducting purely infantry-on-infantry fighting. Which is exactly what we see in Syria and Yemen. It'd be interesting to hear the authority, @Battlefront.com
  15. @Haiduk, interesting as per the numbers. Do you have another source for the quote other than CrowdStrike? I couldn't find any and CrowdStrike is now right in the heat of PR battle of its own in the realm of infosec. InformNapalm carefully states they found no GPS payload in exploit code Bull****ting for the masses We disassembled an unloaded gun, the only energy storage we found was the return spring but it cannot conserve enough energy to propel a projectile to a high velocity so we conclude guns cannot shoot PS @Haiduk, let's move it into a separate thread. I'd be glad to join if you think it's worth continuing.