• 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

Erwin

Members
  • Content count

    9,309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Erwin

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  1. Ok thanks... So with basic ammo load the 51mm using WEGO only lasts 1 to 2 turns. Is that using TARGET LIGHT or TARGET? (So, there is no way to order the Platoon HQ unit to only use their rifles while there is 51mm ammo remaining?)
  2. Sounds very good news if you can get it working. So, currently you play out the operational scenarios using CM2 H2H or vs AI?
  3. "...new TACSOP with the Pause command. This also works inside a small (1 A/S footprint building). Target or Target Light and Pause for 20 or 30 seconds then a waypoint in the same or adjacent action spot with a Face command. So they will shoot for the duration of the Pause, shift to the waypoint and stop shooting. This saved me from running out of ammo." Oooo... must try this... I have always thought that when waypoints were on top of each other or even very close, they would be nullified and disappear as if there was no waypoint. One of my squads burned thru half its ammo firing at an abandoned pickup. I didn't want to five a restricted arc as there was enemy inf in a nearby area. Could not kill that damn pickup until the inf got close enuff for grenades. I enjoy the challenges caused by the Brit lack of ammo as I use fire conservatively in any CM2 title even when I have the US and their huge amount of ammo. It's hard for me to do a lot of recon by fire or area fire on merely suspected positions. I like to KNOW there is an enemy there b4 I fire. Just my eccentricity... I find the 81mm useful for destroying buildings that I know are enemy occupied. I haven't seen a static group of enemy in the bush that would make a good target, so can't see how the 81mm would useful for anything other than destroying enemy in buildings - anything to avoid risky MOUT tactics. The problem with CMSF and CMA is that you don't know how many rounds one has. So, I have been very conservative - using only HEAVY and QUICK duration for all 3 tubes. Done that about 4 times and the ammo counter still seems full. Had I known I had significant mortar ammo, I would have used it more prolifically. Haven't found a use for the 51mm mortar. The squad weapons are pretty deadly at these short ranges and do the job more quickly than trying to use the HQ 51mm. I keep all the HQ's well back in safety anyway. What is a good SOP for the Brit HQ's and their 51mm?
  4. +1 Am very impressed that some like designing maps, some do mods, and some do entire scenarios. You have to be a saint/masochist with no other life to make a campaign. But, others like me have no talent or patience for that. Happy to pay BF to create content, and very appreciative of all the volunteer user-made efforts.
  5. CM2 would definitely benefit from an operational layer. But, these would be two separate games? Or, is there some linkage planned?
  6. You can change the % probability of any reinforcement arriving after a particular turn. That is probably random enuff. In these small CM2 scenarios where you have a company or two, if a reinforcements doesn't arrive at all it may completely unbalance the situation. In a larger scenario where you have a battalion+ plus a company of armor, maybe a platoon of inf or a couple of tanks reinforcement wouldn't be critical. But, then why have the reinforcement at all. I really like the idea of having access to reserves that lose you points if you request them. IIRC in CM1 there was a system whereby one had Battalion, Regimental and Divisional Reserves that were automatically activated by the AI and arrived if the AI system calculated that you needed them(!)
  7. Is Combat Ops available? I recall it when it was a kickstarter.
  8. Have about 55 mins left and am enjoying this immensely - even tho' am not a fan of infantry-only scenarios. Will probably take too many friendly casualties for a Total Victory. One can take the objectives relatively easily with no (or minimal) casualties in WEGO. But, imo one needs to clear every single building to stay in the spirit of things. And it's those close combat situations where friendlies get hit. Am using 2 platoons to go west to east with a third scouting ahead and flanking. Probably should be using the FO and 81mm more. But I get impatient waiting for offboard - always fatal for someone.
  9. Ok, thanks. I didn't see that BF post. Glad they said that as I recall bitter arguments where some folks wanted to argue to the end that the CM2 engine is "so realistic that everything is high fidelity and all you have to do is go to ground level and spot blah blah..." No... going to ground level and attempting to see what the AI sees is an exercise in futility. Mastering the intricacies of the CM2 LOS "system" (making allowances for it) is crucial to playing well.
  10. "The situation should be difficult. It shouldn't be difficult cos one is given inadequate resources." Well yes, exactly... It seems that many/most scenarios have their "scenario difficulty" created by merely making the human attacker overwhelmingly out-numbered. The player has (say) a company and he is supposed to attack a battalion or more of equal or superior quality. Sure, it's fun to play that situation occasionally. But, this seems to be the most common type of design choice in order to compensate for game AI inadequacies and create challenges. For example... Let's say you are the Russians who in RL never got our of bed unless they had massive artillery support. A poor designer will create a scenario where the Russians have inadequate artillery in order to make the scenario difficult. My sense is that the majority of scenarios are variations on this type of "create challenge by giving ludicrously inadequate resources" design concept. The good news is that there are several excellent scenarios and campaigns where the designer has created challenges thru clever design or victory conditions. I gave examples of some of my recent favorites where you have the resources you need, but you cannot expend your units like cannon fodder - the challenge is that you have to conserve ammo and units in order to get a higher level victory. I know this is a personal taste, but I enjoy those kinds of challenges far more than simple bloodbaths where there is "no tomorrow" so you can have your own forces destroyed and end up with only one guy and be a winner. Those types of battles are extreme outliers in reality.
  11. "The AI has no advantage over you for spotting. The Tac AI doing the spotting is the same for your troops and the AI's troops." I think we're not talking about friendly AI spotting but the fallacy of the CM2 WYSIWYG claims. I too have regularly suffered by an enemy finding LOS to my unit when I cannot see anything no matter how hard I look. I play WEGO so I can study a situation for as long as I can stand it, and there are many instances where it is impossible for the human eye to see a clear shot, but the AI can. LOS in CM2 is flawed in that respect. CM2 could be described as "The frustrating game of LOS determination challenges." But, as I said, it depicts the arbitrariness of combat. The most experienced and careful soldier can get shot and never know where the shot came from.
  12. "Erwin (sorry Erwin, not trying to be a d**k, but I just found it striking that he is complaining about the very thing that you were asking for) commenting on the CMSF forum about a scenario that was being created and asking for assurance he'd have the resources to complete the mission." Hi sburke... congrats on achieving your goal without trying. I have no understanding of the relevance of your referring to me re the post I made. It may be helpful to actually READ the posts before going off based on assuming something was said that actually was not. Re "Not much fun having battles be complete walk-overs." A "walkover" is determined by the victory conditions. Suppose you can only win if you take minimal casualties and end up with at least 50% of your ammo at the end so your force is ready for future actions? Now that "easy walkover" gets very tough. There are several xnt scenarios that have tough conditions like that. Am playing Op Barras, a brand new CMSF historical scenario in which your Brit Crack paras are overrunning a bunch of peasants in a series of African villages. Could be the definition of a walk-over. But you can only afford to take 2-3 Brit casualties for a big win! Suddenly, it's a very tough scenario. Also recommended are "Into the Green" and "Mullah Fayed" - similar xnt scenarios where you can't afford to take friendly casualties.
  13. I suspect that the AI can spot thru a 1 pixel gap that only a computer can "see". However, the Ai needs all the help it can get to be challenging. So, generally it's just demonstrates the arbitrariness or war - that you may think you are safe, and suddenly someone gets shot...
  14. "1. No real possibility to use recon vehicles for recon because there is no possibility to make them evade, if they face a threat. Which would be crucial to recon big maps and find an enemy, for example. 2. The Campaign system: only one "battle" on one map. No uncertainty. No recon phases before a battle, no mop up phases. Map destruction not preserved: no difficult attacks, which need recon, cancel of attack, additional recon, try from another direction,... - for example against heavily fortified positions." I completely agree with "1". While inf recon/scouting is critical, there is very little function for recon vehicles in CM2 scenarios. In RL recon units would have been withdrawn at the time period when a typical CM2 scenario starts and it's the combat units which go in. IMO that is a function of the relatively small maps we (usually) see in CM2. By contrast, CM1 often featured 8Kx4K maps and mobility, recon, keeping reserves etc. were required much more. However, there are recon scenarios. Puzzled by "2" since a campaign can feature a recon scenario followed by a battle scenario which handles the situation better. Recon can take hours or days in RL, so not very practical to have a "recon phase" followed by a typical 1-2 hour CM2 battle.
  15. I wonder how they will play since they are different eras. But, since you asked... CMBN: KG Himmelfarht - a large and long scenario. One of my favorites. CMFI: Venafro Back Into Hell - city fighting CMRT: Blood On the Tracks - a classic Mostly I play campaigns and some of the missions would be good. Can one convert a campaign (effectively)??