Placebo

I am late to the party on this campaign, great feedback so just getting it up and started.  Wish me luck 😀

I am late to the party on this campaign, great feedback so just getting it up and started.  Wish me luck 😀

I am late to the party on this campaign, great feedback so just getting it up and started.  Wish me luck 😀

Steve Grammont has been interviewed at the Grogheads Site. Just featured today.
http://grogheads.com/interviews/21100#more-21100

I am not sure i agree with this.  For repository campaigns/scenarios thats fine, but for QB maps/campaigns/scenarios shipping with the game they should also be updated to work with the latest code. 
 
Otherwise you could be buying a new game (with the latest patch) with parts of the game are not-working or incomplete. 

I believe 'quite' places it somewhere in between the next 7 days and 7 years  😀

I believe 'quite' places it somewhere in between the next 7 days and 7 years  😀

Mmmm intriguing, I cannot believe hanging on to hear about the release of F&R is about to be replaced with hanging on for some info on CM3 😀.
P.S. if it anything like the change from CM1 -> CM2 it is going to be mind blowing!!

Thanks Steve for moving the progress bar. @BFCElvis explanation of the process was clear and informative too.
 
FWIW I think Battlefront.com is a "proper" company, even if it doesn't follow the standard publisher model of Slitherine. It has to be incorporated according to the laws of the state of Maine (?) at the very least
 
Having deadlines like that are good for managing expectations. But quality at release may be less than expected, as a host of small items which are unimportant individually, and were thus deemed low priority for fixing, in  the aggregate can make quite a dent in the perception of a game. And I am talking about a very big WW2 wargame that came out recently which I was the lead tester for two years until late last year.

The troops thought Easter was important too  

The troops thought Easter was important too  

The troops thought Easter was important too  

The troops thought Easter was important too  

We'll see about that:

No need to rely on puny Imperialist calibres.....This is CM:RT! 

The new game looks great.  I forum trail for a Fulda gap games goes back so many years, I thought it was never going to happen.  Keep the surprises coming BF 😁

The new game looks great.  I forum trail for a Fulda gap games goes back so many years, I thought it was never going to happen.  Keep the surprises coming BF 😁

Great news the game is on its way.  Been a while since the last release so thanks Steve, Charles and the team!!

The first aider has to be in the same square of the map, it can be hard to judge somethings when the soldier seems to be across the edges of 2 squares.  As I have found trying to get hold of a precious MG42 or AT rocket from a fallen soldier.   
As already said it also boosts you casualty figures at the end as well even though they take no further part in the battle. 

Here are some shocking news from the UK. Perhaps @Warts 'n' all can confirm:

Really looking forward to the next eastern front add on, there is so much depth to CMFB and CMBN the eastern front is due its turn,  Keep up the good work Steve/Charles, still enjoying these games after 15 years! 

Hi everyone,
Here is a cinematic video featuring Shock Force 2! This is meant to be a showcase, similar in concept to a gameplay trailer. Keep in mind this is footage taken from a beta build of the game, and things are subject to change and all that. Hope you all enjoy!
 
 

Not really...  Those of us who have been fans of BF for 20 years know that this is the way things are with a small company... and as Chris said... "I personally prefer nebulous shipping dates with quality products released rather than firm shipping dates with buggy releases requiring endless patches.".

The Following statement pertains solely to me.
 
Since 1983 we've had a small business  directed at a very tiny market group in an other wise huge group (Healthcare Professionals).  We recognize our target group and do some print advertising in specific professional publications.  If we widen the net it's a dead cert that more people would become aware of our products.  It just won't convert to revenue.
 
We love what we do (service to humanity!) but not nearly as much as our family, friends, and personal lives.  Growth is not our overriding concern. Happiness is. 
 
As some of you will note I'm a long time player of CM and QB Map Maker for BFC.  I don't pretend to know How BFC makes it's business decision's. But I do know they are fun group of guys who seem to enjoy what they do and how they do it. 

This is simply untrue. LOS is reciprocal, yes: as soon as you might see the enemy, they might see you. If they're both the same number of high quality troops in poor concealment, then there's a high chance that the two elements will see each other at the same time. But there are many occasions when one side or the other has a spotting advantage and will succeed their "roll to acquire" sooner (on average) than their reciprocate. An obvious example is a two man Elite sniper team with binos in a church tower at 600m from a green rifle team with no binos in an open field: the poor grunts will get picked off one by one without ever seeing the sniper. In the last campaign turn I played, an element of mine stumbled upon a lone straggler and it was a good quarter minute before they were spotted back, and they were Quicking across an open field (it's KG Engel, and the player Germans are quality troops, against piss poor Amis).
 
If the AI always spots you at the same moment you spot them, then you need to work on your cover exploitation. If it's not "always" then what's the problem? It's plain to see that "sometimes" two units will spot each other simultaneously.
 
 
Then you need to work on your movement drills and understanding of how concealment works. It is entirely possible to generate lopsided spotting situations where you can see and spot the enemy well before they see and spot you. The AI sometimes even manages to reverse the tables. But you have to generate them, they won't just happen. Both sides use exactly the same LOS and spotting algorithms; there's no "AI spot you when you spot them" rule (I know that for sure, because I constantly get situations where my troops shoot first, against the AI).
 
So, some advice to help you get on the right side of the spotting algorithms (in no particular order): 
Small teams are harder to spot (because there's less of them to spot, and they fit more easily behind concealing terrain features What's between the target and the spotter (every metre of it) matters more than what terrain the target is in. Example: Light Woods tiles give a concealment advantage; if you are in the "last" tile before open ground, your element has an average of 4m (anywhere from 0-8m, depending on where the individual troopers position themselves in their AS) of "Light Woods tile level concealment", whereas if you're in the next row back into the Light Woods patch, you'll still be able to see out, but you will have, on average 12m  (a guaranteed 8m, for the complete AS, plus the 0-8 for the AS the unit is in) worth of Light Woods between you and the observer, or three times the concealment advantage. Often, you'll be able to be even further back and still see out. Tree models do not give a good indication of the concealment they provide. The tree trunks block LOS, but if they're planted in "short grass", the concealment offered versus eyes on the same level by being underneath them will be minimal; if the canopy is high enough, so that the foliage doesn't preclude spotting, fire can completely ignore a "well-kept orchard" if it's aimed down the rows. Shooting teams are much easier to spot than teams which hold their fire. If your intention is "looking, not reaching out to touch", give your unit a short Target Arc, either circular or oriented the way you want them to bias their cover and shooting opportunity seeking. That way, they won't open fire the instant they see an enemy inside their effective range, giving away their position and attracting attention, causing an instant recipro-spot and return fire. If you're coming up to the "last piece of cover" between you and potential eyes (a bocage line, or clump of bushes at a crest, say) use Slow to move the last AS or two into the cover. This will minimise the chance of your arriving team being spotted by the observing enemy on the other side, because you're moving slowly and keeping low. If you want to spot without being spotted, give the moving unit a short covered arc as above so your scout team doesn't instantly engage the platoon they spot forming up in the field they just got eyes onto. Barns are poor concealment (and negligible cover, but that's a different issue). If you're moving about inside a building the enemy can see, you'll be spotted unless you Slow (or maybe Hunt). If you take this advice in consideration, you might find that you can ambush the enemy a little bit* more than 2-5% of the time.
 
* If there's such a thing as hypobole, this is an example of it...

I really like it the way it is, i try to buddy aid where possible and it does slow down an advance which seems quite realistic.  Adding more micromanagement would not really add anything to the gameplay.