Jump to content
  • 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:


      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
    • Battlefront.com

      Forum Reorganization   10/12/2017

      We've reorganized our Combat Mission Forums to reflect the fact that most of you are now running Engine 4 and that means you're all using the same basic code.  Because of that, there's no good reason to have the discussion about Combat Mission spread out over 5 separate sets of Forums.  There is now one General Discussion area with Tech Support and Scenario/Mod Tips sub forums.  The Family specific Tech Support Forums have been moved to a new CM2 Archives area and frozen in place. You might also notice we dropped the "x" from distinguishing between the first generation of CM games and the second.  The "x" was reluctantly adopted back in 2005 or so because at the time we had the original three CM games on European store shelves entitled CM1, CM2, and CM3 (CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK).  We didn't want to cause confusion so we added the "x".  Time has moved on and we have to, so the "x" is now gone from our public vocabulary as it has been from our private vocabulary for quite a while already.  Side note, Charles *NEVER* used the "x" so now we're all speaking the same language as him.  Which is important since he is the one programming them

cool breeze

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About cool breeze

  • Rank
    Senior Member Extreme (Grande Wizzard)
  • Birthday 04/15/1986

Contact Methods

  • AIM

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    San Jose CA


  • Location
    San Jose
  • Occupation
    Inventor and budding entrepreneur , This is my only invention I dont like.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,048 profile views
  1. Ukrainian Side is Seriously Underpowered

    Ok there s one of em in theater we need em in -game STAT!
  2. Th future of armour

    I like that theory! I mean chemical rockets are, like, why would you choose sub 400 ISP over 10,000+ ISP? As if the brass were really afraid to use nukes... This idea also explains how super cool Freeman Dyson's explanation is off. But still gives reason for the guys in the documentary to be disappointed, they wanted to publicly colonize the stars with massive rockets, not do a clandestine exploration mission. Hmmmmmmm. Did you come up with that one? maybe you should write a book Oh and for those of you who don't know, ISP is about how fast you shoot out the exhaust. Since rocket engines throw stuff out the back to push themselves forward, their speed is limited by how much stuff they have to throw out the back and how hard/fast they throw it. Chemical rockets barely throw the stuff out fast enough to get into orbit, almost all of the weight of the vehicle has to be used up as fuel to get there. Other rockets, like an ion drive, have high ISP, but they have terrible thrust to weight ratios so they can't do anything but send small probes on super long missions. But these nuclear pogostick ships have huge thrust to weight and huge ISP. They throw the stuff out over 20 times faster so they can use less than 1/20th the fuel for the same amount of acceleration. So if you were to use it for example to get to orbit you could get there with most of it still left instead of almost all used up. But it helps just as much once you are up there.
  3. Th future of armour

    Turns out I focused on some of the more extreme versions, they made plans for a smaller one that could ride a Saturn 5 to orbit. It would detonate a bomb every .86 seconds. edit to add. actually both 10m diameter and 20m diameter designs looked at in this study used a bomb every .86 seconds. The 20m design was expected to give a thrust to weight ratio of 3 or 4, and an ISP of 10,000 to 20,000. vs the 400 ISP we are working on approaching with chemical rockets.
  4. Th future of armour

    Thanks for the upload! I'm reading it for my first time, I just saw a documentary on it before. Whuddya think?
  5. Th future of armour

    Speaking of people getting too scared of nukes, have any of you heard or read about Project Orion? basically the coolest thing ever and a good reason to not be a big fan of NASA. Before NASA and the space shuttle, we were working on building a huge super heavy, submarine style construction, spaceship that used nuclear explosions for exhaust instead of rocket fuel. It had a big steel plate on the bottom, mounted to a huge shock absorber, so that you could detonate a bomb right bellow it and the explosion would push up the heavy plate which would push up the space ship. kind of like a pogo stick into space, doing not a double jump, but 800 jumps, into orbit. The bombs go off ever 3 seconds or so. The calculated back then that with their not as clean bombs it would kill 0-1 person world wide via radiation poisoning. One of the really cool things about it is that the size/weight of the ship doesn't really effect the amount of radiation and nuclear material required. The bombs have enough energy that basically no matter how much extra mass you put in em, the specific thrust is still going to be Extremely high, so to lift a bigger ship you just put more chemical explosives and plastic filler or whatever filler to make the bombs bigger but not particularly more powerful. By adding mars or titan rocks to the bombs for the return trip, you can go there and back with 100 people or more and lots of equipment, and back, all with the single stage giant space ship. It also hold the solution to this whole Ukraine, Russia, US, West, extended cold war thing we have going. Ukraine used to be the heart of the soviet space program. Everything's kinda f@#%ed now, but all we need to do is stop fighting and do a joint US, Russia, Ukraine and maybe whoever else modern Project Orion 2.0, main base Ukraine, and have Russia and US and anyone else turn some or all of their nukes into rocket powering mini bombs.
  6. Th future of armour

    Yeah, I've read a few pieces now on how the energy output of the storms is too big to be effected by the nuke but its seems like a pretty lazy way to say it wont work and it seems like its kind of ignoring the mechanism for how it is proposed to work. People keep talking about hourly energy outputs of the whole hurricane. Doesn't seem all that relevant to me, its not about overpowering the hurricane with an hour long process, its about destroying the structure of the hurricane. Seems almost like saying " you cant destroy a tanks engine with a 120mm sabot round because the tank can shoot 30 of those within an hour"
  7. Russian / Ukrainian Breaching kits

    The breaching kits arn't for doors, all doors are considered unlocked/easily broken in the game
  8. CAS (mis)representation

    I thought the main thing we used the concrete bombs for was the air campaign in Iraq in order to hit the AA guns that would be place right NEXT to the buildings.
  9. Its hard to believe that was a real thing that they spent substantial money on.
  10. Th future of armour

    I also hear wheels are soon to be obsolete as we fly around in hovercars
  11. Ukrainian defense news

    I've got a lot more respect for slat armour after seeing it work, Thanks! Watched a related youtube video after the simulation about the Philippines army using wood to protect against HEAT, the end of the clip showed a test where it apeared to work! who'da thunk?!
  12. US conventional warfare capabilities

    Meanwhile Germany continues to impress the world with their level of commitment to a united defense. Wait is Lucas really german or am I thinking of someone else
  13. Future US AFV development

    As off the mark as Sparks is on a lot of things.... I think he has some good idea's in there. If for some reason we ever wanted/needed tons of APC/IFV fast for cheap upgrading the m113 seems like it might work. I also think the containerized force/ "battle-box" concept or whatever he calls it has some merit. And while it seems unworkable in most cases, the idea of making an alternative road network during an occupation is at least an interesting idea.
  14. Future US AFV development

    Ah so thats the real reason for those warhammer 40000 ork tanks to have all the choppers and such, gotta cut down the trees for the wood burners as they drive!
  15. Future US AFV development

    Omg Pansersourkrout, your secrets out...... you are secretly a big Gavin fan! I knew it Edit: Or maybe I mean Sparks