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


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. One approach I have taken for playing with large numbers of infantry (and out of laziness) is to just detach a small recon force and leave the rest behind in the rear area as a reserve. Once contact is made I move in only what I think is necessary to deal with the threat and focus on the point of contact as a abstract objective. I'm still inclined to bring in heavy weapons and tanks over a smashing force of infantry. There is of course great satisfaction in taking a localized area of the map but because of the time constraint and the fact that I've not mobilized most of my infantry to deal with the rest of the map, I usually end up losing the the battle. On a side note, am I even using my infantry the correct way? Meaning, for battles that I win, I usually use my infantry as 'bait' to reveal and locate enemy positions and use mortars, tanks and artillery to take them out rather than taking the positions with an appropriate amount of infantry. Like I stated before, in the AAR my infantry usually account for very little of the enemy losses. Is this typical? All thoughts welcomed, -Mark
  2. Love the CM2 platform for a variety of reasons but am I the only one that finds it tedious and daunting to manage anything more than a few platoons of infantry? And once you start splitting infantry up into teams and trying to use them with sound coordinated tactics, the workload obviously multiplies. Furthermore, when the bullets start flying and units get spread out and disorganized, my willingness to control them with same level of detail as before goes out the window. Am I too focused on micromanaging? For large engagement with a company or more of infantry, is it better to use generalized grouped orders and not be as concerned with organization and losses? In my combined arms battles I consistently find my infantry to be responsible for very few enemy casualties as compared to my mortars, tanks and artillery. Any tips from the CM2 veterans out there on how to organize and manage large formations of infantry and still keep the game fun? Thanks, -Mark
  3. All good suggestions... but does anyone know what the various plane sounds mean? Just because you hear a plane fly by on a particular turn, does it always mean a strafe or bomb drop coming on the next turn? Also, can you tell when the plane is leaving and/or not coming back?
  4. I haven't played very many scenarios where there is air cover... I'm just a bit confused by the various sounds that you hear as a plane is covering the map. Has anyone been able to notice any patterns or use the sounds as an indicator as to what will happen next and how soon or later or for how long? Also, if you don't have any AA assets deployed what are some things you can do to foil an air strike or minimize it's effects? Obviously getting infantry into a building is a great start but what else? Thank you, -Mark
  5. Have CMFI upgraded to the 4.0 engine and I'm getting blank or missing textures on shermans. Any ideas?
  6. Command Lines for CMFI?

    Progress report... purchased the v3.0 upgrade and now I have command lines! All is right with the world and I can sleep comfortably at night now. -Mark
  7. Command Lines for CMFI?

    @IanL - Ah I see... It's an upgrade that I have to pay for. I thought it was included with the Gustav Line bundle. Thank you for clarifying. -Mark
  8. Command Lines for CMFI?

    @Blazing 88's and @badger yes I tried that and nothing happened... When I check the hotkeys menu there is no option at all there for toggling command lines.
  9. Command Lines for CMFI?

    Mine says v1.12 in the lower right and my splash screen shows the Gustav Line icon... I thought I bought the same Gustav Line bundle and then added the patch. If I didn't do something correctly with the purchase or the patch, it may explain why I haven't been able to play the modified QB/scenario you and kohlenklau tweaked out. I copied and pasted the description from the confirmation email of what I paid for an downloaded: CMFI + Gustav Line BUNDLE (Delivery: Download Only CFI1-PC-DW $65.00 $65.00 and I downloaded and installed this patch: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_versions&Itemid=317#CM: Fortress Italy PC Is this all correct to have the latest version and patch? -Mark
  10. I miss the AI behaviour of CMx1...

    @kohlenklau - FYI, I downloaded this file and put it in my scenario folder for CMFI and can't seem to find it when I try to selected from the 'Battle' menu. I also loaded it in the scenario editor to see if something was corrupt with it and it seems to not have any parameters or units set... It didn't even have a map other than the stock flat grass map that is defaulted when you first create a new scenario. Maybe it's a problem on my end? Anyone else? -Mark
  11. I recently purchased CMFI/Gustav Line... I can't seem to get the command lines toggle to work. I even downloaded and installed the v1.12 patch. Are command lines simply not an option for CMFI right now? Thank you, Mark
  12. I miss the AI behaviour of CMx1...

    @Blazing 88's - wow didn't know something like this existed! Thanks for sharing and I will be sure to check it out in more detail... @Heirloom_Tomato - thanks for the offer... I have CMFI so I'll try a out a map or two! @Heirloom_Tomato and @Meach - How would you feel if I sent you guys a map each with a point limit so you can purchase the defenders forces within that limit, compose defensive plans for them and save as an unfinished scenario to send back to me? Then I can purchase my forces (without looking at what you picked of course), save and then play as a quasi quick battle? -Mark
  13. I miss the AI behaviour of CMx1...

    SlySniper, I hear ya and I do of course play H2H as well as scenarios in CMx2 and enjoy them very much... but sometimes a QB is all I have time for. H2H can be a lengthy endeavor and after one has played most of the scenarios that come with the game, it takes a bit of time hunting to find a new scenario that fits the size, terrain and force selection that you are in the mood for. Although CMx2 is superior in so many ways to CMx1, QB's in CMx1 give me more of what I'm looking for. And I only came to this revelation after going back to CMx1 on a recent whim. No disrespect to any of the developers or scenario authors of CMx2, but I was just voicing my opinion and checking in to see if I am the only one that feels this way. And to Meach... I suppose something can be done given my limited understanding of the capabilities of the editor... I've messed around with it a few times but will admit that I don't understand all details or have anywhere near the skill to make scenario or amend a map myself. But would it not be possible to amend the stock probe/attack/assault QB's maps with additional defensive AI plans that are a bit more complex and dynamic? For example, adding a trigger or triggers to have units converge towards an objective and take up new positions once units of the human controlled army are within a threatening distance of the objective? And as I understand it, the AI can't call in artillery on it's own but can't the timing of the barrages be varied a bit so they don't always start falling so predictably on turn 1? And speaking of triggers and artillery, can artillery be associated with a trigger? If so that alone would be a huge improvement that could be implemented for the current selection of QB maps. I suppose the real challenge would be getting an independent group of scenario makers to go back through all the stock QB's and amend them and make them available for download or have BF roll them into a patch. I of course could learn to do it myself and take on a few maps that I may want to play, but then that sort of defeats the element of being surprised. -Mark
  14. I miss the AI behaviour of CMx1...

    I see and understand what you are all saying, but I'm comparing the quality of fight of the defending AI in QB's in each CM platform. Would you not all agree that attacking the AI in a QB in CMx2 is not as challenging as it is in CMx1? Defending AI armor in CMx2 just seems to sit there and once you spot it you can usually outflank it and mount an attack pretty easily, depending on the terrain. Furthermore, I didn't even compare artillery barrages between the two platforms. Defending AI in CMx2 in QB's is so predictable and easy to foil.... in my experience barrages always come down in the obvious avenues of approach on the first turn. Once you know this all you have to do is wait 5 min before you have any of your forces leave the setup zone. In CMx1 barrages are a real threat that can come down anywhere on a portion of your forces that are within visual of the enemy FO. I understand AI routines in CMx1 are simple but in comparing attacking QB's between the two platforms, the simpler defending AI routines seems to give a better fight. I suppose the real issue for my complaint for QB's fights in CMx2 comes down to how the defending AI plans have been written for all the maps. Despite the ability to have multiple AI plans written for a map, the defending AI plans seem to have all been written with the same basic static strategy. And I know hundreds of QB maps have been crafted for CMx2 by talented authors but the random map generation for CMx1is greatly missed. -Mark
  15. I'm really into CMx2 and but I find QB's against the AI not super challenging or exciting.... Especially when you are doing a prob/attack/assault. I recently played a QB in CMAK and forgot how challenging and dynamic the AI can be. Fifteen min into the battle a tiger rolled in from a far flank. I engaged it with 4 shermans, but the tiger ultimately won despite my efforts to attack it simultaneously from 2 different directions. It was changing direction, rotating it's turret, coming in and out of cover and intuitively reacting to the biggest threat in each moment. On top of that, after the first line of infantry defending the objective were overwhelmed, a second wave of defenders seemed to activate from deeper inside the map to fill holes in the initial defense and counter attacked. Sure, in a scenario/campaign in CMx2 you are likely to see similar behavior from the AI depending on the creativity of the scenario author... I understand the scenario editor allows for some very creative and complex programming of the AI but something is seriously lacking for the AI plans and behavior for QB's. Defending AI infantry and armor seem very static as the battle progresses and I don't ever recall seeing anything close to the behavior that I saw in CMx1. And on a side note, computer generated force selection for QB's often results in awkward forces even when 'mix' is selected. I recall many times getting mainly half tracks full of infantry for example. And in my most recent QB I got a whole bunch of 50 cal teams and a sherman.... and after playing several QB's in CMx2, force selection becomes predictable, even with rarity set to loose. I'm guessing it's probably too unrealistic but wonder if CMx2 could ever be patched so that you can have the option of creating and going with premade AI plans for QB's or going with an automatic AI routine similar to CMx1? I think AI plans for meeting engagements and the AI plans for probes/attacks/assaults is good but the behavior for the AI defending just seems very flat. How do others feel about the defending AI in QB's for CMx2 vs CMx1? -Mark