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

About Lethaface

  • Rank
    Junior Human

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
  • Interests
    History, geopolitics, the science/art of war, critical thinking, good food, music and life in general.


  • Location
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

925 profile views
  1. This guy is worth a watch

    In occupied Holland wood gas cars were 'normal' as oil was rationed / not available. Another reinforcement of TIKS point ;-) @Ivanov, thanks for the links. Good to know we're not the alone finding problem in TIKs reasoning :-)
  2. This guy is worth a watch

    Even better, although with carriers they wouldn't be affected by the blockades ;-)
  3. This guy is worth a watch

    My 'decisions win wars' comment was a little tongue in cheek (as denoted by the smiley), although with a touch of seriousness. The problem I perceive in TIKs movies is mainly in reasoning. I'm a bit of allergic to his type of reasoning, because I see it a lot these days. In my opinion his videos are compromised with root cause attribution errors. I will try to explain why: The most easy way of going about this, is by reversing the statement or removing the factor from the equation: So, would having 'enough' oil have won the war for Germany? The answer to this is not obvious yes (possibly even a simple 'no'), from which I conclude that oil is not 'the' reason Germany lost the war. It's a gross oversimplification, like Ivanov has very meticulously explained in his posts. So, another tongue in cheek: I call TIK's oil and raise it with aircraft carriers: Germany lost the war because they didn't have aircraft carrier strike groups.
  4. This guy is worth a watch

    Well, opinions of researchers differ on this subject but that doesn't really matter in the end: how much comes down to a few. Edit: in the (recent) version of Achtung Panzer I have read, the liddel Heart issue is addressed and the outcome is different to your view. Anyway Guderian doesn't claim anymore than just building further on idea's of others. Personally I don't care, idea's dont have 'owners' (apart from legal fiction). At the same time they are often only grasped by a few.
  5. The patch?

    Thanks for the answer. Actually I also consider PBEM most interesting, but RL prevents me finishing those. Fortunately I get to enjoy SP campaigns and scenario's too Maybe i'll try some QBs or a scen without too much arty before the patch comes. Good weekend.
  6. This guy is worth a watch

    If I'm one of those throwing stones, not my intention. Just a bit allergic to flawed reasoning lately due to professional related stress. Especially clickbait reasoning LD Anyway, thanks for the interesting observations. For 3.): after reading Guderian's Panzer Leader a couple of years ago, while realizing the anecdotal aspect, I was under the impression that a better grasp of the frontline situation at highest command stations might have made a massive difference in the campaign towards Moscow. The same goes for Dunkirk, to name two checkpoints out of many in the war. It's comforting to know that lunatic despots usually make plenty of unsound decisions, especially on the more conceptual / higher levels of the decision aiding/making processes. At the same time, from a military historic view, I think it's interesting to wonder what the outcome would be if the Pz / Mot Divisions would have been allowed towards Dunkirk. Or what if more appreciation would have been given to the consequences of deep armored combat in the strike towards Moscow and the terrain in Russia (Napoleon left some notes). With the limited available resources, more could have been done towards a decisive strike around Moscow. The diversion in Ukraine was costly with regards to both casualties (material and experienced personnel) and time/initiative, even though a military success itself. For me those are some of the 'checkpoints' in the war, where given the known constraints (as was the fuel situation), the Axis lost the war they started. Because morale is a sketchy thing, I'm personally of the opinion that things could have turned out very differently if the German leadership acted more competent versus the Allied leadership acted less competent. The Red Army was crumbling but held out, the Brits had their 'finest hour' and stood strong in uncertain times. I think it's interesting to see the importance of individuals on world events. If one would stripe away one of Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, Roosevelt, Mao, Chiang Kai-shek, Guderian, any military important figure, etc, events would have probably turned out significantly different. At least, that's my impression. Personally I'm intrigued by Guderian, who after observing the concepts of radio and tanks during WWI, seemingly came to concept of the Pz Div and after writing Achtung Panzer, took his theories into practice as described in Pz Leader. Even if most of what he wrote was exaggerated: how much of our history comes down to the doings and decisions of individuals? Anyway decisions win or lose wars, not oil. Simply because oil itself doesn't start wars, neither loses them ;-P.
  7. The patch?

    May I ask what you have been playing? I'm itching to pick up a scenario or long campaign (have all CMx2 content available), but especially the troop running from artillery issue makes me hesitant. When I play a CM game, i always try to go full retard and spend time reading briefing and observing the terrain. Knowing that AI troops will run from their position under artillery feels like cheating. I want to play the CMFB german campaign another time (just played some scenario's during testing), or the CMBN scenario pack brit pack, but want a genuine experience. You didn't notice the issue while playing? I just played a little with 4.0 but this issue became quite obvious in a CMBS game I played. The good thing for me is that I have the patience to wait for the patch. It will come when it will come, not too far in the distance so I might as well wait.
  8. Please stop beating a dead horse... just ignore, I will try to do same ;-)
  9. Interesting. Personally I like the vagueness too, makes it more difficult for me to (subconsciously) game the system instead of trying to use actual tactics. Of course that doesn't mean all commands should have 'magic functionality', so long as a command performs more or less as how one would expect it to function (according to RL or manual) it's fine from a design standpoint. C2 In the CMx2 games I've played, having troops in C2 definitely made a difference when in contact with the enemy. With regards to morale: the lower the experience, the more important C2 is in my experience. The importance of information sharing is (also) very situational. Keeping long distance (AT) weapons in C2 with eyes up front can make a big difference. Whether C2 is worth risking your HQ running across open terrain, that's once again up to the context imho. My strategy: In ww2 era I generally try to remain C2 at all times, apart from scouts/sentries and the like. In modern ERA C2 is most of the time less of a concern. For NATO/US/RUS/UKR it isn't because almost everyone has a radio/pda whatever. Because of that I generally try to keep the HQ in safe positions with good observation or inside IFVs providing overwatch. For Syrian / unconventional units maintaining C2 is often not really a viable option, so I adjust to that. Fatigue I had always assumed tired/exhausted units would also degrade combat performance. Although thinking about it, fatigue is only really a factor in offensive/maneuver situations where being able to make a sudden quick/fast dash IS important for having tactical options and or keeping the initiative, so I guess this new knowledge won't really change how I will order my troops around. A question someone may know the answer to: does fatigue affect spotting?
  10. This guy is worth a watch

    Well said! I would say it is flawed reasoning.
  11. This guy is worth a watch

    After your message I watched the video (not fully though). In my humble opinion his videos are a bit of a incoherent bunch of statements shoestringed together. Obviously Germany was, due to its isolated position and resource situation at home, going to be in a bad position for a war of attrition (oil access is only one of the factors here, although especially important for motorization etc). The whole world (and especially the German general staff) was very aware of this 'problem/feature' even before WWI. Basically all he is stating in the video is that control over resources, while denying the enemy access, means that in the long run you will win. That's not really something spectacular, although it might be for some. Imo the whole political aim of Germany was too increase their access to various resources by means of wars of aggression, which spiraled out of any form of control pretty damn fast after initial successes. Stating that they lost that wars because of oil, seems a little moot. They certainly failed to get access to the resources necessary for a ongoing war against the allied factions. Besides, would a fresh untapped oil field the size of Saudi Arabia's discovered in 1938 in Bavaria have really won Germany the war? perhaps. ;-)
  12. This guy is worth a watch

    I think I saw another video from him about the Ost front and thought it wasn't worth the watch.
  13. My opinion: CMBS is worth it's price. It offers a lot of content, hours of play (100+ at least I would say). Maybe not as much (yet?) as CMSF, but more than I have been able to play. So as you seem to have enjoyed CMSF, I would recommend CMBS because it basically takes the fight to another level. There are a lot of new features and RED has a lot more teeth when compared to CMSF. Also, the scenario designers have gotten better at it over the last decade so expect more 'professional' content. Whether 100+ hours of enjoyment are worth $60 to you, is a question only you can answer. Of course your financial situation influences the answer. Personally I consider $60,- cheap for what I get in return. Of course there might be other games that offer more hours of gameplay for less, but then they are not like Combat Mission so that point is irrelevant to me. Plus I like to support (niche) developers like BF.C because I like there to be CM games around, whether I have time to play them or not.
  14. The patch?

    I think this is really an 'eye of the beholder' issue, a real classic one for that. As being part of the 'old guard' myself (at least I think I am after 10+ years and 1000+ posts and having done some beta testing in the past), I don't see any problem with SgtHatred's post. At the same time I understand IanL, Sburke and others because often people that are trying to be helpful on the forum get flak just for having their own viewpoint. I think everyone is entitled their own viewpoint. Conceptual attributes like 'game-braking' are as subjective as attributes can come, because what exactly defines game breaking? Personally I have been so busy with other things that I have rarely had the time and or energy to play CM over the last 2 years. When I tried some 4.0 games, I did encounter the 'run from prepared positions under arty fire' behavior. Because in that particular scenario it did break my immersion, I decided to wait for a patch so I can enjoy the content I play in the most optimal form. I mostly enjoy campaigns when played the first time, so that's why. In the end we are all here to enjoy the game. It's good that there is an old guard on the forum, at the same time it's good that there are new people on the forums. Obviously opinions about bugs, due patches and other things will differ. That's what a forum is about. Anyway, I don't see the problem with this discussion and most of the viewpoints offered here. As long as people keep discussion civilized and not take or make things personal, its all fine imo :).
  15. Happy New Year's Day! 2018 look ahead

    Whats up with the admin appropriation? ;-)