Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Freyberg

  1. 3 hours ago, John1966 said:

    As they seem to be a bit under firepowered in the infantry department

    I quite like the challenge of the Commonwealth, as well as having an affection for them.

    They're quite a 'stand-offish' force - they fight quite well outside SMG range, nice accurate rifles, those little 2" mortars that set up in seconds. They feel a little bit WWI-ish sometimes. But they're not strong on close assault. You have to be patient, and in QBs, I give myself plenty of time.

    For the complete opposite experience, I like playing the Soviets.

  2. I play mostly with British Commonwealth forces of various sorts, who are similar although different. They have less infantry firepower than US infantry, but some nice units and vehicles - recon troops, flame vehicles, Fireflies and similar.

    I tend to play then quite stealthily on the attack - Firefly is a magnificent long-range sniper - and, yes, they do depend on artillery quite a lot, although in QBs I tend to choose the carrier-based on-map mortars when available, which add a lot of punch to the infantry.

  3. I often play on maps, which I make myself, that are bigger than the typical CM map and generally have long sight lines.

    They're fun, but very challenging - it's much harder to approach a defensive position where the enemy can catch sight of you at 1000+ metres and has good LOF from 500+ metres than it is to attack a position such as the one in the map above.

  4. 21 hours ago, domfluff said:

    MGs are important in the attack as well as the defence, but they do require some more thought. 

    Training film, with some useful things, including a depiction of this kind of leader recon at the six-ish minute mark.

    That was a really good summary - thanks. Also, I like those old training films and that was a really good one, thanks again :)

  5. I didn't install the following three patches, because my version wasn't the one listed in the Version Requirement screen of the installer.

    CMFI & CMBN seem to have updated fine. I each case I loaded my most recent saved game and it worked OK.

    As for the three below, I thought I was up-to-date with purchased upgrades, although I haven't tried to keep up with free patches. However, I couldn't find a link on this page - https://www.battlefront.com/patches - to bring me up-to-date with version requirements for this current set of patches,

     Does this make sense and could BF advise on what to do? 

    Thanks :)


    CMBS Engine 4 (v2.0 through v2.13)

    This v2.13 Patch of Combat Mission: Black Sea requires you to have a working copy of Combat Mission: Black Sea installed and updated to v2.12. It works for both base-game only installs as well as those that have Battle Pack 1.

    My version: 2.10

    Didn't try to install


    CMFB Engine 4 (v2.0 through v2.03)

    This v2.03 patch of Combat Mission: Final Blitzkrieg requires you to have a working copy of Combat Mission: Final Blitzkrieg v2.02 installed.

    My version: 2.00

    Didn't try to install


    CMSF2 Engine 4 (v2.03)

    This v2.03 patch of Combat Mission: Shock Force 2 requires you to have a working copy of Combat Mission: Shock Force 2 v2.02 installed.

    My version: 2.00

    Didn't try to install





  6. 4 hours ago, Bufo said:

    I think the real purpose is something entirely different.

    How would the players react if they saw in reality how simple things are in this game?

    That's just mean - and unfair. :(

    You can't possibly believe the programming in this game is simple. Have you ever played other strategy games??

  7. 3 hours ago, Lethaface said:

    Is estimating remaining development time easier than predicting the weather? 😉

    I remember years ago I used to do relatively simple software development - websites with little databases and stuff (a job I came to hate) - and clients would get annoyed because my time estimates were often wrong. But often it was like doing a puzzle. It's like asking, 'how many minutes will it take you to finish the Times Crossword?' Until you solve it, sometimes you just don't know what the answer is.


  8. I'm still buzzing over CMRV. I would never have named Indian, South African and Free French forces as additions I would love to see, but I've been enjoying them immensely since the game came out.

    What would I like BF to do next? Surprise me - I'm certain to love it :)



    Also, I know as a community we've been over this ground time and time again, but -- we know BF is a small company, they work for months and years bringing out these amazing, detailed, realistic historical simulations, recently we've had SF2 and RV, which were both fantastic and took huge amounts of work, but almost as soon as a release comes out, members of the community start griping that it isn't enough and that they've been waiting too long for some other detailed and amazing theatre.

    I just wish there were a bit more positivity in the community - we're all grown ups, aren't we? We realise that hard work is actually hard work...?

  9. 15 hours ago, Bufo said:

    That's not a spotted icon. Its the "somebody told me around here should be a tank but I cannot see it" icon. It is clearly invisible to the gunner at this point.


    8 hours ago, c3k said:

    No. If the Panther is selected (not sure from the video or the difficulty level) any spotted icon like that is what that unit is aware of but does not have positive confirmation. The OP's video does not make it clear. But, regardless, you cannot make the statement that "it is clearly invisible to the gunner at this point".

    It could be either one, but I don't see the problem either way.

    The Panther had ID'd the rear tank, but that doesn't mean it had a clear view of the whole thing, just enough of it to ID it, like maybe the sillhouette of the left side of the turret, I dunno. It's not at all far fetched that there could be a tank in front of it which couldn't be seen, presumably in front of a part of it that wasn't seen by the Panther.

    Especially since both the T34s were in trees - and brush...



  10. 1 hour ago, Sven said:

    I just had a Panther take out an invisible tank. It fired on a T-34 it had eyes on, but the round struck another tank beside the first one. How is it possible for the gunner to NOT see that tank?

    It then reloaded and took out the first one, but the "invisible" tank still isn't seen. Just the smoke coming out of it.

    It turned out to be a very good minute for me, but it's annoying anyway.

    It's been mentioned in so many threads, but LOS is screwed up.

    Can you provide a screen shot...?

  11. 4 hours ago, Hapless said:

    Because I know it barely ever happens to me, nor does it seem to happen very often when I specifically try to do it to my opponents.

    I've played many many hundreds of games of CM over the years, I don't see gun damage very often and it's possible there's been a direct, frontal hit to the gun as shown, but I don't recall it.

  • Create New...