CarlWAW

That's strange. No tactical improvements, nobody asking for improved realism and all are raving about some new textures... 😁
Almost feels like simulated discussions in stockhouse forums...
 

Oh, and I somehow thought there was a group, neither interested in slamming things together, nor interested, if rifles were exchanged with automatic weapons for a bataillon in May 1943 in Nothern Sicily if it didn't rain, but interested in units running torwards enemy lines to commit suicide, or crews to the last man opening up hatches to be greeted with a shower of super sniped bullets... 🚮
I would call that group wargamers interested in tactical realism. But what do I know about circular logic...
 

Do you guys also believe in Santa Claus still? 🙈
IMO it's very naive to believe, that a game release has been delayed for years because of a few new formations. Nobody is interessted in 4 instead of 8 carabines per squad, a few new textures with a different unit name if the game was all about simulation and depth in its glory days.
Either they have sold out long time ago or they are making their money elsewhere - for example developing cheap ****ty apps for smartphones.
IMO they are just milking the tiny fanbase and keep it somewhat on life support with empty promises and when the shop turns permanently cashflow negative, the shop will be closed and you will hear: sorry folks, after such a long time it's time to move on.
And the fanboys will believe that, too and say "THANK YOU!" for betraying and lying to us for years. 😍
 

Do you see the screenshot?

Here are 10 tests done one after another on Roadblock in 4.02
10 times there was "gap charges"
the game starts at 45 minutes, the troops arrives at the hedgerow at 43 minutes
3 times the "gap charges" took place from the 1st minute !!
I let you look at the pictures and the time or the leak took place.
there  or the troop has resisted longer, corresponding to the random or the attichar gun is located near the crossroads, so it is under the firing of light weapon that the leak took place and the delay is longer
you can see the systematic aspect of the problem that makes the game unplayable
even if I'm happy with 4.00, keeping it behind keeps me from discovering new maps and scenarios. it is rather disabling especially as I am also part of those who fixed the update of the graphics card to December 2017 to prevent the game from crashing after about forty minutes.
at 42 minutes !

at 24 minutes !

at 25 minutes

at 36 minutes

at 38 minutes

at 39 minutes

at 42 minutes

at 36 minutes

at 42 minutes

at 28 minutes

I'm a bit confused ... Wasn't one of the big advantages of engine 4.0 that all games now run on the same code base? If so, doesn't that mean that you only have to fix things in one place now, instead of several?

With all due respect, that statement makes really no sense.
If Steve spends 1 hour per month informing his customers about the evolution of the work on their project/s closer to completion, and the patch takes one year of work to be finished, then the release of the patch would be delayed less than two days due to the time invested in informing the customers. I think that everybody would accept that insignificant delay in the release of the patch in exchange of monthly information about the evolution of the work on the patch and on other close project/s.
Txema

Its absolutely clear, that its run now by people with no understanding of how to run a business.
The original creators probably were bought out with a NDA and are long gone. People running their business usually become better and better. Here they want to make the customers believe they turned into totally incompetent "managers"?
It also explains why the current US-government controlled team running this op, is not capable getting the most simple things into the code within two years - because it was written by someone else...
During that time the old team had developed a whole new game and game engine...

No, we actually do not know that at the moment. For all we know they could be prepearing to file for bankruptcy and keeping low profile while doing it not to affect sales. You can't just stop communicating with customers after you've said that soemthing is nearing completion. And this has been a trend for a while. They were supposed to roll out a new store front back when Final Blitzkrieg was announced. Well they stopped talking about it as well and didn't do it. There is no evidence of them working on the patch any more and there won't be until we get an official statement about it. And as you say, it'd only take them a few seconds, just log in and post "We're sorry for the delays, but we are working on it" etc.

It is absolutely unrealistic, no army on the face of the earth trains soldiers to displace out of fighting positions, or to run around like headless chickens when they take indirect fire.

Its absolutely clear, that its run now by people with no understanding of how to run a business.
The original creators probably were bought out with a NDA and are long gone. People running their business usually become better and better. Here they want to make the customers believe they turned into totally incompetent "managers"?
It also explains why the current US-government controlled team running this op, is not capable getting the most simple things into the code within two years - because it was written by someone else...
During that time the old team had developed a whole new game and game engine...

I don't mind so much about the  bugs, they will always be there in some form. I'm especially annoyed about the endless delay and vague promises. And the reactions one gets when one has the bloody nerve to comment on that. A good example is the promise of screenshots in the beginning of this year. We only recently had some new ones for CM Italy, thanks to Bud. The comments were good and grateful. According to BF screenshots always cause a hailstorm of comments and questions. Just didn't happen.
Always the same 'it's all your own fault'- defence, to explain the failing of a decent PR-policy by BF.

I don't see how his comment is a derailment. It's common sense and very relevant to the subject and although our 'freedom of speech' doesn't expand to this kind of logical conclusions, evidence can be seen and found rather easily. The figures about the costs and the increased crime are not published by the German government, but you only have to walk through a big German city nowadays to see the problem. Or talk to Germans (especially the police or civil servants!) when they are not on camera.
I understand this site doesn't want this kind of discussions, but to call everyone who mentions this huge problem a fascist or extreme-right winger won't do in my opinion. There always should be a place for real refugees (I count quite a few of them among my friends, especially from Afghanistan), but what's happening in Germany is indeed lunacy.  It may not be the main reason for the German defence problem, but it certainly is part of it.  It's just hard to prove with figures and facts because nobody dares to publish them or say it openly. That's the state of our freedom of speech anno 2018.
(Political, off topic video link deleted by BFC)

The "experts" here fill page after page discussing unimportant nuissances, but when really big flaws of the sim are discovered and raised, they lose any interest...
 
A car can work perfectly 99% of the time. But if the air-bag system does not activate when needed, then the best car with all the huge design efforts, to improve safety of the passengers, becomes the worst car because it fails in the most important situation.
 
The problem CM still has:
Spotting overall works quite well. But then it comes to the most important situations, the model does not work correctly.
Probably the most important flaw of the spotting model always becomes obvious when tanks are involved.
One example is mentioned above.
Another one - and maybe even more severe, because it prevents the player from using realistic tactics with tanks: it's not possible to use the tank commander for spotting witht he tank turret down.
 
What makes it worse:
The spotting model seems to weigh movement (of tanks) over anything else: with the following effect: if one tank moves and one stands still, the tank moving into LOS will be spotted first by the stationary tank.
Therefore in CM it works better to use smoke to move a tank into position, than to move it without blocking LOS.
 
And in reality if a a battlefield is controlled by enemy tanks/ATGs? The tanks are placed turret down and the TC is spotting - during the attack he is mostly looking for muzzle flashes (which are not modelled at all, btw).
In reality once a flash is detected the TC often also gets a sense where the enemy ATG/tank is. He instructs his gunner and the driver moves the tank hull down and the enenmy is engaged immediately.
After 2-4 shots the tank drives back into safety and changes its position and DOES NOT sit like a duck!
In CM, because of the spotting behaviour, it is better to create pressure by pure firepower and use tanks like sitting ducks because of the flawed spotting system.
 
 

Sorry, something happened up there. That's 5s after opening the hatch.
 
Well, it seems that "hiding" doesn't mean hiding -unlike Brexit means Brexit.
All infantry depolyed as hiding, nobody is moving, nobody is shooting.
Crews Green/Regular.
Bush 3 Wood/H-wood 2 or 3 trees per tile.
Combinations of tiles [Crops] [Bush] [Wood] [H-wood] [Bush/Wood/H-wood] [Bush/H-wood] [T-grass] [Dirt]
In general terms, not always the same test but funny, same results. 
Regular crews seem to be able to see 50m father away than Green.
At 100m or even 150m you are NOT hiding. (One tank commander let's call him Legolas, was able to see a sharpshooter at 200m in the rim of a heavy wood.)
It seems to be as efective to deploy in woods as in crops. (Anybody expected anything different?)
Infantry skillful enough to leave no traces when deployed in crops but they will always choose a place where they can be seen if deployed in the outer line of woods. (They need more training.)
Your'e hinding only in the 3rd line -tile- of trees. (Wondering how good is your LOS compare to a tanker outside.)
The tank is looking at you, if you move or fire it will see you even farther and farther away. (IMO).
This is after 20s

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I don't need more trees I need wide, wide woods. If there's any tank in sight, forget about it. 
 
 

I'm watching this now for the first time and I'm already put off by one of the scenes. They've just finished killing off the AT guns by the tree line and then want to execute the German soldier...oh wait...I meant Nazi...cause every German is an evil Nazi in these films. So not only do we have this ridiculousness, but I'm supposed to identify with American soldiers who want to illegally kill this unarmed prisoner. WTF? 
It's sick how the men who run the Hollywood studios try to get the public to believe these lies against the German people. Do you think that if this movie took place in the Pacific, they'd have our heroes executing a Japanese POW?  Doubtful.
 
    

The default is Shift-F3 to toggle on/off.

I disable the effects when not watching the battle.  You can set a key combination to do it - for me it's Shift + ~.  This way I avoid the warping menu, as you call it (I like the imagery the word conjures!)

I repost my comment from the RT screenshot thread, where I adressed this problem.
 
I just installed it and have got it running. I haven't played with the shaders, but with two out of the box preset shaders that come with reshade, I got very good results in replacing the ingame movie mode with better colors and with fully working anti aliasing.
System: Win10, Nvidia GTX960m
Here's what you do:
Download Reshade 3.1
Install
When asked during installation download fx-shader presets? YES
Running reshade it asks for the executable of the game you want to work with. Choose one. I chose FB.
When starting FB it crashed.
Go to the CM game data folder (usually in "Documents"). There you should see a "reshade-shaders" folder.
Rename "Shaders" and "Textures" in that folder to something else (e.g. Shaders_ Textures_)
Create a new "Shaders" folder. Into that folder you only copy those shaders you want to work with.
To have an instantly better looking movie-mode with working anti-aliasing, from the renamed "Shaders_" copy to "Shaders" folder:
ReShade.fxh
Levels.fx
Technicolor.fx
For fun you can also copy other shaders, like Nighvision.fx or Monochrome.fx
 
Start CM.
Press SHIFT + F2
Now you should see the ReShade config menu as an overlay within the game, where the shaders you copied into the folder, should be listed.
Choose one, i.e. "Monochrome".
The changes take effect immediately.
The game becomes b/w.
If that works, deselect Monochrome and select "Levels" and "Technicolor".
Voila! A good looking movie mode with fully working anti-aliasing.
 
When you are satisfied with your settings, go into ReShade's SETTINGS menu and switch from "Configuration Mode" to "Performance Mode". Which allegedly gives an even better performance.
 
With these two shaders activated I do not recognize a noticeable performance hit (ReShade allows to display the frame rate!).
Amazing software!
 
 

Figured, given how many games this information pertains to, the CMGDF was the best place to post this. Brother George of ex-Cav Scout renown is super anal on whatever military matter he's studying and can and does send it corrections to various game firms, playtest groups, etc. He's taken a hard look at a number of depictions of German infantry TO&E and sent me this link Which, among other things, has the KStns (extended TO&E) for hordes of different units, everything from foot, to infantry, bicycle-mounted infantry, motorized infantry and armor, together with a wealth of other formations, such as HQs and artillery. Anyone looking for detailed info (down to what weapon a man has) will find this of tremendous value, but remember, this is the official structure, the ideal, as opposed to the generally far worse battlefield reality. The material is in German, but is easy to follow, not least because there are crisp clear drawings and silhouettes.
http://www.wwiidaybyday.com
 
The KStN for the medium Panther Company is 1177, but since the site doesn't post a specific page link for a given KStN, you'll have to go to the Panzer section and look it up. It'll be worth your time!
Regards,
John Kettler

 

I said I'd make an illustrated guide, and I did!  Hopefully it helps some of those who were asking me about it  
Step Zero is to download the Reshade distribution at the bottom of the page here: https://reshade.me/
Steps 1 through 8 are in my guide here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LG9Og33Re95sPx4KyKtk98DjyUyK-Qcn
And my preset is here https://drive.google.com/open?id=1dQ5zgLkyS5RRI559yJG929QFs2YqnRdb
Hopefully the archive works, I didn't really do extensive testing on it.

@DMS
I guess thats the reason why today every army uses PPSHs and machine pistols and not assault rifles?
 
Explain to me one thing, if the PPSH (or other machine pistols) was modelled correctly:
Battle for Berlin, the Russians:
Total operational dominance? Check.
Air superiority? Check.
Outnumbered the defender operationally and on the tactical level by multitudes? Check.
More than enough artillery? Check.
 
All that remains, to prevent a total wipeout of the defender and have a walk in the park, is at the tactical level things could go wrong.
And here comes CM's machine pistol model into play: lets assume the model was correct. So the side which has more machine pistols, has a huge advantage. That's what CM shows. Correct?
 
If the machine pistol model in CM was correct, that a squad equipped with them is quite easily capable to wipe out any other infantry within 50 meters without machine pistols, how is it possible, that the Russians suffered MUCH HIGHER LOSSES at the tactical level despite their CM-modelled PPSHs? Were the German Volkssturm and Hitlerjugend superhuman? I don't think so.
 
Let's have a look at the numbers: from roughly 34 million men and women in the Russian Army 84% (eightyfour!) fell, were wounded or captured! 84%!
Can anyone imagine Eisenhower, Patton or any other western commander, presenting himself as glorious victor, his army and his doctrine superior to all others, like the Russian commanders did, if an Eisenhower or Patton would have lost more than 80% of their men? Unimaginable. From a military standpoint IMO the numbers reflect a total disaster.
While German eastern front fighters reported, that the Russian Army in 1944 was more capable than in 1942, one thing didn't change: the Russians EVEN AT THE END suffered much heavier losses against outnumbered and undersupplied Germans. Even in the battle for Berlin, where the Germans lacked almost everything, the Russians bleeded out like a bucket with holes.
How is it possible, to suffer higher losses than the defender under the mentioned circumstances, if the CM machine pistol model was correct?
You can't get the real world results in CM, even if you try, as soon as machine pistols are involved.
 
Another argument that shows, that something is off with CM's machine pistol model:
If the model was correct, why were machine pistols abandoned all over the world for assault rifles?
The simple answer: the PPSH/machine pistol model in CM currently is not reflecting reality.
If I would guess, I'd say that machine pistols are WAAAY to deadly. They should be good for supressing only (and quickly running out of ammo, which I think is modelled correctly). But they should be awful for hitting anything further away than a few meters.
Shooting more bullets into one direction does not make the bullets hit better! Therefore the HANDLING of automatic weapons is significant. How good are they to get more than one bullet on the target (and also hit with single shots)?
THAT's why assault rifles are so much better than machine pistols!
CM does not seem to model that.
 
That brings up my third argument:
Btw it's also the reason, why the MG42 was such an incredible weapon for that time. Not because of the rounds it fires, which everybody focuses on, but because it gets the rounds on the target! Even more with the great tripod. With the tripod it is almost an insult to compare it to a Maxim! Nobody can aim with a Maxim and get a few bullets on a target - but even rookies can shoot with a MG42! It's like night and day.
I guess the difference is as big as machine pistols to assault rifles.
Quality of weapons does matter.

Battlefront has stated, that most players play against the AI.
I had liked to play against the AI, but IME it's biggest problem is, that after a few games it simply is not a tactical challenge. That is no criticism, but with the player's god view the AI can't match a human opponent.
What about making playing against the AI a real challenge?
Keep expereienced players playing and not get bored by playing the AI?
Make tiny scenarios even against the AI great and challenging again?
The existing "Iron mode" points into the right direction, but as it is now, I find it just annoying, because the not displayed info when a unit is selected, can be gathered by unselecting the unit.
For this mode to really work, it needs the players commitment for self restraint. Which is not good. The natural way to play is to use all allowed possibilities.
How about a more realistic iron mode, that goes one step further and which fully utilizes the available individual spotting abilities of units and the already present excellent chain of command net?
In that mode the player's ability to move over the battlefield freely would simply be removed!
The camera view would be fixed on his unit (with a certain tolerance, for example around 1-3 action squares; maybe dependable on unit characteristics; same with the ingame zooming option).
Multi story buildings, or hills would become really important - but instead of only benefitting the units in game, it would be the player himself who benefits from occupying tactically important spots.
Current iron mode could have a nice side effect with that restriction:
if a friendly unit gets lost from the chain of command or gets out of LOS, it could be denied to select that unit with the consequence the player would really lose contact to it. The only way to learn what's going on with that unit would be to search it with other unit(s). The information net would become incredibly important. Just like it is in reality.
Imagine the impact a heavy and successful artillery bombardement could have on the ability for the player, to understand, what is going on, if important HQs and their comm was disabled!
I think that mode would make it possible, for the very first time, to understand the amount of confusion, that can happen on the battlefield.
Ok, that is beyond the current engine, but imagine, if that mode would in a later engine iteration, also allow to simulate small arms friendly fire… Do you really want to area fire where there was a friendly unit? Incredible realism. Incredible chaos.
I am fully aware that mode would not be suited for beginners but for experienced players wo do not have the time or do not want to play against humans.
Or just players who would prefer to play tiny but challenging (without being unfair), scenarios against the AI.
Summary:
Realism:
Unmatched realism.
Fully utilization of the engine's C2 and spotting abilities.
Convergence of the simulated tactical benefits on the map for the units and the benefits to the player from tactically realistic play.
No perfect knowledge of the terrain before being there.

Improved attraction to players:
Playing the AI becomes true challenge - even for experienced players (but playing h2h not less interesting).
Playing tiny and short scenarios, even against the AI, a challenge. Say hello to customers with not enough time to play currently sized battles!
 

@RockinHarry
 
Honestly I see a problem with the fan-attitude of some posters here. They are shooting down good ideas all the time. I fear, if it was told prior, which values were changed and which ones are original, they would (maybe even subconsciously) prefer the unchanged ones. Psychology, you know.
 
Therefore I think blind tests are best to receive unbiased feedback. Afterwards ofcourse we should discuss what the effects of the values are.
 
For shader testing I think that it was good, if we would have certain test-scenes, to make reproducible screenshot comparisons among the different shaders. Therefore I plan to upload the savefiles, of the screenshots when I am finished uploading the pics.

Or do the authentic thing, since they are Russians.. select all your troops and give them one big assault command in the general direction of the enemy