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 Machor

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    Ontario, Canada
  1. Who's winning the tank war?

    Without taking the thread OT - wow! Medvedev has always been portrayed in the West as the 'good cop' vis-a-vis Putin; even the latest BBC long read on Russia mentions "The ambitious project was launched during a brief liberal “spring” when Dmitry Medvedev took over the presidency. The constitution barred Vladimir Putin from running for a third consecutive term so Medvedev kept his seat warm." (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/russia_election ) Anyways, dropping the political discussion with some food for thought on Western foreign policy 'expertise' brought to my attention by Burak Kadercan's twitter feed: "Guilty Men:" https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/04/24/guilty-men/
  2. Who's winning the tank war?

    Are you referring to Sergei Ivanov? I believe you. Can you give the name?
  3. Who's winning the tank war?

    Very interesting, thanks. It would be interesting to compare how South Korea, Sweden, and post-war Italy and Japan developed their defense industries - those being cases I could think of where exports were marginal or non-existent. I do recall reading that Japanese tanks are the most expensive in the world. Shhh, you just gave away the secret of Stryker.
  4. Who's winning the tank war?

    "When whole communities go to war - whole peoples, and especially civilized peoples - the reason always lies in some political situation, and the occasion is always due to some political object. War, therefore, is an act of policy. Were it a game of CM complete, untrammeled, absolute manifestation of violence (as the pure concept would require), war would of its own independent will usurp the place of policy the moment policy had brought it into being" - Clausewitz That credit goes to @Oleksandr. If you read the part of the thread that starts several posts before Steve's post that I linked to, you'll find a most informative discussion of tank thermal sights, including what is probably the most that a US armor officer can disclose without violating OPSEC.
  5. Who's winning the tank war?

    Beyond semiconductors and electronic engineering, there are challenges of materials and industrial engineering, which, for Russia, may be difficult to overcome as they require industrial reorganization and long-term investment:
  6. Turkish army enters Syria

    @Sgt.Squarehead I am describing the perspective of the Turkish public that supports the Afrin operation, not making a normative statement.
  7. Tactical Lifehack

    Indeed, which is why I would love to try it in CMFG - Combat Mission: Fulda Gap.
  8. Tactical Lifehack

    Here's what Steven Zaloga has to say in BMP Infantry Fighting Vehicle 1967-94 (Osprey, 1994): "In the eyes of many Soviet tacticians, the BMP-1 was not entirely suited to conventional warfare. On a nuclear battlefield, NATO anti-tank guided missile and rocket teams would be severely inhibited by the contaminated environment; under such conditions it was argued that the BMP-1 could reign freely at the head of combined tank-motor rifle groups. But in a conventional war, there would be a profusion of anti-tank teams. The lightly armoured BMP-1 was especially vulnerable to the wide range of infantry anti-tank weapons available to NATO. The Red Army questioned how the BMP could be employed in these different scenarios, and concluded that new tactics were required. It was accepted that BMPs could be employed in actions where there was little resistance, such as during the break-out phase of offensive operations, or in pursuit of a disorganised enemy force. When resistance was strong, the BMP-1 would be used as part of a tank-infantry team with the infantry dismounted. A platoon of tanks would be placed in a wave in the vanguard, since they were better able to absorb the blow of anti-armour defences. Infantry would follow 200 m behind the tanks to help root out enemy anti-armour teams. The BMPs would follow no more than 300-400 m behind the infantry, providing fire support for the tanks, and preparing to move forward to pick up the infantry once the opposition was overcome." (pp. 10-11) "Bronegruppa (armoured group) tactics are an evolution of BMP tactics, but using the vehicles for missions without their infantry dismounts. When a company or battalion of motor rifle troops dismount and dig in for defensive fighting, the unit commander can take some of his BMPs away to form a central bronegruppa reserve instead of leaving them dug in with their rifle squads; this gives the company or battalion commander a mobile reserve, and counterattack force that can be held back until the enemy's objective is clear." (pp. 37-8)
  9. I have no intention to take the thread OT; just a footnote to "the only truly progressive group:" For a scholarly take on the YPG, see the second half of "Twilight of the Kurds:" http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/16/twilight-of-the-kurds-iraq-syria-kurdistan/
  10. Tactical Lifehack

    I quickly looked up info only about the BMP-2, and found this: "The commander can exit the vehicle by two means - the hatch above him, or by spinning the turret to face the rear, and then going out through the passenger compartment. In the latter case, he must swing open the turret basket perimeter shield (shown below) to exit the turret." https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.ca/2016/05/bmp-2.html#comstat Given those restrictions for movement between the commander's position and the passenger compartment, I'd say the way this is modeled in the game for the BMP-2 is spot-on.
  11. Turkish army enters Syria

    And where's 2016?... Ah, here we go! Seriously, Western non-interference in the fall of Aleppo [in which the YPG played a crucial part - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Aleppo_offensive_(February_2016) - which may not be known or was forgotten by folks in the West, but certainly not by the FSA fighters in Afrin] and the humanitarian tragedy around it profoundly impacted the Turkish public in two ways: - It relativized the ethics of war, so that any criticism today can be brushed off with "What about Aleppo?" - It did the equivalent of tens of billions of Qatari / Saudi petrodollars in pushing the Islamist / Jihadist message that democracy and human rights are only a smokescreen for a war against (Sunni) Islam [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_against_Islam ]. I have seen a realistic proposition for getting out of this mess only today: "What Washington must do about Turkey and Afrin" https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/02/05/what-washington-must-do-about-turkey-and-afrin/?utm_term=.b2d435ee9135 In short, pressure the PKK to declare a cease-fire inside Turkey, quid pro quo for limiting the operation in Afrin. It would still give Erdogan his victory for reelection, but lifting the state of emergency would at least restore constitutional order, no matter how flawed the constitution. The part that the proposition does not account for is whether the PKK would be willing to go along with this. After all, they have everything to gain from a state of affairs where the only outlet for Kurdish dissent is through their armed ranks.
  12. My thoughts as well. The tank does not appear to have been in combat when the missile was fired; I think the YPG team may have infiltrated what was thought to be a secure area, or blended in with the civilians there. Also note the (white?) civilian car that was parked next to the tank, and sped away right after missile launch - proof that they detected the launch. In related news, the FSA intercepted a large shipment of ATGMs, including Konkurs, to the YPG, that originated from a town under Al Nusra control. The Syrian conflict's mess of disparate interests, loyalties, and alliances is certainly up there with the 30 Years War:
  13. The missile has been confirmed as a Konkurs (AT-5): Five tankers - including a lieutenant - were KIA. Does a LEO2 have space for five people inside?: Presumably the destroyed LEO2, with a crewman who was KIA. I assume he was the loader, as he held the lowest rank:
  14. A rule of thumb that I've picked up from playing Slitherine's Pike&Shot / Sengoku Jidai / Field of Glory 2 at their hardest settings is to give the AI a 50% point advantage, on top of whatever advantage it is already getting for attacking etc. To achieve this in CM, I increase the AI's points by 70% when I'm defending [the AI is very vulnerable to ambushes if you can set up one where the map designer didn't expect it], and decrease my own points by 40% when I'm attacking. If I give the AI even more points, that tends to kick in the "quantity has a quality of its own" phenomenon. I have been able to win total victories in CMBS rolling with Abrams against Russians in poor visibility, when I had the full 60% penalty for my own force. I remember that ancient movie every time I play against the AI - it should be made obligatory for all wargamers.
  15. Russian army under equipped?

    Bellingcat investigation by Nick Waters, an ex-British Army officer. Lots of images, an alleged video of the January 6 attack, and thorough analysis: "The Poor Man’s Air Force? Rebel Drones Attack Russia’s Airbase in Syria" https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2018/01/12/the_poor_mans_airforce/