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:

      -showui

      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

KL2004

Members
  • Content count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    lmao I think Kim would like free McDonalds for life... (consider it a very sly form of assassination!)
  2. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    I always thought the same. This is a guy who wants to make sure he and his best friends are immune to harm. They won't want to attack first, that would bring wreckage on them. If we just cool down and make sure they are assured mutual destruction if they attack, I think they'll continue with the sex slave massage girls. And whatever we think about that, it is a war we should wage by culture. You know, like Civ. We should build some culture wonders in Japan and South Korea.
  3. Th future of armour

    Can we just not agree on sharknadoes?
  4. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    If they did, that would be the last they could ever expect help from Russia or China I hope. Still not much consolation for the families of Seoul.
  5. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    Enjoying the dialogue too. Thanks.
  6. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    That leaves totally overwhelming and defeating, now, those who are pursuing them, and the casualties that would incur. Is that suffering worth it? And as far as NK, they already have it. I get what you're saying. My response (be it worthy or not) is that we either stop everyone by force or start accepting it.
  7. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    The resultant being we don't go to war. Sorry if I missed what you meant! I figure you're saying that there are people who will initiate nuclear war anyhow, even if state actors don't. Before I respond, is that correct? If so can you help me before I respond with some argument or link to why they would?
  8. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    Why not just embrace that nuclear weapons are a thing that all industrial countries now can arm themselves with, and start dealing with that as a reality and settling things based on that new context rather than making the transition between conventional and nuclear weapons a massive problem in human history? The best argument I can think of to the question is that leadership can go to bunkers and do bad things to everyone without immediately being harmed. But these are people who generally want to live -- they harm people yes, but not to the extent that they climb out of a bunker to nuclear ruin. It may be that this time in human history involves nations being ruled by people who, if they establish strong police states, can deter other rulers from harming them. And we just have to suffer and let suffer through that. The whole problem seems to be based on the fact that some states don't like what other states do with their people. If we can all just obliterate one another into a context that means war always has to be at a high price though, that's a reality. Plenty of states were awful to their people throughout history because no matter how much the good people lamented them, they could not harm them without enormous injury and sacrifice. It seems this is just an adjustment back from the dominance of a very humane world power to the fact that inhumane regimes are now able to make it impossible for us to hurt them, and because they hollar about it, we feel offended. We had the chance a long time ago, and didn't do it. It's unfortunate that it takes this slap in the face to recognize it. Solution? Totally overwhelm the areas that could potentially become nuclear, now. Those that have become nuclear and have hostages, let them be. Wage a war of thought. Education. Culture. imho. <3
  9. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    I'm not convinced at all yet. I think he wants to preserve his kingdom and this is the way they're making sure they're scary enough not to mess with. If they attack first they lose. The whole point of the strategy is to show that if attacked or interfered with they will be a big problem for everyone. Secondarily, to show the population that they are strongly lead.
  10. Th future of armour

    Shhh! A really much more challenging argument would be whether armored divisions are obsolete as means towards any potential ends that normal real people could approve of. I'm not talking about the guys in the bunkers, i.e. I could offer my opinion if asked, but I'm not trying to do that.
  11. There used to be a blog by an East Indian fellow, I can't remember his last name, the first was Ravi. He was pretty knowledgeable and open to corrections. Anything like that now? I am not looking for a political blog. Something that objectively evaluates and comments on the situations in the world from a technological and realistic sense. Thanks
  12. Th future of armour

    The whole analysis treats tanks as infantry support. That's not what they do. It's about full mechanized warfare on large scales and, lately, NBC capacity too. Against fixed defensive infantry tanks have lots of problems. That's why part of the combat team is SPA and nastier things, which hopefully will never be used. No realistic situation for the USA will involve tanks operating under hostile air superiority. At worst if that happens, the attrition rate for aircraft will be higher than that of the tanks. They aren't that easy to find, and tanks can "go to ground" and hide in ways that aircraft can't. The whole error is in an original assumption that a tank is supposed to be a monster in a pitched battle. That's not what they are about. They are challenging to deal with in a pitched fight but that's not what they do. They mobilize firepower enormously along with the whole rest of their division as part of a team. As old as Guderian. Airpower has it's own sphere too which is getting bigger. But it needs to be considered with all the support it requires too. "Tanks" or "Fighter Bombers" or any weapon like that needs to be considered as part of the team. The team *is* the weapon. Not just one type of machine. imho. <3
  13. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    Would traditional MAD not work between North and South Korea? (And Japan) Read the two articles and listened to the radio program above, thanks.
  14. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    If Kim is the problem and only problem, it's a simple hostage situation. Seoul is the problem, and only problem. Potential destruction to the city. Meanwhile the US has just had it's own destroyed by hurricanes and has figured out, hopefully, how to handle that. If escalation isn't a deterrent I'm not sure what would stop the US from giving it to NK and ending that problem now. If I lived in Seoul I'd rather shelter or evacuate and end this insecurity than live with it getting worse. I really don't know anything though.
  15. Good analysis of NK dynamic?

    I really don't know enough to have an informed opinion on it, but I thought Kim was a figurehead for the senior army staff. I could be way off!
×