Reverend Crass

An engine upgrade would be CM3.  Hopefully that will show up eventually.

Yes, I have done what I could to make it look ok. Still, I forget about looks when I play it  
By the way, simulation is not the problem here, it's underperforming gfx engine.
When I don't, I can imagine how much more popular that game would be if it would be brought to current standards and I am not really talking about AAA quality here.

As a new player to the series, I really appreciate the depth of the game and AI behaviour. UI is really neat too, it's fun to use. However,  I find performance and overall look of the game off putting. The 3D models of the armour are decent to very good, but terrain, especially lighting and shading is something which is grossly outdated and not up to the even low end modern standards.
The game performs badly and there is really no technical excuse for that by looking what and how things are rendered.  AI and pathfinding definitely takes some processing power, but on modern even mid-end hardware it's not an issue and a game like that shouldn't ever drop frames to low 20s. (8700k@5ghz, 2080ti, 32 gigs of fast ram, I don't have any mechanical drives)
I have shown it to a couple of my friends who are massive strategy fans and all I got was "sorry I can't get over how bad it looks and runs". 
I understand that small team, low resources etc. There are widely available graphics engines out there like Unity which would make the game perform order of magnitude better and look much better, even with very little change to existing assets. There is a cost to port, it's not as massive as it seems, assuming there is a will , long term the cost of engine upkeep/upgrades can be lower than maintaining a homebrew solution. On top of that, I'd happily pay for an upgrade like that.
Having said that, I do not regret my purchase, quite the contrary - the gameplay makes up for it, despite sometimes feeling like I am held to a ransom playing a badly looking/running game, because "niche games". This makes me very hesitant with purchasing other games in the series, I'd buy them all if they would look and perform better.

As a new player to the series, I really appreciate the depth of the game and AI behaviour. UI is really neat too, it's fun to use. However,  I find performance and overall look of the game off putting. The 3D models of the armour are decent to very good, but terrain, especially lighting and shading is something which is grossly outdated and not up to the even low end modern standards.
The game performs badly and there is really no technical excuse for that by looking what and how things are rendered.  AI and pathfinding definitely takes some processing power, but on modern even mid-end hardware it's not an issue and a game like that shouldn't ever drop frames to low 20s. (8700k@5ghz, 2080ti, 32 gigs of fast ram, I don't have any mechanical drives)
I have shown it to a couple of my friends who are massive strategy fans and all I got was "sorry I can't get over how bad it looks and runs". 
I understand that small team, low resources etc. There are widely available graphics engines out there like Unity which would make the game perform order of magnitude better and look much better, even with very little change to existing assets. There is a cost to port, it's not as massive as it seems, assuming there is a will , long term the cost of engine upkeep/upgrades can be lower than maintaining a homebrew solution. On top of that, I'd happily pay for an upgrade like that.
Having said that, I do not regret my purchase, quite the contrary - the gameplay makes up for it, despite sometimes feeling like I am held to a ransom playing a badly looking/running game, because "niche games". This makes me very hesitant with purchasing other games in the series, I'd buy them all if they would look and perform better.

A hard nut to crack indeed! It took me at least 6 tries to win it (WEGO).
I suggest loading your grunts with ammo and Panzerfaust rounds before you start.
Your troops need to find cover fast because those BMPs  will destroy everything that is spotted. IMO the best place to be is on the right hill (the one with the mosque on top). IIRC I rushed two Fuchs to the right hill, one to the entrance of the village and one to the left hill. Then unload all the grunts, split them in two sub-teams and keep them in cover.

Then I sent my two half-squads inside the village.
The Fuchs stay back under cover and only sneak and peak to lay some suppressive fire, preferably from a hull down position.
On the right hill: one half-squad inside the mosque, the other one waiting outside. I'd pull out of the mosque every now and then to avoid returning fire.
2/3 of the Reds went to the village, the remaining 1/3 to the mosque where they were ambushed and dealt with at close range. The rest of the battle consisted in finding the remaining BMPs,  distracting them and nailing them with Panzerfausts. The top of the mosque is a good place for BMP hunting, but you can't stay there for long as it is so exposed.

As the left hill was free of enemy troops I was able to sneak my grunts into the trees.
One last thing: at the end of the battle, there was one BMP remaining in the village, at the foot of the hill, and no Panzerfaust left. I managed to rush a Fuchs behind it and kill it with MG fire aimed at its butt! The trick is you can't fire Fuchs' MG at BMP because the IA will ignore your target order as it considers it to be a waste of ammo (very frustrating!). Just use area fire instead: it will work wonders as long as your target can't move easily.
 

Load up the panzerfaust warheads. Then, utilize the "gamey flag rush" tactic. Unload, await the repercussions, and the have your survivors slog it out.
 
You did keep a reserve? Use that to maneuver the enemy out of position.
 
If none of that helps, open the editor and add a Leopard. Or two.

Angles on a single tank round...

 

 

 

 
Mord.
 

In July 2018 Steve posted something about game engines which I'm paraphrasing below: 
Eventually we will have a new game engine.  Obviously it will be written with contemporary technology in mind and won't be OpenGL as we view it as a dead end.  It will also benefit from 20 years of experience with how best to simulate tactical warfare on a computer.  It's only a matter of when, not if.   

CM does simulate some things to a deeper level than many big popular games. It's mostly about the spotting, and that's a key part of what makes the game interesting. But that's done in cycles, not continually.
And I think most of the work is done when you press "end turn" anyway. That little bar that fills up before you see the replay of the turn.
 
 

That there is pretty much the wet dream of this entire community. Who knows, maybe they are secretly working on an entirely new engine all along and one day we will be pleasantly surprised.

Yes, I have done what I could to make it look ok. Still, I forget about looks when I play it  
By the way, simulation is not the problem here, it's underperforming gfx engine.
When I don't, I can imagine how much more popular that game would be if it would be brought to current standards and I am not really talking about AAA quality here.

Thing is the CM engine is more CPU heavy than GPU heavy, so better and better GPU will unfortunately not help much. It is also on OpenGL. Main thing why it can't be compared to a RTS game that on the surface looks much better, and that is the vast simulation going on under the hood. Especially in large/huge scenarios. So that is the tradeoff for realism under the current engine.
There are settings that can help. I find that shadows look the worst in sunny conditions, which is pretty common in Syria. What you can do is open a scenario in the editor and change the weather to "hazy". Won't change LOS range much but will make shadows better. Also try turning on/off shaders in-game as that can help too. 
There are also mods that can make terrain and buildings look better. Sounds can be improved.
So what I'm trying to say is to make it look/perform the best under the conditions at hand - and then enjoy the ride!

As a new player to the series, I really appreciate the depth of the game and AI behaviour. UI is really neat too, it's fun to use. However,  I find performance and overall look of the game off putting. The 3D models of the armour are decent to very good, but terrain, especially lighting and shading is something which is grossly outdated and not up to the even low end modern standards.
The game performs badly and there is really no technical excuse for that by looking what and how things are rendered.  AI and pathfinding definitely takes some processing power, but on modern even mid-end hardware it's not an issue and a game like that shouldn't ever drop frames to low 20s. (8700k@5ghz, 2080ti, 32 gigs of fast ram, I don't have any mechanical drives)
I have shown it to a couple of my friends who are massive strategy fans and all I got was "sorry I can't get over how bad it looks and runs". 
I understand that small team, low resources etc. There are widely available graphics engines out there like Unity which would make the game perform order of magnitude better and look much better, even with very little change to existing assets. There is a cost to port, it's not as massive as it seems, assuming there is a will , long term the cost of engine upkeep/upgrades can be lower than maintaining a homebrew solution. On top of that, I'd happily pay for an upgrade like that.
Having said that, I do not regret my purchase, quite the contrary - the gameplay makes up for it, despite sometimes feeling like I am held to a ransom playing a badly looking/running game, because "niche games". This makes me very hesitant with purchasing other games in the series, I'd buy them all if they would look and perform better.

Having all games on one platform like DCS would be great, but I understand it could be difficult.
 
I am new here btw, hello everyone.
 

Having all games on one platform like DCS would be great, but I understand it could be difficult.
 
I am new here btw, hello everyone.