Panzer_Freak

AMD graphic card?

As Redwolf guessed... you likely have an AMD Radeon videocard and the latest drivers have a bug that causes a white flash in the screen right before an explosion. The temporary answer is to downgrade your video driver. You'll suffer some much slower load times, but the white flash should be gone:
Screen flashes white with explosions

Hunt mode for infantry are all to exhausting, unrealistic exhausting. I can not recall that I have ever been that much more exhausted from sneaking and wtaching, when enemy contact is expected. Infantry get exhausted as hell as it is, why do Hunt mode exhaust them so damn much? Should not Hunt mode just be the mode where they always stop at contact instead? The move options now is good, the faster the more likely they only stop briefly or not at all to fire back. But it is unrealistic that Hunt mode are that more tiring for the infantry. I would like Hunt mode to be a slower advance and where they always stop at contact. Should it be more exhausting than just Normal move? Of course, when one cocentrate and have the weapon in ready position that is a little bit more exhausting than just marching ahead. But this much? Not in my opinion.

Hunt mode for infantry are all to exhausting, unrealistic exhausting. I can not recall that I have ever been that much more exhausted from sneaking and wtaching, when enemy contact is expected. Infantry get exhausted as hell as it is, why do Hunt mode exhaust them so damn much? Should not Hunt mode just be the mode where they always stop at contact instead? The move options now is good, the faster the more likely they only stop briefly or not at all to fire back. But it is unrealistic that Hunt mode are that more tiring for the infantry. I would like Hunt mode to be a slower advance and where they always stop at contact. Should it be more exhausting than just Normal move? Of course, when one cocentrate and have the weapon in ready position that is a little bit more exhausting than just marching ahead. But this much? Not in my opinion.

Hunt mode for infantry are all to exhausting, unrealistic exhausting. I can not recall that I have ever been that much more exhausted from sneaking and wtaching, when enemy contact is expected. Infantry get exhausted as hell as it is, why do Hunt mode exhaust them so damn much? Should not Hunt mode just be the mode where they always stop at contact instead? The move options now is good, the faster the more likely they only stop briefly or not at all to fire back. But it is unrealistic that Hunt mode are that more tiring for the infantry. I would like Hunt mode to be a slower advance and where they always stop at contact. Should it be more exhausting than just Normal move? Of course, when one cocentrate and have the weapon in ready position that is a little bit more exhausting than just marching ahead. But this much? Not in my opinion.

I have I multiple example when 7,92 rounds hits the enginge room en masse and the damage indicator is not even turning yellow, I did a test with 13 crack jeeps with high morale going up against a crack MG42 at 250+ meters and the result so far is that the jeeps are not invunerable - but they are to unrealisticly strong. In this perfect set up with open terrain where the jeeps rushing in with out caution or in any tactical manner and hardly any possibilities to retreat in shelter the absolute majority was knocked out eventually - but they had in my opinion to damn good resiliance. Two jeeps actually went up in flames after just a few burst, so it is not extremly unbalanced, but no one can argue that it is normal that a engine take multiple hits and never ever recieves damage from it.
 
It seems like engines is seen as armor in this game. 10 destroyed, 2 retreated and 1 dismounted/crew killed was the final result. Watch the video and notice the damage indicator for the engine, even though they where hit hard nothing happens with the damage indicator - this do inflict the game, I will not call it game breaking but it gives soft skin vehicles to much resiliance and that makes things some what unrealistic and unbalanced. The solution is quite easy in my opinion, make the engine take damage when hit and the unbalance is fixed in regards to my view:
 

Hunt mode for infantry are all to exhausting, unrealistic exhausting. I can not recall that I have ever been that much more exhausted from sneaking and wtaching, when enemy contact is expected. Infantry get exhausted as hell as it is, why do Hunt mode exhaust them so damn much? Should not Hunt mode just be the mode where they always stop at contact instead? The move options now is good, the faster the more likely they only stop briefly or not at all to fire back. But it is unrealistic that Hunt mode are that more tiring for the infantry. I would like Hunt mode to be a slower advance and where they always stop at contact. Should it be more exhausting than just Normal move? Of course, when one cocentrate and have the weapon in ready position that is a little bit more exhausting than just marching ahead. But this much? Not in my opinion.

I will set up a test in the near future. I am also very interested how much damage engine takes. I counted 20+ hits to the engine compartment and the jeep kept retreating behind the knoll in the turn after. A engine would for sure be totally screwed after that much punishment. In a CMRT-game a while ago I noticed the same thing. One of my trucks tog alot of hits to the engine, no damage at all. Damage indicator was still green, not even yellow.

I have played alot of games now. When it comes to AA-efficiency I am a bit disappointed, many AA-pieces are good to use against ground targets. But I have no good experience of AA vs aircrafts. They seem not to throw them of target and not a single aircraft has been shot down by my AA so far. I usually have a minimum of two AA-pieces per game (usually playing large, and a few time huge games). I usally use 20mm Flakvierling, 37mm Flak 36, 40mm Bofors, and the soviets 40mm as well. I have so far never used the 88 or the soviets 90mm AA piece. Do I have had bad luck or are AA useless vs aircraft?
AA during WWII did not shot down everything, that I am aware of, but by this time when I have played alot of games they should have knocked out at least some of them. It does not even seem as they are able to disturb the planes when attacking and the aircrafts also seems to have a unrealistic good aim and detection ability (compared to battlereports from WWII).
I really likes this game when it comes to realism, but in my experience the aircrafts vs ground targets and AA vs aircraft is that aircraft are unrealistic good at what they do. They seems to have better aim then modern CAS-aircraft and AA seems useless against aircraft. I actually would tell my AA not to shot at aicraft if I could, because it is a waste ammo, and when an aicraft attacks it also reveals how many AA-pieces I have invested in. I will from now on only play games with out Aircrafts, which is boring because I do not like to have to many house rules when playing. At least the aircrafts should be possible to knock out some planes and also have the possibility to disturb airplanes when they attacking. No more aircrafts in a game before this is fixed. Or have I only had bad luck?

It's a shame that the northern theatre is rarely explored in media. Rarely do we see naval games about the Arctic and Baltic, and I've almost never seen the Lapland War in any sort of game. Even the Continuation War and Courland Pocket often get swept under the rug. I would love a module that built upon RT, to add Army Group North, Northern Front and III Corps. A big campaign for the III Corps, fighting against Soviets, and later, Germans. I'd prefer it to the Vistula-Oder/Berlin one.

Well, not much changes I would say. Good that they fixed the arty/cover-thing that was totally unlogical. I still can not understand why they do not fix the buidling protection, love the game but it is actually crappy that a thin wooden wall has the protection value of reinforced concrete for example. Totally unlogical how they handle the protection levels at this moment,  just cant see why and how it would be a big thing to fix it.

Actually extract it to an empty folder - there should not be any additional files around the install or you will be sad.
Then just make sure the path it wants to install to is the one where the existing game .exe is located. It does a good job guessing but doesn't always get it correct.

Extract it anywhere. When you run the setup program, it'll try to find and suggest your CM install directory, which might be something like "C:\Program Files (x86)\Battlefront\Combat Mission Fortress Italy".

CMBN has a different default install path, and if you've moved it it could have trouble finding it - you can select the correct folder manually.

That should be it.

I am a stalwart supporter of BFC, been playing the games for longer than I can remember. I made a modest contribution to the development of CMFI some years ago.
Yes, waiting for the patch has been unusually testing, but this game system has so many facets that even though I played less I still had a lot of fun making maps and designing scenarios, not to mention fun testing them.
 
These guys are a small team of extremely dedicated enthusiasts. They give 100%. I still haven't found anything remotely approaching their product for the kind of game play I appreciate. I have total confidence in their judgment and integrity. And I don't begrudge them for one minute the long gestation of this patch, or the confusion over exactly when it will be released.
Thank you Steve, thank you Charles, thank you everyone else who put their time and effort in bringing these games to us.
I've gone through a rough patch that has lasted nearly ten years so far. If and when I get back on my feet, I will be glad to lend a hand again. I hope it will be soon (can't give a precise date though... sorry, I couldn't resist that :-) ). In the mean time, I don't mind saying that playing your games has often been the only source of fun and relaxation for me, and a good way to avoid going mad during the long spells when real life got held up in limbo.

Howza'bout being able to adjust the loadout  of your supply truck platoon.  It seems to be available in limited form for the Axis side in both the Quick Battle and Scenario Editor purchase screens, but nothing for the Allies  Of course; total volume per vehicle would be fixed but the type & balance of items would be adjustable, increasing an item would result in a list of the remaining items to be adjusted downward.  Everything would be date sensitive of course (Proximity Fuses, anyone?).  Whose on board with this concept?

IMHO these games are AWESOME. If I had a Shelby Cobra I would just drive the hell out of it and never complain about the tune ups 😎

there HAS NEVER BEEN GAME BREAKING BUGS.
Now the bugs in the 4.0 version is game breaking  in a sense in arty  and infantry reaction to it if you are not accepting of it, but all it has ever taken is to play the game in version 3.0 before that change was made.
what you have is 4.0 format not a good format for play against the AI if you are using arty. Any other way the game is played has been fine, 4.0 is good except for a few other issues.
For those needing to bomb the heck out of AI troops, 3.0 was always still available.
Yes, was it a issue that buying the upgrade and not getting the fix all this time was bad form. Of course it was, but don't act like the game is been unplayable, for it has not.
You all know 4.01 fixes the problems, the releases are close at hand, after all this time you might as well take your chill pills because nothing on your part is making it happen any faster.
 

With regard to a pack for CMRT. I'd say forget the Hungarians and  Romanians and chose the Finns. I loved them in CMBB. Amount of work is doable and also the terrain/buildings won't cause too much trouble.

LOL I may well have learned it form testing that @MOS:96B2P did.

Love the game, the most accurate and realistic so far (it is of course impossible to get a computer game realistic with a big R). I am promoting this game to all strategic nerds I know and also to my NCO and officer colleagues. It is only one thing with this game that is really irritating. Why do paper thin wooden walls of a builidng have the protection value of concrete walls? Tanks has so realistic penetration values, why do not building has that too? Will this be fixed in the patch?
I also have my hopes that all the issues with fortifications (trenches and fox holes) are fixed, making them worth the cost and of course that the units do not run away when arty hits them. One of the points of digging in is to resist arty better, then it is quite "fantastic" when the units running away from shelter - out in the open. Strange behavior if the unit are not paniced, then strange behavior are realistic.
There is of course other little things with line of sight-tool and also line of fire vs line of sight (as you see it from ground camera view), but I have understood that it is quite hard to make this work with out a new engine or something (I am computer "handicaped" and are not interested with the technical disucussion what is the difference between engines, patches, DLC and all other fancy pancy names) and one learns the work arounds to the LOS-issues any way.
Lastly, adding to the discussion of waiting for new patches/updates. Better wait for a patch that is good than them rushing it and it becomes ****. I have quit playing Steel Division, not realistic enough (when I found this game) and I would still quit playing it due to their crappy hurry up updates, making the game more and more un-playable.
This game is good because I have noticed that the crew behind it puts down great effort to make it realistic and still playable, of course critic are always good but for my part I rather wait for a good patch then them throwing out crap.

and to expand on this, also probably misleading is all the many tracers going through walls and pretending bullets to penetrate, when they do actually not. With tracers removed and building penetration sounds emphasized, one gets a somewhat better impression of what actually happens. Also walls and windows are not quite WYSIWYG. It seems any openings are abstractly enlarged, maybe in order to help on buidling occupants spotting and targeting. Just bits of brain farting though.
Edit: There´s some indep (city) buildings from CMBN Market Garden module that have huge windows, making the whole thing an avoid at all cost death trap. So there´s still some variation, which can be substantial. Guess the other games have similar candidates.

Love the game, the most accurate and realistic so far (it is of course impossible to get a computer game realistic with a big R). I am promoting this game to all strategic nerds I know and also to my NCO and officer colleagues. It is only one thing with this game that is really irritating. Why do paper thin wooden walls of a builidng have the protection value of concrete walls? Tanks has so realistic penetration values, why do not building has that too? Will this be fixed in the patch?
I also have my hopes that all the issues with fortifications (trenches and fox holes) are fixed, making them worth the cost and of course that the units do not run away when arty hits them. One of the points of digging in is to resist arty better, then it is quite "fantastic" when the units running away from shelter - out in the open. Strange behavior if the unit are not paniced, then strange behavior are realistic.
There is of course other little things with line of sight-tool and also line of fire vs line of sight (as you see it from ground camera view), but I have understood that it is quite hard to make this work with out a new engine or something (I am computer "handicaped" and are not interested with the technical disucussion what is the difference between engines, patches, DLC and all other fancy pancy names) and one learns the work arounds to the LOS-issues any way.
Lastly, adding to the discussion of waiting for new patches/updates. Better wait for a patch that is good than them rushing it and it becomes ****. I have quit playing Steel Division, not realistic enough (when I found this game) and I would still quit playing it due to their crappy hurry up updates, making the game more and more un-playable.
This game is good because I have noticed that the crew behind it puts down great effort to make it realistic and still playable, of course critic are always good but for my part I rather wait for a good patch then them throwing out crap.

Love the game, the most accurate and realistic so far (it is of course impossible to get a computer game realistic with a big R). I am promoting this game to all strategic nerds I know and also to my NCO and officer colleagues. It is only one thing with this game that is really irritating. Why do paper thin wooden walls of a builidng have the protection value of concrete walls? Tanks has so realistic penetration values, why do not building has that too? Will this be fixed in the patch?
I also have my hopes that all the issues with fortifications (trenches and fox holes) are fixed, making them worth the cost and of course that the units do not run away when arty hits them. One of the points of digging in is to resist arty better, then it is quite "fantastic" when the units running away from shelter - out in the open. Strange behavior if the unit are not paniced, then strange behavior are realistic.
There is of course other little things with line of sight-tool and also line of fire vs line of sight (as you see it from ground camera view), but I have understood that it is quite hard to make this work with out a new engine or something (I am computer "handicaped" and are not interested with the technical disucussion what is the difference between engines, patches, DLC and all other fancy pancy names) and one learns the work arounds to the LOS-issues any way.
Lastly, adding to the discussion of waiting for new patches/updates. Better wait for a patch that is good than them rushing it and it becomes ****. I have quit playing Steel Division, not realistic enough (when I found this game) and I would still quit playing it due to their crappy hurry up updates, making the game more and more un-playable.
This game is good because I have noticed that the crew behind it puts down great effort to make it realistic and still playable, of course critic are always good but for my part I rather wait for a good patch then them throwing out crap.

Thank you, Steve. Much appreciated!
First drowsy observations behind my first cup of coffee this morning:
1.Module 1. So more modules for CMRT are still planned. Great to hear! Still hope for Finland-fanboys, like me.
2.New regions. So Hungary and the Baltics hopefully. Not that different from Eastern Germany, but still.  
3.More attention to ruined landscape/buildings. Just what the doctor ordered. I love the winter terrain of CMFB, so more of  that please.
4.Crazy late war German stuff. So the Sd.Kfz. 251/22  and Sd.Kfz. 234/4  are in. Superb! No need for the Maus and that sort of nonsense. Panther F with infra red would be nice though. Never entered service though.
But the best news of all: the module will probably be released before the end of this year. Didn't expect that, to be honest. Fingers crossed.
Volksgrenadiers are covered by  the progression of standard Heer formations, I suppose?
 
 

A twenty tile radius at one km sounds a bit much for me, but half that might be okay.
Actually, I feel like the anxiety over sound placement is a bit exaggerated. Sound placement was a regular phenomenon during battle; the bigger the bang, the more accurate the placement, other factors such as wind direction and volume being equal. Also, the more rounds fired from a given location, the more accurate the placement is apt to become. That's why in an ambush it was desirable to fire a few shots and then displace to a second location and then perhaps to a third.
Michael