Jump to content
Battlefront.com

Black Sea v1.04 released!

Recommended Posts

Just now, Battlefront.com said:

In 1997 we were still getting used to good beers being available on tap.  My how things have changed since!

Steve

What do you mean, Guinness is still plenty available. :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sburke said:

What do you mean, Guinness is still plenty available. :D 

As someone who has purchased several hundred kegs of Guinness (long story), I am fully aware of that fact :D  Believe me, I'm no Baneman!  But I do like the options we now have.  Especially because I'm a Belgian beer snob!

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Baneman said:

Belgian beer indeed rocks.

In 1989 I bought a bottle of Belgian beer (the brand that had a cork instead of the flip off cap) and thought it was the best beer I ever had. Time passed but I never forgot the experience. Some time around 2005 the local wine merchant was able to identify the brand and ordered a case, of which I bought half a dozen bottles to try out. Sadly, it was not the same, in fact I thought it was pretty awful. It now had an excruciatingly tart flavor, as if someone had squeezed a wedge of lemon into each bottle before sealing it. Somehow Fate had managed to give me a raw deal once again.

:(

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

As someone who has purchased several hundred kegs of Guinness (long story), I am fully aware of that fact :D  Believe me, I'm no Baneman!  But I do like the options we now have.  Especially because I'm a Belgian beer snob!

Steve

Same thing happened in Australia when a whole generation realised there were better international beers out there. Regardless, consumption of alcohol via Beer on a per Capita basis has been falling for some time as we acquire more diverse pallets. :P (Yes out central statistical agency collects data on alcohol consumption).

Alcohol%20Consumption%20per%20Capita_zps

 

As for Black Sea, good patch that's got me having a crack at the modern era again. Looking forward to the (I assume) Marine module and hope some non-conventional forces also get a look in to mix it up a little.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have upgraded to 1.04, but I get all kinds of weird WW2 reference labels over my icons.

First, I thought it was because of some interface mod, but unmodded it does the same. For example, on the weapons icons I get a white overlay label on some referencing WW2 weaponry. Unit type in the HQ box is wrong as well.

Not for all units, but for some. Does anyone else see this?

EDIT: Nevermind, it was due to some leftover folders by the installer in the Data folder.
 Did some searching on this forum and aparently the Data folder should only contain the .brz files, nothing more.
Got rid of the two patcher folders (which contained .brz files) and everything is fixed again.

Edited by Yskonyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2016 at 0:06 PM, antaress73 said:

v1.04 Patch Notes:

Infantry Weapons:

* Effectiveness of the M-25 CDTE's HE grenade has been increased against enemy troops.
* More models of recoilless weapons can fire indoors, and with less suppression on the firing troops.
* Infantry mortar teams will now use their mortars when given a Target Light area fire command.
* FIXED: Disposable AT weapons not disappearing from the soldier's kit after use.
* FIXED: Igla S missile offset from tube when launching.
* FIXED: Rarely an AT-14 team would be unable to finish deploying the ATGM inside houses.
* FIXED: M25 CDTE has 5-round magazine.

Vehicles:

* IFVs with cannons and ATGMs will more intelligently choose which weapon systems to engage enemy vehicles with.
* Abrams tank side turret armor (both base armor and ERA) is now less effective at defending against tandem HEAT warheads.
* Russian Kontakt-1 and Kontakt-5 ERA are now less effective at defending against tandem HEAT warheads.
* Abrams smoke deploys slightly more slowly.
* Ukrainian tank ammunition loads have been adjusted. Oplot-M now carries APFSDS 3BM42 Mango (instead of Zubr), and T-64BV now carries APFSDS 3BM22 Zokolka (instead of APFSDS 3BM42 Mango). T-6DBV now carries 3BK18 HEAT shells instead of 3BK18M.
* BTR-80A, BTR-82, and BTR-82A are now more willing to area fire in low visibility conditions.
* 2K22M Tunguska does not have thermal optics (the 2K22M1 still does).
* FIXED: The AT-10's tandem HEAT warhead from the BMP-3/3M was too weak against ERA. 
* FIXED: Sometimes Bradley and Abrams ERA blocks would fail to function, allowing HEAT warheads to travel through them and hit the base armor unimpeded.
* FIXED: At close LOD, BMP-2M would look like a BMP-2.

Support:

* FIXED: UAV thermal vision works better in poor weather.

Quick Battles:

* QB prices of fortifications have been increased.
* Tunguska SPAA QB price increased.

Artwork:

* Improved textures for M110.
* Improved textures for Skif.
* Improved textures for AK-74M.
* Added muddy textures for MT-12 Rapira.
* Corrected some mismapped textures in a few flavor objects.
* Small adjustments to a variety of vehicle models.

Misc Bug Fixes

* FIXED: M1167 Humvees would sometimes count as a tank kill on the AAR screen.
* FIXED: Unit crossing bridge would sometimes get stuck or needlessly zigzag.
* FIXED: Sometimes a wire fence would stay upright after a vehicle rolled through it.
* FIXED: A specific Independant House building model had opaque windows.
* FIXED: Other minor misc bug fixes.
 

@Battlefront.com or other staff, It would be very useful I think if someone edited my first post in this thread (post #3), obliterating all the incorrect content there, and replacing it with the correct 1.0.4 patch readme?

 

Otherwise I think many will get the wrong impression?

 

Unfortunately there is a timeout on editing ones on posts on these forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Jammersix said:

Real Men drink Irish Death.

Steve: I acknowledge your warning. I'll consider the implications.

What I say here isn't what matters.

Correct.

20 hours ago, Yskonyn said:

I have upgraded to 1.04, but I get all kinds of weird WW2 reference labels over my icons.

First, I thought it was because of some interface mod, but unmodded it does the same. For example, on the weapons icons I get a white overlay label on some referencing WW2 weaponry. Unit type in the HQ box is wrong as well.

Not for all units, but for some. Does anyone else see this?

EDIT: Nevermind, it was due to some leftover folders by the installer in the Data folder.
 Did some searching on this forum and aparently the Data folder should only contain the .brz files, nothing more.
Got rid of the two patcher folders (which contained .brz files) and everything is fixed again.

Yes, whenever someone sees crazy text it's because of some sort of BRZ problem.  Either a BRZ that shouldn't be in the Data folder is present or a BRZ that should be present is missing.  User mods can also sometimes cause problems.

18 hours ago, gnarly said:

@Battlefront.com or other staff, It would be very useful I think if someone edited my first post in this thread (post #3), obliterating all the incorrect content there, and replacing it with the correct 1.0.4 patch readme?

Dang, I thought I did that already!  I'll take care of it. Thanks.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

Am I just imagining things, or did breaching kits get stripped out of US infantry squads? I noticed they were gone this afternoon when I was playing the last scenario of the Training Campaign.

Did some more investigating on this issue. Bought some infantry in the QB section and all the squads I looked at were without breaching kits. I had a game going with the first scenario of the American Campaign that I began before applying the patch, and the infantry in it all had breaching kits, which they retain after applying the patch. However, just as a test, I started a new playing of that scenario now, and the infantry all lack breaching kits.

So apparently all games begun pre-patch have kits and all games begun post-patch are without them. My question is: Was this a deliberate design choice by BFC? And if not, can I please get my breaching kits back?

Michael

Edited by Michael Emrys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2016 at 3:27 AM, Michael Emrys said:

Did some more investigating on this issue. Bought some infantry in the QB section and all the squads I looked at were without breaching kits. I had a game going with the first scenario of the American Campaign that I began before applying the patch, and the infantry in it all had breaching kits, which they retain after applying the patch. However, just as a test, I started a new playing of that scenario now, and the infantry all lack breaching kits.

So apparently all games begun pre-patch have kits and all games begun post-patch are without them. My question is: Was this a deliberate design choice by BFC? And if not, can I please get my breaching kits back?

Michael

Michael, thanks for the report. I've verified that v1.03 had 9 man US squads equipped with two breaching kits. (And by, "I've verified", I mean that I asked around and Vanir ausf B gave me that answer. ;) )

I'll report it. Let's see what happens.

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, c3k said:

Michael, thanks for the report. I've verified that v1.03 had 9 man US squads equipped with two breaching kits. (And by, "I've verified", I mean that I asked around and Vanir ausf B gave me that answer. ;) )

I'll report it. Let's see what happens.

Ken

We call this the 15 second rule. Why take the time to research it when in 15 seconds I can ask you and have you look it up. :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Issues that have been mentioned:

--Missing equipment icons.  (Brought up by The Steppenwulf on page 4.)

--Missing demolition kits for US infantry.

Are there any other known issues with this patch?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Holman said:

Issues that have been mentioned:

--Missing equipment icons.  (Brought up by The Steppenwulf on page 4.)

--Missing demolition kits for US infantry.

Are there any other known issues with this patch?

I think the below thread has several possible issues. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On October 21, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, but see my follow up where I say that hings are now Shiny :)

Steve

I downloaded the patch on 10/26 or 10/27 on my Mac. I still had to go on my account, copy my CMBS S/N, and paste it into my authorization window to play my game. Is that common?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...