Jump to content
Battlefront.com

Soft launch... CMBS Battle Pack 1

Recommended Posts

Can I have any idea about when the next CMBS module will come to us? Just approximately, any rough estimation is fine. 

 

Also, I'm currently under several PBEM games. Does opponent requires this battlepack (with 2.1v patch), if I already purchased the battle pack? 

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume the battle pack requires the new v4 patch also? Haven't got this yet as it seems to have a few bugs re dug-in troops and I was also a bit miffed that 'engine' update didn't mean multi-thread support or dumping openGL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"....Two expertly crafted campaigns that have been play balanced and vetted by the same guys who work on the content for all our games is definitely not a "couple of maps". Steve

Giving the first scenario BSBP 01 Honor a crack and getting spanked by Red AI in some surprising ways:).

Kudos to the Battle Pack Designer✅

Yep... more than a couple of maps... more like a bargain and I am only on scenario #1!

Buzz

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, General Melchid said:

I assume the battle pack requires the new v4 patch also?

Yes

7 hours ago, General Melchid said:

Haven't got this yet as it seems to have a few bugs re dug-in troops and I was also a bit miffed that 'engine' update didn't mean multi-thread support or dumping openGL.

LOL openGL is here to stay to support Mac. Changing to some other low level engine or rewriting it is way past a CM2x engine upgrade. Ditto with multi-thread support. Reset your expectations - CM2x is *never* going to use anything other than OpenGL and only support multi-threading at a peripheral level (its already there for some resource loading activities).

In my not so humble and TOTALLY UNOFFICIAL OPINION :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Erwin said:

Lovely...   :)

Totally agree - I"m going to apologize in advance for picking on you - but you and Steve gave a great example of a point I was making a few days about about version numbering. So Sorry @Erwin I mean no offence I am just taking this opportunity to point out a real life example of what I was talking about.

16 hours ago, Erwin said:

Bit confusing to d/l as usual.  I paid my $10 and got a d/l called CMBS Windows v210 Patch Installer.  Is that what the Battle Pack 1 is called??   Tried it, and yes it is.  All seems to run fine.

 

16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Yup, and when we released CMBN Battle Pack 1 people kept getting confused between the "Battle Pack" and "v3.12 Patch" when, in fact, they were the same thing.  People tended to download and install both, which isn't really a desirable outcome.

This is a lovely example of why there is no winning formula for version numbering and naming. No matter what choice you make someone will read it wrong / backwards / misunderstand.

Anyone who thinks they can devise a naming / versioning system that is simple and would give near 100% understanding is delusional. No hyperbole. I totally agree that you can devise a system that you and a few people in a room and understand 100% of the time the delusional part is thinking that the rest of the world will just get it. Not going to happen.

 

16 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I'm going to add some text to the order pages to help clarify things further.

Which is the correct way to make things better.... buuuuuttt there is always someone who will not read the notice. Surprise! We still do not have 100% understanding. At some point you have to just say, "Hey we did our best. We looked at what worked before and what didn't and tweaked things as best we can - time to move on to other problems and let support and the community cover the few confused people who are frankly just inevitable".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you activate the battle pack with your key? If not - there is your solution. If you already did try again and then contact support if that didn't fix it. Use the activate modules link or .exe in the same directory where you game is installed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah here begins yet another quest of finding a working proxy to purchase a puny $10 DLC because all 3 different ISPs I use are blocked from accessing the store.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I'd warrant that most people who'd whinge about the price of this pack haven't spent a great deal of time in the editor.  :mellow:

Well said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even I was able to stagger through the purchase/DL/install this time with a minimum of missteps. Not bad!

And let me say that—if I understand matters correctly—I totally applaud making available the maps used in the campaigns. I wish that you would backtrack a little bit with that. I would love to have the map for the first battle of the 3-69 campaign. I am fascinated by the map, less so with the battle.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some feedback on the Charge scenario. I played this one this evening without really trying and found it far too easy to win, achieving a Total victory in just over half an hour. I lost 1 tank and one man killed. That#s all! Maybe a second and even a third wave of Russian armour would make it more challenging. As it stands it was like 73rd Easting! ;-)

The campaigns will be better I hope!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am playing the second game of the US campaign Charge of the Stryker Brigade. While  have disliked the Stryker as a combat vehicle ever since CMSF and while I have always found combat in built up areas tricky (which t is in real life as in Mosul) this is an interesting game. With only light forces and needing to keep casualties down I am playing this one cautiously. I have run into serious opposition at Objective Tomahawk and have established a line to the South West of that position while awaiting the arrival of my 3rd platoon and the helicopter gunships. Softening up the area with artillery and mortar fire for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing Battle 1 in the new Russian Campaign. 

 

 

**********  SPOILERS **********

 

 

Completed Mission 1.  It's one of those scenarios where if you kill enuff enemy you get a Total Victory even if you don't achieve the objectives.  So, while I took the first objective, I never got close to the 2nd, and nowhere near the third.  A bit frustrating when that happens.  I thought that designers know to have reinforcements come in after the scenario run out of time to prevent early surrender by the AI.

Most of the battle took place at long range.  AAR showed that the two friendly T-90's killed most of the enemy by far.  The BMP's and infantry were almost a liability cannon fodder as they got killed easily by enemy weapons systems one doesn't even spot until a friendly unit gets killed.  3 friendly BMP's killed and maybe a dozen inf.  But, even tho' I lost points for too many friendly casualties, I still got a TV. 

I think I may be playing the system poorly - too much CMSF and CMA.  In CMBS spotting is 90% of the tactics.  Once an enemy is spotted (by the one drone one is given) one can bring down arty to do the killing, or maneuver the T-90's to do target shooting.  With the benefit of hindsight I should have been more patient and just waited for the drone to do its spotting work b4 moving in with my inf and BMP's.  However, enemy arty is constantly looking for you. So, you can't stay in one place too long.  And the friendly arty takes 7 minutes to arrive using the FO (12+ using an HQ).

The RPG teams btw were absolutely useless.  Two RPG7 teams were in a good position behind an enemy BMP at about 300m.  They shot everything they had - and missed every time.  Irritated, I risked sending a T-90 to do the job (which it did in about 2 seconds).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Erwin said:

The BMP's and infantry were almost a liability cannon fodder as they got killed easily by enemy weapons systems one doesn't even spot until a friendly unit gets killed. 

While not the only thing infantry are good for, I think being there to make stuff shoot is actually one of their important roles.  A tank attack can simply be sat out in the basements if there aren't infantry supporting the attack.

Edited by cool breeze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**********  SPOILERS **********

 

 

I finished 3 mission, the impression is good. I liked how the battalion-tactical group was gradually introduced into the battle. In the 3rd mission when I was attacked by the tank company "Oplot", I had to take up defenses, after a while the incomplete company T-90AM arrived, which very much helped in my position. If it were not for the information that the tanks would arrive, I would have calculated that this reinforcement would be to stop the tank attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mission 1 of the Russian campaign reminded me of Mission 1 of the previous Russian campaign, in that I am still terrible at conducting recce in CMBS. On the attack, BMP-3s are fearsome, but they are very vulnerable to ambush and can only be unbuttoned if I leave the infantry team in them, which is a big risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×