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

Recommended Posts

Ok so here are mine:

The Red occupy bug is top of the list - as a Beta tester I have reported this, so it should be on the radar.

I agree with @SLIM regarding improving capabilities of reconnaissance vehicles.

I would like to see some changes to IED behaviours:

  1. One frustration is that AI triggermen default to 'fire the AK-47' rather than 'press the t1t'. Proposed fixes are - either change the behaviour so that the triggerman views the IED as the primary weapon system or take their weapon away from them.
  2. The second anomaly is that VBIEDs require separate triggermen. My solutions therefore are either to retain the existing system but give the option for the driver to be the triggerman or to get rid of the separate triggerman entirely.

I agree with @Sgt.Squareheadregarding improving IED detection capabilities - there is (and was at the time of the Scenario setting) equipment capable of doing that.

Based on a question asked on this forum, and I can't remember if we ever worked out the answer but a quick rummage around the editor indicates that ECM is rare or unavailable to most nations. Brit vehicles have ECM defences against RCIED/Cell IEDs, that does not seem to be the case for other nations and I would certainly expect the US and Canadians to deploy with such defences.

UAVs were widely deployed in the real World timeframe of the game in the US Forces and to a lesser extent with the UK. These would be a nice feature to port across from CMBS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely like the idea of the slimmed down one man VBIEDs.  I'd like to see a few more vehicle chassis available as options (anything up to and including a turretless T-55/62), would it be possible to add a new vehicle state:

OK

Immobilised

Destroyed

Burning

VBIED

Also some sort of exotic mortars of the 'Hell-Cannon' variety would be a cool touch, but now I'm deep into the realm of wishes again.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The selection of T-72s available to the Syrians needs some revision, the T-72A & T-72AV are missing from the current TOE (yet have been in service for decades) and the TURMS-T system should be an option on any of the types in service (T-72 Ural, T-72A/AV, T-72M1).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be possible to make the 'Destroy' & 'Preserve' terrain objectives a little less 'granular', ie: if a large zone is painted over a number of buildings would it be possible to start awarding points at a lower level of overall damage to the combined structures (tricky request to explain)?

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Combatintman  Re: Point 1 

I think you can do this by assigning them to an AI group and setting them to Hide.....I wouldn't 100% guarantee they won't still take a pot-shot now and again, especially if they take a scare, but it does seem to have some effect, to me at least.

I also pre-activate all or most of the bombs in Preview mode.....No idea if this bit makes any difference at all, but it makes me feel like I tried.  ;)

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erwin   

Not sure if a designer can stipulate a certain % of damage b4 penalty points are awarded.  However, I have been surprised at how much damage can be inflicted without incurring a penalty.  Have found it quite common to have inadvertently flattened a couple of buildings where there may be a dozen or so to be protected and still not be penalized in the final score. 

So, am not sure if this feature is something to worry about - so long as you don't try to flatten a significant number of buildings.  Having tanks etc use TARGET LIGHT is safe.  One or two HE blasts vs a small-medium building is usually safe.  Two or three minute bursts of 30mm and similar vs a small-medium building is usually safe.  Large buildings can take a lot of HE fire b4 a penalty occurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty much my own experience, I've tried to make civilian casualties a feature of my Mosul stuff, because, well, you've read the same reports I have.....But at present the player has to go the full Stalingrad for them to have much impact. 

Share this post


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

Not sure if a designer can stipulate a certain % of damage b4 penalty points are awarded.  However, I have been surprised at how much damage can be inflicted without incurring a penalty.  Have found it quite common to have inadvertently flattened a couple of buildings where there may be a dozen or so to be protected and still not be penalized in the final score. 

So, am not sure if this feature is something to worry about - so long as you don't try to flatten a significant number of buildings.  Having tanks etc use TARGET LIGHT is safe.  One or two HE blasts vs a small-medium building is usually safe.  Two or three minute bursts of 30mm and similar vs a small-medium building is usually safe.  Large buildings can take a lot of HE fire b4 a penalty occurs.

No the designer cannot set damage percentages. A one off test I did with a single storey single action spot building deducted 50 VPs out of 100 VPs when a single wall was dropped by a sh1t tin of 30mm Rarden rounds.

The issue with 'destroy' or 'preserve' objectives is really about scenario designer choices coupled with:

  • A limited number of terrain objective slots in the editor.
  • The fact that terrain objectives cover a minimum of a whole action spot.
  • The fact that some buildings in the editor don't cover a whole action spot.
  • Probably (and if anybody has seen any threads on this then I'd be grateful) there isn't much data on the behaviours of 'preserve' and 'destroy' objectives and their associated VPs.

Assuming that most scenarios will have some 'touch' or 'occupy' objectives (and generally there will be at least two in most scenarios) that leaves the designer with six other slots to use for 'preserve' or 'destroy' and that is not many in even the smallest maps.

In an ideal World there would be more slots so that every structure could potentially be painted as a 'preserve' or 'destroy' objective but this is not an ideal World so the designer has to make choices. The general solution (and I know @Sgt.Squareheadhas wrestled with this in his Mosul scenario) is to paint a whole city block. This is where the issue of action spots/building sizes and an absence of data comes into play. Say that city block has 10 buildings and you allocate 100 VPs as a 'preserve' or 'destroy' objective. Absolute preservation or destruction of every structure will always return 100 VPs but partial destruction becomes less certain. You would hope that if one building is destroyed then 90 VPs would be awarded but to be honest I don't know. It gets even more complex when say a single wall of three buildings gets destroyed and maybe the roofs of a couple of other structures have been subjected to a couple of short mortar stonks that have left the roof damaged but intact. How many VPs do you get then?

As with everything VP-wise the other factor is the designer's narrative:

  • How they perceive destruction or preservation should be rewarded.
  • What constitutes a 'fair' result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Erwin   

"The fact that some buildings in the editor don't cover a whole action spot."

That would explain why it's possible to flatten a wall and/or damage a building and get no penalty.  

But, in general, if one is not indiscriminate one should not be penalized for destruction.   During the dozens, maybe hundreds of CM2 mission I have played where one has to preserve certain structures, after a few mortar hits on a roof, or a wall being flattened or a house damaged, it's quite common to suffer no penalty.  As SS said, you have to go "The Full Stalingrad" to be sure of being penalized.  And that seems good, since if one knows that an enemy is holed up in a particular building, flattening it is not "indiscriminate" destruction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SLIM   
On ‎9‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 7:11 PM, Combatintman said:

I would like to see some changes to IED behaviours:

  1. One frustration is that AI triggermen default to 'fire the AK-47' rather than 'press the t1t'. Proposed fixes are - either change the behaviour so that the triggerman views the IED as the primary weapon system or take their weapon away from them.
  2. The second anomaly is that VBIEDs require separate triggermen. My solutions therefore are either to retain the existing system but give the option for the driver to be the triggerman or to get rid of the separate triggerman entirely.

Better yet, make the triggerman a "spy" unit type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎06‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 4:26 PM, Erwin said:

And that seems good, since if one knows that an enemy is holed up in a particular building, flattening it is not "indiscriminate" destruction.

But what if one knows that the enemy has also trapped civilians in the same building? 

This was what I was really struggling with.....To a certain extent civilian casualties should be unavoidable, but in the current format it is quite unlikely that you will be penalised unless you go 'The Full Stalingrad'.

Frankly I'd prefer grey marked, unarmed, neutral AI controlled Groups that I could just place, but I'm not sure if the engine could add a third 'side'?

20 hours ago, SLIM said:

Better yet, make the triggerman a "spy" unit type

Simple & elegant solution, I like it.  B)

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sburke   

@Sgt.Squarehead  This would not have FOW but you could put some of your civies in a room with no exits forcing the player to fight their way in and not being able to resort to heavy weapons.  You still wouldn't know the size of the enemy force around them but you'd be limited even when you start spotting them from resorting to flattening the structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate using spies for the role though, their spotting capabilities are too powerful for the role I want them to play, if I had 'Grey Civvies', I'd probably stick one or two spies amongst them in some issues to represent friendlies with mobile phones etc.

Whatever the team decide to do, this game is the brightest point on my horizon right now, can't wait to see it.....Please, please, get the UnCons right, fighting those bastards is what it's all about IMHO.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 2:26 AM, Erwin said:

"The fact that some buildings in the editor don't cover a whole action spot."

That would explain why it's possible to flatten a wall and/or damage a building and get no penalty.  

But, in general, if one is not indiscriminate one should not be penalized for destruction.   During the dozens, maybe hundreds of CM2 mission I have played where one has to preserve certain structures, after a few mortar hits on a roof, or a wall being flattened or a house damaged, it's quite common to suffer no penalty.  As SS said, you have to go "The Full Stalingrad" to be sure of being penalized.  And that seems good, since if one knows that an enemy is holed up in a particular building, flattening it is not "indiscriminate" destruction

The law of armed conflict begs to differ.

Share this post


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

But what if one knows that the enemy has also trapped civilians in the same building? 

This was what I was really struggling with.....To a certain extent civilian casualties should be unavoidable, but in the current format it is quite unlikely that you will be penalised unless you go 'The Full Stalingrad'.

Frankly I'd prefer grey marked, unarmed, neutral AI controlled Groups that I could just place, but I'm not sure if the engine could add a third 'side'?

Simple & elegant solution, I like it.  B)

I doubt that BFC have the appetite for this- Pages 101-102 of the CMSF manual lay out the design philosophy and abstracted mechanics supporting the non-inclusion of civvies.

Edited by Combatintman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sburke   

Looks like ISIS morale is crumbling.  There are still for sure going to be some diehards, but the collapse of the caliphate is here.  What remains to be seen is what happens next.  The underlying disaffection that feeds these organizations isn't changing so inevitably it will simply morph into something else given time and no change on the ground.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/08/world/middleeast/isis-iraq-surrender.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fworld&action=click&contentCollection=world&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0

For an extremist group that has made its reputation on its ferociousness, with fighters who would always choose suicide over surrender, the fall of Hawija has been a notable turning point. The group has suffered a string of humiliating defeats in Iraq and Syria, but the number of its shock troops who turned themselves in to Kurdish officials at the center in Dibis was unusually large, more than 1,000 since last Sunday.

The fight for Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, took nine months, and by comparison, relatively few Islamic State fighters surrendered. Tal Afar fell next, and more quickly, in only 11 days. Some 500 fighters surrendered there.

The Iraqi military ousted the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL, from Hawija in 15 days, saying it had taken its forces only three days of actual heavy fighting before most of the extremists grabbed their families and ran. According to Kurdish officials, they put up no fight at all, other than planting bombs and booby traps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll be back, somewhere else, plus they'll continue to claim responsibility for every atrocity, accident or act of god that they can get away with.  :rolleyes:

Vermin.....It's what Buratino was invented for.  :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TJT   
38 minutes ago, akd said:

Thanks! I've not read the forums in a few days and missed that. Thats not even just some bones... thats a whole freakin skeleton! :lol:

4

 

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

×