Holien

Thanks I guess I should have guessed that would happen. OK I need to find some time to dig out old versions of game and load them and then try it to prove that the Panthers and MKIV's did used to get carried forward. Should not take too long now I have played scenario once already.

Yes that would make a 3rd type of issue and I guess there is nothing that can be done about that. There seems to be three types of issues? 1. A possible bug where units that clearly arrive in 1st scenario are then not moved into second scenario. I.e. the Panthers and MKIV's. 2. A unit that used to be available is no longer available due to changes in unit structures i.e. TOE 3. Un intended effect when units get equipment not originally planned for by designer. I am really interested in trying to prove point one as that should work if a designer places units then they should carry through? Point 2 is nasty as a designer has to re-check everything when new engine / patch is released? Point 3 I guess happens even less but one to watch for.. I guess that scenarios / campaigns are not baked into frozen state and the code change can change the design? This I hope can be looked at as the life blood for the game is the playability of the scenarios and campaigns IMO as a player. I guess as a company having new engines and people move to new theatres and pay for new content is what is needed to keep company alive... So if old stuff gets broken it might encourage players to move to the new shiny toys... I am just slightly concerned that designers are burning out and we will lose classic Campaigns that really should still be open to people when they can get to them....

OK that is interesting it might not be an engine issue? It des seem odd that others did get to keep all tanks? I do think something is broken, but can not prove it... Hope FMB is around to see this one day as it is a cracking design and I want to play it all way through...

OK so I have been playing Die Letzte Hoffnung and I have hit a Problem where I think I am being shoirt changed on Panthers and MKIV's going missing from 1st scenario where I lost none in that scenario. I have now seen quite a ferw different threads where other strange things have happened for people. Loss of AT guns that they expected to be there. I have a feeling (yet to be proved) that older campaigns created with earlier engines are in effect broken and this really affects the longevity of CMBN and the other titles if true. I have just given up on Die Letzte Hoffnung until I get to bottom of it as it is a wonderful campaign but I hate to waste time if it is truly broken? Here are other threads where people think things are broken... http://community.battlefront.com/topic/115286-campaign-engel-bug-after-30-install/ http://community.battlefront.com/topic/108388-the-scottish-corridor-a-amazing-job/page-5 The Scottish Corridor Campaign is just too good to be thrown away like this if there is an issue. Possible explanation from Myles One of the few unfortunate side effects of BF upgrading CMBN to stay up-to-date with newer CM releases is that some of the older scenarios and campaigns that were created under the 1.0 engine are now out-of-date especially as to OOBs. There have been changes to OOBs that have resulted in some older scenarios/campaigns now missing vehicles/equipment or having what appears to be bugged chains-of-command (ex: changes made to the OOB for US armored infantry platoons will result in their having TWO platoon commanders in older scenarios.) Since all CM campaigns/scenarios are user-made, BF doesn't update them when it patches or upgrades the game. It leaves it to the individual designers to update them or not. And most have chosen not too. So, when one plays an older scenario/campaign with a fully updated/upgraded version of CMBN then one will occasionally stumble across OOB discrepancies or "bugs." Other threads it has been raised http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118086-missing-reinforcements-in-campaign/ http://community.battlefront.com/topic/98972-new-file-at-the-repository-campaign-die-letzte-hoffnung-2011-08-26/ No real solid answer and no proof it is broken... So I have asked Vanir who has an earlier version of the game loaded to see if he can get different results from a save game I have for DLH campaign and if I get some further time I will try and load up the different engines and see if I can prove any changes... Has anyone else seen this issue and is there anything that can be done about it? Is it really down to re-creating the campaigns in each new engine version? For me it seems to important not to keep these wonderful campaigns alive for new players of them...

Could be a bug, see other campaign threads where missing AT gun has been noted. Not on PC at moment so can not post link.

This bug is affecting other campaigns. Need to get some time to try and investigate further and to see if we can prove it is broken.

There is a potential bug, will post more when I get time this weekend and link the threads as not on my PC. I too am playing the campaign. Stopped until I can get to bottom to see if campaign broken by v3 engine upgrade.

Yes wondering if this is the one which you just have to touch the ridge line? If so Smoke and ignore the bunkers as best as possible. I think I ended up with loads of casulaties in this one but did manage to flank the position and then work my way along the ridge line... Nasty mission and don't go toe to toe with bunkers use all your efforts to flank them even with a small force you should be able to get up there... Of course I can not remember what version I played... If you wanted to share it on Drop box PM me and I can take a look?

And finally re the vehicle bug that has caught me out in a solo play game just recently. Men were sat in truck but I could not get them out of the truck and when I did bail the driver left but could not then get back in. I ended up with several squads frozen. I have a Save file I think if you need any more evidence. As it was I just lived without men for the scenario, Jim can not in this game as he is really up against it so the loss of any men will hurt him. Jim I hope the fix works... (we can always restart turns from earlier point if need be?

Vanir ref mymen and bocage, I managed to get them through had one squad walk away and the others went through with movement path closer. I will have to watch out for that as I had same issue with HMG team and in end gave up on gap and moved them long way around... Tad annoying and yes really does need fixing as new players will not always understand it. BTW do you have V1 or V2 engine stioll loaded?

If James can break a game he will do.. Great to have on a Test Team as he does things differently... OK Drive them trucks in front of me and I can fix that for you... As for the wall just let me know where it is and I can arrange for some Sherman help...

Sorry to bring back a dead thread but just finally getting to play this campaign with version 3 of the engine and enjoying the scenarios. I will post a bit more on that later as I have tried to avoid reading too many spoilers... A question for those that have played it and a potential bug? In the 1st Scenario I got So I am wondering if this is a bug or a design feature? I have my saves and can share if needed? When I get a bit more time I will reload to see if different kit turns up? I am a tad worried as I guess I will need the kities at some stage in the campaign and don't want to be nerfed after putting so many hours in. Wonder if some bug has hit since v3? This has alos been mentioned on the Tech forum thread but not a good description so will try here fist to see if others had suffered the same?

Vanir I have dropped you a PM and can provide you a link to the drop box folder full of saves... I will also let you have my Pwd so you can play both sides as I am sure you will be discrete... I have asked James to respond as well as he has spotted another issue that he can not explain...

since when have you become a moderator? You behaviour towards JK seems to be verging on stalking IMO. Does you no credit. A football phrase comes to mind "play the ball not the man"

I am in the right forum for military debate? Think I have stumbled on wrong forum.

I get the idea of a story driven campaign so if that is the intent I have no problem with the infantry force outside my control. So by all means remove setup zones and focus the player on the tanks. Just make sure those infantry are set up in a realistic manner IMO split squads and reasonable defensive positions. Once the game starts the player is then thrust into playing every role. I have just started to play Red Devil's and that narrative driven campaign has the text better spaced so it is easier to read and engage with.

Superb!!!

You can get Crazy Arty effect, but shorter frame, I am no grog but what you are showing is stuff that would happen before game starts... So from design POV reduce defenders to account for Pre Bomabard and then have shorter stonk of nasty and it will achieve same aim but allow game to start after say 5 mins of stonk?

Hi, I did different deploy to get Total Victory. Place Tigers way back so you have woods near village, place 6 Tigers there 2 angled left and 4 angled right covering road at angle not face on... Move 4 Tigers to woods on right just across field, split two angled left and 2 T on to right so woods protect left flank of the Tigers. Infantry I left all set up as was designed. I then pulled infantry back to woods on far right and hid in the woods (two different woods areas) I pushed some infantry forward to MG posts (BTW I agreed re the comments about why a commander would not have a more forward line of defence). Yes very painful watching your inf die and I did lose lots but because they distracted T34's and AT guns whittled some down by time Tanks enter your LOS you have multiple shots and usually only 1 T34 at a time to take out. That way I managed to only lose two Tigers and all Soviet tanks destroyed as they came into LOS. The key is to not move the Tigers and get the Soviets buttoned moving into your LOS. So I think this mission can be won once you work out terrain and angles and how easily Tigers can die at hands of T34 85's. IMO I would just allow the German player a set up area from bunkers all way back, but then that might make it too easy... In that case reduce German forces by some (inf) and not have AT guns. I did not ask for AT stuff just more freedom to choose better deploy areas... I also think arty lasts too long and Soviets can run into it, I do not know the history so maybe there was that length and maybe Soviets did run into it as a calculated risk.. Just feels wrong IMO and I would opt for Shorter hits but work the different areas over.. BTW does look very impressive so I do get feel of massive nasty Arty hit....

I Agree I think with a half way decent Soviet player the Germans will be bum rushed and against the AI the Germans can win fairly easily once you know where to place and how AI works...

OK, lost my WWW access at home due to switching to BT on Monday and them not connecting me properly... Back on line now.. So just finished the 2nd Scenario and I was kicked out of campaign with a Draw overall after a Tactical Victory in 2nd Game. I basically stopped the Soviet advance on their side of river but did not push them back. I kept Aid Station and I lost Wounded due to them being in a truck hit by arty strike. They paniked and ran into the woods where arty fell for around 30 mins... So I guess that cost me lots of points and Soviets got Objective 1 - not that I can find what that was on map. I also lost two Tigers to the T34's. 1 was fair enough the other obtained a LOS that was not there for 15 mins and then popped open.. Ohh well.. Feed Back and Spoilers...

OK will check what I get back vs what was damaged and will let you know.

Quick update I have just finished my replay of the 1st scenario. Gained a total victory with the loss of 2 tigers. The AT guns helped, the one on far left very useful and survived the whole game. The other two took a couple of tanks between them. The tigers were lost to one shot kills and both were stationary with good los but T85 rolled into view and spotted 1st and destroyed them, got to love the spotting cycles. Even had one T85 take two close range 88mm hits / Penetration's survive and return fire while backing up. A third 88mm hit bounced off the turret! It was finally stopped by a zhreck! The key difference was where I placed my Tigers and withdrawal of a fair amount of infantry to the rear woods. Had a quick look at next map, looks great, hope to get some time to play this week.

Raptorx7 Well perhaps I should pay them more attention, and if you can win the 1st scenario just with infantry my hats off to you. Dragonwynn, Some other comments after a few turns. When you have full squads you need more fox holes and you even have squads / HQ's without foxholes. This is again where it does not ring true IMO. Also just plonking some AT Guns down out in the open and not having fox holes is just a bit of waste and shows no care, if you want players to believe in it you need to pay it a bit more attention IMO. Yes you have given me a swathe of open land to choose some limited deployment but not places I wanted to re-deploy to. Like woods to rear and front. I will continue to give this a quick test to see how I do with slightly different set up. (Also not yet lost a Tiger to arty... although landing close...)

Ok So just loaded it up and both bunkers are empty, so I better read the briefing as I had skimmed it... Not really a story man but I have to ask why would you go to the effort of constructing bunkers to leave them empty... They provide better protection vs Arty and you tell your men to hide in trenches... All I am going to do is re-occupy and yes they will die, but the whole infantry force in this scenario dies.... You see that is where I am at slight odds with this scenario design is that it is all about the tanks and the infantry are mere 2nd bit actors... I get it for the basis of the campaign and I guess for this play through I am pretty much going to leave the infantry as is as to see how (if I can win) with minimal management of the infantry.