Txema

Has there been any word at all from BF on the patch? 
I have supported and bought everything these guys have ever put out and now they just decide to go complete radio silence on fixing something they broke?
I hate to sound so negative but dang its hard not to feel like they really just don't care.  I have to hope that is not the case but it would be nice for them to at least let us know whats going on.
This has always been a pretty loyal fan base but I don't know if it makes good business sense to take that for granted.
Sorry for the rant but with the 4.0 issue I really don't even want to play at the moment and its been that way for quite a while now and should have been addressed by now.
Unacceptable.
 

The (poor) sarcasm is doing you no favors. Jackass move.

Steve, any word as to when 4.1 is due? Apologies if it's posted somewhere else and I've missed it

I totally agree with some of the posts above, taking all things into consideration it surely would not hurt battlefront to just post a quick update once a month or something similar. It would not take a lot of time and would do countless good for their customer relations. At the moment it all seems a bit one sided, battlefront hold all the cards and we, the customer just have to wait until they deem necessary for any updates etc, in my opinion that is not how a company should behave in this day and age, it should be a two-way street of input/output so that customer and provider feel they are both benefiting in some way.
 
Add into this the changed AI behavior that has made many scenarios/campaigns unplayable, and therefore the reluctance of users to create more content until this is fixed. All of these things add up to put battlefront in a poor light, with time users will grow tired and look elsewhere, and that would be a shame for all of us.
 
All we are asking for is a little communication!
 
regards and hopeful, slipper

Please, Battlefront, can you give us some news about the engine 4.0 patch?

I mean this really isn't normal for a patch so rather then it being a problem of getting everything right i'd imagine it has a lot more to do with the manpower that's available. Love BFC but you're kidding yourselves if you think this only has to do with reaching a certain level of quality.

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Try fighting german squads with mg42s firing bursts with your good old british sections with single shot bren guns, i'd say that's pretty game breaking in certain scenarios... after 14 months and no patch people will complain, like it or not, and they do not care how marginal you think the issues are. 14 months are a long time.

@Kuderian @slysniper
 
If you watch this video and still think there is absolutely no problem, you're either high, delusional, or both. 
The fact is, there IS an issue, and Steve has already acknowledged it and said there will be a patch that addresses it. Again to reiterate what I've already said, I would like it if the patch was out sooner rather than later, but I'm not all butthurt that it hasn't been released yet. 

I've been getting back into CM lately after a long time and I haven't noticed that issue before. That's unfortunate. When I read the patch notes for the 4.0 upgrade for the first time and it said the AI would "proactively avoid incoming HE fire", I got excited and thought that they would duck down and cower from it better, not just get up and run away like that.
Maybe this has already been discussed ad nauseam on here, but whenever I read memoirs or eyewitness accounts from the war, soldiers often say that you could hear incoming artillery shells from a long way off, and sometimes even see them flying through the air. After some experience, you can start to tell if an incoming shell will land next to you or not, so you know when to take cover. That seems like the best way to fix the issue. Troops in CM already seem to be able to tell when artillery is coming in, because you can hear them yell about it. They'll shout "Incoming! Take cover!" and so on. Instead of running away, can't they make it so the troops proactively hit the dirt and cower before the shells start landing? More experienced troops should be better at it of course. Once they hear shells whistling in, veterans should be smart enough to know when to keep their heads down at the bottom of their holes, and not break cover and run out into the open. If you have a movement order going on, and the troops detect artillery coming in, they should cancel it and cower. Conscripts and green troops could just ignore the incoming shells, and only react to them afterward.

Rightly or wrongly I am with CptMiller and Bozowans here. Millers video is very telling and mimics what I have seen in battles vs the AI.
I have been waiting for a fix to continue my Road to Nijmegen campaign since April last year. To me the change to 4.0 was like chalk and cheese for the desperate Airborne in the later battles of this campaign.
Not hating just saying.
 

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

Well, a long discussion about those problems in engine 4.0 started in April: (10 months ago!). And a lot of people were agreeing there was an important problem.
And Battlefront acknowledged the problem, after a lot of requests from his customers, at least in August (6 months ago):
In my opinion a patch to fix the main problem with engine 4.0 should have been already released. I can not understand the policy that Battlefront is following with engine 4.0. It was released 14 months ago and at least 10 months ago a long discussion was started pointing out an important problem with that engine and stock campaigns. But that is only my opinion, of course.
Txema

The whole communiction from the side of BF is a joke. People can defend it as much as they like, but their PR is not only very bad, it is almost non-existent. I don't buy nonsense like 'they must concentrate on their work', 'new information will only bring discussion and questions' and 'you can tell them how to do things once you have your own company'.
Reading this forum IS like being stuck in a time-loop and the lack of information IS causing speculation.
 
 
Utter arrogance. Technically not allowed to say that....

What's the latest on the forthcoming patch? It seems a bit strange that we are halfway through the fourteenth month since 4.0 was released and we have still had absolutely nothing....

I realize I am late to the party but I wanted to add some real life experience to the discussion on the effectiveness of indirect fire upon dug in Infantry.
In 1986 we completely dug an infantry platoon defensive position plus company weapons det. This totalled 12 x 2 man fire trenches, Platoon HQ bunker, a mortar pit and 1 x AT trench and a M249 MG trench. We also dug all the communication trenches as well. The individual fire trenches had proper overhead protection consisting of corrugated metal (you could stick your bayonet through it) covered by 2 layers of sandbags. The HQ bunker consisted of 6inch. diameter logs covered by corrugated steel and 2 layers of sand bags.
In each trench we put 2 x target balloons. In the HQ bunker we put 3 x target balloons. The mortar pit had 2 x balloons as did the MG and AT trench for a total simulation of 33 humans.
4x 155mm Howitzers (7km distance) and 4 x 81mm Mortars (3km distance) continuously fired both impact and airburst rounds. for exactly 3 min.
Upon inspection of aftermath we found the 2 balloons of the Mortar pit gone from a direct hit. 2 other balloons were gone presumably from shrapnel. The HQ bunker took a direct hit. 29 persons survived. Although bleeding ears and an overall stunning would most certainly have occurred.
Suppression is the main purpose for both artillery/mortars and machine guns. I have heard many gamers complain that their MGs and artillery/mortars are useless because they are not very accurate...good..they are not supposed to be.

Hi Armorgunner !
Yes, I am !!!  Txema, the WWII tanksim fan :-)
But I just cooperate with the STA modding team, helping in several matters (testing, translations, discussions...). The STA team has several very talented and dedicated modders like Lockie, Will73, Deviator... These modders have done and continue doing an incredible work on Steel Fury Kharkov 1942, to turn it into "The" WWII tank sim :-) It is amazing what they have achieved with that tank sim, and they keep improving it and amazing the players time and again !

Great CptMiller, thank you very much for the information !
However I can not understand why Battlefront is taking so much time to release a patch fixing that issue. The problem was reported and discussed already in April, and some players that purchased Engine 4 have "downgraded" to Engine 3 to avoid that problem that is game breaking for them... I have not purchased Engine 4 due to that reports and I decided to wait for the patch... I guess other players are doing the same. Why not fix that obvious problem of Engine 4 with a patch soon? It can make some campaigns unplayable for a significant number of players... 
Txema