para

So how's the bugging going, Steve?

Some new animations would really freshen up the feel of the graphics. I am all for it.
Mord.

Something I'd still love to see is an expansion of the "particle" effects in the game.  Namely:
Being able to create multiple explosion animations to add variety Tying particular explosion animations to particular impact types - dirt, metal, mud, etc Allowing more than 30-odd frames in the explosion animations.  I want 150!!   Pipe dream - actual particle system so we can create some real beauties like in Squad!

Deep trenches, that protect from artillery! Different types of trenches. Communication trenches, trenches with MG nests. Soviet style foxholes. (For firing prone) Covered MG nests. Stationary telephones.

The ability to choose reinforcement in quick battle. I would want to do some quick battle where i receive reinforcement but for now its not possible. Also more choice in the time section.

Happy New Year everyone.
I've always wanted to see assault boats so we could play the 82nds crossing of the Waal at Nijmegen.
 

Hey there,
I  usually return to playing CM every half a year or so. Often this means reinstalling some stuff. As always, Battlefront's version numbering policy gets me intensely confused and I am creating this thread to not only point some attention towards this unnecessary situation but also to urge responsible staff to may be at least think about doing something about it in the long term.
For example: I just found a recent installation of CMFI/Gustav Bundle on my hard drive. Obviously I only had installed but not activated it before since it asked me to insert the key for a "CM Fortress Italy - v3.0 UPGRADE". In one of my dedicated text files I found that key and after activation, the game started. Arrived in the game menu, the version number didn't show 3.0 as expected. Instead it showed v1.20.
I visited all my installation backups and found a v200 installer and a CMFI v300 upgrade. I then could only guess that the numbers 2.00 and 3.00 may point at those CM engine versions. I am not sure as I can't recall it anymore after some months of absence from the forums. So I visit my Battlefront account, thinking I just should make sure and maybe download missing stuff again. In my account I find a CMFI upgrade 4. Since I just activated 3, I instantly had the idea of needing another upgrade. Opening that upgrade 4 on the download page, the installer shows no connection to anything with the number 4. Instead it is called "CMFI v200 Upgrade" in the downloadable archive. This maximizes my confusion, as I already have downloaded 2.0 and expect v3.0 to be newer.
Is it really so hard to find a numbering convention which instantly tells the user what exactly he has at hand? Without visiting the forum (no central hint there found so far), I have no chance to understand what is going on. I don't think this is the way you guys at battlefront wanted it to be. It goes on since I started purchasing CM titles and isn't that much different with the other titles.
If you call something CMFI v2, I expect CMFI v2 and nothing else. Stop to confuse me with engine versions, instead name them as integrated version numbers of the game and don't call them anything else so that I have a chance to find what I purchased.
By the way, both the Battlefront website including the shop and the forums use unsecured connections according to firefox. Maybe it is time to switch to https in 2018? Since CM titles aren't that cheap, money shouldn't be the problem. Maybe overhaul the whole system, which in its core finally enables me to download including-everything-installers so at the same time stopping the need for me to study confusing version numbers while applying several cumulative patches in a row...
Please forgive the venting character of my inquiry, but seriously, this is hard to bear.
 
Thank you!

Thanks for stating it that way.
I will say, as a beta-tester, coming to grips with this behavior has been difficult. The NDA prevents a lot of what I'd like say (and is a nice way to dodge ) but realize that the HE fleeing behavior was not seen as a deal-breaker before v4.0 was released...or it would not have been released.
Think about the myriad of situations your pixeltroops have been in. Think about how often they do the right thing...and you don't even notice it. Think about when they do something wrong...and the situation which it took to get that behavior.
Without giving too much (anything?) away, I follow two basic courses of investigation: there are areas I dig into to find stuff; and there are times when I get a whiff of something not quite right. In the first case, I start with a set of presumed behaviors and try to stress them to their outlying limits. In the other case, I happen to notice something in passing...and then the Eye of Sauron focuses upon it.
There are fewer and fewer of each. And the gameplay effect of most are very minor.
I can field multiple battalions and have total mayhem reign for four hours...and notice only a few odd cases of behavior. Most (all?) can be explained by men panicking under fire or other reasonable explanations. Think about the magnitude of that achievement: several hundreds of "men" acting realistically over multiple square kilometers whilst killing and being killed and trying to achieve a terrain objective.
The HE behavior slipped through. Now, what if the fix is worse? Maybe men will stick in their locations, but then tanks reverse towards threats. But only if unbuttoned and the threat is known but out of LOS. And only on odd numbered turns. 
Occam's Razor: if the fix were simple, wouldn't you have it already?

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

@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. 

https://www.armytimes.com/off-duty/movies-video-games/2018/02/12/tom-hanks-joins-dale-dyes-d-day-movie-as-executive-producer/
 
Not sure if this has already been reported on here.

https://www.armytimes.com/off-duty/movies-video-games/2018/02/12/tom-hanks-joins-dale-dyes-d-day-movie-as-executive-producer/
 
Not sure if this has already been reported on here.

I vote English Civil War, but I would, wouldn't I? Cuz I won. 

Ahhh, that' s nothin. I remember when we PC gamers routinely had to manually add lines of code to our config.sys and autoexec.bat system files, just to be able to boot up a game and have it run with the limited memory that existed on machines of 25+ years ago... 

Anybody seen this great film? After watching it it has definitely made me want to cyka my blyat. Great film but ****ed up. Not your typical war movie.
 
 

You're in good company though; we're many who would like to see it happen one day

I don't think it was so much a matter of the British voters falling out of love with Churchill personally, after all, they returned him to Parliament in that election. They just felt that Labour would give them a better break. In other words, they had long since lost confidence in the Conservative party.
Michael

Para, did you recently upgrade to Win10? There are some permission issues associated with it. Either way, right click on the icon try the "run as administrator" option. 

Well that is good news.  Good luck.

I know it may sound gruesome but as an option I'd like to see hit decals on Infantry similar to how it works on vehicles however this time leave a dark red decal. I'm fairly sure it could be done as I said along the same lines as hit decals for vehicles.
 
Sometimes I think CM is a touch to sanitised and I'm one of those who feel Warfare should be shown\portrayed in it's bloody entirety.

I must admit that my first reaction is a bit of disappointment too. The composition of forces looks very good to me, but I find the screenshots depressing. As I have said earlier in the CMFI forum:
 
 
Hopefully, the screenshots just aren´t showing new snow textures because simply they aren´t finished yet. If so, this just proves why BFC are right to generally be so reluctant to reveal anything about a new release until it is ready. Because forumites like me tend to zero in on every little detail - and bitch over it.
 
But if the screenshots do show how snow in the Bulge game is depicted - then I´m pretty disappointed.

Can't the Gliders be present as flavor objects - even though not used as a means of transport in real time during battle. The use of gliders might be limited, though Historical battles happened using them, and I'm sure there were a few lying around burning or used as a CP. what the heck, perhaps one can enter it for cover same as one storey building ?
I played scenario operation dead stick - with pretty wording glider1, 2 and 3.. Who knows how it'd look like as discussed above. It can also contain ammo, where one can enter to 'acquire' additional equipment and ammo.

I know full well of the "other side of the coin" with the Russian crimes they commited and the suffering. I also remember Uncle Joe was in charge and was the author of the Katyn Forest massacre of the Polish Officer Corps. Not to forget the countless other atrocities he initiated such as the "Blocking Units" used to shoot their own soldiers who fled the battlefield. And as the inhumanity of both sides progressed the SOP became "paybacks are a bitch".
 
Also look at the U.S. and our inhumanity to our own countrymen during WW2. We dispossessed hundreds of Japanese citizens from their homes and businesses then put them in internment camps. However we let the German decendents run free all over the East and Midwest of the country.
 
Plus look at modern times. Just because a person is of Middle Eastern ethnicity or practices the Muslim religion puts them under scrutiny.
 
The first casualties of any war is innocence and humanity.

Yeah, from what little I remember about the actual battle the outcome felt fairly close to real life. As far as CMBN goes, if you take a couple pounds of hamburger and call it Germans, and then take an industrial fan turn it on high and call it the British, then start chucking the meat into the blades you'll get an idea what it felt like fighting this.
 
I don't think the battle itself was as hard as the fight I had with the engine limitations when it comes to bridges. This being my first ever fight on a bridge I had no clue it would be as finicky and fiddly as it was. I had a helluva a time trying to keep my guys from bunching up because the action spots only allowed placement in the center right or center left lanes of the bridge. After I got used to that I figured maybe face commands would have guys move to the edges like they do in buildings or along walls but It just didn't seem like I could get that to happen. Ideally I wanted men on both sides of the bridge looking out over the town in over watch while I moved others forward.
 
My smoke screen probably came too late to make a difference because I spent the first half of the crossing in dread that DC was gonna hammer me with mortars. I was loathe to move much up, especially my very finite mortar squads, before I knew what kind of hell march they were in for. He basically did the opposite of what I had expected, which was to make me pay for every step my guys took from either rifle fire and/or zeroed in mortars. No, the actual death-fest was waiting on the far side. And you'd be surprised with all that lead flying how very few spots I actually had. I was going crazy trying to figure out where all those broadside vehicle kills were coming from. My dudes had almost no sight to the left or right of the bridge even with their high vantage point.
 
On my side of the river I had set a heavy overwatch on my left flank that consisted of a platoon of PZ Grens, a couple Panthers and a couple armored cars in case his plan was to wail me all the way across. Like wise, on the right I had about four pieces of armor and a couple of teams to cover the crossing from there. Not that I think it would've made a whole lot of difference to my outcome but it did tie up my assets and cost me precious time once I knew the bridge was safe. It took about six turns to get everything sorted out and heading across the river to support the slaughter I was enduring. He completely outsmarted me on the setup.
 
It was a bit frustrating fighting the bridge mechanics but I did enjoy the challenge of trying to get my guys off the pavement and into the town. LOL At one point in the game I felt I'd have a personal victory if I could have one squad or vehicle down in the grass by the last turn.
 
Great AAR DC, you have a flair for it. Only criticisms I have is 1.) You needed to lose. And 2.) More screen shots next time. You can never have too many screenies!
 
 
Mord.

Yes, sort of. Something in the works.