Baneman

haha and 1.03 of BS was supposed to be in final release candidate and out within a week for 6 weeks. If they release it too earlier everyone will character assasinate them like they did on ALPHA screenies (lookin at u wiggum) and feankly I wouldnt blame em for not releasing ANYTHING until its done the way childish wailing was exhibited over alpha screenies and wild conjecturing about how bfc was scamming us was being tossed around over those three screen shots.

Anyone who might be able to give us news has probably run screaming from your avatar !

I almost always play as Russians. Recently with the loss of 8 T90s 2 khriz and some men i got a total Russ victory against a very ezperienced opponent. Wiped out his infantry, killed six abrams ( a few catastrophically) and 8 bradleys. In several other PBEMs Bradleys are the easiest ATGM and tank targets its the Abrams that are the really satisfying kills. I completely disagree with Jammersixes assesment.

Thing is, the flak you take for not releasing information is always exceeded by the flak you take for missing a published date ( even IF it was a "rough guess"   ).
 
Ergo ...

I absolutely hate the sun irl
 
Honestly, the heat-death of the Universe can't come fast enough for me.
Apparently, I'm genetically engineered for cold weather.    A nice pleasant 12-14 degrees is T-shirt weather for me.
 
And there's still 2 months of this year's 6 month summer-hell to go    

Nope, a squad of 9 men could theoretically engage 9 discrete targets if the circumstances allowed.
 
Just as spotting is calculated from each set of eyeballs, so targeting is done per man. Each guy may not even be able to see the same target as his mate etc.

Yeah and also if you fight as Russian, you must fight like a Russian. You must make liberal and well planned use of  automatic grenade launchers (AGS), RPO units and massive amounts of Mortar and artillery fire. Russians believe in heavy firepower, not aimed rifle fire. WHen you do that, they are very difficult if not downright impossible to fight against in infantry-centric battles. Dont use the russians as you would with US infantry. That's fighting on US terms and you will lose. Fight on YOUR terms.

Thing is, the flak you take for not releasing information is always exceeded by the flak you take for missing a published date ( even IF it was a "rough guess"   ).
 
Ergo ...

Well they have an list of which modules / games get worked on in which order.  But one of the immutable laws of software development is that things always take twice as long as you expect (even after you take this law into account).

Looks great Tanks
 
 
Remember that the stock game ( incl. textures ) is designed to be able to run on the slowest computer that customers may own.
Increasing texture definition raises that "lower bar".
 
But hey, with great modders like Tanks out there ( and others ), we get the best of both worlds.

Veteran squad leader Schlaffer has found his squad in a bad situation.  They were advancing to cover and are now caught in the open by a charging Ami halftrack.
 

Lol! Have your men rifle through the hq's pockets. They may find some vodka or binos.

Tanks can help infantry. Just sayin'.

Just a guess, but probably for gameplay limitation purposes.
 
It may be realistic to be able to moonscape any part of the map you desire, but it makes for a much less fun game.

I hope you still have time to get the infantry Co HQ on a tank.  I like to match up my infantry HQs with their supporting tank HQs in CMRT.  It is one of the benefits of tank riders.  When possible, I will put the infantry Platoon HQ on the HQ tank of the supporting tank platoon.  (Same with Company level units.)  This facilitates the flow of intel between the infantry unit and tank unit.  Just have to be careful not to get the inf HQ shot off the back of the tank.  Good luck with that.    Infantry without radios can also use the tanks radio to stay in C2.  With the lack of Russian radios this is often useful.  The screenshot below demonstrates infantry/tank cooperation & C2.
 

Joking aside, Boomkow, there was this thread earlier : http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119001-more-bulge-info-and-a-few-screenshots/
 
If you read all of it, you will see how it rapidly went downhill and that is generally the reason why we don't have more public info regarding development.

You'd think, but really, there's little difference between a red blob under the vehicle and a skull-and-crossbones.
 
I've used Vein's red bases for ages and due to it's "generic" nature, I find it more immersive - skull symbols shout "game" whereas red blob does not ( so much ).
 
Ideally, I'd love the game to differentiate between KO'd vehicles and casualties - a blackish "scorchmark" under a vehicle would be nicer

They will recover from Tired whilst using Move

Looks great Tanks
 
 
Remember that the stock game ( incl. textures ) is designed to be able to run on the slowest computer that customers may own.
Increasing texture definition raises that "lower bar".
 
But hey, with great modders like Tanks out there ( and others ), we get the best of both worlds.

The in-game difference between early and late T34-85 is BIG. From slow hand-cranked turret to a turret motor so blazingly fast that Beta testers initially thought the numbers must be off. The late war T34-85 seems to be a perfectly capable combat tank. Gamer's often make the error of thinking of tanks as knights of the battlefield engaging in individual combat. Especially on the Eastern front it was less a duel than a gang rumble. It wasn't so much T34 vs Panther as T34 battalion vs Panther company.

Looks great Tanks
 
 
Remember that the stock game ( incl. textures ) is designed to be able to run on the slowest computer that customers may own.
Increasing texture definition raises that "lower bar".
 
But hey, with great modders like Tanks out there ( and others ), we get the best of both worlds.

Don't spend lots of time scouting. Don't bother to fix and flank, except with tank forces, who can do it at speed. But also don't just run infantry at the enemy or ignore casualties. That isn't Russian doctrine or how it actually worked, it is just a cartoon slander of their methods spread by the Germans, whomthought it made them defending against it sound all clever and also heroic for braving it etc. (A rather incoherent set of spin objectives, incidentally, but that is an aside).

The first idea is that any definite plan pushed will be faster than slow recon pull. The next is that the process of destroying the enemy really isn't that complicated - it is a matter of laying your ship alongside the enemy, as Nelson put it before Trafalgar. Meaning close aggressively with the enemy, brave what he can dish out to dish out as much as you can yourself, and trust in your strength to destroy him before he destroys you.

But that isn't a headlong charge. Above all, it isn't about movement in the first place, it is about firepower and punishment dealt.

The first infantry wave is fixing, but doesn't have to do it everywhere, or care too much about finding the enemy. Walking over your chosen route of advance will either penetrate the enemy and break up his defense, or he'll find you, and reveal himself stopping that. Let him. Then blow the living crap out of everything that reveals itself, with all your firepower arms. Tanks, mortars, artillery support - call down the wrath of God to avenge the first wave. All the first wave itself needs to do in the meantime is hit the dirt, take what cover they can, and rally as best they can. They did their part drawing the enemy's fire. Don't press. It isn't a race. Save as many of them as possible, by blasting the guys shooting at them and skulking them out of sight.

Then send the second wave. Not a new idea. Not a fancy razzle dazzle end around head fake double reverse. Send them at the spots your artillery and other fire support just blasted into the lower atmosphere, while the dust is still moving upward. They may occupy the places so blasted. Or they may draw fire from a new set of shooters, and repeat the experience of the first wave. You don't really care which. There is no rushing. You have all week. Everyone will get a turn before you are done, every bit of fire support you have will chew on something, and the enemy will need to shoot you all down and still have something left. If they don't, it may be in the bottom half of the clock that they start crumbling. Waves that have been out of the leading role are rallying the while, shooting back. You don't care how long it takes, but not because any of it is tentative or any part of the clock is quiet. Reuse the rallied early waves as fourth and fifth attacks. The whole point is to outlast them, to have the last rallied wave standing. Inexorable is the watchword.

Each wave doesn't bunch up. It isn't trying to run the enemy off his feet in one go. You only expose what it takes to make a serious threat to enemy position if he doesn't open up with a major line of battle. The ideal size of one wave is a numerical match for the defenders on the same frontage. You don't want to give them denser targets that make all their weapons more effective. Instead you want them to face trying to hold off the third wave with empty magazines and surrounded by blasted friends, worked over repeatedly by all your fire support.

They won't stand. Lean hard enough into them, back off for nothing, make no mistakes, and use every weapon in your force for its proper target - and they will go down. Trust your combined strength, believe it, press home and make it so.

No captain can go far wrong who lays his ship alongside one of the enemy.

Why are you so hung up on this "prone lying medic" thing? I've told you in the past it's something medics just don't do, and for good reason. 

Agreed, kevinkin.
 
See GeorgeMC's "Der Ring der 5. Panzer-Division" scenario for an excellent example of a huge map with lots of units ( but it doesn't feel like a lot because ... huge map... ) and plenty of time to work your way (relatively) realistically across.
 
His CMBN "Schmiedestahl" is similar in scope and scale.
 
So it can be done, but a lot of people want a quick half-hour of action - and fair enough, not everyone has the time to commit to a monster battle.
So people sometimes need to rein in their perceptions/preconceptions because we're the ones using units ahistorically, not the game.

Everyone knows I'm a hardcore France 1940 fanboy, but I guess I should put it down in writing one more time in hope
 
Fulda Gap '80's would be my secondary choice.
 
#3 would be Eastern Front 1943 - I'd love to recreate the Kharkov battles ( probably has the best chance of seeing the light of day in the next couple of years )

Win10 is progress?

If you are serious about gaming and performance on your PC, Win 7 64-bit is the system to have at the moment. Just like XP was before the updates stopped and Win 7 finally matured in its 64 bit form.

Newer is not always better. Vista was a trainwreck, 8 was a trainwreck and 10 is just rehashed 8. Those systems are fine if you treat your PC as a smartphone and use it to organize your photos, browse Facebook and utilize all those useless apps. If you are running an overclocked gaming beast, where you require total control with simple interfaces, they are guano.