rocketman

I suspect that it is a preparation for when Engine 4.0 is released which will have that feature.

If you share the file with me in dropbox I'll add it to my bug report. Which mission is it? Mine occured in "Crossroads", but had weird stuff with dismounted halftracks as reinforcements prior to that. Was the book good? I had picked the photo before I saw it as the book cover. In a way it sums up the feeling of war to me.

I have in the US campaign. Posted about it in the tech forum and have submitted a formal bug report with save. If you have one, please send it to support as well as it will be easier for them to squash the bug.

Here is one resource I use: https://opentopomap.org/#map=15/50.39732/30.79584 Zoom in and you'll get topographical lines with elevation height. Take screenshot or many and stich them together in Photoshop. Use as overly and match direct elevation setting along the topograhical line, every 7-8 action points. Usually produces good results to start with at least. And by the way - welcome to the board @Lee Vincent

I stand corrected

I agree. Play FI far too seldom but when I do I'm always struck with a "I really like the look of it"-feeling. I think Aris made some of his finest mods for FI/GL. I just wish he had come around the rest of the Italian vehicles as well. Maybe someone else can pick up where he left? Some buildning mods would also be nice. The next module for FI is what I'm looking forward to the most now.

OH no, bridge bugs again - they never go away completely. Which scenario/module/type bridge?

Any chance that the briefing templates for FB can be uploaded to CMMODS?

You mean the one from the "When Trumpets Fade" movie? I might, no promises, if you can find one with high resolution enough. The one kohl used is a bit "soft" and making it larger will make it even worse and it won't look good.

Grab the FB-guide here: http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=4558

They are from the same platoon but not the same section. Thought it would work within platoon level. They do not both light up when double clicked.

It seems that the unit also can't share its ammo with another mortar in the same platoon.

I stand corrected and thereby proving the point that I know zilch about Korea

I'm up for just about anything that they'll produce, but would actually like a setting which would force me to read up about conflicts/battles I don't know much about now. I have always liked CM being a vehicle for history lessons. Korea is definitely a war I know zilch about and it seems like an interesting blend between modern and WWII equipment.

IMO it would be more fair to base occupation on some sort of ratio (even a less then perfect one) than being entirely negated by one pistol wielding jeep driver. Units in locations outside an objective, let's say a well placed AT gun, doesn't affect the points for the objective as it is today.

Agree that it would ruin many scenarios. But a change could be made in coming new games so that's one reason for pitching the idea at this stage. And for newly made scenarios maybe refrain from using too large occupy objectives.

If obejctive is determined by ratio it should be by comparing forces strength based on how much those units would cost in a QB.

One thing that bugs me with the current engine and which I guess we will have to live with for now is how one single pixeltruppen can negate an entire occupy objective, no matter how many units you have on it. Very annoying if he is hiding in a house not to be seen. Ideally points for occupy objectives could be devided by both sides depending on size/strength of force on it rather than "all or nothing". But unitil that is implemented I've been thinking about ways to deal with it. One solution would be that instead of having one large objective (like in many missions in the US campaign) worth X points, it could be devided into four smaller objectives each worth 1/4 of X points - and that those objectives are separated by just one action square. But of course, the objectives shouldn't be too small either as that could make the opponent camp a lot of units in it and hold it that way. Is there an optimal size for occupy objectives? Other ways to deal with this "all or nothing"-problem?

Here you go, hope puje don't mind. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/xdikhm5h6kkp5p7/AACQX7mi6IzO4f87nlHFstm9a?dl=0

There was one made by puje but never uploaded to the Respository (AFAIK) and therefore not on TSD III. Get it here:

Just a heads up, I have begun work on a guide for flavor objects for FB to make life easier for scenario makers. No promises when done, but no need for anyone else to start one.

Do NATO forces/countries ever share/use equipment from other member's arsenal or exclusively use their own? Do they receive training with equipment from other members?

Steve, in case you guys are planning a NATO module for BS, consider the possibility of Sweden becoming a full member or an co-operative ally. We have some cool equipment, such as the Archer Artillery System, Stridsvagn 122 (modified Leopard II) and JAS 39 Gripen fighter jet.

From what I could tell over at Nvidia it might be connected only to some graphics cards.

For me it was the update 1607 that caused problems. It was done in two steps over two days. Maybe they fixed something in between. I saw over at Nvidia in their forum that some people had problems after the update with drivers stopped working, settings disappearing, control panel out of whack and GeForce Experience dying. You run Nvidia?