z1812

Here is the video:   
 
 

I have always found Battlefront's support to be fast and friendly.

Since we are talking about search...
You can use google's site modifier: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b&q=site%3Acommunity.battlefront.com+wego+turn+length
type site:community.battlefront.com and then your search terms. I find that works better than the built in search.

For your pleasure.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/12/28/this-tank-arsenal-near-oshawa-is-a-secret-the-military-museum-wants-shared.html
http://www.ontrmuseum.ca/tankmuseum/
I live in Toronto and wouldn't mind going to see the museum. If other forum members who live around Toronto would like to go, then perhaps we can plan a joint trip. PM me if interested. 

Thank you very much Mord!! I was messing around with this a few weeks ago and could not find reasonable settings. Not to mention the UI being unreadable.
My game looks great now. I added 3 settings to the ones you suggested to suit my eyes.
Adaptive sharpen:  Seemed to make it clearer, at least for me with my glasses.
Luma Sharpen:       Same as above.
Clarity:                     Same as above.
Technicolour:         Just to warm it up a bit and give a touch more colour.
Thanks Again!!

As you can see we all agree about which is the right game for you to buy................................   The truth is you will be satisfied with which ever one you choose. They are all good....................and after all the suggestions at least let us know which one you did buy!!!

I have all the CM games, however I find that, for what ever reason,  CMSF is my favourite. But you really should try a World War 2 title, and as Bullet point has already said,  CMBN has the most content. It is a really good game. The CMBN Big Bundle, should you buy it, will give you everything at a savings of $50.00

I have found that, depending on the situation smoke can be quite helpful. This is particularly the case if the enemy is degraded and/or suppressed. You can roll your APC's as close as you dare with the last vehicle command being to emit smoke.  

Thanks for doing this. It is nice to have so many resources in one location.

Just as information the New Site does not keep me logged as I asked it too. I have to log in every time I visit the site. I wonder if others are having this happen?

Just as information the New Site does not keep me logged as I asked it too. I have to log in every time I visit the site. I wonder if others are having this happen?

I am not sure if this has been posted before...............................here is the link to the article for those interested.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/may/29/antony-beevor-the-greatest-war-movie-ever-and-the-ones-i-cant-bear

I am not sure if this has been posted before...............................here is the link to the article for those interested.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/may/29/antony-beevor-the-greatest-war-movie-ever-and-the-ones-i-cant-bear

Solved. If you have set a zoom level under display settings in Win 10 then CMA will not run at desktop resolution. Disable any zoom and it works well.
However the fonts are a bit rough at the edges.

I went back and reviewed a lot of wisdom that kind folks have shared with their posts. Fuser said to always stay away from stock detail such as rivets, brackets, etc. Don't hide it and don't cover it. And he also said to go dark with rust and mud,. desaturate it. He doesn't even use layer masks. I guess his technique just avoids covering the details so he doesn't need the layer mask. 
 
Hey, I made a bunch of my own brushes. It was easy. 

Perhaps, but it is probably worth noting that a Bangalore Torpedo only clears a one meter wide path.  Each torpedo section is 1.5 meters long and weighs thirteen pounds.  That's too narrow for vehicles to pass safely, but it allows infantry to pass.  If you consider a full 8 meter by 8 meter action spot it also means that it would take between five and six sections to create an 8 meter long by 1 meter wide path through a one action spot minefield.  There are ten sections in a Bangalore kit so if you used five sections you could theoretically create a two meter wide path, although I think officially 'lanes' through a minefield are considered to be either four or eight meters.  The push team is supposed to put a dummy 'stick' section at the front of assembled sections so that when the push team pushes the Bangalore into the minefield the entire torpedo won't explode if a mine is hit during the deployment process.  Naturally the pushing process would be a delicate one for those involved, aside from the fact that the torpedo has to be assembled to the appropriate length from a position near the minefield and the charge has to be prepped after the torpedo is deployed.  So I guess what I'm putting forth is that it would take several minutes, like maybe twenty to thirty minutes, to clear an infantry path through a single minefield action spot.  Doing it right in game terms would also require a bunch of new animations.  So I'm not actually sure how different it would be from the marking mines command.  The mark mines command is probably done more quickly than it would in reality as well so .... not sure anymore if it would be a net benefit from a practical standpoint.

People have been known to criticize Battlefront and CM frequently. It seems to be a great past time for those with a lot to say and little to offer.


As Wargames go, Battlefront offers a great deal of fidelity to observing "proper combat results" considering their budget and market size.

The only 3D wargame that is at all similar is Achtung Panzer Operation Star. That game however only offers Real Time without any multi-player at all.

There was another 3D Russian front game called Panzer Command Ostfront which, in my view, is just not comparable to the above.

Not to mention the attempt to port Close Combat to 3D which was called GI Combat if I recall correctly.

Armed Assault and Battlefield are first person shooters. As such they appeal to a larger market which means more revenue and more money for development. They are not wargames as such.

In my view it is remarkable that such a small company, serving such a niche group, has been able to provide such an excellent series of wargames.

They have done an excellent job of balancing resources between graphic quality and providing a believable tactical experience.

In war, truth is the first casualty.
Aeschylus, Greek tragic dramatist (525 BC - 456 BC)

I am just thankful for the game.

Warts and all, there is no other that brings the same amount of fidelity to tactical gaming.

You can be sure I would like improvements but I also recognize the work, creativity, and thoughtfulness that have made Combat Mission excellent right from the beginning.

People have been known to criticize Battlefront and CM frequently. It seems to be a great past time for those with a lot to say and little to offer.


As Wargames go, Battlefront offers a great deal of fidelity to observing "proper combat results" considering their budget and market size.

The only 3D wargame that is at all similar is Achtung Panzer Operation Star. That game however only offers Real Time without any multi-player at all.

There was another 3D Russian front game called Panzer Command Ostfront which, in my view, is just not comparable to the above.

Not to mention the attempt to port Close Combat to 3D which was called GI Combat if I recall correctly.

Armed Assault and Battlefield are first person shooters. As such they appeal to a larger market which means more revenue and more money for development. They are not wargames as such.

In my view it is remarkable that such a small company, serving such a niche group, has been able to provide such an excellent series of wargames.

They have done an excellent job of balancing resources between graphic quality and providing a believable tactical experience.

People have been known to criticize Battlefront and CM frequently. It seems to be a great past time for those with a lot to say and little to offer.


As Wargames go, Battlefront offers a great deal of fidelity to observing "proper combat results" considering their budget and market size.

The only 3D wargame that is at all similar is Achtung Panzer Operation Star. That game however only offers Real Time without any multi-player at all.

There was another 3D Russian front game called Panzer Command Ostfront which, in my view, is just not comparable to the above.

Not to mention the attempt to port Close Combat to 3D which was called GI Combat if I recall correctly.

Armed Assault and Battlefield are first person shooters. As such they appeal to a larger market which means more revenue and more money for development. They are not wargames as such.

In my view it is remarkable that such a small company, serving such a niche group, has been able to provide such an excellent series of wargames.

They have done an excellent job of balancing resources between graphic quality and providing a believable tactical experience.

As I recall, most independent observers found that the Ukrainians were largely to blame for indiscriminate shelling.

There is more to the situation in Ukraine than we know and is reported.

As far as blame and responsibility, there is surely enough to go around to all countries involved. Ironically the only country whose approach seems balanced is Germany's.

I have nothing against Aliens and Futuristic settings, however I would settle for the Spanish Civil War or France 1940.

Hi Kip,

Have you considered posting some of your battles to the repository?

Regards,

John