A Canadian Cat

Good one - reported

Yep worked like a charm. I played PBEM until the bullets started flying, in my case until turn 009. It all worked as expected. Used the scenario map I created earlier and picked forces and battled. Just simple run at the objective orders as a test. I have no idea what you are doing wrong but there must be something...

That makes no sense. Trying that same scenario I used for 2 player hot seat as a PBEM...

Yeah, and especially waiting for that Darn Patch (watch your cursing around here, snare). A dam holds back water. Damn is a curse word. Let's see if the forum sw will let that through.

There is no way to by pass the qb screen for force selection. Oh wait yes there is - the scenario editor More seriously a friend of mine and I did this. You can read about it here: Sadly we never finished the AAR but the instructions on on how we get started will work for you. It does require a trustworthy opponent. You know someone you can PIRL (punch in real life)

I just did it. I saved the scenario to the quick battle folder (I added a "as QB" to the end). Note the battle type (in this case for Barkan's corner it is an attack) and the size (in this case small). Then fire up the QB screen and choose a small attack and human selected map. Press OK and there it is. Works too. Obviously if you want a fight vs the AI to be any good you will need to put in some additional work.

Anything that you open in the editor can be saved for a QB. The trick is you have to set the battle type (attack, assault, meeting engagement...) and the size (tiny, small...). Plus you have to put it in the QB folder. Then you will only see it in the QB list to choose the matching battle type and size.

Everyone, one more time!

Certainly. There are people of Kurdish ethnicity in Syria, Turkey, Iraqi and iran and they have been there for a long long time. Way longer than the borders it those countries.

Activation code and license key are the same thing. Yes, unclear instructions suck. A lot of the time during reviewing stuff like this it is easy to miss. This kind of experience is *the* problem with licensing systems - legitimate customers are inconvenienced. I hate that and have argued for dropping such things at every company I have worked at. But they never have At any rate support will get you on track. They are very good at trouble shooting that stuff.

But that is not the way it should be. Your order should have a download link in there somewhere. I would suggerst reporting that to the help desk

No one can be expected to try and correct / remediate all corners of the internet. Reminds me of one of my favourite cartoons: https://xkcd.com/386/ That is not why Steve has not pursued Steam. He has explained himself before. So I will just link to the definitive thread where he explains his position:

Sounds like it. You don't need them installed on both drives. You can move the game install directories without any problem. The scenario files and saves however need to be in the My Documents location. It is possible to move that too but you can only move the whole thing and you have to follow the official MS steps to get it to work properly. However it sounds like you already have those files located on your larger drive (I have mine setup like that as well).

This actually good advice. Advice that I plan to heed. In the future My only problem is this kind of stuff. OK I get that you feel that my calling people out for whining and calling them entitled is annoying. Roger that. My plan is to refrain from doing that, if not at all hopefully a lot less. But who's abusing you? People complain about dumb things (like missed dates before the date has even arrived) or complain over and over about lack of communication (anyone who has been here for any amount of time should be pretty clear that there is not a tone of communications). To me it just seems surprising that people get upset about stuff they already know the answer to and then get upset again when someone points out they are being at least silly. But there I go again pointing out people's entitlement - which is what got you all riled up. I'll sign off on this thread with this simple message: it is not abuse to point out when you are wrong. If you take it as abuse there isn't much I can do about that. Other than not point it out in the future Yep +1

Those hedges are actually bocage. Normandy fields were separated with piles of rocks and vegetation that was many many years old. They are impassible to tanks. There are gaps in the bocage but only some of them are big enough for a tank to go through. Given that you have to plan your movement accordingly. Let you infantry lead the way and let them spend time in a location to spot the enemy. Once you spot them you can position your tanks or mortars (I think I remember mortars in the training mission) to deal with what you have spotted. Shooting on the move is as simple as plotting your move way points and then issuing target orders for the tank - and you can change the orders at each way point. If you don't also add pauses to those way points your tank will fire on the move. Normally WW2 tanks would move and stop to fire and then move again but the game cannot quite handle that so they abstract it by letting them fire on the move instead - just with reduced accuracy. Watch out though for strong dips or rises in the terrain. I have had tanks go over a bump at just the moment they fire and end up with an HE round hitting 20m in front of the tank. Friendly fire is not very friendly.

Happy birthday! Ii see you have a nice new avatar for the occasion.

LOL, that was so funny. You can't make this stuff up.

That looks like you are running the setup from *within* the .zip file UI. If so that will not work. Here is what you do: unzip the contents of the downloaded file to a new / empty folder on your HD. Go there with your Windows Explorer and then double click on the setup program. If that is what you did to get the error then you should open a support ticket but if you tried to run it from with in the Zip program UI that's why it is confused - only the setup program you are trying to run was extracted to the temporary location and now it cannot find one of the files that it needs (because it is still in the .zip file and has not been extracted).

We need the florescent hit decal mod so they jump out more.

You should have an activate shortcut. Launch that and it will prompt you for your code.

Yep, understood. My thinking around including hiding is it might help highlight the contrast. For example, for the sake of argument, say test show that trenches offer just a slight amount of protection for non hidden troops but near total for hidden troops compared to troops in the open. That might make people feel different about the results than if the testing just shows that trenches offer a slight amount of protection compared to being in the open.

Yeah sucks. Here is what you do: make the troops fanatic so they will obey your orders at nearly all costs and give them a pause order. They will then stay a very long time for you to study the slaughter. You can do the same for soldiers in open ground. Also, some people might ask about the difference hiding makes. My personal experience is that hiding in trenches offers crazy good protection. I remember the scenario A Temple to Mars (I think I have that right), when I had my soliders hide in the trench works they were nearly un-kill-able, only shells that went into the trench caused casulties. After the artillery fire I gave them the un-hide command and they fought on.

You are correct that there is some amazing detail. By default the design of the game is based on actual geometry and tracking projectiles. But there is some fudge factors built in for some things. I personally don't know if artillery is handled shrapnel by shrapnel or by chances and factors with hard cover offering total projection . An example is terrain gives people projection based on a factor on top of any geometry like tress or vehicles that might block the path. So heavy forest will give a soldier more projection than light forest which gives more than tall grass. And since trenches are not quite what they should be in terms of geometry they have a factor of additional protection above what you would expect form the polygons. As I was explaining earlier - and you clearly have taken to heart. That is fair enough. There are other people who feel the same way. To be clear I have no opinion on that because I don't know how good projection should be. My only skin in the game is to help explain the way the game works and how changes to the game are made. Things like this do not move fast because even if you create some measurement of the difference between the projection from open ground and the trench then there has to be some determination of if the difference is reasonable. But one thing at a time. It is entirely possible that some statistical test will show something that seems goofy to everyone. I have no idea.

Oh I forgot about that. What you did was pretty cool. Do you have a link to that thread?

Which was the point I was trying to make but with some humour. Clearly that humour missed the mark - or some people's mark anyway