A Canadian Cat

And there is the rub. Spoken like a game player who knows all and has the options calculated out - not like a tank crew. Not trying to be glib or snarky either. Put yourself in an M1 turret. Yes, you know you are in the best damn tank on the battlefield. But you are not so cocky as to think that you are invincible. You know damn well that a T90 even in the front can take our your tank if hit hits the right spot and just about anything else the enemy possesses has some kind of chance at disabling you or putting a whole in your side. Your goal is to take on the enemy but bring everyone home. Don't for get that. Now you as the tank commander are on a mission and executing the plan. Suddenly the automatic system detects someone lasing you. Your crew do not have any contacts at the moment you know that anything on the battle field that has a laser range finder has a chance of at least mission killing your tank and causing caulties or even killing you. You pray the automatic system kicks in and puts up a smoke screen fast enough and that your driver executes you orders fast enough. *Then* you figure out where the threat is (with the help of the LWR system - yes it is that awesome) and make a plan to deal with it. Oh yes that would be cool. Don't get me wrong just because I think the behaviour of LWR equipped vehicles is OK as it is does not mean I don't agree with you about this. Additional equipment levels would be nice to have - especially for stuff that is not standard fair on vehicles now.

Would you be happier if your tanks were all burning wrecks? If your tank gets a lazer targeting warning and does nothing, there is a very good chance that it will become a burning wreck shortly after that. The way things are supposed to work is this. If the crew has a target and are working towards firing there is a good chance they will finish the firing solution before the react to the LWR. If they have a fast move order the will very likely ignore the LWR and complete the move order. Otherwise there is a good chance they will pop smoke and pull back. So, to reduce the chance of popping smoke and pulling back use fast move orders between cover.

Can you expand on that? When I read that I picture a sub directory under the regular CMFB install that contains just the patch contents so that when you delete it you are back to where you started. If that is correct then it means your patch was installed inside a sub directory of the game not on top of the game like it should have been. The installer should find your install path but if it does not it might stick an extra sub directory on the path. For example on my system I have the game installed at C:\Programs\CMFB101 and I typically moved it or renamed it so the patch installer cannot guess the path so when I pick the right path for my system depending on how I do it the path might end up being C:\Programs\CMFB101\Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg and I have to manually delete the "Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg" part. Make sure the path the installer chooses is the directory where the game .exe is located.

Interesting good to know @Ivanov .

Sorry man. I have a good friend who is Serbian and his English is excellent and he barely has an accent. Most people have no idea he was not born here. But the one thing he has trouble with is our goofy expressions - like this one. So, I know all to well how excellent English does not always mean that someone knows the goofy expressions and slang. Like I said if if you already know then just ignore me.

What that a request for explanation - "what the heck are sardines"? In case it was - it is an English (North American only, perhaps, not sure) expression that means packed close together and squeezed in. Sardines are small fish that are frequently packed tightly in a can like this: If that was not a request for explanation - then just ignore me

The repository is closed. Head over here: Scenario Depot

@Bootie has several .zip files up there that are pretty darn big - because of attached mods. His site doesn't seem to flinch - go for it

Yes, for hooking up a firewire drive to a Thunderbolt port: http://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/MD464LL/A/apple-thunderbolt-to-firewire-adapter?afid=p238|syzDP6mS6-dc_mtid_1870765e38482_pcrid_142913545083_&cid=---cth-slid--product-MD464LL/A-CA Also for temporarily connecting bare drives to a computer I have something similar to this at home and they are cheap: https://eshop.macsales.com/item/NewerTech/U2NV2SPATA/ With something like that you can connect any drive up to get data off it. If your mac as a USB port it will probably work for you too. These kinds of things are helpful when you have lost the power cable for a case or have a case with a connector that you cannot use - just open the case pull the bare drive out and power it with the universal power connector and connect the usb cable to whatever native connector the drive wants. Tada! Of course @Wicky's links are good for permanent external drives.

How about putting it up at the scenario depot or the proving ground if it is not finished yet - I forget the status.

But @Erwin the negative response is not due to the suggestions of new features or game play options it was to the OP's original prose. I feel bad quoting it because I'm the one that first reacted snarkily and regretted doing so and @Casus_Belli said they also regretted the phrasing. So, I am only bringing this up in the hopes THAT PEOPLE WILL NOT RESTART the "why are you guys so snarky" when the snarker (me) and the OP agreed to leave it along and move on. "... completely nonsensical. ... commanders are given a certain amount of time to complete their missions, but this doesn't mean the battle simply stops when the time comes. ... It's utterly ridiculous. OK, if you disagree, and you think it's realistic ... hugs and goes home to their families, fair enough, have it your way, ..." People got snarky not because someone made a feature request we got snarky because the OP opened with some snark of his own. Again please don't restart the snark. I think we discussed the true issue and many of us feel we know what BFC's stance is on this. If they read this thread and wish to change their game - that's cool. Like you and others have said if enough people post an idea and or BFC like it that idea will show up in a future release.

This is an excellent site: http://battledrill.blogspot.ca/ In particular you will probably like these: http://battledrill.blogspot.ca/2015/03/rifle-platoon-leader-platoon-attack.html http://battledrill.blogspot.ca/2015/07/rifle-platoon-leader-platoon-attack_29.html http://battledrill.blogspot.ca/2015/03/rifle-platoon-leader-approach-march.html His site even includes .btt files you can download and try the drills out with.

Here is the link to get to the help desk to check on a ticket: https://battlefront.mojohelpdesk.com/ Where did you find the text you quoted "You do not need to login in order to submit a ticket or help request; you can email us at helpdesk@battlefront.com at any time" ?

Yes, this is very interesting. I take it you kept notes while you were working on this so you could do this write up.

Same here Same here

Yeah, exactly. You didn't just make a perfectly reasonable feature request you dressed it up with snarkiness and defended it with more. I feel slightly bad that your first post was met with snarky replies but not to bad . Around here you reap what you sew.

Good to hear you are doing well. And that you are going to be victorious once again over technology.

I have 1607 (which is the Anniversary Edition) and an Nvida card and driver. I had no issues with the update. Full disclosure I installed that update myself early - because I wanted to try out the bash command line support - which means I did not received it through the update mechanism I manually downloaded it and installed it.

That is pretty strange. I have no idea what would be causing that.

How about fast for - just go as fast as you can and don't stop no matter, quick for - go at a good pace and stop if things get really bad, and hunt for - go carefully and stop as soon as anything even looks bad. I know, I know I'm not that funny Mind you I realize that move does a strange morphing that does not seem to match the others. I just think you can already get nearly what you want.

You mean <ctrl> plus the I key to place quick move way points instead of just the I key? No I don't think that is - could you have some alternate key mapping that you are unaware of? If you go to the game options and look at the key mappings what do you see?

For sure. In the modern game I remember in early playing an enemy RPG triggered an APS intercept that killed two or three members of the squad near my tank. That was a real oh crap moment. I had to adjust how I positioned my forces.

I am not sure if there is much difference between a truck full of ammo and one that is empty. Good question. That is defiantly modelled. Tanks, ACs, trucks anything that explodes when hit or cooks off an hurt soldiers or damage other vehicles close by.

I see. Yeah the reality is that ammo acquiring takes multiple turns. There is not much that can help with that. Embarking / disembarking is inherently a do one or the other in a turn and you can only have passengers disembark at the beginning of a set of move orders or at the end but not in the middle. Embarking sometimes works part way along but usually is smoother if you restrict it also to the beginning of the end of a vehicle movement. Which means you cannot have a vehicle drive up behind some trees, have the passengers jump out and then have the vehicle back up again all in the same turn. You have to time one of those transitions to occur at a turn boundary. Which as you say is tricky. Patches have never tackled changes to things like this.

All of those things you listed are more additional features you would like to see. While BFC have done a few things in patches that might rise to the level of an additional feature it is pretty rare and I cannot recall a single one off the top of my head. Just trying to set expectations... There are techniques that can work to make some actions smoother. Can you give an example of something your are trying to accomplish? It could be that you can get close to what you want already. There certainly are limitations to embarking and disembarking vehicles so it is possible there is no help too.