A Canadian Cat

I found this as well. So I often end up with two or three images one each for ranges of elevations. I can then swap the overlay a few times to get all the contours in place.

I long ago sprang for fraps but just recently discovered that the built in game screen capture for windows 10 works. The win alt G pop-up window does not display in game but the short cut for screen captures works perfectly. I did not try the video capture.

LOL 20 years ago the only those of us unlucky enough to live or work near one had to deal with ranting nutcases. Now we all get to see everyone of them https://xkcd.com/386/

That is exactly how it works. LOL quoting that scene from Monty Python really does not clear things up at all

You have a point for sure. I remember reading the thread that floated the idea that PBEM would not be in CM2x. Yikes. As someone who will never be playing this in RT mode and just cannot enjoy beating the AI that would have meant I would never have been a customer. I am sure the game would have done well, perhaps just as well but I would not be here. My issue with RT is not philosophical, it is the simple fact that I do not have hour or multi hour uninterrupted blocks of time to play games. I just don't. So no RT no WEGO TCP/ip for me it just will never happen. So if a game does not offer some turn based way to play I will not be a customer. And I would not have been here to advocate for various things along the way. Not that anyone would really miss my contributions but my point is if there are indeed customers who are not here because WEGO TCP/IP is not in the game then their voices, concerns are absent too. I get that Steve has to prioritize what his team works on so he made is call and it is what it is. Hilarious

No, these changes are for the better. Before the MG change you could charge a platoon at an MG nest in the open and win 100% of the time. Now the MG team will shred the platoon. There is no way anyone can successfully argue that the way it used to be is realistic. It is now. Sorry the argument that TCs should be immune to small arms 200m or 300m from enemy infantry make no sense. And if you were an infantry man shooting at a TC why would you aim for the centre of the tank? That makes no sense either. Honestly I just do not see why this keeps coming up. This has never been a real problem - unbutton TCs are at risk when they get close to the enemy that's the way it should be. You don't think that a piece of shrapnel from a large explosion could not cause a casualty 50m, 100m 200m away? What does your physics calculation say is the cut off? Given that the frequency of this is very low even if it is wrong it is not a big deal. I personally do not think it is wrong either. I have never see that happen and say to my self "oh no way that's impossible". I have said to my self "oh crap it had to be that solider that was taking out".

Absolutely! All the other chatter about the game engine not doing X right or should be doing Y are total red herrings. If any one person above got his way 100% with the tweaks they want (just one person because a lot of these "BFC must fix" demands are at odds with each other:-) then not a damn thing would be different because people would still press and press etc. and cause all kinds of carnage. I suppose an exception might be if soldiers were more likely to ignore your orders and the tougher the situation the less they would follow them. Yeah that might reduce the casulties. I'm not sure how much fun the game would be though. The only thing I can see that might actually make a difference (using the current game that is) is fitting these battles into a operational or strategic layer where pushing until a unit is totally combat ineffective would have consequences for future battles. I have played that way and it does make a difference but I still think we are too aggressive most of the time even then.

Yeah, so if you can edit your post the attachments are listed at the bottom of the edit window and you can delete them. If you cannot edit your post there will be no way to delete attachments.

There is a time limit for editing posts. After which no editing can be done. I'm going to attach a small text file to this and then edit the post to remove it and see what the UI looks like... Update one. Oops I forgot to attach it. Attaching now... After attaching it I get a UI with a list of attachments where I can + to insert it into the post and delete it. Attached here: When I edit I see the same UI. Now deleted...

Well I don't think this is BFC's doing. I predict that Yahoo is your default search provider in Firefox. Change it to Google and your problems will go away (https://www.searchenginejournal.com/change-your-default-search-engine-in-firefox-google-chrome-ie-original/24378/). See discussion here for more info: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.mac.apps/ZO3TAA8f_Rg

Oh ouch. I think it is too late for "run away, run away"

No that is not something you can control or mod. A change like that would require code changes.

Yeah thanks that's important to know because you can check out the map before you buy forces even if the game is set and moving forward.

Yeah, I hope it helps. It seems (you will discover from those threads) that some people have problems and others don't. I used to think that it was perception rather than fact but those threads cleared that up. Sadly not everyone ends up happy. Hopefully BFC can make improvements for people over time.

There is not CM specific mod manager and I haven't heard of any one using one. The place to go for mods is here: http://cmmods.greenasjade.net/ The absolute most useful mod is Vin's animated text. I cannot for the life of me find the version for CMBS - can anyone else find it? Could it not exist? I am no where near my gaming computer so I cannot look to see if I have it. I personally am rather fond of: http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=2681 and http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=2678 (because I created them) but there are other icon mods around too. I have all of @Kieme(ITA)'s vehicles. Check out this thread for all his stuff it doe snot seem to be on the cmmodsiii site.

To clarify are you saying that you experience poor camera control smoothness and stuttering at 25 fps? Or are you talking about the subtle visual things that you can notice if you are looking for them at lower frame rates?

Here are a few useful threads: Latest post has one person's settings. This is a good one to read:

This is only helpful for playing really big battles with human opponents: First post describes how to setup a really big battle using the QB points system.

That is correct. The reason is just one of programming resources. Nope. You have to open them up in in the editor or "play" a test QB with them. Pretty much all graphics and sound mods are compatible. The one exception I know of is early uniform mods. They changed the way uniforms were named in v2 of the engine so some early CMBN uniform mods will not work without you renaming files. Just don't worry about it and try out what ever you want. The worst case with this change is the old mod will not show up but it will not hurt anything. I am personally not fond of any of the terrain mods or sound mods but I do like Aris's vehicle mods. Here are all the CMBN vehicle mods: http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?page_id=5#search/category=CM%3ABN+VEHICLES and here is all Aris's work: http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=2698

If you have purchased the 3.0 upgrade then do nothing but download the 10Gb all in one installer and install that. Make sure you un zip it into an empty directory before running the install. After installing you can then activate the game and each module you own. There is an activate module short cut that gets installed. The only thing you might have to do is install the 3.12 patch. Last time I heard the all in one installer had not yet included the patch.

Its kinda a relative thing. CMFB's force selection is decent - certainly better than CMBN was when it first released. The AI used in the QB maps is way better now than it was. If you were going to play QBs against the AI CMFB or CMBS would be the titles to do it with. But frankly QBs against the AI are not as good as scenarios against the AI and pale in comparison against humans. Probably the best experience would be to attack the AI in a probe battle. I only play QBs against the AI for testing so my opinions might be a little stale. If someone comes along who plays that way regularly I would weigh their opinions higher than mine.

Humm what to say that will not get me dumped on. Probably there is no way I can phrase it, so dump away. @Big Boss this has been asked before and Steve has even said - "nope not going to happen". Aside from the programming effort and resources it would consume at runtime it give us way to much information that real commanders / soldiers don't have. Since we already have a massive information advantage he feels it would be bad to give us more. While it is true that in RL a higher level commander would not be giving "go to this exact spot" orders but instead they would be "go to this area and cover that valley, road or whatever" and then the lower level commander and his soldiers would figure out how to get eyes on the desired area from near the location and report back if they could not / do something sensible. So, we are kind of caught between a rock and a hard place given that we can only give "go to this exact spot" type orders. So, I totally get your desire. The other problem is that, as @Erwin points out the LOS tool (and the proposal you have given) has so many moving parts. Right now it measures if the given unit can see the ground at a location given the unit's current posture (prone, kneeling, standing). But really we might want to know if my guys were standing could they see a vehicle which would be a totally different question. Those variables x10 plus add in how to answer how much trees will block visibility and you see that the UI for actually getting the information we need would make it hard to use. We have a few hints with the "reverse slope" indicator which means that you cannot see the ground but you could see something higher. Honestly I would rather BFC focus on giving us ways to more closely simulate giving lower level units more open ended orders and have the Tac AI do some of the low level work once they "get there" than trying to give is more fine grained LOS information. That's a lot of work too though.

The latest Nvida cards and drivers have shadow play which may work and you may have. I do have a card that supports it but have never tired it. It required some setup work and I didn't bother following through once I got blocked figuring it out because I have FRAPs and wanted to play not tinker

Oh that's cool @gnarly I keep learning about new things stuffed into Windows 10. I'll defiantly check that out at home tonight. The line about might only work in windowed mode in that article might take the fun out of it but it is worth trying.

+1 that is pretty cool.