A Canadian Cat

Humm I cannot find that. I found an article in forbes saying there was going to be no way to turn it off for home users. I found multiple sites with a work around (turn off the update service: http://www.thewindowsclub.com/turn-off-windows-update-in-windows-10). Sigh. I get what they are trying to do but to leave no way for me to delay or control updates - man that is aggravating. I specifically do not want video driver updates unless I have checked on them and I never want my PC rebooted without my direct say so. Two steps forward and one step back. Unless Chris is right and I missed it I guess I'll live with the work around because I already know I cannot live with forced automatic updates. Mind you I'm just going to ignore 10 for a while anyway.

Oh great I have to live like that on my work machine because of some genius at corporate. I personally am very diligent about installing security updates but I like to do it on my own timing. There have been several instances lately where I will have left work with a particular setup and arrangement ready to continue work the next day only to find my self starting at the start up screen when I get in the next day. Drive me nuts when that happens.

Still encouraging to hear a few more people for whom it worked. From yesterday I had herd of one person now we are up to what three and no failures. Like you said no guarantee by any means but at least encouraging.

Check out this thread: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119847-windows-10-cm-compatibility/?p=1623464 Seems some have tried it with success.

Hell no! It was not to long ago my guys got hit with a crater the size of a swimming pool in the back yards of a village and they lost a nearly a dozen guys in four or five buildings around the crater plus two half tracks and a jeep and the bomb hit nothing but empty space. It brought down on of the buildings totally.

No such thing with the newer tittles - you can only do that with CMSF and CMA

LOL Can you wait? I mean I guess I should be OK with you going first since my plan is to wait a while and see how it goes for others. Is there no way you can wait a few months? Hee, Hee famous last words. I am sure they are mostly correct they are updating their OS components and not re-imaging your machine. I strongly suspect it will work for the vast vast majority of programs. The sticky wicket might be DRM related. Check out what @Schrullenhaft has to say: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120375-question-about-windows-10/#entry1623358 No but I would not worry about this - contact support if you need help. I have never heard of anyone having to buy again. But seriously how much re-installing have you needed to do over the years? You get four activations for each game and when you bought 3.0 upgrade that was a new key with a new four activations. Sounds like @Schrullenhaft has tried it under Windows 10 during beta.

Very interesting and enlightening @Vanir Ausf B look at what happens and that there was in fact a change. Good to know. I learned early that to get what I wanted I needed to help out. I agree with others that putting a way point on the far side of the gap in the field is not good from the point of few of pausing in the open. So instead what I do is put a way point on the safe side of the cover right in front of the place I want the men to go through: I have been doing that for a while now and it has been working for me. Now looking at that last example where the team goes through the gate in 3.x I kinda wonder if my technique would break. I have been consistently doing this since the early days and I have not been surprised but this exact scenario you have above makes me wonder. I'm going to have to try it to make sure.

Yep, that's the plan. Yes, good thoughts. If the guys defending the road are taking casualties and the enemy is advancing then setting up / shoring up the next level of defence is the right thing to do. The only thing to keep in mind is the objectives. In this case the farm. How many resources do you need to make that open ground unappealing? How many resources are you going to need to stop the road advance? Can you move guys out of the southern trenches and get them to useful places along the road. At this point if this were a blind game you might not be 100% sure the road was the main attack but you would be at least thinking that was the more likely course. So, thinking about how to tweak the defence accordingly would be a good thing (which you are).

The problem with hunt is they stop when they take that stray round. And slow is really tiring. I agree move can be a problem in unsafe areas but so is hunt. I guess if there was a risk of getting shot at, slow would be the better choice.

Yes, one of those times when you wish one asset was sitting in a location instead of another. The Carrier recon HQ spotted a truck towing a 75 way across the map. Wish it was a Sherman instead As you can see I am bit behind on posting. Real life is slowing me down. I need to catch up too because I have a plan and I want to present it before I do it. I'll try to get up to date tonight.

Yes, that should be the case. If your target command shows you a reverse slope no aim point you will probably still be able to call there. I usually use the target tool to test out the visibility when planning the FO's position. In variably the ability to call artillery is better than the target tool indicates.

Anything that can be called by an FO is in the artillery asset list. Select an HQ or and FO unit and click on the artillery call tab (shape of a artillery piece at the top in the centre). That will bring up a scrolling list of assets that may be call able. Some might not be setup yet, some might be out of contact and some might be unavailable to your HQ but anything that could be used for indirect fire will be there. Anything else will not be listed. As for using mortars in direct fire they an be really effective. To keep them alive long enough to do some good keep them back a bit and only bring them forward when there is a target to hit. When you do get them to fire from as far away as possible and form cover if possible. Mortars can fire just beyond their LOS which give them flexibility to stay back a bit more then other troops.

OK slow down with the worry. The issue was with the transition between scenarios in a campaign. I am confident that stand alone scenarios do not suffer from this problem. You brought up other campaigns, it has not been forgotten.

What is grey? And 50mm raises alarm bells because you cannot call indirect fire with the British 50mm and I have a feeling but am not 100% sure if the German ones can or not. So, after the what is greyed out question can you tell us what nationality we are talking about here and is 50mm correct? Edited to be definite about British 50mm

LOL I'll keep my eye out for that name amongst the officers in any British formations and keep a close eye on his unit.

Sure, that reflects the way it is. As you can read a few posts up that is how I handle things as well. However I would love to see the TacAI improved and this would be one area. I think the player will always need to be in there to get what they want - time movements to avoid too many men in a choke point or to coordinate things so that one squad is moving while another is still watching. But I would like some day to see better movement patterns when using long movement orders so the Tac AI could avoid the one long conga line problem. I think it would look more natural all the time.

How realistic is that? Where tank smoke launchers never used in coordination with other tanks or infantry. Just curious.

Yes, I get that it will not look as perfect as what you have now but function is important. I, personally, cannot see myself using a building texture that looked like it had windows and doors but did not. I suspect I would not be alone in that. Given that I really like how your work looks I would really like to use it So, good luck.

Well you did say: earlier... I must have missed any rude comments. Hopefully none were from me - that was not my intention. I should point out hyperbola like above does tend to be a bit "in your face", I personally try to keep that to a minimum. Oh, I did not mean to go down the whip them out and see how big they route. Let me try to rephrase my point: Given the amount of hours spent by the other people who responded on this, and the other thread, who have not seen the issues you have or who have found ways to get the soldiers in game to behave satisfactorily even if you clocked tons of hours playing you should consider "what should I be doing differently?" or "why might I be the only one seeing these things?" Instead of jumping to the conclusion that the game is broken. I am the first to admit that there can be bugs in the game however when people see something odd the first thing they should ask is "is this expected" or "are others seeing this?" If you begin your investigation and threads here with questions rather than declarations your threads will create better discussions. There that was what I mean. I never meant to impune your abilities or your hours spent playing. As for your offer to play a game, thank you for you kind offer and there was a time when I would have said sure. However right now I fear I have too many games on the go and some of my regular opponents are suffering a slow rate from me at the moment. I could not possibly take on another opponent right now. I don't think that would be a problem You can have two (in fact n) versions of the game installed all at once. All of the 3.x games will share the same activation (i.e. you activate once and any additional installs are just happy). All the 2.x games will share the same activation and similarly with the 1.x installs. I do this all the time. At this moment I have two CMBS installs. At one time I had four CMBN installs going (ick). So, leave your currently working install alone. Fire up the 1.0 installer and choose a unique directory to install it too (do not use the default since it is probably where your 3.0 game is installed). I choose C:\Programs\CMBN10 as an example. You will need your 1.0 activation code and you can now fire up either one of the games and walk down memory lane. Excellent - I am looking forward to them. Please keep in mind that there will likely be a few suggestions for changes in your testing. I do not think I have ever seen someone create a test that satisfied the experts first try before.

So, no offence but what are you talking about? No one is jumping on you - we are saying we either don't see the same problems or we don't get what you are saying. You are frustrated - we get that but do not forget that those who are responding with questions play this game a lot and we are not having the same frustrations. So, either: our expectations do not match yours, you are doing it wrong (yeah, just you cause you are the one who is frustrated ), or there is a bug you are hitting that few other people are Add some examples and tests and then people will tell you what is wrong with your expectations or the game But don't take that as jumping on you either. Like this one... OK now we are talking. This I can work with. First: Are you sure that this was any better in the older versions? I always remember long movement orders causing long cogna lines and bunching up when going through obstacles. Seriously I noticed no difference with this behaviour over the years. Now mind you I have stopped using long movement orders like that for the most part and only do it occasionally. If you (or any one else) can show that there was a significant change between 1.0 or 2.0 and 3.0 then go for it and I'll log it even but frankly I'll be shocked if that is the case. Create a QB in 1.x and save the game with movement orders like your example above and run it a bunch to times and then take the save and move it over to 3.0 and see if it really is different. I do not play that way any more. Even when I am trying to get guys to cover as much ground as possible in safe areas I do not use move orders that long. The best way to prevent that conga line is to use shorter movement orders and be happy with your men getting there a little slower. Personally I give them built in additional pauses so they arrive at their destination fresh and ready. Tired = bad. Not only that I also offset their movement so that in a platoon a squad is still while others move. That is safer in case of surprises but it also helps to limit the congestion at choke points. In less safe areas I change the pauses so only one squad is moving at any given time. Short movement orders like 24 - 32m in safe areas and 16m in non safe areas.

LOL yeah I did that twice today - so not just you

Yep it is for CMBN. Here is the preview thread: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120281-preview-of-the-first-battle-pack/

They will. One thing infantry are good at is hearing the tanks coming.

The other thing to remember is that those '?' icons are not strictly speaking sound contacts. They are unidentified contacts. They could be sound, glimpses of moment, early intel or markers for previously spotted enemy. See "Floating Icons" pp 39 in CM Engine Manual v3.00.