A Canadian Cat

If you hit the bug in more then one then general but if you have examples in specific games then in their sub forums.

My impression is he intends to do that but that made the file too big to attach to the post. I am presuming that a final version would include it and by hosted in an appropriate place...

That is an interesting example but that is how things are designed. Hopefully the ? remains - since they saw it. There is no "can I see dust" spotting check. Dust is visible when the generator is and invisible when not. This is so you cannot, with your god like powers, see vehicles driving (by their dust) in areas of the map your troops cannot see. To process your units being able to see dust or not is too taxing for the current engine so it is a limitation we have to live with. It is a trade off but the right one.

Awesome - new scenarios are only good. Your file allocation here on the forum is crazy small so you probably will not be able to upload another one even. May I suggest you look at an alternative. Dropbox is ok for some testing and back and forth but not good once the scenario is ready to be distributed. Once you are done definatly post to the scenario depot: http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/ An alternative during testing is the proving grounds: http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tpg2/

Probably a new thread would work best - so it does not get lost in the uproar that this thread is heading towards

Correct. The sayings and casualty sounds are random at play back not random at event calculation. Sometimes it feels kinda weird watching an even multiple times and hearing different voice sounds.

Yes, lots of good stuff... Prioritization means that some things are likely to just never be done - by BFC. I have no idea if random map generation is one but like that. It is one that could be side stepped by letting other people do it. Whatever way you slice it there needs to be a decent map authoring tool but what if the map format could be opened up a bit (either as a file format or special simplified input options or an API - I'm not fussy which) then BFC could never create a random map feature but someone else could. And someone could create a tool for supporting campaigns that sliced parts of a larger map and someone else could create something that none of us here have though about yet. Etc.

For better or worse engaging with testers and other community members is as close to official as we are going to get. Keep doing it. Yeah, there was a change made. It seems to not have resolved the problem enough. Testers are still working on it. Now one has abandoned this issue. OK but that's not going to happen. We do have NDAs and sometimes that is a cause but BFC also dose not document the full behaviour scope of every little thing. So, it is what it is and it is intentional so there ya go. To bad so sad. Sorry you feel that way but it is how you feel not how BFC views customers. Sorry I cannot make you feel better Yeah, so interestingly enough it was taken seriously and reported and a fix was made (found the but report). So, are you saying you have seen this (mortar round exploding inside bukers) still in 4.0x? If so I will look at reproducing it. If you have a save that would get me ahead of the game. If not can you at least confirm that it still happens in the latest build. Thankfully no one has said that and no one on the testing team will. The fact that you don't seem to want to believe that isn't our problem. I have explained this before but perhaps you have missed this. I get that end users just see a problem with bridge crossing - heard and understood. The fact is that in the background multiple bugs have been fixed. So far every reported and logged bug has been fixed. The fact that it is still possible to find new ways of confusing bridge crossing is unfortunate. If you guys find examples and report them with a save they will be fixed. So, short version there is not one single thing that "just has not been fixed" this is a complex area and multiple bugs that show the same symptoms have been fixed. If there are more we can go after them too.

That could work. If it doesn't try downloading the all in one installer for 4.0 - that will certainly fix it.

It will very likely be totally fine. Follow the official proceedure of watching playback with the old version, saving during command phase, shutting down and installing, then loading the save before completing the turn.

No, several people had test cases using the new 2019 labeled qb maps.

Correct more than one tester could not reproduce the problem using their test case. 4.01 showed the problem for them -> 4.02 did not. The thing with the Tac AI decisions is there is no way to make a "that will never happen again" statement. Having said that - I am disappointed that you were able to hit it so fast.

Correct. Here are the steps layed out:

LOL you think that was hostile that might explain a lot Here are some of the why BFC is not using Steam: And here is a neat summary of where Steam conversations end up:

I see no sign of this as a logged issue. So, we should get the details... In addition to what @Heirloom_Tomato asks in what context do you see the slow rate of fire? Direct targeting, direct target light, indirect at some specific requested fire rate?

Mind you we are getting even further off topic now - time for me to get back to thinking about CM.

theocracy Spot on. LOL a bunch of activists calling people out for being extremely rude to <insert a target of your choice here> are not the "state shutting down" anyone. They are just pointing out to rude boorish people that they are in fact just rude and boorish Certainly like @danfrodo points out some people whine too much - go nuts calling them out for being whiners - I'll be there beside you on that but they have next to no power and certainly not the power of the state. Exactly there are several paths to totalitarianism - all of which end up in the same place - arbitrary detention, state sponsored murder, loss of a long list of freedoms. Fascism and Communism are only two examples you also have Theocracy which are just as bad and just pure and simple tribalism works for a number of really bad characters in the world too. None of which were put in place by a bunch of new age hippies calling out boors for being boors.

Exactly - bloody scary actually.

Indeed they are design decisions that have to be made. Us players can blissfully list our wishes but the boss has to decide how to deal with the side effects and what to prioritize - or not.

Yeah I have a real problem with this. The acts in question were unacceptable in the world at the time. Yes, I am aware that dogmatic leaders used mass murder regularly then but the vast majority of actual citizens were well aware that mass murder was not an acceptable practice. LOL the power of political correctness? That is hilarious. It has very little power - next to none. It is the very people butt hurt over having to perhaps consider other people in their day to day life that have elevated the idea that some how political correctness is some big bad evil thing. Good lord.

We should all be aware of what this will mean. Either the AI would have to be enhanced to automatically reposition to get the shot it wants. That means armour backing up on its own and moving around the battle field. We should expect a lot more "but he backed up right into the line of fire of <insert scary enemy here> the game is broken". Or it will be yet another thing that the AI cannot do that humans can - we don't really want more differentiating between human control and AI control. It would be cool - yes.

It is not possible in QBs - hence the OP's request. It is a reasonable request but I have never heard Steve muse that this would make it high on a priory list. In the mean time, with a trusted opponent, you can combine the QB setup UI (for points) with the scenario editor to create your own H2H battle with mixed forces. Check out this thread on how to create a 20 000 point QB: First post outlines how we set things up. You can use the same technique to create a multi side battle as well.

What @General Liederkranz said. I'll just add a couple more thoughts. One is the call time will vary based on who is making the call. The Platoon Lt could have a longer call than the Company CO who's call will be longer than a dedicated FO. For battalion mortars often the mortar platoon HQ has the best call time. Just mentioning this on the off chance you don't already know this. Also some people advocate for calling maximum duration missions and then adjusting them. This results in more responsive changes but has the draw back of using all your ammo so you would need to cancel the mission if you don't have a secondary target.

I didn't fix it just reported to the boss. He fixed it - I checked CMBS and a few others seems fixed now.

LOL it does kinda feel like kid logic. My son's hockey coach used to say to the kids when they wanted something that was not likely to happen "don't hold your breath - 'cause ya might die"