A Canadian Cat

Not at the moment.  Although @Moon did say that he is working on improvements to the repository.  Hopefully those improvements will make searching easier.  Many are looking forward to the update.

This is why BF gives info so rarely.  They know it is never going to be enough so why bother.  They literally JUST told us about the next NW Europe family and that CMFI and CMRT would see modules..  LOL  You need to fight this addiction son, it's taking over your life! 
 
The one question I can answer (because BF has already said this) is there won't be another module for CMBN.  There may be additional packs, I think the jury is still out on that pending their assessment of the profitability of the last pack.  The original assessment for CMBN was 3 modules, but they covered all the period material they needed to in 2.  As to future families I don't think they can really say.  It depends on how much material they have to work with.  I am not even sure the remake of CMSF will have 3 modules again.  A lot of the work regarding ToEs etc is done.  They could however expand on CMSF (yes yes yes!! please, Israelis, Egyptian, Jordanian, Turkish units please!!)

The CMBS backstory basically has both sides blundering into a regional conflict neither of them wanted. They both believed that with a sufficient show of resolve the other side would back down. But neither side does. Russia would no doubt have preferred that NATO was intimidated by its show of force, NATO would have preferred to have Russia hesitate before firing on NATO forces.  I do not think *fictional Russian leader* in 2017 would willingly doom his country to assured nuclear annihilation over the fate of Kiev. So win, lose or draw the CMBS Ukraine conflict stays conventional and contained. No bombers over Moscow, no submarine launched cruise missiles fired into Norfolk naval base.

I don't understand why that would be a reason to not make a Cold War CM, just write the story like any other Cold war war-game that doesn't involve nuclear weapons. If that is truly the reason it is a very weak one, CM Fulda Gap (for example) would be a great way to include thousands upon thousands of different tactical scenarios involving a large variety of nations, units and locations.

OK here is one of mine from a way back:

I just did a totally lame test - one sample each and timed with my phone.  For CMRT 1.00 running on my SSD drive it started in 13.7s.  For CMRT 1.03 running on my platter drive it started in 26.7s.
 
Both of those were from time of launch to main screen up I did not <esc> the splash screen.  So there you have it the SSD launch *is* much faster.  I guess I just don't notice anything faster than 30s

OK here is one of mine from a way back:

Just FYI MR's 1,800+ and 5000+ post's. I do know how to read! Please "GET A LIFE", and you are welcome. Know it all people like people like you two are the reasons people don't post here! There is always 1 or more @#$% on every site it seems.

LOL...to beat a dead horse.
 
Say in my WeGo orders phase, on waypoint 8 I have a Target command against a house. Then I merrily place waypoints 9, 10, and on through 33.
 
Suddenly, I remember that the house by waypoint 8 is going to be entered by my own infantry around that time frame. Crap. Imagine having to erase 25 waypoints? (Back in the day we had to: that's also back when we walked uphill, both ways, to school.)
 
Rather than erasing, or giving a "fake" target order (covered arc, etc.), I select that waypoint, and Clear Target.
 
Whew.

Wow you guys are making variable weather complex. How about just letting us set initial conditions and a second set of conditions at X minutes. Maybe allow a short random interval and maybe allow an optional second transition.


I bet that would be plenty of work .

Heck, Canada is capable of deploying a brigade sized force and the CF is teeny tiny compared the the UK armed forces.

Adding Canadian forces gets my vote - but I am pretty biased

I took a shot at a small para drop mision in CMFI. Have a look and see how it feels: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/104496-pathfinder-mission-areal-photos-of-sicily/?hl=pathfinder

Nonsense

I for one would really like the crosses and transparent buildings to be toggle able.

That green up arrow is the plus one...

That green up arrow is the plus one...

LOL, for those who don't know "yours to discover" used to be the slogan in our Ontario license plates.

It got kind of awkward once personalized plates came along.

Well, I don't think many users were looking for a change but the version of software that was running the old forum was getting out of date.

I for one appreciate the black on white colour scheme, much easier to read. And I really appreciate that this new system remembers what you have and have not read properly. That alone makes it worth it to me.

AKA add a feature for a custom point Quick Battle.

OK, well I am sorry for my part if you did not deserve it. However in my defense you did add a post onto one of the worst examples of "the game is broken because it does not match my perception of the way things should be in my opinion, but I will offer no real evidence that my perception is correct" threads in this forums history. (Yes there was a little sarcasm there).

And you also just declared the game broken and offered no real evidence. Heck I don't even understand what it was you observed in game that seemed wrong - I mean specifically.

When the performance of MGs first came up - way back now - I tried rushing infantry across the open against MGs and the pretty much always overran the MG's position. Not good.

Then the effects of MGs were tweaked and now in my same tests I could pretty much never overrun the MGs position. Nice!

I forget the exact troop soft factor specifications but it was not tuned down to a low level. So, unless someone can recreate something that shows things are not working as expected my experience and testing shows that things are. If you have an example that seems off by all means create some tests and share some saved games. But I recommend two things:


Start a new thread - and also start from the position that you think something might be wrong and that you have done some investigation.
Be open to the possibility that your testing, tactics or assumptions are not quite right.