JSj

It's not only a problem of missing issues during testing. Some issues are old and well known and were fixed before - yet they reappear when new games are launched.
For example the issue of the game crashing when choosing an automatic mixed force without having all the modules. It plagued CMBN for a long time before getting fixed in 4.0. Now it's reappearing in CMSF2.
It's not some unpredictable problem you have to pay testers to work hundreds of hours to find. It's already known and should be on a checklist when you make a new game with the same engine and various optional modules. You know there will be OOB crash problems if a player doesn't have all the modules. 

And you get as a result exactly what is put into it.  A very typical old school way of running a software company is to think no testing saves time and money for doing "real" coding in work.  In reality, it does the opposite, as we are seeing here.  Years and months between patches and customers getting antsy.  BFC obviously runs their company the way they want, but sure seems like a an all volunteer testing force with a testing plan with some holes in it is just leading to trouble.
Even one man coding shops can be easily found that have rigid testing tasks.  Those are the people that understand about paying a dollar now saves ten down the road.  It is a lesson I can't believe has to be discussed again.  It gets relearned constantly.

Actually, it doesn't have to be that rigid.  I would have thought a commonsense task is to test each scenario with modules removed.  It seems like there are a number of testers and that would seem to be the most basic test and one of the first tests that should be run.  Someone built the scenarios, someone, I am hoping,  ran it at least once.  Have that person run it with base module and keep adding modules until it works.  Also, that is one of those things that a good QA program would have automated fairly easily.  No one has to sit there and run each one, but it wouldn't hurt.  A fairly simple iterative program could be built to automate that for any combinations of modules if BFC gives someone access to setting DRM licenses. 
If you wanted more manual intervention, I would also imagine that BFC has or could easily build an OOB list of each scenario and a master list with an attribute being module.  Just manually or automatically run a compare.  This is one of those easy productivity tools that costs an hour upfront and saves 10 hours immediately and maybe 100 hours down the road patching.  I've seen it, done it, and felt the pain.
Again, I'll point out that you build a beta organization of people running and configuring the product many different ways.  I would have assumed that one category was different module configs.  If you don't, you end up issuing hotfixes and taking a couple years to issue patches.  I'm not sure what is happening behind the scenes at BFC, but the patching process is taking longer and the quality of the releases has slipped significantly over the years.

Beta testing is a tough job, especially when the only beta testers are unpaid volunteers.  With that said, whoever is designing the tests or testing plans for the beta testers missed a big one on the Marine campaign.  The whole point of beta testing is to judge performance on multiple setups and configurations.  If everyone is testing on the same set up, you're missing the point of a beta test.  There is no way that tests should all be preformed on systems that have all the products.

Not if the bug in question suspends disbelief in the simulation.

Ya that is often what is said every time this patch is brought up, or at least the last 3 times it has been that I can count.  They can either work on the patch or post on the forums.
First I would say it takes 2 min to post something on the forums, but them not posting on the forums about the patch is not really the issue.
Hey it is what it is at this point, it's pretty much Christmas now and I would never ask that they do anything other than spend that time at home with their families. And I hope that is what they are doing.  They deserve it after getting SF2 out the door.  My frustration with the whole situation isn't going to just change if the patch is released or not at this point.  I am pretty used to not playing the WWII games now. 
 

A lot of other game developers release small "hotfix" patches for their games if they find an important issue. Like a patch that just fixes one thing. It makes me wonder why Battlefront never does anything like that. I would rather download several small patches over time than wait two years for one big one. 

"That is really just an unacceptable amount of time for a developer to fix a problem that was introduced in a paid upgrade to a product."
I completely agree with you, TGarner. I've hardly played any of the games that I own and paid for (ALL the WWII titles and all upgrades), for the past two years, because of the more infuriating problems with the previous upgrade. I used to love the games and played regularly, so it is even more of a shame that the prevalent culture here is that the customer is little more an an irritant and liable to be ignored for months on end - except when it comes to promoting new product and 'upgrades'. It is hardly surprising that these games are such a niche market when even the small current customer base is treated with such continued disdain. 

Ya I picked  up SF2 because I do enjoy SF very much BUT the way the patch for all the other games that I have so much invested in has been handled really leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.  As much as I love these games they have been sitting on the shelf for 2 years more or less.  That is really just an unacceptable amount of time for a developer to fix a problem that was introduced in a paid upgrade to a product.  I don't think they feel this way but it really seems like they just don't really care about those who play primarily single player.
Well we pay the same amount for the games.  I am really sorry to come across so negative and I am sure I will get jumped on by the usual people but just remember there are probably very few people who have been more ardent supporters of these games to everyone I could preach to about how great they are than me.  So feeling the way I feel about this whole patch issue is NOT something I enjoy.  I really want to continue to support Battlefront with my hard earned money but I seriously have to question that going forward, which really breaks my heart.
To the devs who might read this I truly am sorry for the negativity, I sincerely mean that and I hope you can get where it's coming from.
 

Yep. It's now been two years since they broke their own game. Two years. You'd think fixing it would have been a bigger priority.

I've gone from looking for the patch weekly to monthly... soon it will be annually. No info, no nothing... this is tedious in the extreme and no way to retain customers.
 

blasphemy!!!!  Centurion Stwike him!!!!

No, I have been waiting patiently for the patch all along. Have no interest in CMSF2.

Good example, but the enemy hMG was badly positioned and isolated. In a proper defence, the approach to the hMG would be covered by other positions - e.g. behind the house to the left or in a house further to the rear/left (cannot be reached by your cover team), in the little wood to the right. It's the tunnel vision that can give you a bloody nose in CM if you try to advance by fire and manoeuvre. 
Also, I wonder whether the fire team actually fired? Trading fire with a hMG with some rifles usually doesn't end very well for the rifles. ^^ (Unless the very short range here helped the rifles. The MG is deployed within 110m of a wood that provides excellent cover for attackers to approach)
Personally, I find it too risky to just suppress the one position I'm aware of and manoeuvre against it, keeping my fingers crossed that there are no other enemy positions. It's much safer to suppress all potential positions within the line-of-sight-sector and only then start to move.  Ammo traded for fewer casualties! Of course you need much more firepower to pull this off. 
Sometimes, I get the impression that the whole "fire & manoeuvre" for infantry was just propaganda to give the infantryman the idea they can win. Yah! You can do it! If the enemy is isolated and offers his flanks, and if there is no enemy armor around, and if artillery doesn't hit you! No really, you can do it! I guess CM has spoilt me *thousand yard stare*
 

The concept of concentrating firepower is correct.   But, if one does move in large formations it is much more likely that one enemy with a MG can cause a lot of casualties as one has provided a "target rich environment".   In the game, the men group up way too tightly.  Most experienced players always split their units but move them in a way that they are able to be mutually supporting.  Yes, that does require micromanagement.  
 

I remember doing this for one scenario. I was attacking an extensive enemy trench line + bunkers behind a slope. There were a couple areas that I could sneak some scouts and observers into to look at their positions, but I couldn't do much more than that. I would have to attack it frontally. So I massed my whole force just behind the crest of the ridge, and prepared a smokescreen. Rather than smoke the ridge itself to let my troops go over it, I dropped smoke directly over half the enemy trench line, leaving the other half exposed. Then I went over the top. The smokescreen divided the enemy force and halved their firepower, so I could halt on top of the ridge and then concentrate my entire force's firepower on that one exposed enemy half. If I had smoked the ridge instead, then my force would still be exposed to 100% of the enemy's firepower once the smoke cleared.
I took casualties, but I was able to suppress that exposed half, making sure to concentrate on their heavy weapons first. Once the smoke cleared, I could shift fire toward the other half of the enemy trenches. As soon as the enemy bunkers and heavy weapons were destroyed or suppressed, I sent the infantry forward in a big wave to mop up the enemy riflemen and HQ teams that I missed earlier. It ended up working really well in the end!

Small (easy to oversee) ridges bare of concealment that cannot be flanked/evaded are the worst kind of thing, especially if there are no hills around to take a look what's behind them. A few ideas:
Have a TRP - my latest game reminded me of that. If there are reverse slopes on the map, buy that TRP. 30 pts is still cheaper than the squad you're going to loose if you crest that ridge without smoke. As far as I know, onmap mortars can also target reverse slopes, so if the ridge/hill is not too steep, you should at least be able to lay down a smoke screen that lets you crest the ridge even if you don't have a TRP.   The problem when going over the ridge with infantry is that the enemy usually is waiting for you - he's prone and stationary (good spotting, hard to spot), while your guys are moving upright (bad spotting, easy to spot).This is especially true if there is no concealment on the ridge. With vehicles, you have a very similar problem (hidden + stationary versus moving). With infantry, consider crawling over the ridge if some concealment is available. Even if you suffer casualties, they will be more limited. The big downside is that it will slow you down horribly, which increases the danger of an artillery strike if you're detected. In modern titles, this is obviously more risky as better spotting devices are available (IR/heat detection). PS: Don't fire!!! (unless you're already detected by many enemy positions). Soldiers are spotted individually. Even if one gets spotted and shot, the rest of the squad might be safe - by firing, they give away their position. When you really have to push, I think it's a good idea to take a look first. Crawl some infantry up the ridge, use the hide command to stay low, un-hide your infantry for a few turns so that they can just look over the ridge (some guys will kneel). Crawl a bit further and unhide to risk another look, etc. This increases the area you're exposing yourself to and you can observe in little increments. At some point you will have gained a picture of what's awaiting you in the dead ground on the other side. Needless to say that this takes lots and lots of time. Next, share this information (via C2) with the troops who are going to push. For the actual push, make sure that all assets crest the ridge at the same time to throw the enemy's fire into chaos (that's why I find crawling is not the method for infantry to push over a ridge) and reduce your units' total time of exposure. Area fire at the targets that you've been scouting. Try to get to the depression on the other side of the ridge fast - often the top of the ridge is exposed to many enemy positions.   With vehicles, shooting and scooting can be usefull. First scout for targets with infantry as described above. Then drive up your tanks/vehicles in hulldown positions for 10 seconds or so, either with a target arc on an identified target or an area fire order. After 10 seconds, your vehicles need to reverse back behind the ridge. Unless the enemy is very close and experienced, 10 seconds should give you a chance to retreat back into cover before the enemy can spot and zero-in on you. This is especially true against ATGMs who travel at relatively slow speed. For your next shoot & scoot, pick a different spot (the enemy will still have a suspected contact on your former position). As with infantry scouting, fight as little of the enemy at any time, expose yourself little by little. Again, fighting like this takes a lot of time. More time than many scenarios would give to you.

I didn't think it was going to be a long wait either, in the fall of 2015, when it was said that the release of Final Blitzkrieg was close. Then, as time went on, I thought there was going to be a release at the anniversary of the start of the Battle of the Bulge, in December... but no, it was not released until in April 2016. So, I am not holding my breath for CMSF 2 or an Engine 4 patch anytime soon. Like I said, we're on Battlefront time here.

We're on Battlefront time here. This means, check back in 6 months, and if you're lucky, you'll see a message about the patch now finally being almost ready, and it will be released "soon".

I didn't think it was going to be a long wait either, in the fall of 2015, when it was said that the release of Final Blitzkrieg was close. Then, as time went on, I thought there was going to be a release at the anniversary of the start of the Battle of the Bulge, in December... but no, it was not released until in April 2016. So, I am not holding my breath for CMSF 2 or an Engine 4 patch anytime soon. Like I said, we're on Battlefront time here.

I didn't think it was going to be a long wait either, in the fall of 2015, when it was said that the release of Final Blitzkrieg was close. Then, as time went on, I thought there was going to be a release at the anniversary of the start of the Battle of the Bulge, in December... but no, it was not released until in April 2016. So, I am not holding my breath for CMSF 2 or an Engine 4 patch anytime soon. Like I said, we're on Battlefront time here.

We're on Battlefront time here. This means, check back in 6 months, and if you're lucky, you'll see a message about the patch now finally being almost ready, and it will be released "soon".

I didn't think it was going to be a long wait either, in the fall of 2015, when it was said that the release of Final Blitzkrieg was close. Then, as time went on, I thought there was going to be a release at the anniversary of the start of the Battle of the Bulge, in December... but no, it was not released until in April 2016. So, I am not holding my breath for CMSF 2 or an Engine 4 patch anytime soon. Like I said, we're on Battlefront time here.

I didn't think it was going to be a long wait either, in the fall of 2015, when it was said that the release of Final Blitzkrieg was close. Then, as time went on, I thought there was going to be a release at the anniversary of the start of the Battle of the Bulge, in December... but no, it was not released until in April 2016. So, I am not holding my breath for CMSF 2 or an Engine 4 patch anytime soon. Like I said, we're on Battlefront time here.

We're on Battlefront time here. This means, check back in 6 months, and if you're lucky, you'll see a message about the patch now finally being almost ready, and it will be released "soon".