Badger73

Well said, @Aragorn2002. These are only games. The balance achieved as you described is what makes them very good games indeed.

Agreed. "Vikings" compresses the historical timeline so that several decades of separate incidents occur in a much shorter time-frame. But while named historical figures were not quite the persons portrayed in the series and setting literary license aside, I still think "Vikings" does a better job of it than most other shows. I found Blood Eagles portrayed realistically enough!

Disable anti-virus & anti-malware. Re-install. Try again. If it works, your security software needs to "allow" CM to run.

Are not the two related? Should one not always conduct a full reconnaissance while approaching the objective?

Google "Loreena Bobbit"

Yes, indeed; exceptional actually. First scene of first episode shows exactly and correctly how legionaries rotated files from front rank to back in close combat. The adult content including nudity throughout the series also captures Roman pre-Christian sentiment and values very accurately In my opinion, History channel's "Vikings" (available on Netflix) is far superior to both "Knightfall" and "Last Kingdom".

Yep, Centurio Lucius Vorenus. My favorite quote of his is when his wife asks, "What's wrong?" and he responds, "I have pledged my honor to a man who has none."

Sorry, @Erwin. I can't recommend this. As you said, the costuming and vehicles are impressive and the cinematography is acceptable. But the screenwriting is dire. The acting is wooden. The film strikes me as puffed up philosophic self-absorption by director Allesandro Pepe. I watched the first 18 minutes and had to turn it off. Maybe I'll come back to it when too drunk or too bored to care.

Right. Water does not have to be at the lowest level. But, whatever level you set water to be initially, it will stay at that same level you create a water feature anywhere else on the map. In other words, on a single map, water can only be at one and the same level everywhere it's used.

Yes, supposedly. As long as you have a valid license key, downloads work. However, be aware that some physical media keys were omitted from the Battelfront License Key database. In that case, you will need to open a support ticket with the Help Desk to resolve. That's at URL =https://battlefront.mojohelpdesk.com/

http://www.norbsoftdev.net/forum/hits-headquarters-in-the-saddle

Well, the game does provide "Brew up" opportunities . . .

Not quite. I opine that the 332nd Fighter Group ranks as the best WW2 fighter unit anywhere because they trained as a squadron for three (count 'em, 3) whole years on four (4) different fighter aircraft before being committed to combat. With that much individual flight experience and unit training they'd better be good, and they were. Compare their performance against the under-trained late war Luftwaffe and Japanese pilots and its easy to see why training profoundly matters. Racism kept the Tuskegee Airmen out of battle until Air Corps leadership concluded, "Needs must when the Devil drives." The movie "Red Tails" is over the top Hollywood pap. The reality is that early 20th Century America was institutionally racist despite which the Red Tails were very good indeed.

Not a bad question in general and Battlefront will do what makes best business sense for them game by game. But there are other places to look too. Graviteam Tank Warfare Tunisia 1943 is a standalone game with 3 DLC's Mius Front is a standalone game with 5 DLC's Operation Star is a standalone game with 8 DLC's Command Ops 2 1 base game with 8 additional modules and the 9th module (Bradley at Bay / Patton's Charge) has been "in the works" for almost 2 years. I think it boils down to how robust the core game code holds up and how well the code can be managed to absorb permutations and variations. Within a single code set, every change or add-on should require regression testing of everything else already in place. At some point in time old code grows unsustainable and new code makes better sense. Developers sustaining legacy stuff burn out. Developers working on new stuff get excited. As a consumer (user) I wouldn't even try to hazard a guess. (Kind of what @||CptMiller|| just said).

Too young for any god emperor methinks!

Yep, the CMAK Companion book (item BK100) was available by itself for USD$10 several years ago. It's a good read.

Tanks should cross railroads very slowly and perpendicular (90 degrees) to the rail bed. Because rails are typically around 6" (16cm), most tanks certainly have the ability to clear them crosswise as well as travel along aligned with them, albeit very slowly as well. The original poster complained about the failure of his tanks to traverse over railroad tracks at FAST speed. The thread mentions several reasons why that's a reasonable outcome. Other posters digressed into the topic of tank travel along railroad tracks. I think the thread addressed many of the realities for that as well. However, there's always exceptions to general rules.

Yep, CMBN uses C . . . Documents\Battlefront\Combat Mission Battle for Normandy\Data\Z. That changed with subsequent games per Micro$oft guidance back in the day to separate "programs" from "data" in distinct folders for software applications. CMFI, CMRT, and CMFB have C . . . Documents\Battlefront\Combat Mission\Fortress Italy\User Data\Mods but they also allow D:Program Files (x86)\Battlefront\Combat Mission Fortress Italy\Data where you can create Z. Now I'm confused. Which folder should one use for mods in the non-CMBN games?

That is the correct idea. Treads running on top of the rails cannot reduce their ground pressure PSI (pounds per square inch) as designed. Concentrating PSI on top of each rail reduces tread traction and increases tread fatigue. Bad things will likely happen and the crews will get very grumpy at any tank commander too dumb to know better. Repairing tracked vehicle suspension systems is punishing and brutal scutwork. The tracks should be off the rails while traveling along the rail-beds. Keep in mind that the treads will produce wear and tear on the railroad 4x4 wooden ties by the way.

Good discussion, @Kozlice. This game goes pretty deep indeed.

Okay. That helped me better understand your meaning. I still think the game does so now. In your example, the mortar direct fire aiming point would be the top of that wall. In the game, mortar rounds fire in a small but variable pattern around that aiming point; some long, some short, some left, some right. The blasts suppress the enemy. Shrapnel has a pretty good chance to kill or wound. I think the effort to calculate, code, test, and finalize such a small tweak in the game incurs costs to Battlefront which far outweighs negligible benefits. To me, there are far better uses of programmer time.

I opine that in war zones "terrorists" equal "illegal combatants" and everywhere else they are pretty much criminally violent anti-establishment extremists. I agree that they lie outside the scope of CM games.

Well, yes, sort of. Keeping the tank treads aligned along railway tracks really requires a ground guide in front of the tank to direct the driver; not a snail's pace but certainly slow because the ground guide has to walk backwards in order to watch the tank treads and use hand-signs to signal the driver. I opine that Battlefront should not implement such a feature. Ground Guides usually disappear when in the vicinity of enemy fires . .

I led a 107mm self-propelled mortar platoon for 13 months. Gunners cannot accurately fire at targets they cannot see. More importantly, they cannot adjust fires so as to hit targets they cannot see. Your "justification" is flawed in that is not realistic. The game currently (and accurately) lets mortars and grenadiers lay "area" fires anywhere they have lines of sight. That's about as realistic as it should get in any game.