AlexUK

The draw distance in CMCW seems very short indeed, I did notice with regard to ground textures mainly. But could just be the size of maps and forces.

I'd much rather see other countries in the time period that CMCW is about rather than backtracking all the way to WW2 again. It seems like a huge waste of potential doing that.

hello,
i find it quite restrictive how the level of detail disappears as you zoom out of the battlefield. and frankly, it looks quite ugly not having trees or ground detail on the far side of the map. 
I have all the details on max but i find this still not enough. I wonder if someone knows if there is a way to force the game to use more generous levels of detail?
 
Thanks!

I agree, this is very annoying. The other end of the map itself will literally disappear on the largest maps at certain angles.

After years of playing, I still see cool pictures !🥰
this one taken yesterday I made my wallpaper !!!

Moments later, the Soviet wave crashes across the entire front line with Guards infantry and armor seemingly everywhere. German keyhole HMG teams open up on the Soviet infantry while a panzerschreck engages the lead T-34, hoping to knock it out before it can spot the machine guns. The schreck team lands a perfect shot and the tank erupts in a mighty explosion.  The AT team then displaces as another T-34 is spotted further back. Hopefully, the team will be able to circle back and be ready before the new threat attempts to engage.
Meanwhile, the next block over is chaos. Just as the German AT team there raises its tube to engage a T-34, the Soviet tank suddenly turns and darts down an alley, leaving its infantry behind. The bewildered German AT team barely has time for a next breath before previously unspotted Soviet scout and armored cars dart into the fray. The buddy German infantry teams adjacent and below desperately keep Soviet infantry at bay, while the AT team goes to work on the light vehicles. It's touch and go, but the schreck team holds its nerve and manages to brave the thick rocket exhaust and dispatch multiple vehicles only seconds before they can return fire. The zone is hot!

 
At the far end of the company's defense zone, Soviet infantry rapidly closes and attempts to rush the sister strongpoint at the post office complex.

However, since the attack is unsupported by tanks, the defenders are free to fire and most of the attackers are quickly cut down. Only one or two Soviets manage to get past and round the corner.
 
Doing so, they find themselves out of the frying pan and in the fire, as they bump right into the German's flank anchor.

 
Death comes faster than any time for regrets.

Friendly reminder that if you want to see a module at all, get your friends to buy Cold War. The better it sells, the more likely the chance of a module!

"I think MikeyD has a Point"

I hearted this because it reminded me to say how happy I am I was able to have a Mac version of the game. It makes a huge difference to me -- I'm surrounded by Macs anyway, no PCs of any decent gaming spec. Very grateful, as a Mac gamer, for Battlefront's work.

As much as I love North Africa, that is still my guilty pleasure future dream.
Big Stompy Robots in the CM engine would be wargaming nirvana.

Maybe I wasn't linear in explaining my reasoning, I'll try to be clearer here.
0) DOI for the various 125mm APFSDS rounds we're talking about are: 
1976 3BM22
1982 3BM26
1983 3BM29
1985 3BM32
1986 3BM42
1) Ukrainian military and Russian separatists expend their stockpiles of 3BM32 and 3BM42 then get older 3BM22 from stocks.
2) Notice that after depleting their 3BM32 and 3BM42 stocks they don't go after 3BM29 or 3BM26 stocks, but after 3BM22.
My conclusion is that they had large stockpiles of 3BM22 rounds and scarce or non extant stockpiles of 3BM26 or 3BM29 rounds. Why? Because if they had plenty of the better rounds, they would have used them!
So there's a large stockpile of 3BM22 rounds. But when was this stockpile produced? If I understand you correctly your question is: what makes you believe that it was there in the late '70s early '80s?
Well, of course the 3BM22 stockpile couldn't have been produced 1982 or later because they would have made 3BM26 or 3BM29 rounds instead! So it should have been manufactured in the 1976-1981 timeframe and, since we already concluded it was produced in significantly larger quantities than other rounds, a plausible conclusion is that they produced them at full rate during the whole six year interval.
Well, if the website you yourself just provided is to be considered a reliable source (I do think it is and, I presume, you too) I'd like to point you to the following excerpt:

" This was the most common APFSDS projectile used by Soviet Army in late 70s-early 80s, and though no longer produced is still massively stockpiled and cleared for use." (emphasis mine). I presume this statement supports my point, don't you think? 😉
But there's more, see below...
Since you said that you trust these nerdy guys (I do too), I point you to another excerpt from the very wepbage you posted:
"This round [the 3BM15] was in use by the Soviet Army until 1976, and then it was exclusively for export and also license-produced by some nations." (emphasis mine)
So, according to the websites you mentioned, not only the 3BM22 was widely used in the 1979-1982 timeframe, but it was practically the only one fielded!
I rest my case.🙂

IMO @BFCElvis was too busy herding us beta testers around 1) collecting and submitting bug reports for CW, 2) collecting and submitting bug reports for FR, 3) getting us to check the FR patch prior to release (yes, I broke it for the Mac. Well, actually it was broken and I found it). 
All to get out two patches absolutely as fast as possible. The beta testers herd themselves pretty well (reasonably well?) (Maybe?) (Sometimes?) but someone has to direct traffic.
Whole lotta stuff went on behind the curtain the last several days.
Dave

I found plenty of resources on how us army operated during the 2nd world war and I still immensly enjoy even the most mundane things like company movement in the WW2 titles.
However, yesterday I started the NTC campaign, loaded the first mission, found myself infront of intimidatingly big wasteland (twice or three times bigger than anything I've seen in Normandy or Italy) with half a dozen vehicles under my comand. At that point, I realized I had no idea how these vehicles are used or what I am supposed to do with them.
My question is, are there some resources on the doctrine of the US troops that I can learn from to play the game?
 
also, if someone has any idea of the following technical  problem. As I said previously, the map is huge compared to previous titles. While this is nice change, unfortunately it brings a nasty visual problem. The detail level further down the map is completely lost and frankly, that looks horrible despite having the highest graphics level enabled. Is there any way to force the game to raise the distance for level of detail ???
thanks!

Of course I have no difficulties believing that a lot of thought went into this whole business of crafting CMCW. I know the quality Battlefront strives to deliver because I'm a happy customer since the days of CMBO. With CMBO, Battlefront started to produce the best (that is, in my opinion, the most realistic, user friendly and fun to play) tactical wargames and still does. So, rest assured that I'm not writing this to bash CMCW: in fact, now that it is available, and installed both on my Windows laptop and Mac Mini, I ditched all my other tactical cold war era videogames.
Does it mean that CM is perfect? Of course not. And, although I am not one of the top posters,  it's more than 20 years that I joined this community and I do remember how the process of polishing, improving and expanding the various CM titles passed also through a lot of long, documented and passionate threads on these very forums. Even I had the occasion to partecipate in some of those discussions and contribute a little bit of info than managed to find its place into some CM titles. So, I wrote the OP in the spirit of those constructive threads, not to point fingers, not to demand, but to suggest and discuss.
And, speaking, of the engine restrictions on ammunition natures, I'm aware of them, but they are not consequential to what I wrote. They would be of hindrance if one had to place in the very same AFV different APDS types, or different APFSDS types, but that's not the case.
 
I know of the sandbox nature of the game. But CMCW is not a 'generic' Cold War game nor simply an OPFOR vs US Army simulator: it sports a specific timeframe (1979-1982) and it's obvious that BFC goal was (as always) to provide players the most accurate and high fidelity representation of the opposing US and Soviet armies in terms of organization, equipment, weapons, ammo types etc. In this respect I do think that some more polishing and chrome might and should be added. Moreover, it can be easily made in a way that is already a CM staple, i.e. adding to a tank's name a suffix like 1979 or 1980 or early, mid, late, latest to differentiate models that differ only for the ammo loadout composition (reflecting, for example, the introduction of a better kinetic penetrator).
For what concerns the composition of the M60 park in USAREUR units, you are, of course, right. In fact, even with the 'policy' of one tank model-one ammo model, BFC managed to achieve the "best fit" for M60s and M1s in the given timeframe. But, as you noticed, I wasn't speaking of them (although one could point out some subtleties that could allow for a bit of chrome... but I'd better reserve this for another post! 😄)

Thank God. For a second I thought I had nothing to wait for! 😄

Congrats to all you MFers that have been hamming away on this for the last twenty years. You did it!
Now, where's my Nam?
 
Mord.

So, BFC, what are you releasing next Friday?  I just want to clear my schedule...

First US NTC mission of training campaign - NTC 1B (ouch!). Briefing says 155mm howitzer in direct support but does not appear in artillery tab. 

First off, thank you and welcome to the game.  This post is really a place for you guys to Q&A with the game designers.  Questions on features, campaigns or scenarios can go here and we will try to get to them to help you out.
So if you are new to the CM you probably want to start easy and small to get the feel for the game.  Check the scenario notes as designers often will highlight which side may be easy or harder.  For example, "Valley of Ashes" is by-design, pretty easy for the Blue side as an opportunity for beginners to get a feel for a larger scenario.  While the Red side of this scenario is pretty tough.  I will let the other scenario designers chime on on their babies.
I will say that the Soviet Training scenarios by Cpt Miller are a very good place to start for a lot of people as full Cold War Soviet formations, in all their glory, are a bit of a new thing for the series.
For the Campaigns, I highly recommend people start with NTC.  Bil and GeorgeMC did a really good job in putting together some very good scenarios that can get people into the groove of maneuvering in the context of a Cold War battlefield. 
Then I would suggest moving onto the US Campaigns.  1982 was designed to be the primary but 1979 turned out to be really interesting, so players choice really.   1982 is probably a little easier as 1979 can be challenging with the older equipment set.
Finally, I would then suggest that players can gird their loins for the Soviet Campaigns.  These are designed to be tough and a challenge to manage.  Every battle is battalion sized and frankly pretty tough.  The March or Die version is designed to be downright unfair to the loins, but also probably the most realistic....you have been warned.
Anyway, enjoy and have fun!   

Have fun with the game guys.. please post your reactions!  Curious if you think its as cool as we do.   

now the time is EDT AM04:30
for me is PM 16:30.
I will not sleep tonight ,waiting for russia attack

That, unfortunately, presently remains correct, but this is something I can at least look at once I can DL. The subject matter of the new game was my job from Valentine's Day 1978 on for many years. Killing Soviet and Warsaw Pact AFVs was a major part of the Hughes Aircraft Missile Systems group product line, which included TOW, a whole bunch of Maverick versions, the developmental revolutionary WASP brilliant swarm missile, the deep strike massed armor killer ASSAULT BREAKER and more.  If a particular CMx2 title interests me, and I can afford it, I pre-order. May not be able to play now, but am fundamentally an optimist (I WILL be able to eventually play) and a BFC supporter, so pre-ordered anyway.

Regards,

John Kettler

I feel a bit guilty ignoring the Cold War board during the recent Fire and Rubble hubbub. So here's something at random.

We're not fools, we are the only sane ones. Challenging our ageing brains with complex strategy games is an excellent way to keep them in shape. And that is a proven fact. 

Following is a quote (perhaps not exact) by a very famous man:
”We don’t stop playing because we get older, we get older because we stop playing.”
Benjamin Franklin