AlexUK

If you've got halftrack, you've got tanks.
If you've got tanks, you've got smoke.
If you've got smoke, you have a close assault with halftracks.
It's meant to be a symbiotic relationship.
I see I really need to get around to making the 'Mechanized Infantry' video for the TTP project.

Lets stop doing the same thing while expecting different results. At least, this threads seems to revolve about exactly that. It's insanity.
Ill try to be productive and think of a realistic way the 'bone updates' plus 'expectations'/ planning could be handled in such a way that everyone is happy. Maybe others can chime in, as I do seem to remember Steve saying something along the likes that 'if anyone has a good solution for the updates that works for everyone, he's all ears' in the last bone threads a few months ago.  Not sure though, could be the pod
At least coming up with a productive and realistic proposal that most of the community supports seems better than the repeating infighting about the ever recurring 'when is it finished?' subject.
Realistic in such a way that BF.C will still be BF.C and Steve will still be Steve: weekly/monthly dev updates/diaries whatever are not on the table. Neither are accurate release dates. Those, gentleman, are the facts.

Now, my 0.02:
* Quarterly bone updates. Similar to the 'bone' updates Steve has given in the past. Quarterly doesn't mean a fixed date, a bit more flexible than that but still people would know sumfink more about when to roughly expect info's. Maybe Steve and or others at BF could find themselves in something like this which is a little more 'regular' compared to the current bone update schedule. I'd think it would be a welcome 'gesture' to the raving refresh monkeys too.
* No predicted 'release dates' since they don't work, it's all fantasy which somehow gets people angry. If there need to be relative moments in time posted, I would suggest going for 'strive quarters' for predicted release windows. As in 'we strive to have you guys playing this in Q3 2018'. These striving quarters could be updated in the quarterly update and are sort of expected to be subject to change. 
* Separate rant threads for people that wish to rant, where only rants are allowed. 😜
 

There have been a lot of good points made in this thread. 
They're even better when they're kept at a civil level and the ad hominem vitriol is left out.
A game which causes emotional responses is a pretty good game, in my opinion. (Someone mentioned Bejeweled. Yeah, it pisses me off that my wife kicks my ass on that game.)
By definition, beta testers are fans of the game. We are tied to a non-disclosure agreement. That causes stress. I'd like to tell you more, but all I can do is play Bejeweled to vent...and that's not going as well as I'd like.
 

Of course, BFC could make us look like even bigger idiots by releasing the game this weekend.  You never know.

From my point of view, I have learned that a lot more effort is going into the update than originally planned, e.g. most/all scenarios being tweaked/improved, new artwork, new functionality. For me that is a good thing, and I understand that this might/will delay a delivery date. I am checking in regularly because I want to get my hands on the game - I see this as a positive thing. I am not having a go at Battlefront at all. I am sure they are working to deliver a top quality experience. It would be helpful simply to get an updated idea of when it will arrive so I can manage my own expectations. And this is all in the context that the deadline hasn’t even passed yet!

It isn't whining when people have been waiting two years for a patch, and it isn't whining when a date is set for a release and then missed without a word.
 
You're the one who whines after people criticize BF for anything.
 

I love Combat Mission. I will never forget the first time I played CM:BB all those years ago. It was a case of love at first sight. 
However, the lack of patches and the lack of feedback regarding in-development projects is vexing. A monthly update on the main website or the forums about what is being worked on and how things are coming along would be nice. 
Also, I think a lot of people would like to see more being done to improve the visual aspects of the engine, like better explosions,  more stages of building and vehicle destruction and a greater variation of craters, perhaps based on terrain - i.e. no more earthy craters on paved/concrete roads etc.  

Yeah, like me. Give us a heads up, Steve. What gives?
 
Mord.

I've posted these observations some time ago in my Gerbini scenario-topic, but I think they deserve a better spot and some discussion, so here we go!
Some short notes on dust in Combat Mission 
I have not conducted serious tests, just some quick hotseat-experiments in Combat Mission: Fortress Italy.
What raises dust?
Vehicle movement over "dusty terrain". The faster the vehicle goes, the more dust is thrown up. Firing large calibre guns (AT guns, tank guns, etc) from "dusty terrain". MGs are okay. Shell impacts on "dusty terrain" Whether a terrain is dusty or not depends on the ground condition (no dust if wet, eg.) and on the type of terrain. E.g. the ploughed field tiles don't raise any dust, most crop tiles do. Also consider different road types.
Who can see dust?
Dust generated by shell impacts can be seen by the opponent. Dust generated by firing or moving can only be seen by the opponent if he has spotted the unit generating the dust (confirmed contact required). Note that the enemy can only see the dust that is created from the moment on at which he has spotted the source (i.e. "older" dust generated by the source is not shown to the opponent retrospectively). On the other hand: once you've spotted dust, it stays even if you lose sight of its source. Effects of dust?
Dust reduces/blocks LOS. For example, if you have 5 tanks on a sanddune fire, they will literally disappear in a cloud of dust. This is a two-edged sword and something to consider if you want to area-fire. Fire --> dust-cloud --> No LOS --> no area fire until the dust dissipates. This also raises an important question: Do dustclouds that my enemy can't see (because he has not spotted the source) still handicap his LOS? In order words: Is it possible that he can't see me because he's looking at a dust-cloud of which he is totally unaware?  Can you be fooled by an invisible dust cloud? Another highly interesting question: I don't know whether dust raises the chance of getting spotted (as an unconfirmed contact at least, even if you're shrouded in your own dust-cloud?).  Behaviour of dust?
Dust travels with the wind (scenario condition) and dissipates at some point.

When a US halftrack is unbuttoned (manning the gun), it will stay unbuttoned even if the crew and passengers are in the "panic" state. And the player is unable to order the halftrack to button. So the vehicle will keep driving around randomly, and the passengers will keep getting shot one by one as they pop up to man the gun. This is not the behaviour of panicked people, but of very brave or fanatic troops.
Panicked guys should stop manning the gun, and try to hide at the bottom of the halftrack. If rounds start to penetrate, they should bail out and run away.
I know there have been cases of very brave troops who kept manning the guns even though they were under heavy fire. However, I'd argue they were not panicking, but merely rattled or shaken in CM terms.
Thanks for your attention. You're now welcome to tell me I'm all wrong

(Unofficial) status is Steve's in a hurry to get it out the door. Demo scenarios have all been play tested and feedback given. Last thing to do in any demo is for Charles to construct the standalone exe with only the art necessary for the scenarios and nothing else. Something he's done many times before.

It is a pity that positive feedback hasn't been left at the Scenario Depot on these recommendations. If more people did so, then potential downloaders wouldn't have to ask around various forums. Also, while most people who create scenarios and campaigns aren't doing it for the positive feedback, it never goes amiss because the end product is always the result of a lot of hard work. I certainly appreciate and welcome feedback on my releases and when its positive it does give you a boost to crack on with the next project.
As it stands - 52 people have downloaded @MOS:96B2P's much praised and recommended TOC scenario but no one has commented on it.

It would go more like this:
Driver, forward. Driver, halt. Gunner, target tank at one o'clock. Gunner, fire! Driver reverse! Which would probably take about ten seconds. Or, if you're feeling lucky, use a five second pause instead.
What you're asking for is this:
"Make me a whole bunch of highly specific unit commands that I will probably only use maybe once per battle, otherwise this game is incomplete crap!"
*Shrug
 
Everyone would like to save time on everything, but that doesn't mean the devs should waste time trying to save everyone some time.
Especially things as rare as driving a vehicle column down a road, which barely ever happens. You dig?
 
If 2nd Platoon is so desperately low on ammo they need to call 1st Platoon over to share ammo, you've probably done something wrong. Because what you should do is withdraw 2nd Platoon and leave 1st Platoon in their place, thus freeing up 2nd Platoon to go resupply. How many people have actually run out of ammo in this game? Ever? Can I see a show of hands?
Maybe I should skip the next part of the TTP videos and make a new one called: "One easy solution to NOT run out of ammo!"
 
Vehicles do not occupy action spots. Thus, acquiring ammo from a vehicle would require a whole lot of work to implement, unlike ammo dumps which are placed directly in an action spot, and can thus be acquired from any adjacent action spot. In game terms, this cannot be done with vehicles.
How long, in real time, does it take to grab some ammo out the back of a truck and pass it out to everyone in a squad?
Because if it takes longer than two minutes you have nothing to complain about, because the same action can be completed in game in two minutes (turn based) or about fifteen seconds (real time).
TURN ONE: Split scout team and order to move into vehicle. TURN TWO: Acquire ammo and order to move back to squad. Elapsed Time: 120 Seconds.  
Nice. I'll keep this in mind.

About the acquire command, I often find it a lot of click-work when using armoured infantry - each squad must be told to pick up 1000 bullets for the MG, 200 for the SMG, maybe some extra for the MP44, a Panzerfaust or Bazooka.. the next squad. And next squad.
Especially with larger scenarios several times, it would be nice to have some kind of "grab ammo and dismount all" option. Or it could be built into the  existing "dismount" button. So if you pressed that during setup, they would grab ammo, but if you manually moved the squad out of its halftrack, they would leave the ammo behind. Something like that.

Ok lightened up the Jihadi flag background a bit. Added a couple styles of Combatant and a Spy. Again all preliminary right now, but pretty damned good looking I think, for first shot attempts. There's a particular detail I added, see if any of you guys pick up on it.

I am really digging the spy.
Mord.

Indeed. I still remember the consternation I felt when Steve announced Shock Force was going to be a real-time game with an optional "turn based" mode which basically paused the game automatically every 60 seconds. It didn't even have the blue bar pre-processing of it's predecessor.
However, things are not quite as bad as all that, you just need to train yourself to think in 60 second chunks. I.E. "For the next 60 second, this unit will do this:" and then plot your orders accordingly. Need a linear smoke screen? Check the wind speed and direction then fire away. Wait a minute or two for the smoke to spread out, then plot new orders.
Need to shoot and scoot? Move forward, place a cover arc, pause for ten seconds, then reverse.
Are you a scaredy-cat? Okay, just pause for five seconds instead...
Having split-second fine control of your troops is pretty darn unrealistic, despite the fact one believes they can play in a MORE realistic manner by micromanaging excessively.
Honestly, I think one reaches a greater enjoyment of the game by just rolling with the punches when they come, and using your superior "big picture" ability to win the game, rather than fretting over the exact proper placement of smokescreens, or making your tracer bullets fire in pretty patterns.

You can do this already with the existing orders. MOVE : 10 Second PAUSE w/ Anti-Armor Cover Arc: MOVE You can do this already, just place the BLAST waypoint in the action spot the engineers are already located, they will blast the wall and then stay put. Group select all units, place a cover arc. Done. Granted, a Shift-Click combination would be nice, but it's not a critical piece of the puzzle. Adjacent units share ammo already. If you need to resupply a squad, split off a scout team and run them over to an ammo source. Acquire ammo and run back. That's how it works in reality too. For machine-gun teams, use the ammo bearers to run and get extra ammo, that's why MG teams use the ammo bearers ammo first, and the native team ammo second. OR: You could stop using so much ammunition. OR: You could pass out extra ammo at the start of the game, especially for HMG's and SMG's. I don't want to be a dink about this, but by far the most common complaints I've seen on the forums have long since had answers to them.

Okay, sounds like I’m going to have to play @IanL again sooner rather bam later to erase the stain of that last battle.

If somehow the rights to CMA could be crowd funded and bought would BFC consider updating it?
Yeah, it's a long shot. But what would Snowball care. They abandoned the title in less then 6 months after it was released.
 
Mord.

I would be interested in knowing the kind of things that go on behind the scenes. Pros and cons taken into account when making a decision, areas being worked on, some things that have been achieved since the last update. It may also have the side effect of people realising, and appreciating, more what goes into each game. 
For example, something that i have been thinking about is the work involved in a new vehicle. I guess research has to be performed on armour, effectiveness of weapons/ammo, ammo load out, performance on/off-road, then building the model (with armour values for every panel?), modelling separate elements (eg road wheels/tracks to simulate suspension), siting the crew members so that they fit and access the viewing ports ( no idea if that’s modelled), designing one or more skins - depending on weather conditions (are skins needed for different levels of detail?). I’m sure i’ve missed lots out. When I think about it I am amazed at the final product.

Hey, guys -- just a quick line to say that I'm back from my extended summer break. No time to start any new videos yet, but I am chipping away at the map again. Tons more work to do on it, but I've made a lot of progress. Here's  a birdseye of the current status:

Macisle out.

Thanks for the compliments, guys! They are much appreciated and motivate me to keep my nose to the grindstone.
I don't want to give too much away yet, but here is one detailed shot, along with the corrosponding google map area that inspired it:


 
I've lowered building heights in some places to reduce the modern look. There are a ton of balconies on the map, but only a tiny number of them are actually functional. Almost all are cosmetic -- the door removed to prevent troops from becoming more vulnerable by going out on the balcony.
Yeah, I hope folks take this and do interesting things with it. It won't be everyone's cup of tea, though. SMG troops or no SMG troops, you really gotta' split teams and put in detailed orders for coordinated micro-tactical play. Otherwise, attacking troops just evaporate. And, pretty much every inch of the map is tube guy paradise. The attacking Soviets will have T-34/76 as base and they're gonna' need every round of that HE loadout for area fire. Keeping them alive to use it, though...😈

The big step forward was the big update on the game.  I am reading into this that people aren't demanding some solid date on release, but looking for a more than once a year update on where their games are in development.  There are 5-6 games and everyone has their favorite.  I am reading into this that customers just want some communications, beyond the quick spurts that come along after months of grumbling.
This is especially true of a patch.  If a patch is being worked on, can we at least get an idea of what is being worked on?
 

Now that SF2 is near to be released (so I hope), I'm waiting for more bones/screenshoots about R2V. Steve, do you have some sweets for us? (Please)

No disrespect to you or the deceased was intended. On the surface my attitude towards such matters may seem flippant but it is a defense mechanism.
To satisfy your quest for justice over this remark I will inform you that my life is a absolute nightmare due to combat PTSD. It destroyed my marriage, alienated me from my parents, and siblings and I have no friends whatsoever. I really do not eat or sleep much. My counselor fears that I may do something drastic to myself. If I was to cease to exist no one would notice or mourn for me.
So if this statement does not meet your need for retribution then I do not know what in God's amazing universe will.
"There are only two things that are infinite. The universe and mans stupidity. And I'm not so sure of the universe" Albert Einstein
"I'm surrounded by assholes!" Dark Helmet, Space Balls (oh hell, there I go again, quick someone report me to the mods so they can bend my dog tags and send me to Antarctica)