DougPhresh

You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.

You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.

You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.

You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.

You know this has generally been a pretty good community over the years, albeit one with a fair bit of Clean Wehrmacht apologia.
Sure, I can see the value Sicherungs units add, and while I disagree, I can see why some may want to see Feldgendarmerie. That inclusion has never extended to entertaining the idea that they were "just like" Commonwealth Provost Wing troops or American MPs. They weren't, and anyone who can open a book can see why.
I do not have a single kind word to say about the Waffen SS historically, but this is a wargame and they were unmistakably a major combat force. I can play Battle For Normandy and see why they were such ferocious opponents in the fight for the Carpiquet Airfield. Their massacre of Canadian prisoners there and elsewhere, to say nothing of the countless crimes of the Waffen SS as a whole are outside the scope of the game, and reasonably outside of discussion.

The idea of the Dirlewanger Brigade as "soldiers like any other" is absolutely sickening and reprehensible. There may not have been humanitarians on the Eastern Front, but one side waged an unprovoked genocidal war of extermination - and the other did not.

I don't want to see this thread locked, but I also don't want to read excuses for the war the Germans waged, only to see how BF is choosing to model it. To their credit, they have done a fantastic job balancing sensitivity with historicity and I expect they will do the same here. They are not in the business of morally exculpating mass murderers, just getting the colour of their tanks right, and they do it well.

Great stuff. I know the mod community is spread thin with all of the upcoming modules for other series but I'm glad an oft forgotten theatre has gotten so much love

I really like the mods the community has put out these past few years, but I have to admit I think Aristoteles' are the gold standard. I don't think he's been active in a long while, and so far as I know he didn't get around to Gustav Line. His skins from BN weren't suitable for the early Italian campaign, but now that RTV has brought the fighting to mid '44 and the close of the war, I was wondering how suitable his BN and FB mods would be, in light of most vehicles being olive drab in Italy from this point on, if nothing else.
Beyond that, what differences in uniforms and vehicle markings would have to be taken account between RTV and BN and FB?

NATO, but only because it's nice to see yourself on the big screen. 🇨🇦

Yes, I think so.
Fortress Italy as a whole needs a once-over to get everything in-line with the changes that have happened over the years. Now that it is complete, pending the Italian module and Elite Forces Pack -
I think it would be worth the effort to give it a thorough once-over. Something like the SF2 campaigns, although it will probably be much less work and take much less time. The reality is that so much has happened since 2012. AI plans are better, there are new terrain features, new types of equipment and formations, maps can be much bigger and many more changes large and small.  Maps and AI plans made for R2V are miles ahead of Gustav Line and light years ahead of the Base Game which in turn makes all of the scenarios, campaigns and QBs better.
I am a supporter of how Battlefront develops Base Games and modules. It's been much smarter I think than breaking up the effort over the past 11 years into 3 straight for Battle for Normandy, 3 straight for Fortress Italy, 3 more for Red Thunder and so on. This is a marked improvement over the CM1 titles where CMAK was so much better than CMBO that there was really no reason to buy the older titles unless you had an interest in that particular theatre. I know I started with CMAK and had a very hard time going "back" to play CMBO.
The engine patches across all titles and cycling development into modules for each series in turn has meant that the older titles don't feel as "old".  The system now works fairly well, where R2V is in fact newer than the newest base game and the quality of scenarios, maps, campaigns and so on is just as good as the nearest WW2 line, Final Blitzkrieg.
Even with the engine up to date, and new modules being as good as the newer games, the old modules and base games certainly show their age, for the aforementioned reasons. There are so many scenarios in the base game and Gustav Line that would benefit tremendously from AI area fire, AI withdrawl and for God's sake AI triggers!  There are very good maps that could be improved with ditch contours, streams and the like. On-map AAA was added in Gustav Line and is conspicuous in it's absence in Fortress Italy. On top of that is the TOE and OOB changes, and the much better formation selection in QB, that for one thing gives infantry units their assigned vehicles. British infantry Carrier Platoons actually have carriers!
In short, the way the titles are developed is a good way to distribute improvements, maybe even quality generally between titles, but not within titles
Bringing the existing content up to the standards that have grown over the past 8 years will be a fair bit of work, but it will eliminate bugs. More than that, it will mean that when you buy Fortress Italy, you are getting a CM title of 2020 standards, set in the Italian Theatre of Operations in 1943 and incorporating all of those improvements into each campaign, scenario, QB and map. The Gustav Line module may introduce the Commonwealth and fighting in mainland Italy, but the quality of the maps and scenarios alone will not set it apart from the Base Game. Rome to Victory brings many new forces to the table and takes the timeline to the end of the war, but wouldn't be alone in having steams in Italy or the AI withdrawling on the defense.
Think of it as a capstone - the engine is not only up to date, but the game is as good as new, across the board. This is much easier to do when a game is complete because each module may change things. However, once it is done it will make engine updates or routine patches much easier. It would also mean Battle Packs can still come out, though the BP for CMBN they would likely require all existing modules. Which just goes to show how these improvements build on each other and are best used together.
For Fortress Italy in particular, I'm happy to wait for this kind of undertaking and get a temporary patch for the bugs that have popped up. My rationale for this is that I don't think Fortress Italy is complete yet. We know that the Italian Forces at least will be coming at some point down the line, and that obviously would have big implications for the Base Game. Any changes to the Italians in a module focused on them made there would create the same sort of problems with TOE and OOB we're seeing now with the Commonwealth, Germans and Americans.
I know that there are major modules in the works for other games, so this is probably down the list. I believe that in the same way patching all of the games to Engine 4 and rationalizing the TOE OOB and so on was an agonizing time for BF, a "capstone" update is a necessary process to close out the CM2 titles as they reach the end of their time periods and full roster of forces. Think of it as Shock Force 2 on a smaller scale.
This "capstone" would also be good to do before serious work starts on CM3. If all the CM2 titles are great from top to bottom, you can buy the oldest or the newest depending on your theatre of preference. It's a good way to keep sales going while working on a whole new game.

Fortifications need a fix. They're annoying to place to the point of widespread un-use in QBs, and the objects themselves and how troops interact with them could be improved. I can't imagine the poor scenario designers right now working on The Seelow Heights.
Can you imagine trying to place this in the editor? In QB?!

I just wanted to say this this is an incredible resource! Bookmarked.

I just picked up CMBN after having all the other titles and modules so I was curious since I wasn't following it during development.

The Firefly was really better than it had any right to be considering how they managed to cram that gun and ammunition into the Sherman, and all of the compromises that entailed.

I was wondering, if the Americans really only encountered Tigers 3 times in North-West Europe, why are they included in the base game? It seems like they could have been saved for the Commonwealth module.

Yes, they horizontally share information.  This works much better if the 2IC / XO team has a radio.  Then the 2IC / XO team is able to use radio C2 to send the information (gained through horizontal C2) back to its parent unit.  The team will also receive information (tentative contacts) via radio from its parent unit and horizontally pass that information to the other unit. 
This  is most useful when playing with house rules where tentative contacts (information) plays a role.  A friendly unit can't react to an OpFor unit unless it knows (at least a tentative contact) about the OpFor unit etc.  This is one of the cool things about combat missions.  The extra house rules and C2 ability can be used by players that like that kind of thing or they can be totally (or partially) ignored. 
Also as Bud said an XO / 2IC team will take over for a KIA CO team.         

I found a quite vague reference in Wikipedia, saying that “not all newly formed FJ Divisions did receive a jump training after 1942“.
As for the Gebirgsjäger, I don‘t think they were all „skilled climbers“. I would assume they were generally „skilled mountain men“. It takes a lot, before you need to „climb“. It’s difficult enough to move in the mountains with heavy equipment anyway. That‘s not to say, that they did not know how to use their ropes...

And I hope, I have them, too.
But @DougPhresh has a good point. Is there a „complete“ list of mods somewhere? I have seen some  scenario and campaign lists, but don’t remember anything for mods.

JuJu gave me his blessing, some psd files and assistance in creating an addon pack for his UI mod. Details and link found here:
 

This is not a drive filled with stuff but it is a list of everything publicly available with links where to find it:
http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/index.html
 

Here´s a quick-fix mod set for the R2V Shermans.

@DougPhresh made a request for Sherman mods for R2V the other day. I replied that I dont really have the time to make mods from scratch. Luckily, I discovered that I had an old set of Sherman  Photoshop files that Aris´ once sent me. This was only the files for his CMBN Sherman IC mod, so most of the mods in this set are based on these. 
I have simply taken each bmp for the hulls and turrets of every Sherman in R2V - and placed the dirt, mud and grime from Aris´  Sherman IC on top of them. So most of the mods have the excact same layer of dirt on top of them. Luckily, it doesn' t really loook like that, because the base bmp´s are relatively different.

In some cases, the bmp´s were so different from the Sherman IC´s layout that I couldn´t use the method described above. In that case I have taken files from other CM games and renamed them to fit. Or done a bit of modding myself.
In short: This is not a set of mods made from scratch - but a quick-fix that will allow you to use "Aris´ed" R2V Shermans. Sherman grogs might find errors in camo schemes and such, but as far as I am concerned, they are as good as they get.
I am sharing the mods via this Dropbox link - until they are available on Cmmods IV.
 

i like your quick-fix mod !!!
what could a be for a long fix mod ???
thank you Umlaut

Fighting as a battalion the Soviets are nearly unbeatable. Trying to use them like the Western Allied armies is a recipe for disaster though.

I'd be as happy as anyone to see the early and mid war in Combat Mission but I am sometimes wary of romanticism for the Wehrmacht during the years when they seemed unstoppable. While the campaigns for Poland, the Low Countries and Barbarossa were incredible, the Einsatzgruppen that followed in their wake, and the Wehrmacht's own crimes are unconscionable. I'm very proud that this community does not traffic in "both sides were bad" "brave soldiers fighting for their country" tropes or comparing GIs killing camp guards or the Reds sacking Berlin to the top to bottom atrocities of the Third Reich.
I wonder if there is something in wargamming and amateur military history itself that causes that romanticism for the defeated. It happens with the CSA, the Third Reich and Napoleon, though in that last case I don't think there is as much moral equivocation, nor the need for it.
At least Afrika Korps would mainly feature the Italians who for all the bad that they did, fought a fairly "clean" war in North Africa, made more of an effort than any other Axis power to save their Jewry, and when push came to shove the Italian people joined up with the Partisans and Co-Belligerents. I'm much more comfortable with people waxing nostalgically about the valour of the Folgore than the Waffen SS.
I hope that isn't addressed at me. I don't think anyone here is white supremacist, a nazi or racist. I certainly didn't say so, much less make an accusation.
Wargaming and military history have long had a historiography that sanitizes the Third Reich and CSA, for totally understandable reasons. When I was young I was obsessed with Tiger tanks and saw the Heer as soldiers just like my own country's. The truth is more complicated, but a wargame does not have the duty to inform about logistics or war crimes, nor should it. This community stands out as one that is exceptionally good for having a culture of nuanced discussion.
When discussing the topics outside the scope of a game, I think it is fair to point out the advances in the discipline, especially these past few decades. Look no further than the Axis History forums to see how far we've come recently. It's nothing short of incredible and I find it rather admirable.
I'm not going to dignify the remark about scoring points or posting for my own self validation with a response. Peruse my posting history and make your own judgement, if you'd like.
Finally, this is a friendly dialogue among fellow hobbyists. Get off your high horse about censorship or freedom of speech. I asked the question in good faith, and good an answer in good faith. That's a positive exchange for everyone. I think @Bulletpoint is a good poster and I appreciate his taking the time to elaborate on what he meant. Why on Earth would I want to censor him?
 

I can't imagine trying to clear woods without pausing.
Still, a tweaked Hunt command that allows for a cautious advance without exhaustion would be a welcome change. I disagree that it could be "too" useful and totally replace Quick or Assault, commands that I find indispensable. A cautious, readied posture (and accompanying animation) would make it less efficient than  Move for routine movement even without artificially penalizing exhaustion. In contact with the enemy, moving relatively slowly in line is less useful than either Assault or the minimized exposure of Quick.

NATO, but only because it's nice to see yourself on the big screen. 🇨🇦