Bellaco

Why flamethrowers dont burn houses, wheat fields or woods? 
They are useless in CMRT. Fire is not used as a weapon which is ridicolous.
I edited and scenario with 20 T-34 (with Flamethrower) in a wheat field and never cause big fires after being a lot of minutes burning the wheat fields. You see small fires but never grow and dont kill soldiers is they pass by these small fires.
 
During war and in Combat Mission Barbarrosa to Berlin you burn the first floor of a house and you wait until enemy on top floors has to runnaway from fire and then you kill them outside. 
Or you use to burn a wheat field to make a wall of fire and smoke to help in your attack/defense.
Fire should be and interesting element to design scenarios. If you put craters you should be able to put fires on the escenario editor. Bombs cause fires.
 
Why russian infantry dont use antitank grenades?
They had them. And german infantry aswell. Where are them? Only tankhunters had them? And if you use tankhunters to destroy a tank, you have to be at 8 m to throw your antitank grenades which is useless.
 
Why russian infantry dont use coctels molotov?
German infantry has panzerfaust but russian infantry has nothing to kill tanks. Not even coctel molotov.
In Combat Mission Barbarrosa To Berlin russian troops have coctel molotov in their equipment.

Kind of confused as to what you are suggesting here.  For a start I thought the normal procedure for non-inner sanctum BFC posters who believe there may be an issue with the game is to first post it up here at the forums for "peer review" so that they can at least establish that "it is not just them" and the problem can be duplicated by other players (hence the posting of saved files with instructions on how to test and requests for feedback).   The issue then seems to have to pass the scrutiny/filter of one of the never really too impressed BFC inner sanctum members who seem to be more interested in denying here is a problem than actually wanting to know if there is a problem.  If it can't get past them within the context of open discussion in a public forum, how can you expect the issue to be taken seriously by the helpdesk?  Only after it seems the discussion has snowballed/escalated/generated more interest/views/weeks-months pass (I really don't know what it is) will the inner sanctum appear to reluctantly "cave" and suggest a helpdesk ticket be formally raised.  Is that not the normally accepted process?  If not, please advise what is.
 
It also is quite courteous and informative to keep fellow gamers informed of any potential issues with the game by posting any issues here initially.  Isn't that part of the reason why we have these forums?  I certainly don't come here to read just how awesome and fun and perfect CM is.  Stick to normal light conditions.
 
 
Tried and results are essentially as you say. Can you please now do the same and let me know if you get the same results with the "blue lien creep" and random max visibility? (see post #64)
 
PS: Could make it easier for people to run the test by issuing all the move orders to the 16 drivers and saving the game as a "save as" rather than a fresh scenario so that all they need to do is load and process the turn with exactly the same orders.
 
 
Yes that would be good.  There is clearly something at least massively misunderstood about LOS mechanics in at last degraded visibility/low light conditions in this game. Certainly having no real documentation to reference/check against is a key contributing factor. At worst there is something not working as expected.
   
Have you read post #64?  Have you tried reloading the same night/fog scenario a few times and checked the (if it can be trusted) max visibility range by using the Fire "LOS tool"?  Up to 1000m difference each time.  And what about "blue line creep"?
 
 
Yeah, now try imagining ordering a company/battalion to engage the enemy in similar conditions.  Could you imagine if you were driving a tank instead in combat?  How would you even know where you are going? Seriously, why are we even bothering to consider validating CM LOS mechanics (let alone combat) under the context of the most extremely degraded visibility/light conditions?  It's ridiculous to even think CM comes anything close to doing even a reasonable job of simulating combat engagements (not that they probably even happened!) under these conditions as it does in the more normal/standard day/clear visibility conditions. 
 
 
Incredible. The inappropriateness of this comment has already been well explained by the poster it was directed towards.  What are you trying to say?
 
I would be happy if BFC just came out and said that they are removing all extreme low light/visibility conditions from the scenario editor and instead focused their attention on improving the LOS mechanics in the more normal light/visibility conditions.  Judging by how light/time/conditions can be defined in the Scenario Editor, it just seems that BFC have tried to model LOS and visibility in a way that incorporates quite a few variables that best work and function under normal light conditions.  It seems the accuracy/function of the modelling seems to dramatically fail and have unusual results the further the light/visibility conditions degrade.
 
FWIW, there are so many things the CM engine DOESN'T even do that are KEY to even getting close to providing a realistic experience of WW2 night combat.  Without modelling the range of illumination sources that you would find under realistic low light/night conditions the whole exercise becomes kind of farcical.  eg. light from burning vehicles structures, illumination flares.  Not to mention how these sources of light can actually further impair vision depending on the position and facing of a unit relative to the light source.  It really is just too complex, why bother.  If you are going to do something, do it right and do it well. It seems the current LOS engine comes no where near to what it needs to be. Save ourselves the trouble of caring, and let BFC focus on more important stuff.

I just tested CMBN v2.12 (with both modules; bought but haven't installed the massive 10gb 3.0 file), and CMBB.
 
Okay, several points:  (Yes, I know I'm contradicting myself about not arguing.)
 
1) Well, duh, the reason people keep "burbling on" about the LOS tool (a terminology hold-over from CMx1) is because it's the ONLY FRIGGIN WAY WE CAN TELL HOW FAR OUR TROOPS CAN SEE!  It isn't rendered, it isn't defined, and I can't ask my troops... wait, yes I can!  Battlefront gave me this cool little tool that started with CMBO  IIRC, 15 years ago, it goes from light blue to dark blue and pink where I can't see anymore.  Isn't that cool?!?  So nice of them to keep the tradition going all this time.
 
2) The LOS tool DID tell you that in CM games for over a decade (a reasonable *max* spotting distance).
 
3) An identical test in CMBN v2.12 done on the same date at both 1900 and 2000 give average spotting distances of a single running soldier out to a reasonable average of 202m, max spot 316, min spot 59m.  LOS indicates 390m.  I'd say it kinda correlates.
 
3.5) Why does LOS indicate different in CMBN- 2Sep 1900 CMBN 390m, CMRT 83m.  Is Ukrainian fog somehow different?  Maybe Chernobyl makes it foggier, no… wait.  Line of Sight is how far you can see or spot.  This is reduced in low light conditions.  Light fog is light for optical clarify whether it’s 1200 or 2300.  The game is clearly NOT giving visibility, because that doesn’t change day or night.  So the game is clearly, somehow, trying to give you an idea how far away your guys can identify targets of some type.
 
4) Better soldiers spot better bc of better training and discipline, not bc they don't have cataracts.  Well, usually.
 
5) In aviation (which is pretty much what modern international meteorology is based upon), fog starts at 1/2sm.  That's 805m.  As CM uses identical terminology as aviation haze, mist, fog, etc, I'd say it also correlates.
 
6) I think there is a significant difference between "light fog" and once in a lifetime I can't see someone standing in front of my car fog.
 
7) Just about everyone has seen fog.  I have routinely (in real life) landed corporate jets and airliners at 1/2sm / 1800 RVR AKA "light fog", at night (have gone lower when/ where legal).  I have routinely taken off in jets down to 500 RVR which is "heavy fog" in anyone's book.  Night is actually easier than day.  Granted, there are runway lights.  Some airlines can go even lower.  However, if the visibility at the DA was such that I could run over a T-34 during taxi, without noticing it, we all would have been dead (kidding)... or actually just gone to the alternate.  Visibility below 100m / 300' is very rare.  Personally, I compare the measurable results of professional experience combined with thousands of airports that report extremely reliable weather over an apparently once in a lifetime experience.  Maybe they should make that the title of a setting in the game- Light Fog, Fog, Heavy Fog, and “One Time with my Dad Super-Doom, Zombie Movie Fog”.  I think I'll add that to my strings file now.
 
8) CMBB Sep’44, Dusk, Fog (no light fog) gives ~190m LOS with regular initial spotting of infantry to about 100m, retention of those targets to about 200m (difficult due to Borg spotting).  Man, CMBB sure still is fun!
 
9) The general consensus is that low vis in v3.0 engine is busted.  That consensus includes CMBN v2.12 and CMBB.
 
Somebody pass me my friggin cactus,
Mike

I have to wonder whether some people have ever been outside in dense fog. I got caught in some dense fog once while driving. My passenger (dad) chose to get out and walk along the boundary line of the road, and I followed his shadowy form. That's a distance of less than 3m from me to him, and I could barely make him out, knowing he was there. I wouldn't have seen anything further away, no matter how big it was. I certainly couldn't see the boundary line on the road surface beyond the front of the car.
 
Of course tanks are blind in those kinds of conditions. You keep burbling on about what sort of "LOS" the target tool gives you, but that's thoroughly misleading. Oh, and Experience level of the troops affects how well they spot, with, unsurprisingly, Conscripts being the worst.

Recently I´m playing with heavy fog to avoid excess of visibility and conscripts to avoid Rambos. It works fine! Playing with house rules can make it more realistic. CM is so flexible.