Gafford

Great way these two are showing each others' perspective. Nice!!

That brought fond memories to life. I hope we again some day in the future will see NormalDude (ChrisND) on Twitch doing his now infamous scouting. 

My sentiments exactly, sburke. Besides, it beats growing a tumor about things that you can't control anyway.

Been reading through this one again and felt there was one area that kind of bothered me. While there have been some very good points and ideas floated in this thread, there is one particular bent in parts of the discussion that I do disagree with. That is the view that some things just can't be explained away as bad luck or just one of those crazy a** things that happen in combat.

What I think sits behind this is not recognizing that battle is friction and friction creates conditions where people do stupid unexpected things as well as amazingly heroic crazy things. What they want is their pixeltruppen to do exactly what they want and to do it correctly every time and do so while also handling unexpected issues that pop up that the player never anticipated. It is exactly the opposite of what a commander in RL would face. I personally do not want that. I want mistakes to happen, I want the unanticipated, I want the variable behavior that some times a guy steps out the doorway and gets drilled when he should have been taking cover. Or maybe the AT guy will sit there in the roadway stupidly reloading when he should be dodging for cover cause maybe he thinks he can do so before he gets gunned down or maybe he is just freaking out and that is all he can think to do. I do not want micro-managed soldiers to do exactly what I want them to do all the time. That isn't a simulation, that is a game. Yes I realize that some of these events are actually due to issues in the game, AS positioning, oddities about buildings and movement etc etc The cause isn't as important as much as knowing I can't control everything.

I know that is not an opinion everyone shares, hell maybe nobody else shares it. I like the ambiguity though.

I see that the @sburke and @c3k have already pointed to the discussion about the issue in 4.0 and the plan to fix it and all the fun around that. So I'll just try to answer some of the other questions or should I say statements
 
That is easy peasy as long as you USE THE ALL IN ONE INSTALLERS. If you still have the all in one installers from previous builds of the games you own you can don't even have to re-download them. If you don't still have them, you can download them again. After that you have two choices:
1) you don't want to keep the v4 update versions on your machine at all (I recommend this only if you are tight for disk space)
Uninstall the previous game.
Run the all in one install for the v3 update.
You are done.
 
2) you want to keep v4 around so that you can patch it and move forward later
Run the all in one install for the v3 update and make sure you point to a different directory than your v4 games.
You are done.
 
There is a small chance that it will ask you to activate again but I expect very few people will see that since v3 is already activated on your machine. So, there you have it: one decision to make and max two steps to follow and optionally some downloading time. I wish everything in life were that simple
The only gottcha is that for all the games other than CMBN they share the scenarios and game save folders. So, your v3 game will not load any saves or scenarios created with the v4 game but they will show up in the list. For many people there are not many scenarios that will trigger this.
PS. I have multiple version of all of the games installed on my computer at any given time. I am not the only one - very doable.
 
Good - me too. Awesome game.
Hummm I'll refrain from saying much here but there is something you can do right now - the pause command. If you put your defenders on pause the will stay put - sometimes even when shaken. For your attackers you can put a pause command on their final way point to make sure the stay and fight. There is a downside - OK two:
1) The AI is not doing this work around so it works best vs human opponents.
2) Also, if you men are paused they will not withdraw on their own until they are really messed up.
I know a lot of people are very bent out of shape over this but we should all keep in mind that the TacAI is *supposed* to act on its own and try to preserve the lives of your men. I know people feel the balance was thrown off in v4 - and I agree. However, I feel that this is another one of those times when expectations need to be set / reset / hammered home . These pixel soldiers are *not* meant to be supermen. They are *not* mean to make perfect decisions at all times. They *cannot* read you mind and act accordingly. So, once we all get this patch remember that. Remember that even before v4 soldiers skipped town and sometimes ended up dead because of it. And the will again after the patch. That desire for self preservation was always in the programming and it is not going away.
 

This will be the final analysis post, if these posts are the appetizer, then after this post I will be jumping into the main course.  I hope these aren't too boring for you.   
ENEMY AXIS OF APPROACH (AOA) ANALYSIS
After looking at the map I thought my opponent had three main options for his attack.  I think that he will use the road network for his armor, they allow longs fields of fire and he can clear the bocage lined shoulders with his infantry and armor.  Anyway, that is how I would attack on this map, and I would do it on more than one axis while maintaining at least a third of my combat power for a breakthrough attack, penetration and exploitation at the location he looks weakest: stretch him, identify weak point(s), penetrate weak point(s), exploit.  To find out whether that is what my opponent does or not, you will have to stay tuned!

AOA 1 (AXIS RED) - to me seemed the most likely AOA - it contains a good road network for his armor, and is the shortest route to my objectives. 
AOA 2 (AXIS ORANGE) - another highly likely AOA as it also contains a strong road network, however this route would be costly in time and ammo supply due to the length of road he would need to clear.
AOA 3 (AXIS YELLOW) - a very unlikely AOA in my opinion.  This route is not armor friendly, and it would mean clearing bocage field after bocage field on the way to my objectives.
The drawback for all of these AOAs is that I will see him coming and can take action to block his path.  
The following screenshots show the map from his perspective... thought they might help set the scene.
AXIS RED SECTOR:
AXIS ORANGE SECTOR: 
 

TERRAIN ANALYSIS
Okay, for this AAR I am going to provide several maps to help orient you to the terrain.  Here is the base map with elevations turned on:

That is clear as mud isn't it?  You can loosely make out the road net, but the bocage map and even the elevations are tough to decipher.  I added the 100 meter grid in Photoshop. 
ELEVATION TEMPLATE
This map was created specifically to highlight the elevation on this map.  Blue indicates low ground, while red is high, you can clearly see that the terrain rises from the bottom left corner to the top right.  My forces are arrayed on this ridge and will have great visibility.

OBSTACLE TEMPLATE
This map clears up the terrain and clearly shows the obstacles in this scenario.  I will use this map periodically to help you orient the actions throughout this AAR. This template includes the general location of my initial dispositions in blue.

BOCAGE TEMPLATE
This map clearly shows the road net, and the bocage map.  It helps to keep these types of maps clear of clutter for planning and for analysis throughout a game.  

Thanks fellas.
For some of my philosophy you can read my two part blog post on playing a defensive game:  PLATOON DEFENSE Part 1 and PLATOON DEFENSE Part 2
A quote from part 1:
I will, hopefully, illustrate some of the items I have bolded above in this AAR, and hopefully will throw in a surprise or two along the way.
Bil

This is a true After Action report (AAR).  I played this game last year against one of my most skilled opponents (ScoutPL).  The scenario was Green Hell, my goal was to protect the Farm and Cafe objectives, and if possible, try to take the la Madeleine objective.  Simple no?  This was the first time I had played this scenario and the scenario and sides were chosen by my opponent.
I will give a general overview along with a quick and dirty METT-T analysis, then I'll get right into the action.  A word of warning though, there will be no long range tank fights in this AAR, it will be a tough costly mainly infantry slug-fest for both sides.  I do hope however that I can at least show my philosophy when on the defense.  I will be honest, I struggle the most with the defense, I am very offensive minded and just can't help myself sometimes and overextend, right Baneman? 
MISSION
The mission is simple, hold the enemy at bay and force him to waste his combat power on the drive to my objectives, so that when he arrives he will have a spent force.  My main goal is to protect the two objectives in my zone, and preserve my force as much as possible.

ENEMY
I have been told to expect German FJ troops in unknown strength, though if I go by the tactical map above I can expect a combined force of infantry and armor.  All I really know is that they should be entering around the a Madeleine objective area... if the tactical map above is correct.
TERRAIN
My force is sitting on a ridge-line, so I should have good lines of sight across the entire map.  Whether that means I will be able to spot much is another matter.  The map is also broken up by bocage lined fields.  However they are easily penetrated, so will be easily flanked, also those fields will mask movement wonderfully, for both sides.

TROOPS
I command Baker Company, with a weapons company (Dog) in support.  I will get into my initial plans for this battle in a future post.  Initial deployments are shown below.. Baker is spread across the entire ridge-line and Dog has been broken up evenly to support Baker's Platoons.


TIME
I have 1 hour and 20 minutes to hold off the enemy.  That is a long time, but will also mean that ammo supply could be the deciding factor at the end.

From my post above, when playing on the defense I always try to find opportunities for:
Counter-attacking with a force large enough to cause serious damage Conducting spoiling attacks on targets of opportunity whenever possible I am not saying whether or not an opportunity presents itself for either of the above in this battle, but yes, I am prepared to act if it does.  It is too early in this fight to start thinking that way right now.

INITIAL MOVES
I moved a small portion of my units into picket positions, and a small scout force of two jeeps down what I identified as AOA RED.  The intention with my pickets, which are very small units made from splitting squads, is to get close if possible to the enemy's lines and setup listening and observation posts to identify movements.  My scout force is a bit stronger and the idea is for them to be my first defense along AOA RED, they have one bazooka on hand.  They are meant to be a speed bump and to slow, not stop, any enemy advance down this approach.

Scouts disembarking:

ENEMY CONTACTS
It didn't take long for me to start identifying enemy units, and with these contacts and subsequent movements I will put together an intelligence picture of my opponent's intent.  The intial enemy contacts were two STuGs and one UI infantry unit, which was moving, otherwise I doubt I would have seen it. 
One STuG (identified as STUG 01) is sitting on the AXIS ORANGE road and facing my ridge-line.  Right now it appears to be a support by fire asset, but more information is needed.  Also along AXIS ORANGE is the moving UI Infantry unit.  I can't make any assumptions about what he is intending on this axis yet.  I will await further information. 
On the AXIS RED road sits another STuG (STUG 02), this vehicle did not move this turn, but just sat facing up the road.  The white carrots in the following image indicates facing for the enemy armored vehicles.

STUG 01:

Sorry that makes no sense. Installing is easy. The new v4 installers are all in one for each game. Support can help you get reconnected with your keys and guide you through any difficulties you run into.
Read the instructions, don't take drastic actions on your own and follow the advice from support. 
You can be playing in no time.

Oh man, yeah. And each game had specific requirements, so I made a batch file that let me choose the configuration of drivers, buffers, etc... 
 
press 1 for general use
2 for Harpoon,
3 for Windows 3.11..
 
omg...so glad I don’t have to bother with that crap any more. 
 

Ahhh, that' s nothin. I remember when we PC gamers routinely had to manually add lines of code to our config.sys and autoexec.bat system files, just to be able to boot up a game and have it run with the limited memory that existed on machines of 25+ years ago... 

CM turned me into a WWII freak. I'd played Steel Panthers, Close Combat, Men At War, and a few others, but CM grabbed me like nobody's business and never let go. I'll have been coming here 18 years this October so that's gotta tell ya something. There's no other WWII/modern tactical games like it. The scope, the play styles, and the fidelity nail it. The game is very deep without breaking your brain. And with WEGO, there's just nothing out there that can touch it. WEGO kills it! WEGO has provided me with as much excitement, entertainment, and immersion as any movie ever could.
 
Mord.

That was my guess. That is why I will not open such a thread. Let's be happy with what we have already !!!

I think this is really an 'eye of the beholder' issue, a real classic one for that. As being part of the 'old guard' myself (at least I think I am after 10+ years and 1000+ posts and having done some beta testing in the past), I don't see any problem with SgtHatred's post. At the same time I understand IanL, Sburke and others because often people that are trying to be helpful on the forum get flak just for having their own viewpoint.
I think everyone is entitled their own viewpoint. Conceptual attributes like 'game-braking' are as subjective as attributes can come, because what exactly defines game breaking? 
Personally I have been so busy with other things that I have rarely had the time and or energy to play CM over the last 2 years. When I tried some 4.0 games, I did encounter the 'run from prepared positions under arty fire' behavior. Because in that particular scenario it did break my immersion, I decided to wait for a patch so I can enjoy the content I play in the most optimal form. I mostly enjoy campaigns when played the first time, so that's why.
In the end we are all here to enjoy the game. It's good that there is an old guard on the forum, at the same time it's good that there are new people on the forums. Obviously opinions about bugs, due patches and other things will differ. That's what a forum is about. 
Anyway, I don't see the problem with this discussion and most of the viewpoints offered here. As long as people keep discussion civilized and not take or make things personal, its all fine imo :).

What's the big deal. Old guard, new guard, your opinion, my opinion. V 4 is better than V 3, V 6 will be better than V 5 and so on. Fun's a poppin', just play the bloody game, life is to short as it is.
 

What's the big deal. Old guard, new guard, your opinion, my opinion. V 4 is better than V 3, V 6 will be better than V 5 and so on. Fun's a poppin', just play the bloody game, life is to short as it is.
 

Hey Guys, It's Miller Time...Just Relax and have a Brew or three on me :-)

Finally,  somebody has come up with some sort of reasonable answer instead of just ranting off..... Thank you.

Thanks for stating it that way.
I will say, as a beta-tester, coming to grips with this behavior has been difficult. The NDA prevents a lot of what I'd like say (and is a nice way to dodge ) but realize that the HE fleeing behavior was not seen as a deal-breaker before v4.0 was released...or it would not have been released.
Think about the myriad of situations your pixeltroops have been in. Think about how often they do the right thing...and you don't even notice it. Think about when they do something wrong...and the situation which it took to get that behavior.
Without giving too much (anything?) away, I follow two basic courses of investigation: there are areas I dig into to find stuff; and there are times when I get a whiff of something not quite right. In the first case, I start with a set of presumed behaviors and try to stress them to their outlying limits. In the other case, I happen to notice something in passing...and then the Eye of Sauron focuses upon it.
There are fewer and fewer of each. And the gameplay effect of most are very minor.
I can field multiple battalions and have total mayhem reign for four hours...and notice only a few odd cases of behavior. Most (all?) can be explained by men panicking under fire or other reasonable explanations. Think about the magnitude of that achievement: several hundreds of "men" acting realistically over multiple square kilometers whilst killing and being killed and trying to achieve a terrain objective.
The HE behavior slipped through. Now, what if the fix is worse? Maybe men will stick in their locations, but then tanks reverse towards threats. But only if unbuttoned and the threat is known but out of LOS. And only on odd numbered turns. 
Occam's Razor: if the fix were simple, wouldn't you have it already?

I think your perception of the 'defect' is different from most of of us players. I have been playing v4.0 since day 1. , every fffing day and my experience is that the AI High Explosive awareness has often saved my troops bacon (despite sometimes my best efforts to thwart them) which more than compensates imho for the odd 'running-away-too-quickly' behaviour. So please tone down the hyperbole( and vitriol) and try and understand  that your opinion of 'defect' is by no means a deal breaker for most of us ( and BF are not sitting on their fat asses' smokin' cigars -  Read Steve's candid post's on BFC's year of 2017).

What's the big deal. Old guard, new guard, your opinion, my opinion. V 4 is better than V 3, V 6 will be better than V 5 and so on. Fun's a poppin', just play the bloody game, life is to short as it is.
 

What's the big deal. Old guard, new guard, your opinion, my opinion. V 4 is better than V 3, V 6 will be better than V 5 and so on. Fun's a poppin', just play the bloody game, life is to short as it is.