sttp

The show/hide terrain grid thing would be nice. If that were an insta-toggle, the graphic could even be made to be less subtle than with the grid mods, and therefore maybe make the land contours even more apparent. I feel like I read somewhere, though, that they've tried to implement that feature but that it was a huge resource hog? So... if not in CMx2.4 (seems unlikely it would be), maybe it could go on the CMx3.0 list instead.

Awesome idea. I use the gridded terrain to get a better sense of slopes, terrain cover, etc., but it does have its disadvantages. So I've often wished for some kind of "auto-generated topographical map" function. Even if just in the editor. Now that I think about it... seems like something maybe an ambitious modder/programmer could tackle? Not sure. I'd take a crack at it if I had the skills. I can envision something where you go to the map editor, pull up the elevation page, take a screenshot which shows each tile's elevation, stitch those all together (if needed, like for larger maps), and then assign different shades to those different heights. Great way to show slope and cover. It'd be so much easier to do if we could just pull all the map's elevation values out directly though -- like as a 2-dimensional array, I guess -- but I don't see any way that'd be possible? You've stimulated some interesting thought here. Precisely the point of these kinds of threads.

I love this combat simulator. Adore it. So I'm wondering what the most requested possible tweaks/features for CMBN have been over these last four years? Things to go in the next big engine upgrade. I'm gonna list some of my ideas/requests, and many of these have been mentioned before, but others... maybe not? So what the heck, maybe it's time to initiate some constructive discussion on how these ideas can be expanded or modified? It seems like a lot of new players are showing up in the last year (including me), so it might be productive... as long as people don't turn it into something that sounds more like bug reports. ------------------------- MAJOR FEATURES / ADDITIONS (I guess they'd be major?) ------------------------------------ These first two could be great for videos / screenshots. Video AAR's would require a ton less editing, and all would look better too. 1) --- adding the option for a truly fullscreen video? Maybe another ALT-[whatever] toggle which hides the bottom UI and top Nav/Info Bar, and expands the scene vertically? Definitely mentioned here before. 2) --- a way to instantly toggle off everything on the screen that's not part of the battle scene... i.e., no green soldier bases even when a unit is selected, and no red crosses popping up for new casualties... no nothing, except the battle. Maybe a single new hotkey (like ALT-V, for "video") could work? One press, all off; second press, it reverts back to the show/hide (trees / icons / paths / objectives / landmarks / vehicle hit text / command link) combo you just left. Alternatively, even just a couple more ALT-[whatever] shortcuts to individually toggle off the artificial elements we still must always see? 3) -- At least the ability to save a few "favorite" unit formations/combos. If we really wanted to splurge, maybe edit and save their relative positions, too, for quick and easy deployment and organization. Hugely useful for big QB's. (Discussed here recently, but it'd be such a useful feature that I couldn't possibly neglect mentioning it.) 4) --- (Something tells me this might be more difficult to program than it seems?) After the battle, the option to "review" even the units that have been destroyed or removed from the map. Or just any additional feature that could indicate or summarize the fate of every soldier you commanded. To me, the more stats the better. By squads and platoon, too... though at some point too much data in a 'game' really can start to turn people off. But maybe a slightly more detailed after action report screen? Percent of soldiers who are broken at the end of the battle? Good to know! (BTW, it'd be useful for video and screenshot purposes if the AAR displayed the QB map name on it.) ***I wouldn't dare put this one on a list like this, since I'm talking about things that are hopefully practical and reasonable. Still, it seems like it's the #1 CMBN feature request.(???) I'm referring to the ability to combine all 1-minute replay files into a single, huge replay of the entire battle. I'd probably pay an extra $100+ for that feature alone, frankly, but I do get where Battlefront's coming from on this. Not just the cost/benefit part, but that they're not even sure the CMBN core code could allow it.) ------------------------- 'MINOR' TWEAKS / FEATURES ------------------------------------ (Maybe minor, maybe not? For all we know the addition of some seemingly "minor" feature would be an unimaginable nightmare for the programmers.) 5) --- Please please please, an option to disable the "camera scrolls when mouse at edge of screen" behavior. ("When were those reinforcements coming? I'd better go read the mission briefing again... " [mouse cursor moves a millimeter below the Menus button] "WHOOPS, I guess instead I'll have to put my camera back into that perfect position it just darted away from....." If I could choose one single thing from this list, it'd probably be this. 6) --- Fixed cameras, customizable, which maintain their position and orientation with respect to the map. So, stuck looking down an important alleyway or terrain area. Maybe something like CTRL-SHIFT-[0-9] to set a fixed map camera, and ALT-SHIFT to switch your view back to it? 7) --- maybe an additional "Toggle Floating Icons" option that gets rid off all enemy contacts except those that are currently known, identified and in sight? As it stands now, ALT-I (at least when playing in Veteran mode) toggles between displaying ALL contacts (whether they're known or just suspected contacts)... vs. displaying only POSSIBLE contacts... vs. displaying NO CONTACTS at all -- all icons off. The 4th logical option there would be to display KNOWN and certain contacts only. With big battles, especially when you split squads into teams, all those floating question mark icons can really clutter up the screen. Displaying ALL contacts would remain the default though. 8) --- a command & control link option where, for example, if you clicked on a squad, you'd get the same type of red command link lines we currently get, but maybe also something that shows the quality of each element in an entire comms chain all at once... i.e., a line from the squad to the platoon HQ, then another line from platoon HQ over to company HQ, and so on right on up. There are a lot of situations during the chaos of battle where this could be useful, especially in real time mode. 9) --- In the editor, it'd be really nice to have the prices of units displayed, just like they're displayed when you purchase units for a QB. 10) -- A way to instantly draw 180-degree target arcs. (And a way to make them visually less intrusive -- see #11.) So here's the kind of thing I have in mind: just as always, you could still click and drag to draw your arc manually... and you could still SHIFT-click to cover the whole 360 degrees.... but maybe also there could be an ALT-click option, which gives you an instant half-circle that's centered on and extends out to wherever your next mouse click is. Similar to and as easy as a quick FACE command, but still with all the important differences. These 180-degree, wide-as-possible arcs are needed so often. Again, especially useful in real time mode. 11) ---- a way to tone down the visual display of the target arcs? Sometimes you need to keep a unit selected, and its arcs get in the way of other important things. Say your squad is traveling a curved path and you need to change the arc's orientation at a bunch of different waypoints, so now you've got 3 or more arcs on screen, with the entire map drowning in a sea of yellow or purple. Could there maybe be an option to display only the arcs' outline? Or even just temporarily toggle them off completely? (Another ALT-[whatever] display option.) 12) -- same thing with setup zones. Some way to soften or toggle them. Yeah, really minor. But that bright red or blue can be pretty intrusive during setup, right when I most need to see all the 'pure' terrain, and boy can it be an immersion killer. Maybe we could at least be allowed to softened/lighten the colors via mod? 13) --- a TARGET HEAVY ARMOR ONLY command, as discussed a few weeks ago. Say you want to ambush a Panzer with your last Sherman, and then your Sherman blows its cover just so that it can fire at a non-threat... like maybe a halftrack that has only a 30cal, but which is still considered 'armor' by the TARGET ARMOR ARC command. 14) --- almost forgot... could there be a new movement command, something with a speed in between MOVE and QUICK? Maybe call it HUSTLE or something like that? QUICK seems to be ~80% the speed of FAST, and the troops get tired quickly. Same thing with HUNT. And sure, MOVE has no stamina penalty, but it seems so... very... slow in comparison. Like there's too big of a gap between MOVE and QUICK? Probably discussed before.... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm pretty sure that mentioning 14 possible feature requests is enough. And they are just that, nothing more -- feature requests. None of those things involve bugs or any serious shortcomings, and I hope any comments wouldn't devolve into that. I don't want this all to sound like I'm dissatisfied with CMBN in any significant way. Quite the opposite -- this is an astounding piece of software, IMO. Still, there are a thousand things that players and even Battlefront staff themselves would love to see added or tweaked.... yet we all know that development resources are finite. I just wanted to see if there's ever been any kind of forum unanimity on these kinds of feature requests, and to also float some ideas. Seems like we all share the common goal of trying to help turn what's already a great combat simulator into an even better one. Thanks.

Great blog! Thank you for your efforts there. Your tips have been extremely helpful.

Switching to Windows 10 had no effect on any of my Combat Mission titles. They all still work perfectly. I have only the ww2 titles though -- the main three, plus CW Forces, Market Garden, Gustav Line, the Vehicle Pack, and all version upgrades. As to the install procedure, you'll definitely want to hear from someone who's certain, but I think you'll just need to download the most recent version of CMBN, which has all files and the master installer for all modules. You then just enter all the serial numbers and activate them one by one. (There should be a shortcut in your Start Menu called "Activate Modules.")

Great idea. I just recently got burned by the situation you describe. A new command like "Target Tanks Only" could help ease ammo worries, too.

Right through the tracks. The Pak40 crew that sent this shell my way was dead about 15 seconds later, killed by the very tank they "missed." It's the little things like this that make Combat Mission so ridiculously enjoyable.

Those tanks are looking great, so keep up the good work, Battlefront team. Fingers crossed that it'll be ready by December 16th... and if it's not, well then we'll just enjoy it later. Glad to see it's being done right.

Thank you. I've just read some more about all this spotting stuff, and it's a really interesting topic. So I'm going to try to "retrain" myself and create some new habits. So with that in mind... For something stationary like a deployed MG team, is it the case, then, that a FACE command affects spotting in exactly the same way as a 180-degree TARGET ARC? (The arc being centered on that same heading.) Does each command get "eyes towards the center" at the same rate, and for the same ratio of troops in the squad? I'm now pretty sure the answer to that is yes, but i'd love to be certain. I had come to prefer FACE over 180-degree TARGET ARCs, and always tried to make my target arcs as narrow as possible, and I'm now reconsidering all these kinds of issues. I do (at least!) understand that the two commands have very different effects for troops that are on the move -- the relative vs fixed/absolute thing -- and that a target arc adds the firing restrictions.

Thanks Muzzleflash. Wow, so I've already learned one new thing here. Yes, I've definitely been playing as if those target arcs focussed a squad's attention to the arc's width or azimuth limits. (But ignoring its length / distance... otherwise cover arcs would not make sense.) I have NO idea why I thought the arcs affected their scan / spotting. So if the troops' awareness of their 360 degree environment is the same regardless of the target arc's width, well then that definitely changes some things. Now I'm wondering how much this misunderstanding has affected my tactics or even battle outcomes. Hmmm... guess I'll be watching a few battle replays sometime soon.

I've having trouble finding some way to get my anti-tank gun crews to focus on a particular terrain area, immediately at the start of a one-minute turn, but to then, within that same one-minute turn, become much less rigid with their armor targeting, so that they'll also engage those tanks just as if I'd been able to stack a wider TARGET ARMOR ARC cone on a nearby waypoint. Does that make any stinkin' sense? I'll give the situation in detail -- way too much detail. (It just feels difficult to convey this somehow, though the issue comes up a fair amount....) I've got my AT gun crew working under a ~120 degree wide TARGET ARMOR ARC. They're getting uncomfortably low on rounds, and they have potential targets at 10 o'clock and and 12 o'clock. At 10 o'clock there are enemy infantry and a couple of half-tracks. I don't care about those right now -- low threat, not even firing towards us, and they'll soon be suppressed anyway. At 12 o'clock there are two Panzer IV's, only 200 meters out, which have been sporadically coming into view, and are sometimes "targetable". This AT gun scored some hits on these tanks just a minute or two ago, and the tank crews are now "rattled," I assume. The tanks are moving kind of erratically, stopping and surging and so on. So there would have been decent shot opportunities for my crew, and there almost surely will be again sometime soon. But... nope, my gun is pointing somewhere else, up towards those low-threat targets at 10 o'clock. All because I don't know how to tell the AI to do what I need it to do! I'm guessing that the fact that these higher-threat/higher-value Panzers are only visible sporadically is what's causing the AT crew to ignore them? But I, as their supposed commander, want these Panzers to be priority. I want AT shots to be taken as quickly as possible, as soon as a tank comes up over that hill. Whether it "pops up" at 12 o'clock a mere 5 seconds from now, or becomes visible at 2 o'clock or 10 o'clock (near the half-tracks) 30 seconds from now. This kind of duel between armor is often pivotal, so the importance of every second and every single degree of gun rotation is magnified. What I need to tell my AT gun crew to do is this: 1) Ignore the softer 'armor' targets at 10 o'clock, for now, and instead immediately start to focus your gun and your eyeballs towards 12 o'clock. Focus "right here" on the map, on this terrain that we know those tanks may pop up over at any second. 2) HOWEVER, AT gun crew, if those tanks instead race for the edges and come into view anywhere between your 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock, sometime later in this same turn, then disregard that terrain area I HAD to make you originally focus on, and instead track these 'sometimes partially visible' tanks across your field of view, and [for the love of god] just shoot them. Or at least start rotating your gun that way. It's a maddening situation. For part 1, a TARGET ARMOR ARC with a pretty narrow cone towards 12 o'clock is superior, isn't it? For me it has seemed to be. For part 2, I really need the AT crew to be flexible enough to "zoom out" and engage those tanks, basically as if I'd given them a much wider TARGET ARMOR ARC command. Even though the enemy tanks aren't close enough to force an AI override of my wishes. This common sense kind of targeting scheme (if you could call it that) is exactly what a person would naturally do in real life anyway, right? Yet I apparently cannot properly convey to my AT crew this switchover in focus that's desperately needed. This targeting and timing flexibility can be achieved with infantry or tanks or any weapons which can move to a nearby spot in just a few seconds. I use a TARGET ARMOR ARC command stacked onto a short PAUSE, and then a quick move to a nearby action spot, which can get its own new targeting parameters. Even if not ideal, that's all a decent workaround most of the time. So I feel like there's probably some way to accomplish this with AT guns, too? Yet they move so slowly that the 'adjacent action spot' workaround isn't at all feasible. Here are the targeting command choices, and the results: --------------------------- A) A general FACE command towards the tanks at 12 o'clock, relying on the 'naked' AI for target choice Result: My AT crew keeps going after the softer armor targets at 10 o'clock... which I don't care about. Those light half-tracks at 10 o'clock may technically be "armor," at least to the TARGET ARMOR ARC command, but still... we've got bigger fish to fry here. --------------------------- A narrow TARGET ARMOR ARC cone, centered at 12 o'clock Results: This does get the AT crew hyper-focused on that 12 o'clock Panzer-rich area, immediately. But if those tanks choose to pop up at my 10 o'clock or 2 o'clock 30 seconds into the turn (instead of popping into view at 12 o'clock just 5 seconds from now, like I expect) ... well too bad, I guess, because those Panzers are now outside that narrow targeting cone I had to create in order to get my AT gun to immediately start turning that way. (I'm using the clock positions as absolute bearings here, with north = noon, instead of as the relative bearings they typically represent.) --------------------------- C) A wide TARGET ARMOR ARC cone, centered at 12 o'clock Results: The AT crew will engage the Panzers if the Panzers do become visible out towards those edges 30 seconds from now. Beautiful. But... for now the crew keeps firing at the low-value targets located near 10 o'clock. The Panzers are only partly-visible, intermittently. And with a scan area as wide as that arc, and with so many more potential targets to sort through, my AT crew might not even spot an enemy tank that they otherwise would've probably seen. The AT crew will not start turning their gun to face where I really need it to face, at least not immediately... not while there are still other, constantly-visible "armor" targets within my target arc. --------------------------- D) A TARGET BRIEFLY command, targeting terrain that's as close as possible to the currently-hidden tanks This also gets the crew to focus and turn immediately toward 12 o'clock. Love that. BUT now precious ammo is being needlessly fired into the dirt. So if you only had a handful of shells left... oh well. And after this TARGET BRIEFLY command expires, there's nothing stopping my AT crew from turning back towards those low-value targets at 10 o'clock. Also, last (but maybe worst of all), those Panzers which are dead ahead but just a little too masked by the terrain will now be "discouraged" from moving out of the slight cover they're in... even though moving is exactly what I want them to keep doing. --------------------------- With each of those, there's a very real potential or even likelihood of way too many wasted seconds... seconds that can often be extremely, and disproportionately, costly. You can order all other assets in the game to do what's needed here, and I don't really see, in principle, any reason an AT gun crew couldn't also have the flexibility? So how do you all deal with the AT gun's 'coarseness' of targeting orders? What is the procedure to make it do what troops and tanks and all can already do (short waypoint hopping, with command stacking)? Or, if no direct solution, what's the best workaround or compromise? I'm betting that someone here has dialed in on it. I've only been playing for 8 or 9 months, and there is SO MUCH I still don't know. This little targeting dilemma has come up a lot in my recent battles, so... yeah, it really was time for me to finally post, with enough detail to be useful to others. My forum searches just weren't that helpful. Thanks for any advice!

Just wanted to say thank you for all the scenarios. I'm loving the smaller map sizes and smaller engagements. I just completed "Small Patrol Action" last week, and it was very interesting. (Tried to get some MGs over in that orchard on the American's left, and there was quite the skirmish up near that road.) I'm starting "Amongst the Ruins" right now, for CMRT. I just opened that map, and... wow. Had to come say thanks, immediately. Really excellent work SeinfeldRules! (I'm doing my Elaine dance right now.) Like many other people, I hope you'll keep putting the maps/scenarios out there. Can't wait to see what your map-making style may bring to the much-anticipated Bulge project.