sttp

Yes, good news indeed. I may just revert to an earlier version of CMBN until everything is working as intended with version 4 and the bocage. All this talk of it makes me miss it even more. I've always enjoyed CMFI the most, but CMBN was a not--too-distant 2nd place.

You know what Ultradave, I must admit that you are right on this. I did find the post by Steve that I was remembering, but I missed his post on the same topic later on in the thread where he clarified BFC's position a little bit. Here's what I was originally referring to: Steve said "The bocage issue you've brought up is certainly more than irritating to those who experience it, but it is fairly isolated when one considers the whole range of possible Combat Mission games and maps. We have to balance our limited resources. I'll see what I can do, however don't hold your breath for anything soon. Our schedule is crammed at the moment and we're already having to juggle too many things. The release of RtV helped get things back to "normal overloaded", so odds of a patch are better." Later in the thread, though, he clarified that work was ongoing, but that a patch would not be anytime soon. That's still quite disappointing, and I'll admit is a little extra grating after it taking something like two years to fix the artillery / indirect fire issue. After all, these were issues that did not always exist, i.e., they were introduced by UPGRADES, so I think it's more than fair to expect those issues to be addressed by specific, individual patches. Just my opinion.

It has been game-breaking, practically speaking, at least twice for me personally. And has caused me to quit scenarios several more times than that. If your radio and binoculars get separated, for example, good luck calling in artillery. Or imagine you've only got one bazooka or panzershrek, and its carrier is stuck hugging a hedge? Are these situations really that hard to imagine? I'm sure the fanatics will come to BFC's defense and try to justify how this simulates the chaos of battle or some other such nonsense, but it is almost impossible to exaggerate how frustrating these two bugs have been. It has nothing to do with poorly plotted movement waypoints. It's a bug, plain and simple, and is apparently just not that important to them... or is about as important to them as the bridge bug that's existed for how many years now?

There are at least two CMBN hedgerow bugs -- there's a suicidal-rush-towards-enemy-territory bug, and a soldiers-get-unintentionally-left-behind bug, each of which get downplayed on this forum, but in my experience are each very prevalent and extremely frustrating. Game-breaking at times. So I, too, could not feel good about recommending CMBN until BFC makes some kind of progress towards fixing those issues. (Last I saw, BFC didn't even want to admit they were real or significant issues.... which is patently ridiculous.) So I'd recommend to OP that he check out the Final Blitzkrieg demo and play through a few of those missions. That demo is Engine 3 (IIRC), plus CMFB's maps and scenarios are superb.

To the contrary, the rise of Trump offers valuable insights into the rise of authoritarianism, and how certain elements of a country's population can be made to practically crave it. To me it would be more dangerous not to notice and discuss the historical parallels. I don't think anyone is saying that Trump is or will ultimately be responsible for tens of millions of deaths.

Awww, man... if you wanted the original images -- they're bitmaps, 2560x1440 -- I would've happily just given them to you. The image names are the QB map names. Oh well, at least you got to work on your scripting skills!

After having put the CM2 titles down for awhile, and having tried a handful of other similar games in the interim, in my opinion the single biggest change that's needed for CM3 is a more efficient way to check spotting / visibility from the various points on the battlefield. Related, but a somewhat different issue altogether, is that I'd love for there to be a way to quickly generate high resolution terrain relief maps for any scenario or QB map. Improved animations -- more of them, for more specific actions, with better resolution / granularity -- would also be on my list of high priority changes for CM3.

Good decision. Those Cassino master maps look great!

I posted a new thread which has the CMBN pdf link it. The links to the older pdf's will also be changing, so I felt that made more sense than just adding a post to the end of an old topic.

(I'm starting this as a new topic since the links to even the old pdf files will be changing.) I just finished the pdf which shows all QB maps for CMBN. It is a huge file -- nearly 400 pages and 330MB -- and is HERE. (A smaller, lower quality version for CMBN is HERE.) Since Assault, Attack and Probe versions of the various QB maps usually vary only slightly, I only included Assault in these pdfs. Those and (I believe) all Meeting Engagement maps. Also, the old dropbox links for the other 3 titles will be expiring, so I'm moving everything to this newer account. Here are the new links for pdf's for the other 3 WW2 titles: CMFB is here. Here is Red Thunder. And here is Fortress Italy.

The M.2's are amazing. I just built a new system with one as the primary drive. I can be inside of a typical CMBN scenario within 1 minute of powering on my PC. Some battles used to take a full minute or more to load, but now there are few that take more than about 15 seconds.

Hi. I'm the one who made those pdfs. I lost a hard drive recently and decided to just go ahead and build a new PC, and I now have all 4 WW2 titles running again. But... I lost the images that I was using to make that last QB map pdf for CMBN. I'm now getting back into these games after a bit of a hiatus, though, and this new solid state drive makes a huge difference in map load times. (Most maps and scenarios now load in about 15 seconds, and I've yet to find any that take more than 30....) So I may start over with the CMBN pdf during this upcoming holiday.

Has anyone fixed all the South African wav files yet? If so, it'd be great if they could be uploaded to CMMODS or even to the forum or whatever. I'm sure Battlefront will get around to fixing those sounds eventually, but I kinda suspect it could be months before we see the first R2V patch.

Problem solved. Thank you guys for the very prompt response. I'll get started with reinstalling everything tonight.

Just opened a ticket. Thanks.

I had to build a new PC, so will need to reinstall all of my Combat Mission games... meaning I need to log in to my account on Battlefront.com to re-download everything. I could not remember my Battlefront.com password, so went to reset it. I have done this 4 times now in the last 36 hours or so, and each time it says it has (or will) send an e-mail with the password reset instructions to the e-mail address I provided. But I have not received any such e-mail. I have looked in every gmail folder -- yes, including junk mail -- and the e-mail from battlefront is just not getting through for some reason. Thanks for any help.

Based on BFC's release history over the last few years, I would be very careful about interpreting the statement from BFC Elvis in that way. i mean, I want you to be right, but it just feels like we've been here several times before.

In my impatience (in waiting for the CMFI module), a few weeks ago I finally went ahead and bought GTMF. And wow, I'm really glad I did. It's a much different game, with its operational layer and all, but the experience is just as rewarding and entertaining, IMO. The one thing that had kept me from buying GTMF is that with CM I'm primarily a turn-based/WEGO player -- I spend as much time watching the action as I do planning it -- so GTMF, having no replay capabilities, just didn't seem all that attractive to me. What I did not realize, though, is that GTMF has what might be called a pretty robust StratAI, so once you get proficient with the (very different) orders and control system, you can pretty much just position your forces, give a few basic commands, and then just watch the action unfold. It's a real hoot. There is much, much less micro-managing than is needed in CM, and you can usually trust your forces to do the smart thing, so as it turns out there's still plenty of time to play Combat Cameraman. Any CM players who like Red Thunder the most, or really anyone who leans more towards armor vs armor battles... you, especially, are really missing out here. Don't let the lack of WEGO be what stops you from trying out GTMF -- that's what held me back for so long, yet I now realize I could've been having fun with TWO great games for the past few years. CMx2 is still my overall preference (for a dozen reasons I won't get into right now), but there's really quite a bit to like about this Graviteam game.

Yes, the scenario, whether it be standalone or through a campaign, is where the player interfaces with the product. What good are new vehicles, skins, forces, etc., if there are so few scenarios in which you might encounter them? I would have never guessed that I'd have to give serious thought to the question "Should I buy the Rome to Victory module?", but... here we are.

Commonwealth Forces ($35): 2 campaigns + 20 standalone scenarios Market Garden ($35): 2 campaigns + 14 standalone scenarios CMFI Gustav Line ($35): 4 campaigns + 18 standalone scenarios CMBN Battlepack ($10): 1 campaign + 12 standalone scenarios CMBS Battlepack ($10): 2 campaigns + 6 standalone scenarios This new CMFI module has 2 campaigns and 8 standalone scenarios and is priced at $35. (Obviously it has other content as well, like all the modules do.) I guess the customers will decide with their wallets whether this is an acceptable amount of value or not.

Great news! Thanks. The product page for Rome to Victory says that it has 2 campaigns and 8 standalone battles. I assume that should be 18 standalone battles, to bring it in line with the other similarly priced modules? (Even the $10 battle packs have had a campaign and 10+ battles....)

Exactly, and especially when the presentation of a save game is used as a sort of gatekeeping method for bug reporting. The whole forum, at times, has had a kind of "save game or it didn't happen" sort of feel to it. It's great that we, as customers, can help the developers isolate their software's bugs, but if a potential bug report isn't going to be taken 100% seriously until save-game evidence is presented, then there really should be some kind of simple, official, and centralized method for uploading those saved games.

I don't think we should just throw our hands up here and say "oh well, software's complicated, so what are you gonna do?" I feel like that's what happened with the tanks humping bridges bug, primarily because of some of the more vocal forum members here, and all that's gotten us -- the community of players -- is a bug that still exists. Do we know for certain whether this "fleeing toward the enemy" bug appeared in CMx2 version 3? My understanding is that it did not. Has anyone -- beta testers, Charles, or whoever -- reverted their game to a version prior to 4.0 and then set up situations similar to the save games that have been submitted and confirmed to be broken? It seems like that would be a good thing to know for certain. Only Charles knows the relevant AI code that was touched between versions 3 and 4. I feel like sufficient evidence of a significant issue has already been presented (via save games, images, etc.) from multiple forum members. Unfortunately though, yes, it's across multiple threads on multiple forums. And even if the problem relates to something "baked into" only some of the maps, as you say, there is still a solution that exists that can be rectified by modifying the code. (Again, it worked before, right?) There are only 1 or 2 people who have access to the software and debugging tools needed to analyze, isolate and resolve this issue, and to be honest (but hopefully not too harsh), those people should have been all over this, by their own initiative, as soon as the problem was first confirmed.

Also, can't resist sharing this video, since I know many people here would enjoy it as much as I did. CBS just uploaded it yesterday: CBS Reports (1964): "D-Day Plus 20 Years - Eisenhower Returns to Normandy" It's 90 minutes of Cronkite interviewing Eisenhower as they visit many of the famous Normandy landmarks. (Omaha Beach, Pointe du Hoc, Sainte-Mere-Eglise, cemeteries, etc.) I've read a pretty good amount about D-Day and the subsequent push through France, but I still learned some interesting things... and also saw some footage I'd never seen before, despite having watched probably hundreds of WW2 documentaries.

Thank you for posting this. And thank you to those men who were left behind so many years ago, taken from the world right at their prime. Tragic. Yesterday I mentioned to some people at work that today would be the 75th anniversary of D-Day, and some of the reactions were really surprising. Especially from those under age 25. A few of them looked at me as if I'd just exclaimed that my mom was abducted by aliens and that I am, in fact, an alien-human hybrid.... Turns out they just didn't know much about D-Day. They proceeded to tell me that their high school history classes spent only about ONE WEEK on World War 2!!! I was speechless.