sttp

The rumors of my death have been greatly exaggerated.

Thing 1:  The Blue units on the board at the beginning of the game are to have something to do besides slugging down beer and eating pretzels... Really!  The Amphibs are reinforcements.
The FO is a MUST for Human Player 1st turn arty- air strikes.
Thing 2:  The Engineers were used against wire and mines when I was doing the original scenario.  Also They were a compact unit which allowed fewer order slots.
Thing 3: As the author of A Day at the Beach I made a decision NOT to be realistic so much as fun.  Honestly -  No Marine would plan such a hap hazard beach assault with No intel, a couple of Helo's and pretend Naval Guns .   The Scenario was designed to display the New game features and to blow stuff up.

I didn't think it was going to be a long wait either, in the fall of 2015, when it was said that the release of Final Blitzkrieg was close. Then, as time went on, I thought there was going to be a release at the anniversary of the start of the Battle of the Bulge, in December... but no, it was not released until in April 2016. So, I am not holding my breath for CMSF 2 or an Engine 4 patch anytime soon. Like I said, we're on Battlefront time here.

Video 1 looks like the Indirect Fire bug that @HerrTomhas alluded to. The unit takes 1 casualty and suffers about 70% suppression and  drops to the morale state of 'Nervous'. The unit leader is the casualty, but the assistant takes over who also has +1 Leadership. Can a hand grenade cause the Indirect Fire bug?
Video 2  looks like a typical auto evade when troops in the 'Rattled' morale state become Pinned.
I cannot comment on video 3 as I don't have any information on the unit status.
When I see my troops in CM behave in a way different to what I expect, I can typically 'roleplay out' the situation so as to be less dissatisfied with the result. 
It is hard to make that case here in either of the first 2 vids.
In vid 1, the unit does not panic, nor does it suffer from being led by an incompetent. The unit is merely dropped to 'Nervous' and still has a capable leader fronting it up. The unit is also aware of 2 enemy contacts to the north. I would therefore find it difficult to roleplay out the situation that developed and would come to the conclusion that something was wrong with the TacAI.
In vid 2, the unit is Rattled and (probably) Pinned whilst moving. The auto evade kicks in but again, I find it difficult to roleplay out that they would run back into the fire that was coming at them. Again I have to conclude that something here is wrong.
Having said that I have never witnessed a situation in any of my own games that I have not been able to roleplay out, but I've also never witnessed the Indirect Fire bug demonstrated by @IICptMillerII. That's not to deny it exists, just that I've not seen it in a game I've played. I do not have the Shock Force 2 demo.
 
 

If Ford sold me a car with a radio without a volume control I'd be pretty annoyed. You sold an upgrade to your game that added the ability to mute the music. It's hard to argue that basic audio controls shouldn't have been part of the base game.
 
You can't seriously be complaining that other people are unreasonable when your stated position is that you don't know if your game is ready to launch until 10 minutes prior and that acknowledging a missed release window when it becomes obvious it will be missed is too time consuming, yet spend 10x as many words complaining publicly that your customer base isn't entirely rational. 
$150 for a new game with all the trimmings is fine. Games are expensive to make. It's the 21st century, money practically grows on trees now. Games across the board should go up in price.

Here is my clumsy translation of the first few pages, more to follow: 
The assault-platoon in the grenadier-company
 I. General remarks
Based on the experiences in the war, a new structure and new armament is required for the grenadier-companies, both for the attack and the defence. The partition of grenadier companies into assault-platoons allows their unitary and flexible/swift employment. [? pretty general remark]  With its new structure, namely two assault-squads and a fire-squad, as well as with its new armament, the assault-platoon will fulfill a very clearly defined role. The uniform armament of the squads facilitates their lead, so that even young and inexperienced squad leaders who have not finished their full training, can lead them into battle more readily. The adoption of the assault rifle 44 [Sturmgewehr 44] increases firepower and the manoeuverability of the squads. The withdrawal of grenade-launchers and sharpshooters from the squads relieves them of specialists. It allows the grenade-launchers to be concentrated on the platoon-level and the sharpshooters on the company-level.  II. Structure of the assault-platoon [you can compare it to the diagrams on p. 15 of the electronic document]
5. The assault platoon consists of:
 the platoon leader  the platoon HQ team, including the grenade launcher team 2 assault squads (7 men each) 1 fire squad (7 men) 2 infantry carts (Jf. 8), coupled, 1 horse, 1 operator/rider 1 backup/reserve/supply [?]  cart (“Feldwagen oder Panjewagen”), two-horse, 1 operator/rider  6. The platoon HQ team consists of:
2 messengers/runners 1 litter bearer/medic 1 Grenade-launcher-team (3 grenadiers) [probably this means 3 tubes], one of the greandiers is teamleader; The concentration of the grenadiers at the platoon-leader increases the effectiveness of fire and allows them to be used in a concentrated/focused manner  7. The assault squad consists of 1 squadleader and 7 soldiers. The soldiers are equipped with assault rifles 44. They are to engage in close combat and are equipped with plenty of ammunition and grenades. One of the soldiers is second-in-command of the squad leader.
 8. The fire squad consists of 2 light MG teams. The squad leader is in command of the squad as a whole and one of the MGs in particular. His second-in-command commands the other MG. Each MG is crewed by a gunner (“Schütze 1”) and two ammo-bearers (“Munitionsschützen”).
The first [=standard?] ammunition-allotment is 720 rounds for each assault-rifle 44. On them, the soldiers are to carry 6 magazines for a total of 180 rounds (30 rounds per magazine).
 III. The assault platoon in combat
 General principles
 9. In the attack, it’s the assault platoon’s task to wipe out the last resistance of the enemy. In the defence, the assault platoon defeats the final assault of the enemy.
 10. The assault platoon can accomplish any task, both in the defence and in the attack.
 11. The assault platoon is best used for the following tasks:
For assault and recon missions, for combat in rough/difficult (lit. hard to oversee) terrain, for missions during night or in foggy weather In the defence as a mobile reserve for the counter-attack and the protection of open flanks For the pursuit of the enemy and as an advance guard, riding on Stugs, trucks/cars or tanks; As rearguards in retreat actions, or for combat “im Zwischenfeld” (?) as a hunter-platoon of a ski-unit or as a ski-equipped part of a winter unit [… I don’t know how to translate all the special terms – generally it refers to their usage on skis]  12. The assault platoon is the smallest tactical combat unit of the grenadier-company. The individual deployment of assault squads or the fire squad is an exception.
 Attack
13. In all combat conditions, the completely hidden, hunter-like (“jägermäßige”) approach into the rear or a flank of the enemy and the sudden, overwhelming and surprising employment of fire at short distance is the key to success.
14. When approching, the platoon leader leads his assault platoon close to the enemy, evading fire combat. 
15. Proper assessment of the terrain is required prior to any action. Every opportunity of concealment needs to be taken. It’s not that important to reach the forming up point for the final assault as fast as possible, [but – is missing] to reach it undetected by the enemy and without any casualties.  
16. The assault platoon opens fire as late/close as possible and needs to make even more use of the support fire of heavy weapons [to cover its movement, obviously] than before. It’s not the assault-platoon’s task to use [it’s own] suppressive fire to get/manoeuvre within large or medium distance to the enemy.  
17. To advance, the assault platoon evades enemy fire zones, exploits even the smallest cover, and crosses areas observed by the enemy in a trickling manner (“Vortröpfeln”). Very narrow but deep formations as well as spreading out a lot helps reduce casualties. Any method of advance that does not offer good targets to the enemy is suitable.  
18. When crossing open areas in a trickling manner (“Vortröpfeln”), the intervalls between the men (or pairs of men) are to be set between 0.5 and 5 minutes. The objective area for the manoeuvre needs to be determined beforehand. An energetic squadleader should be picked to be “Schießender” (lit. firer). He oversees the manoeuvre, and ensures that the men move from one waypoint to the next in irregular intervals. (see example attachment 3) 
19. Only if all other means (support by heavy weapons, terrain, fog/smoke, darkness) fail, the assault platoon may stop its forward movement and advance by fire [so that means providing its own suppressive fire]. 
20. Concentrated fire by all supporting weapons needs to be exploited for a swift and cohesive advance.  
21. When assaulting, one or both assault squads are to be deployed in front/attack. The fire squad  and the grenadier-team are following closely. They provide fire-support wherever the enemy is still resisting. 
Assault squads roll up enemy trenches (“stoßtruppartig”). See the details about rolling up trenches in “Merkblatt 25/3: Instruction for close combat and grenade-training”, Nr. 73-86)
22. If the fire support delivered by the company or battalion proves insufficient for the assault, the platoon leader needs to employ his fire squad and the grenadier-team for fire support or suppressive fire. 
23. The platoon leader needs to plan the attack according to H.Dv.130/2a Nr. 458-463.
24. The combat-plan needs to consider the following questions:
 Where do I need to go? What/who is preventing me from going there? How/where do I launch the assault? From where and when can the assault be supported by the fire squad?  25. The combat-plan then needs to be broken down into individual orders:
a) To the fire squad: Fireposition – where?, Target – where? Fire support – how? (time to open fire, duration of fire); Follow up – when? Where? b) To the assault squad: Target of the assault – where? How to approach? How to assault? c) For the grenadier-team: Follow up – to whom? (advance together with the assault squad or stay with the fire squad?) – fire position – where? Target, where? Ammo-consumption  26. This is how the assault squad is to be used on the attack:
a) When conducting a two pronged attack [“zangenförmiger Angriff”], the fire squad and both assault squads are to be used in a way so that they don’t lose their communication with each other b) The grenade-launcher team follows the assault squads to support them in the attack and in the assault against targets that pop up surprisingly c) The assignment of the grenade-launcher-team to the fire squad is an exception and depends on the terrain and the distance to the target d) Holding back one of the assault squads as a reserve of flank-guard to support the fire squad is the exception  27. Assault and fire squads complement each other even if there is no explicit order for it. The light MGs of the fire squad always need to cover the assault squads, even when they [the MGs] are advancing in alternate bounds. The assault platoon’s squads act upon signals or shouts.
 28. The platoon leader takes in hand all the preparations for the assault. He is the first to charge forward, motivating his soldiers to do the same, and assaults with the assault squads.
During the assault itself, a lively fire of all of the platoon’s weapons is employed, as well as loud and continous cheering. The assault-rifle 44 is fired on the move, the enemy needs to be drowned in fire. In the first phase of the assault [? not sure; “beim Sturm”], the soldiers are to fire aimed single shots in quick succession, in the second phase [?  not sure; “beim Einbrechen”] bursts (2-3 rounds).
29. The big effect that  the assault rifle 44 has on morale needs to be exploited for a quick assault sprint into the enemy line/position. When approaching close to the target, going prone and throwing grenades often leads to unneccessary casualties and threatens the success of the action.
30. After the successful assault, the fire squad and the grenade launcher team follow up without orders.
31. After the successful assault, the platoon-leader reorganizes his platoon for the next assault. Any success needs to be exploited further. The enemy must not be given time to reorganize his defences.
32. If the assault was directed at a limited target [so the platoon is supposed not to exploit a success with continous attacks?], the platoon leader sets up a defence of the conquered position with the two light MGs of the fire squad and the grenade-launcher team. They (the MGs + grenade launchers) ensure that the position is not lost to a counter attack, even if no explicit order is given.
33. Due to its quick readiness to fire and its high firepower, the assault rifle 44 is of particular use in the night attack. Assault-platoons are to be used in the first line. Moonlit nights and snow are favourable conditions for a night attack.
 34. A night attack requires a very detailed attack- and fire plan. The attack needs to proceed according to the very strict plan. It is impossible to redirect the attack on the fly.
 35. Night attacks are always conducted against a limited target. The enemy position is taken by a surprising dash/assault by the asssault squads in line [? “in breiter Front”, on a broad front], with continous fire of all soldiers. The fire squad follows up closely.
Defence
a) The assault platoon in the main defensive line ("Hauptkampflinie")
 36. When the assault platoon is used in defence at the front line, it deploys in a way to defend the position.
 37. For defending a large front, the light MG from the reserve [? “Gerätereserve” - the diagrams at the end of the document show it being transported on the horse cart] is to be used [in addition to the other MGs, obviously]. It is to be manned by the ammo-bearers of the fire-squad. The platoon leader decides where to position the fire squad, either deploying it in individual nests over the platoon sector, or, depending on the terrain, he might use concentrations of the light MGs and the assault squads. All MG positions need to be fortified as “fighting nests” and equipped with anti tank weapons. Additional anti tank weapons (Panzerfausts, blinding devices, mines, Molotov cocktails) are to be distributed all over the position, readily available for every man.
38. The grenade-launcher team needs to cover those folds in the terrain that cannot be reached by the fire of the light MGs and the assault rifles 44. It supplements the effect of grenades to cover the dead angles in front of the position. The grenade-launcher team has to be mobile.
39. The counter-attack-reserve of the platoon leader consists of one assault squad. If the sector is very large, however, the counter-attack-reserve only consists of the platoon leader and a few soldiers. Counter-attacks in various situations/in different directions need to be preplanned and practiced.  
40. On the defence, one needs to consider daytime and nighttime positions (setup of pickets, organization of the sentry duties, coordination with other observation posts close-by).
 b) The assault platoon as a counter-attack-reserve
 41. Usually, a battalion’s or regiment’s counter-attack-reserve is made up of its assault platoons (fire extinguisher!).
 42. The assault platoons that are deployed in the rear area of the front (“in der Tiefe des Hauptkampffeldes”) need to be set up in a way so that their fire squads can destroy any breakthroughs by the enemy and support the assault squads’ counter attack.
 43. If the whole assault platoon counter-attacks, the fire squad is to be used as the fire-reserve of the platoon leader in the re-conquered position. [?]
 44. Counter-attacks have to be conducted against the flanks or rear of the enemy, along the main line of defence (“Hauptkampflinie”). The faster/earlier the assault platoons counter-attack, the better their chance for success, even if the enemy is in superior strength. Therefore, the platoon-leader needs to make his own decision [on his own initiative] if/when to counter-attack.
 45. Fire by all weapons and any means available are applied in order to destroy an enemy breaktrough and overrun it with a swift counter-attack.  The counter-attack is to be carried out with all guns blazing, reckless personal commitment, and continous cheering.

Combat Mission future???, how about we do Combat Mission present, which is now past.

"don't let other people's posts discourage you"
I don't think it's other people's posts that are discouraging - I think it's the general apathy and disdain with which Battlefront treats it's customers. In this day and age of instant communication it is ludicrous that news flow is almost non-existent. Having bought all the WWII games and all the add-ons, I am now at the end of my tether awaiting - in particular - the long-promised and yet still unprovided patch. I would suspect that many have already thrown in the towel and will not be returning. I may shortly be joining them.
 
 

For the record, Grogheads.com takes no official position with respect to Battlefront one way or the other. However, our members possess a variety of opinions that we encourage them to express, be they positive or negative. Wargaming is a subject we are all very passionate about obviously, so sometimes, some people have difficulty expressing their views in a rational, calm manner. I know I'm stating the obvious, but I just want to go on record by stating clearly that the opinions expressed in our forums belong to those of the poster.
Personally speaking, I have every CM game ever released. Yes, I've been frustrated with the DRM and licensing and the delays, but it never has, nor will it ever dissuade me from buying a game in the series if it appeals to me. Shock Force 2 is eagerly awaited. 
I encourage anyone here who strongly supports CM and Battlefront to hop into our forums and represent. You are all welcome.

To the point about customers complaining, does anyone else find it inherently fascinating that business in general often has this complexion: We survive only because of customers, yet their very presence is an exhausting weight that must be endured. They are both the sole reason for your existence, and, seemingly, a kind of existential burden.

I have spent about $300.00 here. That's more than I've given AAA game developers in the last year. If I didn't find it so sweetly ironic I would find it incredibly sad that posts in the same vein as mine are read by Battlefront as attacks - or, as Burke suggests: whining.

The people "whining" are, perhaps quite literally given the size of the community, the only people allowing you to contribute to making these games.

I can tell you that the response from beta testers and the like have made me pause on a purchase of Red Thunder. It felt wrong for the moment to be so disappointed in the staff, and then hand them more money. If you're looking for an effect caused by your behaviour, there's a clue.

I know you are just beta testers.  But it is you guys that come back in and seem to try to turn the conversation about everyone picking on Steve and BFC.  And you come across as semi-official.  So what you say carries some weight.
Instead of just saying, yeah, we know it sucks that our boss doesn't communicate, you feel the need to aggregate every slight BFC has ever faced in their 19 year history.  There are a couple beta testers that generalize individual statements into all out customer-led attacks on all that is BFC.  It would probably be better as a beta tester to not say anything.  Let it go.  By you guys coming in and trying to ride herd, you are letting Steve and BFC off the hook on their poor business practices. 
People will come in and complain.  So what?  Its not like BFC is going to suddenly change or salvage its reputation in single forum thread.  You guys do more harm then good when you circle the wagons on issues that are legitimate or excuse away BFC's actions/inactions.  You guys, as beta testers seem very frustrated by these conversations.  So why do you involve yourselves?   Let BFC address it, or not.
I came to the place in my life that I recognize that BFC makes great games, but, outside a cadre of old players and beta testers, they really don't like their customers much.  I still play now and then, and I poke my head in now and then, but I tend not to take stuff personally much.  As long as the games are good, I'll put up with the abuse.

"No, we are going to miss late September" is a perfectly reasonable thing for a community to expect by now, if the date will indeed be missed. I don't think Battlefront respects the community enough to provide that though.
 
Far more important than the release of a new product is that this represents yet another delay to the 4.0 patch. Something that people have already paid for.
 

Really when customers paid $120 in advance they have no right to be notified or updated when they might actually receive the product?? You really should rethink that!!

To be honest it's getting to the point where I'm thinking that I ought to request a refund because I could spend the money on something else that I can enjoy right now, not in 6 months time. I don't think that's an unreasonable regret on the part of the customer either!

I agree completely. The developers have developed some bad habits concerning marketing and support of their games, and these habits continue to go unchallanged by the community, thus ensuring the continuation of said bad habbits. If their product sucked I obviously wouldn't care one bit, but since the product is pretty excellent this constant lack of communication and broken promises and deadlines (in regards to the patch) is getting on my nerves. 

It isn't whining when people have been waiting two years for a patch, and it isn't whining when a date is set for a release and then missed without a word.
 
You're the one who whines after people criticize BF for anything.
 

I prefer a guy with big thumbs and Parkinson's.
 
Mord.

Artkin, if this is how you speak in real life I would murder you after one conversation. LOL. I haven't been this confused since my proctologist sent me flowers and a Thank You card.
 
Mord.

I've posted these observations some time ago in my Gerbini scenario-topic, but I think they deserve a better spot and some discussion, so here we go!
Some short notes on dust in Combat Mission 
I have not conducted serious tests, just some quick hotseat-experiments in Combat Mission: Fortress Italy.
What raises dust?
Vehicle movement over "dusty terrain". The faster the vehicle goes, the more dust is thrown up. Firing large calibre guns (AT guns, tank guns, etc) from "dusty terrain". MGs are okay. Shell impacts on "dusty terrain" Whether a terrain is dusty or not depends on the ground condition (no dust if wet, eg.) and on the type of terrain. E.g. the ploughed field tiles don't raise any dust, most crop tiles do. Also consider different road types.
Who can see dust?
Dust generated by shell impacts can be seen by the opponent. Dust generated by firing or moving can only be seen by the opponent if he has spotted the unit generating the dust (confirmed contact required). Note that the enemy can only see the dust that is created from the moment on at which he has spotted the source (i.e. "older" dust generated by the source is not shown to the opponent retrospectively). On the other hand: once you've spotted dust, it stays even if you lose sight of its source. Effects of dust?
Dust reduces/blocks LOS. For example, if you have 5 tanks on a sanddune fire, they will literally disappear in a cloud of dust. This is a two-edged sword and something to consider if you want to area-fire. Fire --> dust-cloud --> No LOS --> no area fire until the dust dissipates. This also raises an important question: Do dustclouds that my enemy can't see (because he has not spotted the source) still handicap his LOS? In order words: Is it possible that he can't see me because he's looking at a dust-cloud of which he is totally unaware?  Can you be fooled by an invisible dust cloud? Another highly interesting question: I don't know whether dust raises the chance of getting spotted (as an unconfirmed contact at least, even if you're shrouded in your own dust-cloud?).  Behaviour of dust?
Dust travels with the wind (scenario condition) and dissipates at some point.

Setting up two platoons to "Typical" in the Editor -

The Infantry Platoon consists of:

39 dudes w/
3x Thompsons
3x BAR
3x M7 Rifle Grenades
2x Bazookas
3x AT Grenades
2x Carbines
+Rifles

Each 12 man squad (something close to)
1620 .30 cal rounds
180 .45 cal rounds
16 Grenades
3 66mm HE


The Straggler section consists of:
51 dudes w/
4x Thompsons
10x Carbines
+Rifles

Each 12 man squad (something close to)
1056 .30 cal
180 .45 cal
150 .30 cal Carbine
12 Grenades

Soft factors were generated identically in this test.

Setting this to "Excellent" gave me two BARs on this test, obviously there's a die roll involved here for all of this, but I think you usually won't get BARs.

Speculating, but I wonder if "Typical" is lower than "Average" for Straggler sections?

Obviously there are the aforementioned differences up the org chart as well. They're definitely a weaker formation, and very different to the mainline infantry.

Also, US and German stragglers both suffer from less flexible command. They don't have XOs at the company level, so their leadership is fragile, and they don't have Assistant Squad Leaders, so splitting the squads weakens them more. And since they have four squads per platoon/section, they're a little clumsier if you want to keep them in C2. In general it seems to me that German straggler units suffer more--since their squads never have inherent MG42s, which is a bigger loss, whereas the Americans only lose BARs, and even then only in some squads (it seems to be randomized). And the Americans also still get radios at the platoon/section level! 
It seems to me the stragglers, often as not, represent not beaten-up infantry units, but all the other hodgepodge of forces that ended up fighting as infantry in the Bulge--cannon companies without their howitzers, AT companies without their ATGs, non-combat engineers, supply units, cooks, drivers, clerks, etc. Hence the high numbers of carbines (and the reduced grenade counts) -- but there were still plenty of radios and even a few BARs and Thompsons floating around. The M1917 HMGs instead of M1919 MMGs also make sense since they were more common in the rear areas, lots being issued to engineers (I have no idea why?) and to the battalion HW companies and I think HQ guards. I don't get the lack of bazookas though.
Also, a full-strength straggler group is 226 men, while a US infantry company in the game is something like 160. So the straggler group seems to me more like the remnants of a battalion (and probably not an infantry battalion) rather than a company. Man-for-man, you can get a lot more firepower, and a lot more nimble C2, out of 226 Americans in other formations than you can out of the stragglers.
This seems especially important for the 60mm mortars--the only way to use them for indirect fire is to keep the Group HQ back with them.
 

The H2H Campaign has been completed. It will be on the Scenario Depot soon. A special thanks to Rocketman and BobWillett for all their help. Rocketman also devised the briefing setup and completed the hi res maps.  I thought I'd let you all see what the briefing paper looks like.
To get the proper lighting and ground conditions for a fall battle, the scenarios are set in September 1943. Once Rome to Victory is released I will change that to September 1944.
 

Resurrecting this old thread on specs and settings, plus some helpful pro tips @IanL linked to below. Cheers, Ian et al!
I am shopping for a CM2 machine as my old one won't run CMBN at all any more,  and certainly won't handle Ramadi SF2... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Since all the WW2 titles are all sold as the newest and most up to date there will be no difference in how the game functions between titles. That said, the game with the most variety you are looking for is the CMFI+ Gustav Line bundle. July '43 to May '44, only game with this long of timeline. Only game with two Axis nations, and yes the Italians play very differently. Only game with summer heat and winter blizzards possible. The variety of units is also unmatched for a base game and one module.
There is only $20 difference between the base game and GL bundle. If you are looking to only buy one game, for now, and will be playing a lot, the extra $20 goes a very long way to expanding the game. As well, Battlefront have a new module for CMFI in the works and hopefully it will ship in the next 6 months to a year. This will expand the game through to May '45 as well as adding new nations, units and TO&E changes. 

I might get an argument on this but if you're new to the game you might want to buy a title that's 'general' in nature, not specialized.
By that I mean CMBN is great but its Normandy Hedgerow fighting, which can be vexing for a new player just learning the ropes.
CMBS is modern war at its most lethal. Fun-fun-fun... except if you're just starting out and struggling.
CMFI (starting in 1943 Sicily) is less overtly lethal with mid-war armor, and the terrain isn't as 'specialized' as Normandy bocage. It captures southern Italy well.
CMFB (the Bulge title) has all the good stuff of CMBN but you're beyond hedgerow country and into pine forests
CMRT has the same eastern European terrain as CMBS but is 74 years earlier.

If you want a totally different environment from what you already have, I'd say go with Fortress Italy. It offers probably the most unique look and feel of all the WW2 titles, IMO. Plus lots of varying landscapes -- flat, to huge hills and mountains. Plus it has snow, if you want, like Final Blitzkrieg. Plus... CMFI base game also has tons of content. (It seems like there's more than the other titles, but I'm not positive.)
CMBN would come in 2nd on my list, but the big determinant in enjoyment of that title is going to be whether a person likes the hedgerow style of fighting. It's very different. Maybe check out a few CMBN AAR's to see if that style appeals to you?
I've gotta say though... you really can't go wrong with any of the WW2 titles. They're all a blast in their own unique way.