Wiggum15

... And that's my whole point.
You talk about how CM is "continuing to develop" but I and many others don't see that.
CM is in a standstill since 2007.
They fixed bugs and added minor features but the big issues and shortcomings are still there...just look at the infantry movement !
Or the awful "floating in nirvana" map.
8 years and still, CMBS feels like the 2007 SF just with a 55$ texture mod.

Reusing old models is ok.
But what BFC does is just "cheap".
Just look at the terrain, its the same for CMBN, CMRT and CMBS.
The infantry movement is the same since 2007 and never got improved.
They recycled the Germans from CMBN in RT (1944 again) and will do it in the bulge game (1944 again).
The winter terrain will be the same as in CMFI...
And don't get me started about the lack of new features or engine improvements since 2007.
BFC sells texture and scenario packs as full price games, some think that's acceptable some don't.

I think you are just too close to the game.  I have found that people associated with a software developer for too long, game software or business software, have a hard time dealing with people that have issues with the software.  Its just human nature.  I have seen this in factory automation software where an individual becomes an expert in the software and that becomes his identity.  He becomes very cranky when people question any aspect of the software, as only an engineer can.
 
Your perspective is completely different than someone who sees CM for the first time after playing ARMA or COD.  You see the same issue with ARMA also.  There are people who spend their whole young adult life modding ARMA and it has become their identity.  They can't move on or get any perspective on how other people perceive the game.
 
The fact you can't understand people not having the same wonder makes me think you just need to take a break.

Only on the BFC forums can a totally legitimate post about lack of progress since 2007 turn into a discussion about Space Lobsters...

Thats not really true, the french army (on paper) was at least as good as the german army, there were countless "CM scale" encounters during the 1940 campaign were both side met at equal terms and many which saw the French temporary defeating German troops.
I would recommend you the book "Blitzkrieg-Legende" by Karl-Heinz Frieser if you are interested in this topic.
Operational the French forces got crushed by the Wehrmacht but that does not mean much for the CM size of engagements.

That's nice, now run along.

This game, while good, is inferior to CMBB, despite the new graphics. CMBB covered 4 years of warfare, had TONS of different armies, and randomly generated quick battle maps. 10+ years after CMBB we have a three month time period, barely any armies, and set quick battle maps that become stale very, very fast. Red Thunder is a good game, sure, but it is nowhere near as good as CMBB was relative to the competition in 2002. 

BTW lest anyone think these AI issues are limited to Combat Mission, anyone who's every spent time in, say the infantry, is well aware of what its like to have an observer with your platoon OR to be an observer going with another unit. It actually doesn't matter how well trained or elite the unit being observed. When you spend time looking at them or being looked at under scrutiny, you find flaws (Even if they are perceived flaws vs what you think should be happening) and go WTF? Of course the guys being observed go, "Tactics are like assholes, everybody has one"  That's before you takie into account that under various conditions humans are apt to not the right thing at the right times.
 
Los

If you talk about the TacAI then its still bad and not really any better then in Shock Force.

If you talk about the TacAI then its still bad and not really any better then in Shock Force.

Iraq currently very much reminds me of post-WW1 Germany. The following is by no means and objective or complete analysis, just my subejctive impression. I think people in Iraq have never lived in a democratic country and are in general not used to take the responsibilities that living in a democratic society requires of each and every citizen. Saddam was what held Iraq togather by force, and after Saddam was, gone people were attracted by various extremist groups because they offered them a sense of power and security in a time where they felt powerless and threatened. This attraction to extremeist groups was further amplified by the dire economical situation after the 2003 invasion and by the lack of experience of living in a democracy. The result of all of the above is ISIS, which is pretty much the Iraqi version the 1940s Nazis. The biggest difference between ISIS and the Nazis is IMO that, unfortunately, the Nazis had the economic and military power to actually implement their extremeist views. ISIS totally would do 1939-1945 all-over again if they had the power to do so. Here is a pic ISIS released recently:
 

I will try to reduce your post in the quote to its core...
 Here we go again, the typical attitude of this forum towards users who focus on (or point out) the issues of CMx2...
 
a ) tell them to play another game and shut up
b ) tell them they are idiots who talk nonsense
c ) bash them and/or call them names
 
...as always.

But why did they not announce new winter-condition features already ?
If they are currently working on them and dont know how they will end up they could at least write something like:
"We are currently working on..."
or
"We plan to include..."

That they say nothing about it tells me they will just port over CMFI "snow" and give it new textures. We all know BFC has other, more important work to do...

Putting everyone who is not happy with everything BFC does on your Ignore list just shows how much of a (so called) "Fanboy" you and some others here are.
"Near constant whining and no valuable input", should i laugh ?
The only "valuable input" for you is if someone cheers BFC like a little cheerleader !
 
There is a technical bug report thread -> Hell no thats not a bug/issue, buy a new PC and shut up !
Someone points out a spotting issue -> Stop complaining the spotting model is to complex for you to understand, thats all !
A guy points out the lack of progress of the CMx2 Engine games -> Vote him down, and tell him how he is just constantly whining !
Someone request a new feature -> Shut up dude, BFC has "other work" to do !
 
...just pathetic !
 
Maybe iam to negative towards BFC and CMx2, but some of you alre clearly way to positive about every aspect of CMx2 and BFC as a company !
So i just try to balance things a bit...

Thats actually true.
Everytime i play CMx2 i think about how much better it could be if the developers had choosen another engine that wouldn't get the game stuck into a "dead end" from which there is no escape.
CM needs three things, a more flexible engine (that means new features can be included easier and there arent that many "dead ends"), a ArmA like editor and a more appealing user interface.
There are so many shortcomings and problems with the CMx2 games but its still the best 3D tactical wargame out there and really fun to play most of the time...

Again, whats the point of "Constructive feedback" if BFC seems to ignore this forum and has left many things the players complained about unfixed in nearly 8 years ?

Isnt your katushagirlsoldier.com link also just some quickly googeled semi-offtopic stuff and just slapped here without any context or information ?

Is the black texture on the BTR 70 wheels (LOD bug) also fixed ?
If not then why ?
It's so annoying...

The battles of antiquity are not a good model for modern fighting.
 
Given the separatist line about the outcome of the battle, they lack the POWs to support a flaming cauldron of doom, but an inflated kill count supports that to a large degree.  Either way that sort of losses is something that the Ukraine couldn't keep under wraps, simply in terms of human mortality.  That's something like 5% of total Ukrainian ground forces KIA/WIA, and 2.5ish Brigades down.  There's reason to have some pretty serious doubts.

Is the black texture on the BTR 70 wheels (LOD bug) also fixed ?
If not then why ?
It's so annoying...

Is the black texture on the BTR 70 wheels (LOD bug) also fixed ?
If not then why ?
It's so annoying...

Hi!
 
Are there anybody else than me that would like to have a selective side specific Vehicle Hit text function as an option before you start a H2H game?
 
IMO I would like to have the Vehicle Hit text appears on my own vehicles but not on the enemy. That way you should be left a little in the dark of the effectiveness of your hits. Today, even on Iron difficult level you know exactly if it's a spalling, partial or penetration hit. Without the text message, burning and opened up vehicles can tell you a lot but other than that you may want to fire an couple of extra round just to be sure. This I think would add to the fog of war and immersion.
 
This should encompass all combat mission titles and not just cmbn and if this has been requested/discussed  in the forum before I'm sorry.
 

OK so I have been playing Die Letzte Hoffnung and I have hit a Problem where I think I am being shoirt changed on Panthers and MKIV's going missing from 1st scenario where I lost none in that scenario.
 
I have now seen quite a ferw different threads where other strange things have happened for people. Loss of AT guns that they expected to be there.
 
I have a feeling (yet to be proved) that older campaigns created with earlier engines are in effect broken and this really affects the longevity of CMBN and the other titles if true.
 
I have just given up on Die Letzte Hoffnung until I get to bottom of it as it is a wonderful campaign but I hate to waste time if it is truly broken?
 
Here are other threads where people think things are broken...
 
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/115286-campaign-engel-bug-after-30-install/
 
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/108388-the-scottish-corridor-a-amazing-job/page-5
 
The Scottish Corridor Campaign is just too good to be thrown away like this if there is an issue.
 
Possible explanation from Myles
 
One of the few unfortunate side effects of BF upgrading CMBN to stay up-to-date with newer CM releases is that some of the older scenarios and campaigns that were created under the 1.0 engine are now out-of-date especially as to OOBs.  There have been changes to OOBs that have resulted in some older scenarios/campaigns now missing vehicles/equipment or having what appears to be bugged chains-of-command (ex: changes made to the OOB for US armored infantry platoons will result in their having TWO platoon commanders in older scenarios.) 
 
Since all CM campaigns/scenarios are user-made, BF doesn't update them when it patches or upgrades the game.  It leaves it to the individual designers to update them or not.  And most have chosen not too.  So, when one plays an older scenario/campaign with a fully updated/upgraded version of CMBN then one will occasionally stumble across OOB discrepancies or "bugs."
 
 
Other threads it has been raised
 
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118086-missing-reinforcements-in-campaign/
 
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/98972-new-file-at-the-repository-campaign-die-letzte-hoffnung-2011-08-26/
 
No real solid answer and no proof it is broken...
 
So I have asked Vanir who has an earlier version of the game loaded to see if he can get different results from a save game I have for DLH campaign and if I get some further time I will try and load up the different engines and see if I can prove any changes...
 
Has anyone else seen this issue and is there anything that can be done about it?
 
Is it really down to re-creating the campaigns in each new engine version?
 
For me it seems to important not to keep these wonderful campaigns alive for new players of them...

Probably been suggested before but I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds what's available in the present Movement menu often to be inappropriate for what is trying to be achieved. More appropriate to civilian movement than to military personnel.
 
The entire present Movement menu could be replaced with order type commands eg Move to Sighting, Move to Contact, Move to Engage which respectively would mean stop moving when enemy sighted, stop when enemy contacted and engage him, and, engage the enemy while continuing to move. These sorts of orders would reduce the amount of micromanaging and intense supervision presently necessary and allow the player to better concentrate on tactics and strategy which to me would greatly enhance the playing experience. 
 
Not that Battlefront are going to rush around changing stuff but this subject may be appropriate in the future. What do you think?

Isnt your katushagirlsoldier.com link also just some quickly googeled semi-offtopic stuff and just slapped here without any context or information ?

There are games that make good use of SSD's...funny that i can launch ArmA3, load Altis and have a quick firefight with the AI in the time it takes me to just load a medium sized CMx2 scenario (both games are on a SSD).