Chrizwit3

Do you have a source for your claim that Germany didn't ration oil in 1941? You put that claim in bold even. You've been vague with the sources you've been using in this entire thread so far. According to the sources I've seen (In TIK's videos, he's mostly just quoting directly from books as far as I can tell. He uses the money he makes from videos to buy more books, then makes videos on those books.) Hitler himself ordered severe rationing of oil in 1941. Their economics minister said the economy was receiving less than 18 percent of its peacetime oil quantities. Before that even, in the early days of the war it seems you needed ration stamps to get access to any kind of oil (like cooking oil). And what exactly do you mean by not being "fully mobilized for war" even in 1941? Germany had already conquered most of Europe by that point. You make it sound like Germany was in happy peacetime mode with few problems at all. You mean not fully mobilized compared to the Total-War-Entire-Country-At-Arms-Facing-Complete-Annihilation Mode they were on later? And what do you mean by "bad management of industry and bad policies in general"? That's very vague. What policies?
You're also comparing Germany to Britain, which is not a good comparison because Britain also lacked essential supplies of oil. At that time, almost all of the oil in the world was coming from the USA, Venezuela, and Russia. Anand Toprani argues that Britain ceased to be a great power not during WW2 or after, but before WW2 even began, due to their inability to achieve energy security with the dawn of the oil age. Britain had to import all of its oil, and was under U-Boat blockade itself. Nazi Germany, in order to win the war, had to defeat not only the Soviets, but the USA as well, which would have been impossible without Germany achieving its own energy security.
Now, with the claim I made on mortars, I got that from the thread's favorite Youtube guy. Look at the chart at the 21:40 mark:
 
This is a pretty good question and I'd like to do more research on this myself when I have more time. Petroleum is found in practically everything today. The global economy is hopelessly dependent on it and would utterly collapse without it. I imagine it would be less so back in the 1940s, but to what extent exactly? For war production, oil would of course be very important, not just for gasoline for vehicles and tanks and planes, but for the production of the industrial infrastructure itself. For construction equipment, road building, for the production and maintaining of machines used for producing other machines, for machines for producing weapons, and for chemicals and explosives production and so on. Germany was probably the most powerful industrial country in the world in 1900. What changed from 1900 to WW2? Was it because Germany lost WW1? But Germany's infrastructure was pretty much intact after that war, and that war was devastating for the Allies just as it was the Germans. And then the Great Depression was a worldwide thing. So could it be the dawn of the oil age then? If Germany was awash in cheap oil like the USA was, I think things would have been very different.

I won't say I have a hand in this discussion, but it's worth noting that 3 to 3.5 million of the Red Army's "casualties" were murdered, worked-to-death or starved-to-death POWs. Try to remember that a racially and politically charged war of annihilation was being fought. The losses were always going to be heavier, and the fatality figures almost certainly take that into account (re.: Civilians).
As for lend lease, yes; I am in the party that believes it was decisive to the Soviet Union's survival. No one can convince me that a nation can re-locate and re-organize its industry under fire and have provision of non-lethal and lethal aid 'merely be a help.' That the Russians even recognize it is admirable, but the typical language ("we dont really know how helpful it was" or "it was helpful, but....") is to me, shoddy post-war revisionism. 

Russia wasn't overwhelmed militarily in WWI, they were overwhelmed politically from within (with a little help from both sides).
Lend lease was indeed a factor in the Soviet survival, how big we'll never know, but Soviet historians give credit where it's due, so IMHO we should do the same.....A late friend of mine served on the convoys to both Archangelsk & Malta, he considered the latter something of a pleasure cruise after the former. 
 

Despite the fact that historically, after taking the losses that you describe, they still won? 
Wow! 
Do you fancy a game of poker for cash? 

I'd like to see some way to export / import forces into Quick Battles.  One of the biggest frustrations of single player is the lack of surprise at AI forces (because if you want a decent battle you have to tailor the AI force).  It would be great if you could import other user's AI forces eg via xml file or similar.  Could get a bit of community engagement around creating opponents for people (as some people would take pleasure in crafting a challenging opposing force within given points/timescale/etc constraints).  Force files could be hosted as "3000 point 1944 Heer defensive force",  "3000 point 1944 US probe force" , etc.

Have always thought it ironic that we have many night scenarios where one has to alt-b plus turn the monitor gain up so that we have a weird "daylight" in order to see to play (and the wonderful game graphics now look like crap).  Never understood the point.  Stick with daylight scenarios imo.

How I should have gotten laid a lot more as a young man.
Michael

The "follow the leader" or convoy command has been a much requested (and IMO a much needed) feature since the CMx1 days.  It was mentioned as being on the drawing board for inclusion in the 4.0 upgrade, but somewhere between that upgrade's inception and its release it was dropped.  Like ammo sharing between vehicles, it appears that BF couldn't get it to work within their code.
Sadly, it's being dropped from the 4.0 upgrade does not forebode well that it'll ever be part of CMx2.  If that's the case then it's unfortunate because one of the most tiresome things about CMx2 is plotting the road movements for numerous vehicles.  It's just so much micromanagement with all the waypoint setting and use of the pause command.

One thing I would like to see if it could be implemented without an excessive amount of hassle, would be a feature allowing a player to check on a potential movement path or static location and find out how easily his unit could be spotted from a specified possible enemy location. I am aware that this is a complicated issue, which is why I used the caveat "without an excessive amount of hassle". To some extent the game already does this in that any terrain that blocks LOS gets factored. What I am mainly concerned with is such things as skylining, where the critical terrain is behind the unit being potentially spotted. Avoiding skylining is a crucial skill taught to well-trained troops whether infantry or vehicular. At present, if there is an LOS traceable between spotter and "spottee" (for lack of a better term), there is a die roll and spotting occurs or not depending on the outcome of the die roll. What I am suggesting is that in a case where the subject unit might be skylined, the odds of a successful spot go way up.
Michael

Another one of those threads! Oh well, never hurts to dream. In order of feasibility...
1 - A pre-selected retreat path command (you could set a waypoint outside the normal waypoint chain that overrides the TAC-AI's chosen retreat position)
2 - A Shoot n' Scoot command (the most important use-case would be a bazooka team being able to retreat to a pre-selected position immediately after firing a shot)
3 - More fortification objects, perhaps in a pack (H-barriers, H-barrier bunkers, guard towers for modern games; large concrete bunkers, deep trenches, shallow trenches/breastworks, concealed foxholes, combined tank-trap/barbed wire for all games)
4 - The ability to save the state of maps for later use (in a campaign, or as the map of a different scenario)
5 - A game-mode similar to Close Combat's Operations
Goes without saying that I'd be more than willing to fork over some good money for those!

He says all of this in the video though. You just made his point -- that the lack of oil ensured Germany's defeat from the beginning. And he didn't claim that oil was the only reason they lost, just that it was a major one, and probably the most significant one when looking at the grand scale. He didn't claim that Germany was defeated after they ran out of fuel either. His argument was not that the Panzer armies ran out of fuel and then were defeated, but that Germany lost because they didn't have enough oil to expand their armored and mechanized forces and keep them going to the level they needed to win the war. They had enough fuel to fight the war, but not to win it. They only had just enough fuel to run what little tanks they had, could only keep some of them activated at any one time, and even had to downscale mechanization from lack of fuel. At a time when the Soviets were motorizing and mechanizing their own armies on a massive scale, Germany was having to re-equip some of their recon units with bicycles. In late 1941, fuel rations were so tight that Germany's largest truck factory had to shut down production at one point.
And then you have Hitler himself saying "If I do not get the oil of Maikop and Grozny, then I must end the war." Another one of the sources the guy used in the video said "The loss of the Caucasus would deprive the Soviet Union of half of its oil reserves and 80-90 percent of its crude oil production, refinery throughput, and pipeline capacity." So taking the Caucasus would have allowed Germany to expand their mechanization and offensive capability dramatically, while strangling the Soviets' ability to do the same, which could have been a major turning point of the war, or so he argues. The Germans did manage to take some of those oil fields, but were militarily defeated and driven out before they were able to make significant use of them.
You also made a claim that "for Hitler the Ukrainian grain had a priority over the oil of the Caucasus". Where are you getting that from? Certainly it was a major priority, and the guy in the video said that. He put up another Hitler quote in there that said the "raw materials and agriculture of the Ukraine were vitally necessary for the future prosecution of the war." So it's not like the Germans were only looking at oil and nothing else. Even if what you said was true, and that Hitler thought the grain was more important than oil, that doesn't make it true. That only says what Hitler thought. Not what was actually the most important resource.

No, he specifically states that Germany had always suffered from a lack of oil, and it was this critical lack of a fuel source that hamstrung them. He doesn't make broad generalizations about resources, only how a lack of available and accessible oil reserves severely limited Germany's ability to wage mechanized war, which is true. 
This is a contradiction. If his main goal was Ukraine, then why weren't all efforts devoted there? Why was it supposedly second on his list if it was his main concern? 
Unless you are disputing all the various sources that state the opposite, this is unfounded. Germany had a very limited reserve of fuel from the beginning. He goes through everything, showing why Germany could only support the small amount of mechanized divisions it had, and why many were trying to reduce that number even more. They had no fuel reserves in 41, nevermind 44. 
This is a gross over-generalization that isn't even true until post-Stalingrad.
No good deed goes unpunished. Believe what you wish, I'm washing my hands of this thread. 

TIK is excellent. I originally found his channel from watching his lets plays of the old Close Combat videos. He has since moved on to making his own well researched historical documentaries on various battles and subjects. A lot of what he is working on now is all part of his research for a monster Stalingrad documentary. 
His channel really is fantastic. I find his content to be highly educational and well presented/researched. Would highly recommend checking out the posted video to this thread as well as the rest of his channel. Great stuff!

I'm not sure if anyone found a fix but i am having the same issue. I recently bought a new computer and now every 20-30 minutes of playing then on one of the command phase it just stops responding and will not start responding again unless i close the game. This happens while i play CMFI CMFB and CMFB. Dont know what causes it because it doesn't matter about the size of the battle or anything like that. If anyone has more help on this that would be awesome, i dont think its my computer either because its much better than my previous one which ran CM just fine with out crashes.

LMFAO. He says, not realizing the irony of the statement, in which he is literally dictating the financial freedoms of BFC. Frankly, if you're too poor to afford a $60 game, then don't buy it. Get Shock Force, which is $15, or is that too expensive for you too?
No one cares about your whining, and BFC isn't going to change their prices based on your entitled opinion that you deserve the product of their labor at a price you determine.
Someone tag based Steve and burn this thread down. It's only getting worse from here. 
Honestly, the quality of posts here on the forums has taken a serious nose dive. Good grief...

You seem to have your mind made up. Not sure what you are looking for.  Typically when people give you reasons why something has value, you don’t argue with them why it doesn’t. You don’t have to accept their reasoning, but you don’t engage in a debate.
you liked CMSF..  no cmbs isn’t a different game engine, but unit capabilities etc are significantly different. Hell you have drones. You’ll have to make up your own mind but if playing the demo doesn’t convince you then what exactly are you looking for here that will?
help us to answer your doubts but most folks here bought it and likely own CMSF as well and will likely buy CMSF2 when it is released. It’s like asking a deadhead if you should collect every concert. They’ll just wonder why you are asking a question when it is so obvious the answer is of course.
 

I have CMBN installed on 3 machines right now, my main desktop, my laptop and my daughter's laptop. She is enjoying LAN battles with me almost as much as I am.
I have CMFI installed on those three as well as my desktop at work. 
My understanding is the game comes with 4 activations initially and a new one is made available every year you own the product. 
As for Steam, Battlefront have stated repeatedly they will not be using the Steam platform.
 As stated before, my daughter and I have been playing LAN battles with each other without issue. I own a copy of Civiliation V and while it is installed on both our laptops, I need to buy a second copy to battle her thanks to Steam's DRM rules. So a big thanks to @Battlefront.com for not using Steam so I can introduce the joys of CM to the next generation. 

Unfortunately not, my passion at the moment lies with the WW2 titles. I own CMBN, CMFI, CMFB and my next purchase will be CMRT probably later this year.

Thanks for the answer mate! Just testing the ice.. There definitely exists a market gap for CMBS pbem AARs. Maybe we get some more modern AAR action when CMSF2 comes out.

Well as others have done it then I may as well jump in with some of my own shameless self promotion. 
I have almost completed part 2 of my Lonsdale's Block AAR against Pericles and as well as watching that here are some things I have picked up playing against a human opponent:
1. Keep tanks mobile - infantry will seek cover if a tank has LOF to them, to overcome this keep your opponent guessing as to where the tanks will reposition. Do not stay too long in one place so that AT assets can be brought to bear on you. 
2. If you are infantry vs tanks, then move behind buildings so as to be out of sight of the armour. Try and predict where your opponent could move to next turn and get those units that would be in LOF into cover ASAP. 
3. Use lots of smoke! Use it to conceal manoeuvre and to blind enemy guns/armour. Frustrated opponents may expose their tanks to attack by trying to get through or around the smoke. Mortars are excellent for this. 
4. Manoeuvring without concealment or cover fire is suicide. 
5. When opportunities present themselves, take them if the pay off is worth it i.e.  casualties vs objectives. 
6. Use large calibre artillery for prolonged periods. Urban environments allow good protection from indirect HE, so go big and go long. 

Shameless self-promotion:
 
This is a scenario from fortress italy.

In combat, situational awareness sometimes becomes clouded and things happen.  These vehicles bunched up in Syria and paid the price.

and these 13 Churchill tanks of the 107th Regiment RAC (King's Own) managed to all get knocked out in a clump during a battle on the Orne in August 1944.

Sometimes things happen in combat and sometimes things happen that weren't what scenario designers intended.  But the first company to make an AI that approaches the challenge of playing against a human being in a tactical combat game will be unspeakably rich.
 

How many times do I have to explain the same thing on one forum? 
There is no such thing as a forward mounting or a rearward mounting on the VAST MAJORITY of Shermans.....The circular surround of the split-hatch commander's cupola (also later used as a loader's hatch on some 76mm T-23 turrets) which supports the .50cal pintle mount rotates through 3600.
There is also a stowage position for the gun at the rear of the turret, it was usually covered by a tarp when stowed, so its presence might not be apparent to someone who doesn't know what they are looking at. 
This Sherman has both a .50cal and a 3600 MG mount:

Can you see them?

One good place to start is with drivers. What version of win 10 are you running. When 1709 came out a few other vendors were caught off guard with some of the changes. I think everyone has updated their drivers to work by now. Once Widows and the Nvidia drivers are up to date pay attention to sound card drivers and issues.
 
Sounds like no pattern of what you are doing when it goes off.
 
I have that - actually some CM games on C: (SSD) and some on D: (HDD) and data on D:. There should be no problem at all with that setup.