cbennett88

Question...did you load it in the Editor...or load it as a QB? Because when I (or my opponent) loads it in the editor, everything is as it should be (3 occupy + 2 exits). But...once it is used in a QB all of those disappear.

Yup...thought of this. Made sure they are set to be visible to both. And...have test played as both sides to be sure it wasn't set to one or the other.

I am pulling my hair out trying to figure out what I have done wrong on the objectives for a QB map. I found the map online from a another site. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to contact the modder who uploaded them. It's a large map in CMBS (called "pelis QB Two Towns") that he created with two towns as objectives. What I did in the editor was to add several more "occupy" objectives to the map. While in editor, ALL the objectives appear just fine. However...as soon as I play a game on the map, it reverts to just the original 2 objectives. All the new setup zones that I added to the map appear just fine, so some of my changes are working. It is only the attacker objectives that will not show. There should be 5 attacker objectives TOTAL...2 at the map edge to simulate exiting...and 3 terrain objectives. For the defender there are 2 terrain objectives (Juliette and November)...and a mission objective to destroy >70% of the attacking force. Would appreciate anyone's input... https://www.dropbox.com/s/ktezgryfgr75bxg/pelis custom map attack with far side touch objectives.btt?dl=0

Did complete uninstall...re-install. That seems to have cleared the problem up. Bizarre though, because I really haven't touched the game in years. I focus on CMFB and any downloading I have done have been just maps and scenarios for that. Guess one of them "crossed over" and corrupted it. Sorry if I got anyone excited about a new "Indian army battlepack" release.

That's kinda what I had guessed because the game seems to play fine otherwise. Do not use any mods, so I am not sure how it happened. I tried downloading a fresh install this morning, but the problem persisted. Granted...I had not uninstalled the "old" copy hoping, it would just overwrite it and solve the issue. My next step is to do a complete uninstall.

Good morning and happy Thanksgiving to everyone! I need someone's help... Here is my confusion... Used to play CMBS exclusively but transitioned to CMFB about 3 years ago. The only time I have actually opened Black Sea in that time, was last month for a scenario PBEM game. No issues. Gamer is ongoing. Then...last night a new opponent contacted me about setting up a QB in CMBS. When I went to set up the QB, I got a very unusual menu. Has anyone ever seen a menu that lists "Special Service"? cannot figure it out. The defender side is blank in who you are selecting. The next screen is worse. It's like a weird mix of German WWII labels...and the Indian Army!??!? I've included screenshots(the website limited me to these). When I get to the actual forces on Turn 1, the units seem to be the "normal" Russian pixeltroops...but not in the formations that would be in CMBS. Same with the other forces...they are the modern American units. It is all very bizarre!! And...yes...I have Engine 4 ver 2.16 Anyone experience this before?

Any idea on what changed? I haven't played that campaign in so long, I'm not sure I would notice changes if I didn't know what to look for...

Did anyone else notice that the soldiers in the 1st video(of the 2 just above) all had "but-pads"? Never seen that before...

@Jobu88 I thought it was hilarious when you asked "if the flash was caused by me using tactical nukes?!?"

Totally agree! But...that isn't the situation described in the article. There, the tactic/technique was to be used in tank vs tank warfare(against western tanks). It's not like I don't see that tanks can be used in a variety of roles other than strictly tank vs tank fighting. And...yes...if they have nothing else they can be used for, then by all means, re-purpose them as "artillery", etc. But...(from my reading of the article) the "new tactic" seemed to be about tank vs tank warfare. I still hold that, while the technique of "area fire" to expose hidden enemy tanks/positions is valid...the job is much better done by artillery(which the Russians have never been in short supply of!). BTW...it did just occur to me...doesn't every round fired from the main gun of the tank progressively (slightly) degrade the accuracy of the gun(even smooth bore)..leading to lower muzzle velocity, greater dispersion, etc? I know muzzle reference systems help correct for this but...if you are lowering the accuracy and penetration of your primary weapon (even slightly) every time, why would you willingly do so right before the part of the battle where you'll need those factors the most(i.e. tank vs tank)?? Found these on barrel wear IF you like REALLY technical reading ... http://www.naun.org/main/NAUN/mechanics/17-292.pdf https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214914718300217

If you plan for failure... Because...those rounds are going to come in handy when you are fighting infantry in an urban environment.

I have no knowledge of if/how the game setting of EW affects the radar on the Tunguska, but...even if it does, I'm not sure the trade-off in degraded UAV comms and artillery times would be worth it? You are better off "rolling the dice" and hoping to spot it first with your UAVs and using artillery on it. Last time I played a (US)battle with EW at the highest setting, I came to realize that it was almost pointless to even have artillery(beyond 1st turn and maybe TRPs). It reminded me of training in the US Army(infantry) with full MOPP suits on!

Unless I missed something in reading it...it sounds like the "new" Russian tactic is...area fire of suspected enemy positions. Nothing revolutionary there. And extremely wasteful of precious tank ammo. If anything...it seems to confirm that they know that their sighting systems are lacking(vs Western systems) since it is implied that they don't expect to spot western tanks first. They are HOPING that the western tanks will "reveal themselves by firing". Thereby allowing their "sniper tanks with special crews" to target them. Then there is stuff about fighting from trenches and behind berms. Not exactly practical when engaged in mobile tank warfare... The only thing I agree with them on is... that a tight-knit crew functioning as a team is vital....

@Hardradi No worries. I appreciate that you took the time to respond.

I set it up the same way I had with the previous monitor... by editing the game data file. It's okay. The graphics for the battlefield(trees, vehicles, etc) is what I expected. The ability to see the whole battlefield without scrolling is the biggest plus. I just wish the UI wasn't so "muddled". It's certainly readable, but not enjoyable to look at. I realize the game isn't designed to scale to this resolution. It just seemed that from his screenshots, the UI looked better than what I am seeing on my setup. Figured by asking, he might reveal his setup just in case there is a setting I might have missed...

@Hardradi I finally got my new computer & monitor. How did you setup the game resolution? Did you leave the display setting at "desktop"...or go into the game data and manually write in "3440 X 1440"??

@Hardradi Lol...that is the same one I am looking at getting! Well...it looks great from these pics...but...what's your impression? Any problems? Does it get worse when you zoom in...or stay crisp looking? What about screen lag as it re-draws trees in the distance while zooming around?

@Muzzleflash1990 @Erwin @RepsolCBR Really appreciate all of you for responding! I'm going to read up online about running 2 monitors at different resolutions off of 1 video card. Otherwise... I will have to "pass" on getting the wide-screen, ultra resolution, monitor this cycle. I'm not willing to give up Combat Mission...

It's about that time to upgrade my computer setup(over 6 years old). I'm considering moving up from my 24" monitor to one of the 34" widescreen ones. It isn't a 4K one...but it offers 3440 X 1440 resolution. Of course, I will get a graphics card that can support it(probably Nividia GTX1080). My question is...what is the max resolution anyone has gotten with CM: Black Sea? It's the only game I even play these days. All the flashy new FPS games that are perfect for those ultra high resolution displays are of no interest to me. Right now I am using a 1920 X 1200 display and the game works fine(sometimes a little slow to refresh trees, etc but definitely playable). Has anyone had problems getting the game to play with newer graphics cards? Any insight on personal experiences with getting the game to play on the more modern equipment that has come out in the past 2-3 years would be appreciated...

No offense but this is "old news". They made this announcement months ago. What is frustrating isn't your post...it's that their "urgent upgrade" isn't going to get deployed till 2020! So much wasted time already on this. For the cost of 1 or 2 F-35's we could have paid the Israelis to "rush" installation on 1 or 2 actual units and had them in service NOW! Just venting...

It's a PBEM game. The problem is...I would have to also send you my password for you to open it.

@Sgt.Squarehead@c3k @John Kettler @MikeyD It finally happened a 2nd time...and this time I remembered to take a screenshot! This is a radio operator from a 3 man FO team who performed "medic" and recovered the Laser Designator(even though he still cannot call in fire!). Any clue as to why the game program does this, even though he is not permitted to use that equipment??

Thanks John That would be my expectation too. I understand that the TO& E of the Stryker scout teams doesn't give them Javelins so I "stole them" from the other vehicles. It was just weird to me that, in addition to being unable to get the scouts to actually USE them, visually examining the soldiers up close, didn't even show them being carried! But any carried AT-4s showed up on their backs just fine. I am of the opinion that it was a random glitch. Maybe some byte of data just got "misplaced" during the loading of the game.

Now it was used in combat too? What combat was it deployed in?? You chose the word "combat"...and since it was only used by the Soviet Naval Infantry...what conflict were they involved in?? The picture you provided only showed 1 vehicle...in a "clean" motor pool configuration...with no indication that it was "in theater" or any signs of "combat". No gear hanging off it. Not even a single crew member standing nearby! You ARE correct that it was "operational". You have yet to show that it was "deployed in combat". Words...they "cut" both ways. I know what you meant...just as you knew what I meant when I said "plausible"

Yes...I only have CM:BS. Had to google CM:A. I stand corrected that there IS a version of the game where that equipment was definitely plausible. And "technically" you are correct that an APS system was operational...for a very short time. My statement was too far reaching. I should have said..."Show me another army that CURRENTLY has deployed APS..." I concede the point to you even if you knew what I was trying to get across.