badipaddress

Check your main folder for CMBS. Look in the data folder to see if there are ,brz files that don't belong there, such as ones from other CM games. I've had this problem in the past, and it was a .brz file from CMBN that somehow ended up in my CMBS data folder.

I agree with you, but I think they hide these details on purpose, to make it unclear what is a bug and what is a feature. A lot of people have a very good imagination when it comes to explain away weird events in this game.

From the CM Manual, Artkin:
You are all allowed one mistake, after which Wart’s will vilify you mercilessly. And may God have mercy on your damned soul!
 
BFC plays rough!
 

maybe I don't need pre-order because I will never ever ever ever ever play CM again (kidding).  Last night lost 4 tiger tanks in 60 seconds in St Vith battle in CMFB (one tiger1, three tiger2).  To 57mm & sherman 75mm fire!  Two destroyed, two immobilized.  Flanking fire. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!  
I know this is realistic WW2 warfare, based on what I've read, but it HURTS

I don't think there's much benefit to pre-order.  And I will pre-order the very minute it opens.  😀

Unless RAF are ported in... on the NATO side of course
I think very many CMSF2 owners would pay for a Russian module. From a technical perspective most of the RAF is already there from CMBS, just need to be reskinned for the desert and have their tech knocked down to 2008 levels. Or not, I wouldn't mind them in with all their 2017 tech. It's a fictional conflict already, why not! 

While I wouldn't object to seeing the delay return, I'd much rather see static campaigns with persistent map damage (and real fire too) first.

@chuckdykeCorrect me if i'm wrong, but you can drive infantry on your tanks in RT no matter if you have the upgrade to version 4 of the engine or not. RT was the first CM game released on Engine 3 and infantry driving on tanks was feature of that game right from it's release AFAIK.

Welcome abroad Zloba! With CMBN big bundle you have contents for years

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT
You press that button, Zloba, and you’re a goner! You don’t think you’ve had enough sleep now, but wait until you start really playing.  Your addiction will only grow, and grow, and grow. You will reach new heights of frustration and angst. Many Rage Quits await you. And if, like BornGinger says, you jump into pbem, you’ll be pulling your hair out and climbing the walls waiting for that next turn to see how your orders worked out.
(This isn’t a duty that I enjoy, but someone had to warn him. I know you regulars understand.)

A feature to consider for engine upgrades is the command delay of CM1 being reinstated as an optional setting.

I don't envy anyone playing SAA in SF2. There's only one way a fight between T-62s and an Apache can go -- like Cheech & Chong, Up in Smoke. Congrats on a valiant last stand!

Well, I am happy to pay for substantial upgrades (like CMSF to CMSF2). In the past, some updates of the engine for me were really "light" in terms of new features: at 10$ each, if you have 3-4 games, it's almost cost of a AAA title on Steam. Sure they have bundles, but still I could not justify the cost. I'd like spending my money on new contents and not on "almost obligatory" patches. 
Agreed. Something like "Command Ops 2". The "core" engine (that you can download for free) is the same, then you buy single modules (from Ardennes to East Front) with scenarios and campaigns. 

This.
In my opinion, CM is far from perfect. Graphics are outdated compared to current standard. Of course you do not play CMx2 for its graphic, but appearence also counts and I really hope in a overhaul of the graphic engine when (if) CMx3 is released in the future. I would also like a "detailed in game log" in order to understand why my unit did not fire or did not spot the enemy one. Sometimes this game is so cryptic.
I also could not stand the periodically "paid upgrade policy" of CM engine (quite expensive if you have 4-5 titles). These "engine upgrade" were one of the reason I took a long break from the series years ago.
Having said that, I always keep coming back to CMx2, actively supporting it: in the last 4 months I bought one CMBN module, the CMSF upgrade to CMx2 and I plan to buy CMBS after Matrix release and Fire and Rubble module for CMRT.
The reason is that, for me, CMx2 is the best game in its genre, despite its flaws. I own a couple of Graviteam titles in my Steam library: I've played them a fraction of the time I've dedicated to CMx2.
For me a major plus of CMx2 is that I can play it via PBEM. I currently have 3 matches ongoning with my gaming buddies and I can play during launch breaks, in the evening, etc. With lockdown and smartworking, I can do 1-2 turn a day per each match. Probably CMx2 is one of the most played game I own.
 

A 10 year fan here. ^^^^ This is exactly the attitude we should have.
It's all find to look forward to something new, report issues and desires but what a waste of time all this bitching and complaining is - about a schedule for f's sake. Go play CMRT or any one of the other games instead. Heck go build a snow fort in your back yard with your kids or grand kids.
Edited to correct how long I have been here.

To me what is surprising is not the length of time it takes BF to produce product given the tiny development staff, but the fact that BF is still in business after 21+ years and AFAIK the only and last surviving developer making realistic and brilliant tactical wargames for our tiny niche within a niche market.
We should not begrudge these guys from wanting to make some money from MOD even though that surely has delayed all entertainment product development.  My only hope is that BF is making the money they deserve and are not getting exploited.  My experience in the US DoD development game is that the sort of products that BF has been developing for us gamers would cost million of dollars - and many millions more when developing for a government agency.  These products would cost the customer many hundreds of thousands of dollars - very easily many millions.  We are getting them for $60-$70 bucks!  The biggest software bargain of all time.
The choice may be slow development of entertainment COTS vs no product at all.  Yes, we're all impatient.  But, we must consider the commercial realities.
 

I get that some people, a small vocal group of people,  are disappointed. I just wish they'd have the humility not to constantly flood the forum with petty bitching

We need to continuously keep in mind that BFC hasn't just been making CM for us for quite some time now. 
The income from the military applications they've been contracted to provide will pay dividends for us over the long term, so I don't mind the trade off of time for improving the bottom line.
Anyone who's impatient has the right to their opinion and I'd love RT five minutes ago, but the longer BFC is profitable, the higher quality my gaming will be, so I'll enjoy it when it come out and keep playing all the other CM until it does.

If you like WW 2 I would go for Final Blitzkrieg. My reason infantry can ride on tanks which was widespread practice in WW2. I work my way through SF 2 as the modern stuff is fascinating for me. I am 70 years old soon I will be 71, I found CM realistic as you can apply real world tactics. I find it money well spent. If you buy the SF2 bundle for example it will keep you going for a couple of years. Yes, there is a learning curve and as your first games stick to the tutorial games. There are five different levels it will keep you busy. 

My opinion:
CM Shock Force 2 is a good all-rounder. You dip you toe into 'modern war' (about 2008-ish) and the opponent is a generation of weapons behind you so the difficulty level's a bit lower. There's a number of smaller scenarios (Company size or lower) 
CM Fortress Italy starts in 1943 so the overall lethality is dialed-down a bit.
CM Final Blitzkrieg is the middle of the pack. The opponents are more-or-less balanced.
CM Battle For Normandy is like CMFB except you're fighting in hedgerow country which makes life a bit more difficult for you. There are a number of under-Company-size scenarios in the title.
CM Black Sea is modern war (2017-ish) and is the most unforgiving of mistakes. But you've got cool toys to play with.
I've been playing the game forever and my ideal scenario is mixed force company size, or maybe a touch smaller. I hardly ever play those battalion-size monsters (other people prefer to go big).

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1502380/Combat_Mission_Black_Sea/

Steve in his 2021 greeting said 'CMBS/Steam/Very Soon'. I expect Slitherine's definition of 'very soon' is much quicker than BFC's. It was working with Slitherine on deadline-driven 'government work' that's had the effect of delaying everything else last year. BFC's been busily working away but unfortunately much of it is not for your eyes. But they have gotten into the habit of working to a deadline, which may have positive downstream effects.

I wasn't thinking anything as far ahead as this. More like some improved animations on house storming such as infantry backs to walls and stand up grenade throws etc.. I'm not a Company of Heroes player in particular, but house fighting is much more immersive for these reasons in that game.
More advanced version of this might move to include a specific house assault action function for carrying out a building assault - the infantry then carrying out a scripted procedure with set of animations. Specific assault function would get away from the present standard movements (slow, hunt, quick) all of which can make a difference to success. For me presently that feels very unsatisfying.

Lastly, a specific house assault action icon (e.g. flashing arrow on the house being assaulted) would add a bit more game immersion in the command phase rather than the usual movement path lines. 

In Normandy, I thought everyone would be thinking 'fromages forts, bières et vins'?  I know I would 😄.

I did two scenarios, and then I stopped. My personal experience was that while scenario making can be fun, it's also a ton of work. And while some of that work comes from testing and balancing, a lot of the workload is also due the editor not being very user-friendly. If BFC wants more people to do scenarios, making the editor easier to use would help.
For example, adding basic functionality like an undo function would help lots. Or an ability to rename AI groups so you don't have to remember that group #3 are 1st platoon HQ, # 7 is AT guns, etc. And maybe change the system for selecting configurations of doors/windows/damage/textures for building walls.
But I'm not thinking they will invest in changing the editor this late in the game's lifecycle.