Bagpipe

Close but no cigar - it is called something Rumpus - or more accurately Rumpenheim Rumpus - it is one of mine and I didn't know that it was the biggest one in the title.  I should stop overachieving 😉

I left a positive review (I know, I know, you are surprised). 

So the steam reviews so far are "Mixed".
I have been playing on standalone but have switched to Steam so was able to leave a positive review. I would ask anybody else who is enjoying standalone to consider at least playing the steam copy for an hour or so in order to leave a positive review and support the devs over in that area as much of the negativity seems to be pretty petty and unfair.
Thank ya 😎

I thought the DCS World and various flight sim forums I frequent were the place for jet wars but apparently I have found my new Mecca lol
This is great 😅

I thought the DCS World and various flight sim forums I frequent were the place for jet wars but apparently I have found my new Mecca lol
This is great 😅

Interesting article with commentary from an American who has actually flown one, apparently he rather disagrees with the forum's 'arm-chair air-vice-marshals' on a number of points: 

In the four years that the MiG-23ML has been in his charge, Ward says he has not come across any pilot or maintainer that didn’t “absolutely just love this airplane.”
In contrast to Western fighters of the same period, which mainly relied upon more efficient turbofans, the Soviets chose to retain a turbojet. However, Ward judges it was “probably one of the best turbojets ever made,” and “magnificently reliable.”
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39824/this-myth-busting-walk-around-of-the-soviet-mig-23-flogger-fighter-is-a-must-watch
 

I play tested the '79 campaign and I do remember some issues with this one and the last one (is that Citadel), but once the setup zone was gone, things worked well enough. But I'm on a Mac, without a GPU (just integrated graphics) so I don't have any GPU hints for you.
But @The_Capt is right. I went with the defaults setup to see how things played out that way and did quite well the first time through. I think the only things I changed were some vehicles near some long low buildings near the bottom of the slag pile. But I really waited until turn 1 to move much of anything.
Citadel (if that's the name of the last one) the setup zone is monstrous and I pretty much gave up trying to reposition anything. The good news for both of those is that the default setup is pretty good and you won't be far wrong going with it. The enemy starts a long way off so you have time to react.

Dave

I left a review.

So the steam reviews so far are "Mixed".
I have been playing on standalone but have switched to Steam so was able to leave a positive review. I would ask anybody else who is enjoying standalone to consider at least playing the steam copy for an hour or so in order to leave a positive review and support the devs over in that area as much of the negativity seems to be pretty petty and unfair.
Thank ya 😎

I really wish we could get to the bottom of this one.  It seems to be happening with few players but is still happening.  I built, tested and run that scenario on a whole lot less computer than yours (7th Gen i7, 1050GTX mobile, 16G RAM).  You should make sure that your graphics card is running the game and not the integrated chipset, that seems to happen the most often.  If that is not the case then you should definitely put in a support report to BFC or go to the Tech Support thread.  

But this is not another game. If you have CMCW installed on Steam, you can quickly find the saved games folder like he showed us on the picture. You said that is different. No, it is not.

Dropping the resolution is worth a shot, I barely managed to make it work by facing the camera towards where the Soviets would be coming from and slowly deploying my units front to back to keep as little of my own setup zone in view as I could. Awful experience but it made it slightly more tolerable.

While we're snickering at MiG-23, lets remember in this timeframe US is still flying A-7 Corsair which makes MiG-23 look like Star Wars technology in comparison. 

I've seen the same behavior myself. 
 
H

Is it during the setup phase? If the map has a really big setup zone and you point the camera at it it will demolish your FPS no matter your system for some reason, once you actually press start it should go away.

This mostly only applies to TO&E changes that alter the structure of a unit (rather than equipment carried on soldiers).  This is to preserve stability in existing scenarios, and updating a scenario to include structural changes requires "repurchasing" the units, which can entail a pretty extensive rebuild, possibly for only small changes.

I am fairly new here but this seems a bit of a bum statement.
Shouldn't we be expecting the developers to be working to update their original scenarios to keep in line with fixes ad improvements as they are made? 
Seems like a strange thing to admit things needed fixed/improved and then declare that the base game will not have those improvements incorporated.
Or am I missing something?
thanks

Just took my serial from Battlefront website and registered it on matrix "My page" and it gave me my steam key

Here is the natural building block for the US player in CMCW, for this is the training film on the combined arms team. It teaches core tactical principles that, if violated, will pretty much ensure defeat. Though the film looks horrible initially, the actual res is tolerable. Something which might bear looking into is the racial mix in the game vs reality. Frankly, though, am having a tough time finding close range imagery of US infantry in game so I can tell whether there even is an issue. Nor is this situation helped by having rocky vision today.
 
Regards,

John Kettler

Never saw this 1977 gem in my entire career as a Soviet Threat Analyst, a career which began in 1978. Not only does this show the ins and outs of the T-62 and how it operates with BMP-1s and AT-3 armed BRDMs, but it shows US capabilities, too, including the hulldown disparity, telltale reload indicator, low T-62 ROF and more. On the US end, everything from tanks to tacair and scatterable mines (by automatic minelayer or helicopter dispenser) are all there to see. Nor is the terrain the sere NTC, but someplace very European looking. Not only is there lots of great footage, but some remarkable model work, too. Of particular intetest to players will be the comments on open fire ranges, engagememt philoposophies, ammo selection and other game useful groggery. 

Offhand, I can't think of a better intro to the real world which CMCW seeks to depict.
 
Regards,

John Kettler

I am a tanker.
In general id say tanks are spotted far too easily in hulldown positions and when los is broken up like shooting through trees etc.
They are also far too hard to spot in the open or when moving across the field of view.

http://grogheads.com/interviews/21100

Then you make the same mistake like they did in WW1. 

The NTC region selection changes EVERYTHING. Frankly, some QB maps play better as NTC region than they do in Germany region. Though you might want avoid city maps with cathedrals in the middle. 

The QB maps in general seem to have been a lower priority - the majority are CMRT or CMBS maps (which also share maps).

Having said that, *making* QB maps is pretty simple, at least for PBEM. I'm currently playing a QB on the master map which makes up the first mission of the Soviet Campaign.

Further, making the maps "NTC" is a single mod tag - every map can be an NTC map, if you want it to be.