Any news about CMFI 4.0 release

[JoMac]

20 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

Simmer down and don't be so hypersensitive to imagined insults. I haven't insulted anyone, but have tried to shed some light on a real problem. Yes, the BFC nomenclature is complicated and differs from what other gaming companies and the gaming pastime in general use, requiring a mental adjustment on the players' part. Any claim that this should be beyond the mental capacity of the average player is what is insulting. I am 73 years old and don't have nearly the mental capacity I had 40-50 years ago, but I made the transition without breaking into a sweat. That much younger men are simply unwilling to exert themselves at all is disgraceful. Whether BFC chooses to accommodate those players is, as I said in my earlier post, up to them to decide.

Michael

Yeah, Kirk...Your Insulting, Khan's, Intelligence... :-)

[Ultradave]

7 hours ago, Wolfseven said:

still doesnt work. after all the keys..

Have you contacted the help desk? (sorry if I missed that you said that). Steve had said previously that there are a handful of people for whom the upgrade licensing is really quirky and needs some custom help. I've forgotten the obscure reasons why. If you haven't, please do and I'm sure they'll be able to help.

Apologies if you already did and this is old news.

[Mastiff]

yes all sported now had to reinstall on the reinstall..

[Battlefront.com]

On 4/14/2017 at 9:19 AM, Thewood1 said:

They changed it.  It said 2.0 up until a day or so ago.  There was a post about it a little ways up.

No   I am the only person that messes with that stuff and I have not renamed anything once it was put out to the public.  Because it is potentially confusing I've tried, very hard, to be absolutely consistent.  The purchase pages also note that the version number will be v2.00 for Engine 4.

On 4/14/2017 at 9:23 AM, Thewood1 said:

So lets look at even the changed download page.  CMFI full install 2.0 compared to CMFI Upgrade 4.0.  Looking at that with little history, it looks like, if you are doing a full install, you need the 5 Gb file to get to 2.0 and then the Ugrade to 4.0 to get to a completely up to date install.  Those who have been on the forum and reading all the posts kow that 4.0 upgrade is embeded in the 2.0 full installer.  Just looking at that scree capture makes the point of why someone might be confused.

Unfortunately, there's only so much that can be done with a file name.  There's also only so much that can be done to head off every single possible way people can get confused.  All we can do is make it as simple and logical as possible.  And that is what we have two separate concepts which require their own number:

Version Number = the EXE indexed number which designates which specific release is being used.  Numbers are designated vX.XX

Engine Number = the version of the core game code that is in use.  The number is a one digit affair that is always preceded by "Engine".

Currently CMBN is v4.00 Engine 4 (it is the oldest, so that makes sense), all other games are v2.00 Engine 4.  I don't know how it can be more simple than that.

Honestly, if this is the biggest thing that people have to gripe about... I'm thinking things are pretty good

Steve

 

 

[Thewood1]

I downloaded both files.  One said Upgrade 2.0 and one said 2.0 and was 5 Gb.  I downloaded within an hour of it showing up on the forum.  Another person on the forum mentioned the exact same thing.  When upzipped they both say 2.0, not one of them says 4.0.

You can gripe about your customers all you like, but over several upgrades, a steady message has come through that the numbering system is confusing.  Either  anumber of your customer base is stupid, you aren;'t communicating well, ot it is confusing.  The same comments are showing up on grogheads as well.

[Thewood1]

"CM Fortress Italy v200 Full" is the full downlad.  If it just said..."CM Fortress Italy v200 game and v400 engine Full".  17 letters extra saves how much discussion?

Edited April 15, 2017 by Thewood1

[Chops]

20 hours ago, Thewood1 said:

I downloaded both files.  One said Upgrade 2.0 and one said 2.0 and was 5 Gb.  I downloaded within an hour of it showing up on the forum.  Another person on the forum mentioned the exact same thing.  When upzipped they both say 2.0, not one of them says 4.0.

You can gripe about your customers all you like, but over several upgrades, a steady message has come through that the numbering system is confusing.  Either  anumber of your customer base is stupid, you aren;'t communicating well, ot it is confusing.  The same comments are showing up on grogheads as well.

I totally agree.  The naming and numbering system is convoluted, confusing, and overly complicated, especially for someone new to the CM Series.  A possible solution, since BFC is reluctant to change things would be to create a Table.

This Table could have all of the CM games listed, along with modules, patches, and engine upgrades listed for each game.  Presenting all of this information in Tabular format would really help your customers, and be an easy quick reference.

This Table should be on the Battlefront Website as well as in the Forums.

[Ivan Zaitzev]

Why not say that engine version 4 brings all games to version 4 and be done with it? Then if you have an update for a specific game you can call it 4.x. Next time you have an engine upgrade, that's version 5.

[Michael Emrys]

2 hours ago, Ivan Zaitzev said:

Why not say that engine version 4 brings all games to version 4 and be done with it? Then if you have an update for a specific game you can call it 4.x. Next time you have an engine upgrade, that's version 5.

This is what I have been thinking too. Something Steve posted a while back though seemed to flatly reject this as a strategy. No explanation for why that is; might have something to do with their internal accounting system but I don't know. Could just be one of those personal quirks.

Michael

Edited April 16, 2017 by Michael Emrys

[MikeyD]

You do know that the separate BFC products are separate, right? Its only as a courtesy to the customer that version naming conventions are consistent across titles. They could have named CMFI OS 'Lion', CMBN OS 'V4' and CMBS 'V1.50b' if they had wanted. It would have only confused you and them both but there was no impediment to them doing it.

[akd]

21 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

This is what I have been thinking too. Something Steve posted a while back though seemed to flatly reject this as a strategy. No explanation for why that is; might have something to do with their internal accounting system but I don't know. Could just be one of those personal quirks.

Michael

Skipping version numbers causes brain jar water to boil instantly.

[Erwin]

At least they haven't started calling the versions "Vista" or "XP" etc... 

[Michael Emrys]

10 minutes ago, Erwin said:

At least they haven't started calling the versions "Vista" or "XP" etc... 

Good one, Erwin. Made me laugh.

Michael

[A Canadian Cat]

Or after candy (or is it ice cream). That drives me nuts.

[Mark_McLeod]

Sorry if this has been answered before but the 4.0 just update the engine or does it also update the TO&E as well as other stuff, i thought i read somewhere that's why it was taking awhile! sorry once again if this has been answered not trying to be annoying... Thanks.

[Cobetco]

1 hour ago, Mark_McLeod said:

Sorry if this has been answered before but the 4.0 just update the engine or does it also update the TO&E as well as other stuff, i thought i read somewhere that's why it was taking awhile! sorry once again if this has been answered not trying to be annoying... Thanks.

Yup TOE has been completely reworked for FI from the looks of things. its mostly small changes here and there, OH and flamethrowers!

[Mark_McLeod]

5 minutes ago, Cobetco said:

Yup TOE has been completely reworked for FI from the looks of things. its mostly small changes here and there, OH and flamethrowers!

AWESOME!! thanks for the info man!

[nightops]

Is it just me or is CMFI 4.0 very slow at processing turns? Even on small scenarios it seems to take much longer than the other games. 

[IICptMillerII]

4 minutes ago, nightops said:

Is it just me or is CMFI 4.0 very slow at processing turns? Even on small scenarios it seems to take much longer than the other games. 

In my experience the v4 upgrade shortened turn loading times. Onsmaller battles the turn is almost instantaneous, and on larger battles turns seem to load better as well. 

I haven't had a chance to upgrade CMFI yet, but I've upgraded all the other titles and noticed a positive effect on turn load times. Could be an issue with CMFI, or it could be an issue on your end. 

Quick note, having CM installed on an SSD does reduce load times, both of loading a battle and turn loading times, but it only saves you a handful of seconds (10-30 from what I've observed)

[Kevin2k]

On 10-4-2017 at 4:20 AM, Battlefront.com said:

I did forget to say that you guys who use the Auto Picker for Quick Battles should be much happier with the selections.  Much, much happier.

Steve

 

I would like to use the auto picker. But using 'Mix' tends to regularly give combat forces that almost exclusively consist of Panzerjager marder II's. That is in Italy 1943. In CMBN it often does the same with Tracked Flak 38s, Hummels and Sturmtigers. It is kind of a waste, since just a little extra infantry would make it a much more usable force. The auto picker 'Mix' setting seems to like german units consisting of special purpose armor. For the allies it works better.

 

[sandman2575]

@Battlefront.com (or anyone else knowledgeable) -- I installed engine 4 for FI/GL when you did the 'soft launch' back on April 8. Is there any reason I'd have to re-download and reinstall -- i.e. was the 'April 8' release (what I have installed) identical to what's currently up on the website?

Thanks.

[aleader]

Now that it's back for sale, anyone have an ETA on the next CMFI module (Road to Rome or whatever it's called)?  Just waiting for a bundle that includes all ala CMBN.

[Battlefront.com]

On 4/17/2017 at 6:13 PM, Mark_McLeod said:

Sorry if this has been answered before but the 4.0 just update the engine or does it also update the TO&E as well as other stuff, i thought i read somewhere that's why it was taking awhile! sorry once again if this has been answered not trying to be annoying... Thanks.

Major TO&E updates.  Not necessarily noticeable to casual inspection, but I can say for sure the changes are measured in the hundreds.

5 hours ago, Kevin2k said:

I would like to use the auto picker. But using 'Mix' tends to regularly give combat forces that almost exclusively consist of Panzerjager marder II's. That is in Italy 1943. In CMBN it often does the same with Tracked Flak 38s, Hummels and Sturmtigers. It is kind of a waste, since just a little extra infantry would make it a much more usable force. The auto picker 'Mix' setting seems to like german units consisting of special purpose armor. For the allies it works better.

The system itself has its limitations and so there's always going to be room for improvement.  However, relatively speaking the Auto Picker should be much better than it ever has been.

One reason it works "better" for the Allies is the Allies have a lot less variety of stuff with less wide a range in capabilities.  Think of it like the Germans having 4 great picks, 4 questionable picks, and 2 bad picks to choose from, whereas the Allies might have 6 great picks 3 questionable picks, and 1 bad pick.  Odds are simply in favor of coming up with a more appropriate force for the Allies.  And if you think about it, that somewhat reflects reality.  The Germans often had to make do with stuff that really wasn't suited for the mission because that's what they had.  The famous example of this were the use of King Tigers by KG Peiper.  Totally unsuited for the terrain and weather.  Peiper didn't even want the KTs.  But Peiper was subjected to a historical form of "auto picker" and had to live with the results.  CM players can always restart

44 minutes ago, sandman2575 said:

@Battlefront.com (or anyone else knowledgeable) -- I installed engine 4 for FI/GL when you did the 'soft launch' back on April 8. Is there any reason I'd have to re-download and reinstall -- i.e. was the 'April 8' release (what I have installed) identical to what's currently up on the website?

No changes have been made to the files.  We always change the version number when the files are different.  The soft launch is more to make sure the sales and website side of things is working correctly, not the files themselves.  That's done ahead of release by our testers.

7 minutes ago, aleader said:

Now that it's back for sale, anyone have an ETA on the next CMFI module (Road to Rome or whatever it's called)?  Just waiting for a bundle that includes all ala CMBN.

No announcement for ETA yet, but it is the next thing that we will release.

Steve

[Mark_McLeod]

Awesome Thanks for answering my questions @Battlefront.com! also ive noticed a few new units such as the Pak43 and flamethrower of course, does anyone know of any other new units or  were those the only 2?

[Battlefront.com]

AFAIK only Flamethrowers are new.  I thought Pak43 was in Gustav Line, but I might be mistaken.

Oh!  And I keep forgetting to mention that CMFI now has "Supply Unit" options just like the other games.  This was something we added after Engine 3 so it's the first time we had a chance to get it into CMFI.

Steve