Bug and stuff thread

[Kevin2k]

1 hour ago, herr_oberst said:

Has to happen eventually, but "After 12 years, support for Windows XP ended April 8, 2014" -- sheesh, that's nigh on 6 years past EOL.

Time for an update to something more recent, like Windows 7. That EOL is only Jan 14, 2020.  Loads of time...

Funny thing: Extended Updates for Windows (XP) "POSready 2009" were still coming in until past April 2019.  That is 18 years of updates with a small tweak. 

Microsoft is going to do a similar thing with Windows 7: Extended Updates for another 3 years at least. As it stands, normal people and small businesses can't get these Windows 7 updates, not even if you want to pay for it.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Kevin2k

[ushankashenk]

1 hour ago, Heirloom_Tomato said:

This is not a bug. This is a design feature because the real life Archer actually has the gun facing the rear. This allows the Archer to be perfect for an ambush, fire at the enemy and then drive away at full speed without the need to turn around.

The Archer never moved with it's ass towards the enemy. You are misunderstanding it function.  True, it drive faster in reverse.  But this was, so is could fire and then leave. 

[akd]

The front of the Archer and the driver position is opposite the gun muzzle.

[ushankashenk]

57 minutes ago, akd said:

The front of the Archer and the driver position is opposite the gun muzzle.

I know. You too, Are not understanding what I'm talking about. It's not a good idea for, a any armored asset to dive with it's gun facing away from the enemy. the problem is Archer, is does not operate like it needs to. the AI don't know how to, drive the thing. I get it, Archer was an odd, tank destroyer.  However, when asked to face some thing. It will face the driver towards it.  having to micromanage eight of these things, to do something as simple as face something with it's gun. in a game where split second decisions are needed. Is not a good thing. 

[Frenchy56]

The Archer driving "forward" is it driving in reverse. So put reverse orders if you want it to advance with the gun facing forward. If it's facing orders, just make it face the opposite way you want the gun to be pointed at. It's not that hard.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Frenchy56

[Ultradave]

5 hours ago, ushankashenk said:

I know. You too, Are not understanding what I'm talking about. It's not a good idea for, a any armored asset to dive with it's gun facing away from the enemy. the problem is Archer, is does not operate like it needs to. the AI don't know how to, drive the thing. I get it, Archer was an odd, tank destroyer.  However, when asked to face some thing. It will face the driver towards it.  having to micromanage eight of these things, to do something as simple as face something with it's gun. in a game where split second decisions are needed. Is not a good thing. 

Using the face command always faces the front of the unit, whatever it is, to where you point. So for an Archer you just have to set the face command 180deg from where you want the gun to point. 

[Mastiff]

I'm having an issue where the tanks will fire then magically transport to another position they were not at.

[waffelmann]

19 hours ago, waffelmann said:

For some SS-Troopers in greatcoats are missing the textures for the boots...

I have to add:

The error appears 1944 november, not 1944 januar

[rocketman]

47 minutes ago, 71st_Mastiff said:

I'm having an issue where the tanks will fire then magically transport to another position they were not at.

Can it be replicated? Please post video and keep a save file.

[CHEqTRO]

While playing the Two Crowns scenario, my T32 Mountain gun refused to fire for some reason.

The gunner kept in a permanent state of "turning" the weapon, but never fired, despite having perfect line of vision/fire and being commanded to fire via the target command. It is true that one of the 4 soldiers that usually handle the weapon was killed before this, and maybe that was the reason it refuse to turn the weapon, as it needed the full crew to work, so maybe is working as intended?

I doubt that as I feel that would be extremely odd and unrealistic but who knows.

 

PD / "Spoilers" for the Two Crowns scenario /  :

 

 

 Not a bug, but after playing the scenario I feel it is poorly balanced. Taking the last objective it is nearly impossible due to the high concentration of German troops conceiled behind the ridge and the fact that it is situated in the edge of the map, forcing you to go directly against them, makes it nearly impossible to take it, as all your troops will get instantly killed by an incessant volley of close automatic fire.

Also you only have one 81 mm mortar and 2 62mm ones, with limited ammo, which by that point you would have probably spend taking out the 75 mm gun and some machine gun positions.

I feel like if the germans would lose one or 2 squads of infantry, and the US would get a small battery of 105 artillery with limited ammo the scenario will be more balanced.

 

[Bartokomus]

Stuart Recce problem(?).

two man crew; when opened up you can use the target command to fire the .50 cal.

when opened or closed your light fire won't use the .303 cal mg.

is this a bug or am i doing it wrong? it's basically acting like a Stug and you lose your gunner quickly instead of firing using the protected mg.

 

thanks

 

[rocketman]

South African forces seem to lack any voice sounds like various expressions but also artillery call in/response commands.

[Albert DuBalay]

Good news : CMFI is available

Bad news : I cannot extract the package for installation. Got this message

"CM Fortress Italy v210 Installer.pkg" can't be opened because Apple cannot check it for malicious software.

This software needs to be updated. Contact the developer for more information

.. downloaded from battlefront.sharefile.com"

 

Any help around ? on MacOS Catalina ... thank you

Edited December 4, 2019 by Albert DuBalay

[Albert DuBalay]

1 hour ago, Albert DuBalay said:

Good news : CMFI is available

Bad news : I cannot extract the package for installation. Got this message

"CM Fortress Italy v210 Installer.pkg" can't be opened because Apple cannot check it for malicious software.

This software needs to be updated. Contact the developer for more information

.. downloaded from battlefront.sharefile.com"

 

Any help around ? on MacOS Catalina ... thank you

Good news:  « just » go into the pref pan and select the security thing and tells it to open it ANYWAY. Damn it it does it to me each time and I keep forgetting about it ! 

Note: I do not think BF team is malicious

 Cheers and let’s enjoy the new module 

[Lethaface]

22 hours ago, Bartokomus said:

Stuart Recce problem(?).

two man crew; when opened up you can use the target command to fire the .50 cal.

when opened or closed your light fire won't use the .303 cal mg.

is this a bug or am i doing it wrong? it's basically acting like a Stug and you lose your gunner quickly instead of firing using the protected mg.

 

thanks

 

IIRC the bow mg is occupied by the scout team passengers (if they are onboard), the gunner is sitting in the .50 / observation seat. I think that's just how they roll, but I'm not really in the know.

[akd]

37 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

IIRC the bow mg is occupied by the scout team passengers (if they are onboard), the gunner is sitting in the .50 / observation seat. I think that's just how they roll, but I'm not really in the know.

That is correct, at least for Stuart Recces in formations.

[Lethaface]

One small strange thing I noticed but forgot to mention is that the Sherman Kangaroo under the single vehicle tab, has a rather large crew (~7 men) and is thus not really useful as an APC, since most of the seats are occupied by the crew and armed with only pistols. When selected through the 'Armored Personnel group' (orso), the Sherman Kangaroo comes with a more expected crew of 2 and does function as an APC

I was also looking for kangaroo variants for the Canadians, but couldn't find any. Is that correct? The manual explicitly mentions the Canadians first employed the 'kangaroo idea' on a large scale, but perhaps they just used them in the ETO?

Edited December 4, 2019 by Lethaface

[Heirloom_Tomato]

5 hours ago, Lethaface said:

One small strange thing I noticed but forgot to mention is that the Sherman Kangaroo under the single vehicle tab, has a rather large crew (~7 men) and is thus not really useful as an APC, since most of the seats are occupied by the crew and armed with only pistols. When selected through the 'Armored Personnel group' (orso), the Sherman Kangaroo comes with a more expected crew of 2 and does function as an APC

I was also looking for kangaroo variants for the Canadians, but couldn't find any. Is that correct? The manual explicitly mentions the Canadians first employed the 'kangaroo idea' on a large scale, but perhaps they just used them in the ETO?

While the idea was from the Canadians, the only ones to use them in Italy were the British. 

[DerKommissar]

On 12/3/2019 at 5:11 PM, rocketman said:

South African forces seem to lack any voice sounds like various expressions but also artillery call in/response commands.

Just tried to play the South African campaign. Can confirm this, on my end -- as well.

[weta_nz]

Yup no S.A voices too and blinking unknown contacts. I have created a ticket so Elvis is aware of it.  

[Frenchy56]

The SA voices are in the game files. I've listened to some and I can say that the English-speaking ones are not immersive at all ("They'll kill us all. Run." spoken in a completely nonchalant tone. All of them are.), and are too quiet. Which is probably the problem, another thing I can think of is them not being named right, as I saw some of them with misspelled names.

The Afrikaans ones are okay, but like the English ones some of them are misspelled as well.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Frenchy56

[user1000]

9 hours ago, Frenchy56 said:

The SA voices are in the game files. I've listened to some and I can say that the English-speaking ones are not immersive at all ("They'll kill us all. Run." spoken in a completely nonchalant tone. All of them are.), and are too quiet. Which is probably the problem, another thing I can think of is them not being named right, as I saw some of them with misspelled names.

The Afrikaans ones are okay, but like the English ones some of them are misspelled as well.

You are right. Voices are far too quite, I can barely hear anything the added nations say!

[waffelmann]

November 44, gebirgsjäger in (gebirgsjäger-) greatcoats: missing boot-textures

Edited December 5, 2019 by waffelmann
Better description

[Frenchy56]

Looks a bit weird, no?

[Anonymous_Jonze]

When German soldiers are "tagged" with their winter uniforms their Battalion commander doesn't have a uniform. This goes for both "Gerbisjaeger winter" and regular wehrmacht troops as well.