Bug Tracker Thread

[Artkin]

50 minutes ago, Grey_Fox said:

Not in WW2 they wouldn't. Germany wasn't very motorized at all.

Okay how about USA then? Have you looked at the turn I posted yet or nah?

9 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

Dry grass and dirt tiles should not be treated essentially the same as roads, which they were prior to the bogging changes mentioned above. Given the lack of real world data, reasonable people can disagree on how much difference, but the bottom line from my point of view is that roads are not there to be used only when it rains.

Fine I'm totally cool with that, but at the very least from a gameplay perspective - my conscript vehicles are bogging within 250m of driving, and even less in the turn that I posted.

In my opinion these vehicles must have had some sort of off road capability. In the case of the PSW222/3 it's a 2/5 on the HUD. It feels like a 0 or 1/5 currently.

It sucks especially since conscripts generally perform realistically in combat compared to regular troops.

[Lucky_Strike]

Panzer IVG (Latest) employing the wrong turret skirt model

This happens in CMRT but could also be happening elsewhere, haven't checked. Panzer IVG (Latest) uses the mark IV H (Late) turret skirts rather than the mark IV G skirts available for both the IV G (Latest) and IV G (Late):

IVG (Latest) - note the zimmerit, also notice camo pattern

IVG (Late) - note no zimmerit, and notice camo pattern

IVH - zimmerit

IVG generic texture bmp - note no zimmerit, also notice camo

[Lucky_Strike]

21 hours ago, Lucky_Strike said:

Panzer IVG (Latest) employing the wrong turret skirt model

This happens in CMRT but could also be happening elsewhere, haven't checked. Panzer IVG (Latest) uses the mark IV H (Late) turret skirts rather than the mark IV G skirts available for both the IV G (Latest) and IV G (Late):

Whilst on the subject of correcting the Panzer IV models. I've just noticed that the mark IV G (Late) is using the Panzer IV H turret texture - pz-ivh-turret.bmp - JUST for the vision blocks in the commander's cupola:

Identical object, and the artwork is already done so just needs a change in the mdr. As it stands it's cross-referencing to something that could potentially cause confusion when modding. May as well check the rest as well and make corrections.

[Artkin]

Artkin #8 CMCW atgms flying right through M901:

Edited October 23, 2022 by Artkin

[Artkin]

Artkin #9 CMRT 2.11 Heavy "Antiaircraft" guns such as the 85mm 52k and the 88mm Flak 36 don't target and engage enemy aircraft.

This one is pretty annoying. They shouldn't be named "Antiaircraft" batteries when they don't target aircraft. How can I make a historical campaign in Stalingrad when only half of the antiaircraft batteries actually work?

Edited October 25, 2022 by Artkin

[Bulletpoint]

On 10/25/2022 at 6:06 AM, Artkin said:

Artkin #9 CMRT 2.11 Heavy "Antiaircraft" guns such as the 85mm 52k and the 88mm Flak 36 don't target and engage enemy aircraft.

This one is pretty annoying. They shouldn't be named "Antiaircraft" batteries when they don't target aircraft. How can I make a historical campaign in Stalingrad when only half of the antiaircraft batteries actually work?

I believe these were heavy AA guns intended to engage high altitude bomber formations, and would not be able to fire on the ground attack planes we see in this game?

[Artkin]

8 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I believe these were heavy AA guns intended to engage high altitude bomber formations, and would not be able to fire on the ground attack planes we see in this game?

Well I have here an anecdote from an Anton Joly video. Anton Joly wrote a trilogy of books called the Stalingrad Battle Atlas, and used Glantz to produce it. The book is fairly new (c. 2013).

In this anecdote found at 9:19, Joly wrote that the 6th battery of 1077th Antiair "Regiment" (I think he means Division edit... nvm divisions established November 1942) managed to destroy 24 tanks, 3 aircraft, and a "lot of manpower". They had no antitank shells. So I assume this means the 85mm guns, since I don't think 37mm HE would even defeat a panzer II. If it was a couple tanks I would believe it to be a 37mm. But he listed 24 tanks KIA between these two days AND 3 aircraft. The only aircraft that I know of over Stalingrad during this time were BF109's and JU-87 Stukas.

I will rescind this bug report but really the 85mm should be able to engage the stukas before they initiate their dive at 5000m. I'm not sure if it was this particular Joly video I watched, but the gunners typically shot at stukas before or after they dove, and not inbetween.

I took a look at the Flak 18/38 and it had a fuse which activated after .11 seconds, but this is probably for engaging ground targets since the fuse only activates on impact [Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (kz.) m. A.Z. 23.28 (8.8cm)].

Edited October 26, 2022 by Artkin

[Artkin]

To further bolster the argument that the 6th Battery could not have been comprised of 37mm guns:

16th Panzer Division (The same that drove over 1077th Antiaircraft Regiment) contained 70 tanks on July 22nd 1942. On August 19th 16th Panzer was able to muster 70 panzers. This is from Glantz's "To The Gates of Stalingrad".

The battle that 1077th was part of happened on August 23rd, 1942. They listed 24 destroyed tanks using high explosive shells.

On 12th September the 6th Army's Diary listed 16th panzer as having 8 Panzer III Shorty, 47 Panzer III Long, 2 Panzer IV Shorty, and 7 Panzer IV Long.

It's clear that the ratio of tanks that 16th panzer contained could not allocate 24 Panzer II tanks. And EVEN if there were 24 panzer II's still in this division (Highly unlikely), they were never subordinated to their own light tank company. They were always in the panzer battalions light tank platoon. OR, they were found in the company's support platoon. So, it's even more unlikely that 24 panzer II would have assaulted the 1077th and been destroyed in such great numbers. I doubt that the 37mm HE would have had much of an effect on these tanks in the first place. 85mm would have done the job though, even on Panzer III.

So, the same antiaircraft battery that killed 24 panzers also scored 3 air kills. One was listed as a JU-88 bomber. So it's possible that they did not successfully target JU-87 Stukas, but I don't know this.

[Artkin]

2 hours ago, Artkin said:

The only aircraft that I know of over Stalingrad during this time were BF109's and JU-87 Stukas.

Correction: I thought this attack was closer to the 13th of September. On August 23rd there was a massive bombing raid on the city containing JU-88s.

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, Artkin said:

Well I have here an anecdote from an Anton Joly video. Anton Joly wrote a trilogy of books called the Stalingrad Battle Atlas, and used Glantz to produce it. The book is fairly new (c. 2013).

In this anecdote found at 9:19, Joly wrote that the 6th battery of 1077th Antiair "Regiment" (I think he means Division edit... nvm divisions established November 1942) managed to destroy 24 tanks, 3 aircraft, and a "lot of manpower". They had no antitank shells. So I assume this means the 85mm guns, since I don't think 37mm HE would even defeat a panzer II. If it was a couple tanks I would believe it to be a 37mm. But he listed 24 tanks KIA between these two days AND 3 aircraft. The only aircraft that I know of over Stalingrad during this time were BF109's and JU-87 Stukas.

I will rescind this bug report but really the 85mm should be able to engage the stukas before they initiate their dive at 5000m. I'm not sure if it was this particular Joly video I watched, but the gunners typically shot at stukas before or after they dove, and not inbetween.

I took a look at the Flak 18/38 and it had a fuse which activated after .11 seconds, but this is probably for engaging ground targets since the fuse only activates on impact [Sprgr. Patr. L/4.5 (kz.) m. A.Z. 23.28 (8.8cm)].

I'm thinking their AA guns probably engaged those aircraft while they were at high altitude going to or from some other targets. It's a different thing to hit a ground attack plane when it's actively diving down towards you than when it's just passing through the airspace far above.

[Artkin]

8 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm thinking their AA guns probably engaged those aircraft while they were at high altitude going to or from some other targets. It's a different thing to hit a ground attack plane when it's actively diving down towards you than when it's just passing through the airspace far above.

For sure, and for that reason I suggest a mechanic that can target planes while they're not in this very short dive phase (5000-2000m).

[Bulletpoint]

5 minutes ago, Artkin said:

For sure, and for that reason I suggest a mechanic that can target planes while they're not in this very short dive phase (5000-2000m).

I think the planes when they arrive at the battlefield are already assumed to fly quite low.. And in any case not loitering around at high altitude before diving down. At least that's the way I always imagined it, but I'm not an expert. Could be you're right.

Edited October 26, 2022 by Bulletpoint

[Lucky_Strike]

ALL the PaK bunker in CMRT have muzzle flashes that emanate from the concrete ABOVE the embrasure. This happens regardless of how the bunkers are emplaced:

[RockinHarry]

Pillboxes not providing cover vs Arty in certain conditions

 

[kohlenklau]

2 hours ago, Lucky_Strike said:

ALL the PaK bunker in CMRT have muzzle flashes that emanate from the concrete ABOVE the embrasure. This happens regardless of how the bunkers are emplaced:

The same in CMFB. and CMFI

Edited October 28, 2022 by kohlenklau

[Lucky_Strike]

8 hours ago, kohlenklau said:

The same in CMFB. and CMFI

Thought they probably would be, thanks for confirming - Death Star bunkers!

[Bulletpoint]

On 10/28/2022 at 5:56 PM, RockinHarry said:

Pillboxes not providing cover vs Arty in certain conditions

 

Is this really still a thing six years after you first reported that bug?

[RockinHarry]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

Is this really still a thing six years after you first reported that bug?

yup, had another try out with my reference YEG mission set up just recently. As said it´s most prevalent when pillboxes are combined with some ditch locked terrain tiles. Not so much (or not at all, can´t recall ATM) when beeing placed in level terrain.

Edit: From my latest messing in Blender it could maybe have to do with some the pillbox bounding box data. Meta unkn1 or 2 might be possible candidates. So possibly can "fix" it myself if BFC can´t or not taking it serious (again). That for BFC QC....

Edited November 15, 2022 by RockinHarry

[kohlenklau]

"BUG" but just missing/incorrect textures. It seems that the normal maps for German senior officer greatcoats are incorrect and show y-straps.

This is for CMFB and CMRT AND CMFI. CMFI seems to not even have normal maps for the base module nor for Gustav Line  module but then finally they shipped with Rome to Victory. But shipped still incorrect. 3 strikes and you're out.

I have never been invited to be on the BFC BETA test team but I recommend that each guy get some "specialty area" to be in charge of. I THINK from grape vine and forum comments, that they all get a loosey-goosey "play the game and report stuff that seems wonky". Put a guy in charge of uniforms. Put a guy in charge of vehicle models. etc etc All the piddly stuff we see that slips on through. MAYBE it does get diligently reported and MAYBE gets diligently fixed but SOME-EFFING-HOW it gets right back in the folders? That is a QA issue somewhere.  eggshells in the omelette. 

Edited November 17, 2022 by kohlenklau

[RockinHarry]

Did I miss something or did on map ammo dumps got removed from CMFB and CMRT? (either from supply platoon or other valid vehicle when status=dismounted and playing at Iron level) All works as normal in CMBN though.

[Artkin]

Artkin #10

Unnecessary spotting icons plague the map all over the place. They prevent easily plotting moves from height since the partial contact icons act like real units. There are WAY too many of these. It's a plague.

Iron difficulty

Edited November 21, 2022 by Artkin

[Artkin]

4 hours ago, RockinHarry said:

Did I miss something or did on map ammo dumps got removed from CMFB and CMRT? (either from supply platoon or other valid vehicle when status=dismounted and playing at Iron level) All works as normal in CMBN though.

Interesting. Supply platoons won't give me ammo boxes either, but other formations will.

[Artkin]

On 10/17/2022 at 9:14 AM, Ultradave said:

Yeah, I always kind of micromanage waypoints near holes in bocage, or else troops might look for the long way around instead of going through the gap you wanted. Is this a bug? No, I don't think so. Is it fiddly. Sure. But to me it's the equivalent of the platoon leader telling a squad, "Look, see that small gap right over there. I want you to go through that and then follow the left side of the next field to the next hedgerow, and scout for a gap there." Instead of just saying "Go to the next hedgerow"   First one gets the real troops and the CM troops to do what you actually intended (or at least attempt to given morale, enemy fire, etc - applies to real and CM).

Dave

Artkin #11

Infantry unable to navigate through thickly hedged maps. They split consistently when ordered to run over long distances including roads. They also especially split when ordered to move through hedgerow doors/fence doors in thickly hedged maps.

If this is not a bug would you consider this intentional behavior? Tell me, do you see my HQ units anywhere?

The third image is a picture of the stragglers of my mortar teams FINALLY catching up after 30 or so minutes. They were idle for most of that time. I only ordered them to run down an unobstructed road.

 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by Artkin

[Grey_Fox]

46 minutes ago, Artkin said:

Artkin #10

Unnecessary spotting icons plague the map all over the place. They prevent easily plotting moves from height since the partial contact icons act like real units. There are WAY too many of these. It's a plague.

Iron difficulty

Those are last-known positions for contacts which individual units have spotted. The reason you have so many is that some of the troops haven't recognised that there are multiple different last known contacts for the same units.

An example, unit A spots a tank and loses contact with it. A tentative spot is created. Later, unit B spots a tank, and reports the contact. This is the same tank, but neither A nor B know that, and this is what the player sees.

This is part of the deep fog of war that is core to CM gameplay. It's not a bug just because you don't like it.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Grey_Fox

[Artkin]

Artkin #11

Terrible LODs for Bmp-1 that have no consistency. Units will be dull at 50m, then bright at 100m, then dull again at 150m (Ranges are guesswork).

Note the wheels:

Edited November 21, 2022 by Artkin