Fortifications BUG!!!!!!!!!!

[dieseltaylor]

I know about it but keeping finding players who do not so lets ressurect this as a warning.

Where fortifications are used in CMBB they are awarded as VP's to your opponent. The only exception to this are bunkers AND TRENCHES who do not give VP's to the other side.

A simple demo game on 500 points with 400 points of Russian fortifications and 100 points of flame throwers gives an immediate score of 44% to the Germans and 56% to the Russians.

Therefore killing a single flamethrower unit gives the Germans a draw. [420 of 920 as a percentage is 46.12%]

If you wish to play with fortifications make an agreement before the game how this should be treated so that it is a true game. Deducting points spent on bug affected fortifications and recalculating seems a fair method : )

[ August 12, 2006, 07:51 AM: Message edited by: dieseltaylor ]

[John Kettler]

dieseltaylor,

IMO, this falls squarely under BFC's commitment to fix major glitches. This is much worse than, say, the 45mm ATG undermodeling and the overmodeling of 80mm front armor StuGs. I think it needs to be fixed both here and in CMC, which presumably uses the same logic.

Regards,

John Kettler

[MikeyD]

Luckily in CMBB the purchase of great massses of foritification elements is very very rare (though it does happen with some of the crazier scenario designs), most of the time we're talking chump-change for a few coils of barbed wire. Also, the foritication purchaser is usually the defender in an attack or assault scenario, which has already been weighted in favor of the defender point-wise. Though I've never heard of this 'bug' before, perhaps it was done on purpose. Maybe BFC supposed that if you're being forced to assault into a trench system you may need a bit of extra help. They just didn't figure on 500 points of barbed wire and 100 points of flamethrower guys being purchased!

[JonS]

IMO, this falls squarely under BFC's commitment to fix major glitches.

They revised that commitment.

This is much worse than, say, the 45mm ATG undermodeling and the overmodeling of 80mm front armor StuGs.

Do you think? I dunno. There are workarounds you can use - external to the game - which still allow you to use fortifications, as long as you know the bug exists.

There is nothing you can do to make the 45mm stronger, or the StuG weaker, except not use them.

[McIvan]

I have a challenge to a 5,000 QB assault presently in my inbox. What I'm planning to do is work out my force mix first, then start a separate test QB with the same parameters, choose only the fortifications, and immediately surrender. The results screen will give me the fortification casualty points.

Can then use that at the end of our QB to work out the "real" victory points.

[MikeyD]

We've all heard BFC's reason for the low quality of the 45mm gun and robustness of the Stug. Mostly due to quality control problems with Russian AP shot, which was judged to be manufactured too hard and hence too brittle, combined - I believe - with the Stug G's fortuitious switch to homogeneous from of face-hardened armor (I always get them switched). Hate the reason or love the reason, but that's thier reason.

[dieseltaylor]

Sorry I should have added trenches to the original message as also being glitch free.

But what about the 76mm tank gun being able to do Tigers from the flank? Major error or what.?

[Michael Dorosh]

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=009607

The solution is to use Axis bonus points (positive or negative) to offset the fortifications bug. See thread above.

As dieseltaylor points out though, does not work in Quick Battles, etc. that are not player designed.

[Richie]

DON'T COUNT TRENCHES, BUNKERS OR PILLBOXES...

Count all other fortifications when adjusting points...