All Activity

ISW doing great stuff, as always.

The way I read the NATO stuff with Trump was that it was all about the money. That's how I read almost everything that he did and does. Now. I am not a fan. I know that many of you will be tempted to call me names or belittle me in some manner, but I'm going to make an observation anyway. There might be more availability of weapons and equipment under him, as he would likely see it as some sort of US MIC super Walmart. No doubt there will probably be an end to aid packages, but there is a good chance of actual investment into production and sales. As long as someone else was paying the tab, he could yell from the podium that he "fixed it" and that it was a "win" for his constituents, the tax payer, and the economy. It would certainly be a win for Ukraine if everything was for sale and it sure might be, as I believe he is very myopic when it comes to foreign policy and security.

Meh, the 2% thing is a weak metric and everyone knows it. I mean it is better than nothing but it is not a measure of effectiveness nor contribution. Greece is spending nearly 4% GDP - which is essentially an extension of workfare. When was the last time Greece led a multinational brigade in Latvia or took an entire operational province on in Afghanistan? Cynically 2% GDP is designed to drive NATO members to buy into American defence industry either directly or indirectly as opposed to really measure effectiveness. The reality does not often match the theatre. But we will bow and scrap. Roll in Coast Guard and VA funding and other creative accounting until the heat gets turned off. The US on the other hand cannot walk away from its position as a leader of the free world and expect everyone to forget it.

Where is it written that NATO countries must support nonmembers? AS far as I can tell they must only support each other in case a member is attacked. Governments which had an open checkbook are already voted out of office. That is the crux of the matter, that some governments cut back on spending.

Agreed Canada and most other NATO members could and should do more. But these guys below should show that Canada indeed was and is part of NATO. Fallen Canadian Armed Forces Members - Canada in Afghanistan - Canadian Armed Forces - History - Remembrance - Veterans Affairs Canada

Agreed. I'd rather have historical, like CMRT Barbarossa but I realise I may be in a diminishing client base in that respect.

I mean, really Canada has already basically withdrawn from NATO hasn't it? Can you be considered a serious NATO member when your government says that not only will they not spend 2% on defense but they will never spend 2%.

I would, and I'm pretty sure the Pentagon would be as well.

I interpreted it more like a mutual understanding. On a more lighter note (or heavier): I'd rather they publish more content on an existing conflict instead of releasing a game about a 'fictional' conflict. If for example they release Combat Mission: Tiger Dragon, three years later China will invade Taiwan! We've already seen it happening twice.

Day 1 buy for me. Perhaps in the future we can see Norway with local forces and USMC. Maybe even the Southern NATO front with the Greek and Turk forces fighting alongside NATO.

I've had that on at least two Panthers in recent games. One on a road under artillery fire so just one of those things. The other in a forest with no LOS in and a single round arrived, that was more .

Ah, the Commonwealth. Ian will appreciate that I'm sure .

@FlammenwerferX's luckiest artillery shot ever. Somehow this one landed right on the deck killing my entire SMG HQ riding on the tank in addition to KO'ing the tank and killing the entire crew as well. Ugggh.

And yet the narrative in Russia and the West is that Russia is advancing, a slow grind, but one that one could argue will result in breakthrough and collapse of the Ukrainian army. Certainly reviewing Russian news, where they were touting the hold up of aid to Ukraine via the U.S until just now, is part of the narrative that it is signalling to its domestic and international audience that dividends will occur with this costly advance, that the West and Ukraine is close to giving up. It is essential that Ukraine and the West defeats this narrative, both to ensure that Western audiences and elites are not convinced of the futility of further aid, and to spur further cracks in Russia. Continued, loud, assertive Western support to Ukraine is essential, the kind vocalized by Macron recently. But just to emphasize, I'm not saying focus on the bridge solely, but it takes time for a Russian operational collapse, and we don't exactly know what Ukraine has in terms of ability to immediately make that happen. But a bridge that symbolizes Putin's regime and Russia's connection to Crimea is a good way of telling the Russian civilian the war is not going well. And certainly one that won't potentially backfire on Ukraine and the West like targeting economic targets like oil and gas before the American election. (I believe analysis is finding that targets are being struck that focus on domestic consumption and not exports that might more severely drive up prices) and certainly not of the civilian harming, war crime potential. (In fact the first bridge attack probably acts like a way of defusing potential war crime objections in that Ukraine has been able to explain itself and gained western acceptance via normalization) Again I'm not saying focus on the bridge. I'm just saying that I'm not going to be surprised if Ukraine sends a ATACMS against it.

Hasn't this theory been discussed to death already in this thread like two years ago?

As I expected (although your nice pic has a lot of gaps in the bocage ), but why then would my Pershing shy away from the 'fence' aka low bocage? And drive slowly for a long way with its side exposed. Duh, as Billie Eilish would say.

I think Ukraine has already done this. There is an army's worth of scrap metal all over south-eastern Ukraine right now and at least 50k dead (likely more) and times 3-4 wounded. You know what would demonstrate the futility of the Russian cause even better...another RA operational collapse.

Being one of those who has warned of long term conflict not being instantly favorable to Ukraine and the West, it's always important to remind myself that Russian perspective is focused on portraying futility in opposing Russia, aimed at western audiences and Ukraine itself. (At least that's what I think) Actions like these piecemeal attacks, mounting losses, a focus on offensive vs defensive, but in a way that is wasteful and at opposition to the conception of modern warfare, signals to me that Russia is hoping on diluting Ukrainian and Western will, trading its personnel and equipment on the hope that either Ukraine breaks or the West breaks. Is Russia that changed from 40 years ago in the Soviet-Afghan War that it can continue to blink with no emotion at its losses in Ukraine? Certainly it is entirely in Russian advantage that Russia is mindlessly sending its forces to death, that it's supply is endless, and its will concrete. But is it true? In my opinion, Ukraine needs to focus on stabilizing it's front, and conduct signalling to both the Russian public, and internationally, that Russian advances have halted and will not occur, and will be a high tally for every attempt. Currently, despite these high losses Russia has convinced its public, and onlookers that advancing will be worth it. Ukraine must shatter that image, same as it shattered the images of Russia pre-invasion.

In the Commonwealth of Nostalgia Magna we forge our own history.

I have a very vague recollection of reading that CMFB would only have two types of hedgerow, "Hedge" and "Low Bocage", and that for movement purposes they would be treated the same, unlike in Battle for Normandy. Obviously, now that I want to find it in the manual I can't. So I just ran a quick test with a Locust and a Jeep. Both made short work of the low bocage....

Just wanted to say that BFC are not Matrix/Slitherine and vice versa. From memory BFC decided not to release the Black Sea module in the current circumstances, and publisher Matrix/Slitherine agreed with them. If Matrix/Slitherine proceed with other 'similar' titles, that's nothing to do with BFC.

The 'desire' (or belief) in the more clownish part of the electorate may have been true, but the "lack of commitment" in Europe was not.

I just want to reiterate that Matrix/Slitherine will publish Broken Arrows this year and they have been advertising it heavily since 2022. Although the game is 'fictional' it literally has all the TOE from the current war (drones, heavy airstrike jets, heavy bombers, Bradleys, T-90s and Armatas) and the maps look frightingly similar to what we've seen on the news in the past years. Broken Arrows is set in the Baltics (which makes it completely fine, I guess) and yet after a 30 minutes match with 8 players, the map looks exactly like Mariupol. Sorry, but I have a great distaste for double standards. And denying the release of the Black Sea module, yet putting so much PR effort into a game like Broken Arrow is just too much. And we didn't even speak about the seriousness of Combat Mission which could even be called educational, whereas Broken Arrows is a competive game for fun. And to multiply that: Combat Mission is a niche product, whereas Broken Arrows will be a beststeller relative to wargaming standards. (similar to CM: Red Thunder and Steel Division 2 if you will.)

Where can I see the forums for the explanation for it.

Ok thanks for sharing I haven't seen those threads about why the DLCS were shelved