Sequoia

Just a thought. We're thinking Xi is going to make the best move for China. We saw a year ago a supposedly shrewd dictator make a disastrous move for his country, and have blamed it on Putin surrounding himself by yes men after many years of accumulating power. How certain are we Xi isn't prone to the same flaw?

The level of discussion in this thread is extremely high, which is why I read it and am very thankful.  The knowledge, study and experience of several contributing posters is off the effin charts...which makes this such a valuable source of information.  However, it may also deter counter-arguments in that so few individuals have equal experience to voice counter opinions which then leads to...an echo chamber of sorts.
I could study and research a relevant topic for months, (outside of my own little business/supply chain domain), and guarantee you and a few others could argue my points better than I without any research whatsoever.  But, in my opinion, we still need those counter opinions/arguments--when presented in a logical and respectful manner-- even if they aren't at the same level of expertise as some others. 
Just my opinion. Peace.

Yeesh, how much did Exxon and Chevron pay for this imperialist drivel? 

I think that's one of the reasons that Russia feels it needs to control Ukraine and Belarus. Strategic depth for a conventional defence. The West tends to disregard this since Russia has nuclear weapons.
The west's logic is: Russia has nuclear weapons. Therefore it doesn't matter if hostile forces are based even in eastern Ukraine and Belarus, since any attack on Russia will get a nuclear response.
Russia's logic is: if hostile forces (read NATO) are based on the border of Russia itself in eastern Ukraine and Belarus, then too much of the economic and industrial core of Russia is undefendable by conventional means, so they have no choice but to go nuclear, which then creates a likely WW3 scenario. Or they don't go nuclear, and get destroyed. Either way, if someone is crazy enough to start a war (and Russia has no control over whether a lunatic ends up with the power to start a war), then Russia is destroyed. Even more so if Finland and the Baltics are also on the NATO side.
On the other hand, if Russia controls Belarus and Ukraine (at least up to the Dneipr), and Finland is neutral (assuming an all out attack from the Baltic States isn't plausible), then there is enough strategic depth to at least give them the possibility of a conventional defence - either successful defence that stops short of Russia's borders, or at least buys time for a solution to appear before Russia is destroyed. This gives them a course of action that isn't suicidal, unlike the previous scenario.
Bear in mind the oft repeated point that Russia judges threats on capability, not intention. Intentions can change quite quickly. The fact that NATO isn't going to attack Russia is irrelevant. It has the capability to do so . Hope for the best, but plan for the worst - as a thought experiment, should a Stalin, Hitler, Genghis Khan type get decisive control over the west, Russia wants a plan where it can survive, and that plan is basically a conventional defence starting at the border of Poland, or as far west as possible. 
Without that depth, the Russian logic goes, any attack from the west leads to the destruction of Russia, with nothing they can do to prevent it.

In Germany's defense, their operating assumption for 30 years was nobody in their right mind would start a major land war on the European continent in this day and age. Unfortunately, the most relevant part of that was 'in their right mind'. They didn't factor in Putin's creeping senility turning him reckless in his old age.

Well, yes. US is free to provide bilateral direct support to Ukraine especially from outside the conflict zone.  A Russian direct “soft-kill” on a US asset in international waters is technically an act of war.  By the logic you seem to be proposing, Russia can conduct attacks on US personnel who are flying these things in Italy, or Nevada.  So what would be an “international crisis” by your measuring stick then?  Because is we do not have legally defined limits of what is inside and outside this conflict then we are very likely to have a lot of them.  
For example, Russia is flying their version of AWACS within Russian airspace who are directly supporting the targeting of civilian housing.  Russia industry with links to defence outside of Russia? Russian military outside Russia? Tell me where the redline is then.  
(note: by military definitions this was not likely a “soft kill” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_protection_system. Looks more like a hard kill by ramming).
 

Once upon a time there was mention by Steve of the desire to do an elite units pack for CMFI with units such as the First Special Service Force and 442 regiment. I know things change, but maybe this is still somewhere on his wish list? 

Once upon a time there was mention by Steve of the desire to do an elite units pack for CMFI with units such as the First Special Service Force and 442 regiment. I know things change, but maybe this is still somewhere on his wish list? 

I've had this idea since CMCW came out. A campaign that takes place in the Agger Valley, i.e. North Rhine-Westphalia, east of Cologne instead of the Fulda Gap. The main roads and railway go through the valley, the hills around it are a mixture of woods and farmland with only smaller roads and settlements. This is the area I grew up in and CMCW reminded me of the young boy I was back in the 80s with his regiment's worth of plastic soldiers and tanks, imagining things while looking out of the window. Recent events in Ukraine made me reconsider whether it is really that much of a good idea to see your home town being devastated by war. Then again, part of why I play wargames nowadays is to get at least an idea of how people must have felt or must feel in a war. So how better to explore this than having a battlefield where I actually recognize the features from my childhood?

I'm not much into Cold War force compositions and I'm no expert on how such a campaign would have been organized in reality (i.e. what forces would have been employed where and how and such). So this is where I would like to ask for your input. What forces would have realistically taken part in such a campaign, how they would have been equiped, their structure, OOB, you name it.
The Backstory
It is september 1980. Similar to what almost happened with Able Archer a few years later, the KGB had identified Reforger 80 - Certain Rampart as a disguise to actually start a war. According to Soviet strategic planning this had to be prempted with an attack of their own. Soviet tanks had suddenly crossed the border just a week before Certain Rampart was to start. The first few days had gone badly for NATO forces that had been busy preparing for the exercise. But now, about a week into the war, much of the frontline has become static as both sides are nearing exhaustion.
North Rhine-Westphalia had seen the fiercest fighting in and around the Ruhrgebiet, the industrial heart of West Germany and also the largest urbanized area. The southern part had been relatively quiet as the region east of it, Sauerland/Siegerland/Rothaargebirge was difficult terrain with little infrastructure. It was here where the Soviets had gambled: They had thrown in their last fresh reserves, Category C formations, beefed up with some remnants of some Category A and B formations that had been pulled from the frontline for reconstruction. Still they must have had help from either local supporters, sleeper agents from the GDR or SOF that enabled such a quick advance after the break through. Every German Autobahn had been prepared for demolition and in case of a Soviet advance, bridges should have been blown, roads made impassable, etc. They weren't and in a mad dash Soviet forces had rushed down Autobahn 4 up to Engelskirchen where they were finally forced to go by normal roads. The western part of the Agger valley lay ahead. It was narrow and there was not much infrastructure outside of it. But a successful advance down the valley would bring the Red Army to the river Rhine, just oposite of the West German capital, Bonn and close to Cologne/Bonn Airport.
NATO was hard pressed at this point as most of the reserves had been commited already. It was decided to take parts of US 5th Infantry Division to plug the gap. The Reforger reinforcements had been delayed and parts of the equipment had fallen prey to Soviet missile strikes and interdiction. Somewhat understrength and under equipped a battalion TF was sent ahead to setup in the town of Overath.
The Current Situation
While the battalion is still setting up in Overath, the scout platoon and 2 platoons of B Company are racing towards Loope to delay the Soviet advance and give the rest of the battalion time to setup.
Several things I'd like to explore here.
Terrain that is different from Fulda Gap, dominated by hills around a long valley. Not AAA elite tank formations duking it out but understrength, second rate forces. Autumn weather, rain, mud and all that. So, what do you think, is the back story plausible? I hope that noone feels offended by me calling any US troops second rate, but in the sense I described above, what would a second rate force look like (also in CM terms). I don't know much about National Guard formations, I was thinking about 256th Infantry Brigade, for instance. Is it realistic to view them as possibly worse equipped than formations permanently in Europe and less trained/fit? I'd love to have West German reserve units (Heimatschutz or something) for this but I have to take what I can get. What should Soviet forces look like?
Locations
I'm not very skilled at map making or am too impatient (or both), so that so far kept me from actually starting with this. This is part of why I've been busy developing CMAutoEditor (well work is still in progress). Which automates much of the map making for me (but also puts some constraints on the map making, like only maps with axes parallel to the coordinate axes).
Sorry for advertising my own tool here, it's just to give you the context for how maps are done. I use laser scans for elevation data and OpenStreetMap as starting point form map making (meaning I delete buildings that weren't there 1980 and stuff like that).
My Loope map so far looks like this:

I have some of the eastern part of Overath. Do you have ideas for other locations or missions that would make sense?
 
 

That's pretty much all the Royals I've met 😉
P

@The_Capt - a British one would be more appropriate:

Ok so this was the Falklands but the right era at least ... the bootneck with the moustache front left of the photo was a mate of my father's and was in the original NP 8901 and was one of the three who evaded capture for a few days after the original Argentine landings.  He, like the rest of NP 8901 returned with the Task Force.  Liked to drop his trousers in the pub to urinate off WW2 veterans who claimed that post WW2 conflicts "weren't real wars."  He got shot in Borneo in 1966 during Confrontation and had the hole in his leg to prove it.

I would bet Kohlenklau's life Battlefront will never do a game where either side didn't have significant mechanized forces, unless an outside developer took it on as what happened with CM:Afghanistan. We'll probably never know if that game was profitable enough for Snowball.

The response we're seeing from many on this thread is why we don't get more bones threads. It's nothing new for those that remember the response to the very first CMBN screenshot with the Tiger Tank.

Pshh, Space Lobsters are so 2005.  CM: World War Z, now there is a money grabbing concept.

I've seen a lot of comments around the web about the Cold War low point for the US Army being the late '70s. I have a suspicion this point of view may be related to the feeling that the US was humiliated by the hostage taking in Iran, and the botched rescue attempt. Also, after that time, all US armed forces began a general expansion. By the end of the 80's, as we all know, the Iron Curtain fell, and the Soviet Union began to dissolve.  I am of the opinion this late 70's nadir viewpoint is mistaken, or at least exaggerated.  
Here is my argument, and I'd be happy to read counter arguments. I won't try and make a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy argument regarding the collapse of the Soviet Union here, though I think one could be made. That's not the issue. Rather I want to put forward, as it seems to me, the low point for US Forces in Europe would have been during the height of the Vietnam War, and immediately after. Though the size of US Forces naturally expanded during the War, obviously, a large part or the US Army, Marines and Airforce were in Vietnam at the time, and those forces had the priority in support in terms of new equipment and replacement parts. The Soviet Navy wasn't yet the contender it would become by the late '70s, but it's function would always be of secondary importance. 
After US involvement in Vietnam ended and the temporary peace ensued, there was naturally a decrease in the size of the US armed forces. Nixon soon resigned, but not before having improved relations with China, thereby opening up a "second front" for the Soviets to worry about. The Ford administration at first perused a policy of detente with the Soviets, also began under Nixon. Indeed, there were successes here such as the signing of the SALT I and II treaties. But the US Defense Department was (as proved correct) suspicious of the Soviets and lobbied for further military spending.  
Staring later in the Ford Administration, and continued under Carter, the US Armed forces began to grow again. As I recall, the US Army added at least two divisions then (The 5th Mech at Ft Polk and the 24th infantry at Ft Jackson). The first two Nimitz class carriers were commissioned, and a new generation of Aircraft (The F-14. F-15, F-16 and A-10) came into service, along with an expansion of the number of air squadrons. I've read drug use among troops was high at the time (no pun intended) but find it hard to imagine higher than during the Vietnam war, though I don't know the statistics.  The US armed forces were moving to an All Volunteer force beginning in the mid '70s. There were some "change pains" then, but they were certainly less than the earlier recruitment of substandard (i.e. low IQ) troops by McNamara in the 1960s. Having a force with a large number of draftees has its own issues.
I was in USAEUR in the late '70's to 1980, so perhaps I'm taking the criticisms of the period a bit personal.  I have of course, anecdotal incidents to share from the time, but anecdotes make a poorly supported argument.  Thanks.

I've been looking into this and so far, here are all the aircraft types I've identified that the RAF could have had in North Germany for ground support.
Of course, I'd be happy to be corrected.
F4 Phantom
Sepecat Jaguar
Hawker Hunter
Blackburn Buccaneer
BAE Hawk
Hawker Siddeley Harrier
 
 
 
 
 
 

I decided to browse through Battle Order's videos to see what we've got to look forward to. This is the British rifle section we'll have through this timeframe (saved the video URL at the timestamp for the late 60s-mid 80s section): 
 
So it looks like an 8 man rifle section consisting of a four man rifle group (plus the section leader) and a three man GPMG group (including the 2IC). That'll be five L1A1 rifles in the rifle group, with two of the riflemen being equipped with L1A1 rockets (M72 LAWs) by default, with a possibility of equipping more of them with L1A1 rockets. And two L1A1 rifles and an L7A1 GPMG in the GPMG group. As we get into the 80s it looks like one of the L1A1 rockets is replaced by the L14A1 MAW recoilless rifle (Carl Gustav) with the MAW gunner's rifle being replaced by the Sterling SMG.
Should be interesting.
 

Nah, he won’t sober up until noon at least.  And the hangover ought to bleed right into the evening drowning sorrows session.  Probably fine for the next 48, after the mourning period though…

I imagine this dire warning might apply even more today 😬.

His beloved Philadelphia Eagles are in the American Football Championship, the Superbowl today. If you don't want to see his full ire, don't make him come here today to have to moderate a thread.
 
 

His beloved Philadelphia Eagles are in the American Football Championship, the Superbowl today. If you don't want to see his full ire, don't make him come here today to have to moderate a thread.
 
 

His beloved Philadelphia Eagles are in the American Football Championship, the Superbowl today. If you don't want to see his full ire, don't make him come here today to have to moderate a thread.
 
 

His beloved Philadelphia Eagles are in the American Football Championship, the Superbowl today. If you don't want to see his full ire, don't make him come here today to have to moderate a thread.
 
 

His beloved Philadelphia Eagles are in the American Football Championship, the Superbowl today. If you don't want to see his full ire, don't make him come here today to have to moderate a thread.