Yardstick

Q.e.d., I guess. Is ad hominem and being rude really your only way to deal with people who happen to not share your opinion?
Makes for a bad discussion and that is what we are here for isn't it?

But to value honor, freedom and self respect higher than peace and your life is in itself already a choice you've made and a choice that was made many times throughout history (with both outcomes).
That is not semantics. It makes all the difference in the world to make that choice deliberately or be forced to.

easily said from the comfort of your couch here in the US.

It's because Ukraine is losing and the war may be over before the end of 2024. It won't look good releasing a game about the war in Ukraine after they surrender or give up a large chunk of their territory.
I'm not pro Russia just calling it like I see it. Bring on the hate mail.

I have been a player of the CM series since the Beyond Overload days and have bought just about every title since.  I have enjoyed the modern games and I am very disappointed to hear the the expansion for BS has been shelved.  Why?  As I understand it, Battlefront did not want people thinking they were making a profit off of a war even though the game was designed before the war in Ukraine.  I understand this point, but I don't remember any complaints about the release of Shock Force when there was an active war in Iraq and Afghanistan.  The game wasn't pulled when a real war in Syria happened.  What makes the Ukraine situation so special?  Is the issue simply that the setting is in Ukraine?  Could BS and the expansion simply be retitled Combat Mission Europe or something with a new setting but using the exact same maps and equipment?

Because he's there, and tens of thousands of people are actively trying to kill him and are devastating his homeland.
One of the things I value most in this forum is the opportunity to gain diverse insights and opinions.
And after all, he did preface his post with "I think". If someone says something that can be proved wrong, correct it, but play the ball, not the man

Just call this what it is…flat out racism.  I mean it boils down to white versus brown/black(sigh).  A quick internet search shows that “Muslim hordes” in Europe constitute about 5% of the population and may grow to a Christmas-killing 8% by 2030.  Meanwhile European demographics are cratering - and we point fingers at China (insert rolly eyes).
But we all know they will marry all our (white) women and steal our jobs (the ones we cannot fill anyway).  
What is truly baffling is the level of complete inability to see that this position leads directly to “so we are spending billions to keep Ukraine racially pure…wait, what?”  Seriously guys from Ukraine, have a freakin meeting or something.  So far we have had bleak defeatism, shaming-guilt,  fear mongering and now outright racism.  I know things are bad but how is any of this going to make things better?
 

I really should dive back into this. It's cool to see little parts of this live on in other's mods lol.

If they are staying home while their nation is fighting for its life, and whining that Ukraine is losing this far into the war. They are cowards. Sorry, but that's the truth.

My problem now is trying to figure out if this is sincere - in complete absence of proof.  Or is it some sort of IO play.

Re: T-90 Article
 
It's actually pretty bad.  There's some howlers in there like comparing the M1's loading process to a bolt action, while the T-90 is a "semi-automatic" (if we're using small arms analogies, the M1 is a bolt action, and the T-90 is a bolt action with a machine that operates the bolt at near human speed), claiming the T-90's smaller size makes it more urban capable (it doesn't, the size/weight difference comes chiefly from the turret, which has only limited effects on the actual ability to fit in places, and both suffer about equally from gun tube length, while the Abrams has much better gun elevation factors).  It also praises the Russian focus on evolutionary designs vs revolutionary designs, while totally neglecting the M1 is pretty much exactly what he's extolling in the progression from M1 to M1A2 SEP v2.  It is pretty bad.
 
I could go on further if you would like however!
 
Addendum: M1 tanker time in service
 
Here's a loose estimate from time in service starting from graduation from basic by crew position:
 
Driver: 0-3 years*
Loader: 0-4 years*
Gunner: 3-9 years **
Commander: 7+ years +
 
*A lot depends on the unit.  Certain units consider the loader the entry position to tanking, while others prefer the driver to be most junior.  However both are good entry level positions on a tank, and most soldiers will serve as both before moving on to being a gunner.  Average rank is PV-2 through Specialist
** Nearly all gunners are Sergeants who've been both drivers and loaders.  Some units that are short on Sergeants will put more junior ranks in the gunner's spot if the soldier is especially good.  For instance my Company had several PFC/SPC gunners because they were that good, and the Army hates Korea and just opted not to send new Sergeants to us for a few months.  Some gunners will stay in position longer, especially if they're the sort of dude who is a good sergeant but who've done something to make them less likely to be promoted to Staff Sergeant.  
+ The two "wing" tanks are commanded by Staff Sergeants, frequently promoted from internal to the organization.  The Platoon Sergeant is usually an angry dinosaur of a man with something around 14-20 years of tanking under his belt, and he will be a positive terror if you do "tank thunderdome" like we used to do with MILES.  The Platoon leader frighteningly enough has something like 1-3 years in the Army, but usually will only be in the platoon for 12-24 months at most.  Generally his gunner is the most senior gunner in the platoon, and serves as sort of a co-tank commander, keeping the tank in good order and fighting it when the platoon leader needs to attend to the platoon.  Tank commander is much the same, although he may have prior experience from his platoon leader/XO time, or being a Cavtasitc dude like yours truly who has not been in a tank since officer's school.  
 
Regardless, the tank has a lot of experience contained within it, and troop quality is certainly something the US Army hopes to leverage into the future.
 
Addendum:
 
I do envy the sort of unrestricted training areas the Russians have though.  

Links to what? If you don't believe that an M1a2 SEP 2 isnt an overall superior tank to a t-90, then nothing I post will change your mind. If I was a T-90 crewman. I wouldnt be excited about attacking an M1a2 or Challenger.

It's an opinion and since they haven't foughy, anything anyone links to is the same. BElieve what you want

The M1/challenger/leapard 2 tanks were very innovative.

Do you think a russian tank crew receives the same training via simulator and operations against "professional OPFOR trained to mimic US tactics? That is unbelievably expensive. U.S. NCOs attend various schools from leadership academies to staff NCO academies. Nothing I have read would indicate that Russia is economicly capable of trainimg its tank crews to that level...not just the tank but operation with other arms.

I can't prove a negative or something that hasn't happened. My response was directed to the comment that the poster wished the T-90 could go up against the Leopard 2 to show its superior...I think that would get a lot of T-90 crews killed

I hope that T-90 will never be able to prove itself in a real tank to tank combat, because that will mean a war against a country operating that tank.

I hope that T-90 will one day be able to prove itself in real tank to tank combat hopefully against the Leopard 2,
If the T-90 beats the Leopard 2 that will shut up the Leo Fanboys up for awhile.

This is a CMx2 thing and I had hoped it would get better over time, but sometime the Infantry Tac AI is so frustrating it pulls my hair out.
 
I been a player and holder of CM games from CMx1 to now my latest Black Sea.
 
I absolutely love the vehicle TAC AI even when I do not like what the crew does, it still makes sense, the vehicle become endangered and throws itself into reverse only to get hit from a previous spotted At weapon, still perfectly understandable.
 
But close combat Infantry Tac AI is what I feel lets the game down in the biggest way, I will explain some scenario and what I see and what i would prefer to see.
 
----------------------------
 
PERCEIVED ISSUE:Running, I am not sure if it is the animation or they are so very slow but when guys a running they seem to be doing it on ICE, as in lots of movement but very little forward progress, 9 time out of ten they are all on top of each other so it easy for the enemy to get multiple kills. Now the speed may be due to the amount of weight they are carrying but the speed is exactly the same in WW2 where the in very little weight factor.
 
PERCEIVED SOLUTION: What I rather see, is they move in pairs and individuals, with a more open gap between the soldiers, this way they all do not get slaughter like sheep. This could be an extra command like sprint, to get across streets, without loosing a whole 4 man team, because they are all snails without a care when moving.
 
-------------------------
 
PERCEIVED ISSUE: Assaulting from a breached corner into a house. To do this you need your 8 man squad to Quick to the breech and then the other team to runs forward into the house, this normal exposed the first team to a hail of fire as the moving into an open area (rubbled wall) which gets them killed then the team racing in like lemming charge in without fire support, goo by 8 man to to a single person with an 8 AK or SMG.
 
PERCEIVED SOLUTION: You can have a number of the team stack on the corner of the wall and support by fire, this has them less exposed, the assault team then breeches.
 
---------------------------
 
PERCEIVED ISSUE: The Breaching team in a house assault get slaughtered come in the front door, The 4 man team act stupidly regardless the distance the team is away from the door, they pile in to there death like lemmings. The enemy just needs to be a single automatic weapon guy to take down a full team. The assault team does not halt its attack, does not toss a grenade in, does not do anything but run and die. I would just like to say I hate every stuid the tac Ai does, but I am giving one example above.
 
PERCEIVED SOLUTION:
The assault team stacks at the door, so we do not have 4 separate entries spread over 10 secs. If the team suspects enemy it toss in a grenade before entry, it enters in the door the first few metres in a rush then halts and frees at the enemy it does not run all the way to the end of the house to turn around and come back to first at the enemy at the front door. It the sweeps as a team through the house and stops an fire as a team at contact.
 
-----------------------------
 
PERCEIVED ISSUE: Move and then in contact. I prefer to use move sometimes instead of hunt cause I find hunt they stopping all the time on non valid threats that not firing at them, but using move in woods is a pain. If they get ambushed in the wood, the player continues to run and get slaughtered even if it running into the fire.
 
PERCEIVED SOLUTION: If the fire is come from the front, then the move is cancelled and the TAC AI stops and returns fire, before they have to lose a man in the process and start cowering.
 
----------------------------
 
PERCEIVED ISSUES: Cowering, I understand cowering makes sense, but I see cowering out in the open, I seen a whole team cower in the woods, and continually get suppress and eventually killed cause they will not even attempt to return fire. This frustrates me more then anything.
 
PERCEIVED SOLUTION: Blind firing, not to hit the enemy but to suppress back to gain a little morale back, throwing grenades, throwing smoke if they have them. crawling away out of range. I rather this then see each individual solider die one after the other cause they will not do anything but cower.
 
 
---------------------------
 
PERCEIVED ISSUES: Hunt in single file, move in single file. All movement is is single file. This allows  for longer time to get set for contact and normally means all you guys end up cowering and picked off one by one.
 
PERCEIVED SOLUTION: Hunt when moving through woods should be in arrowhead or line formation, this would allow return fire on contact, right now it contact and then cower cause they need to run forward and the firing at the pint guy suppresses the rear guys, the time that my guys normally do better is when i am shot from the side, which they happen to be in a line formation.
 
--------------------------
 
 
 
 
 
There is many more bugbears I have of the Infantry TAC AI, but these are my major ones, and the reason I find this game frustrating. I know there is certain things I could be doing better and I am sure a lot of people will come to the defence I the TAC AI . I am not saying it is super bad, just these things could be improved on. Right now infantry without a huge amount of micro management on building assaults or any assault in general take what I would consider unnecessary losses due to it stupidity, where a normal human would do something different. I would love to see BF spend so more time on this front, rather then more vehicles etc. 

You guys better completely avoid CMBN, FI, and RT because your delicate sensibilities will completely shattered if you ever play those games. I always get a kick out of the self-righteous manufactured outrage that flows like water nowadays. People live their lives just praying something will pop up and offend them.
 
 
Mord.

The other possibility is they reclassify the F-35 as the A-10, the A-10 as the F-117, and just hope no one actually looks at the planes they're sending to the scrapyard/that the A-10 now costs about as much as it would to simply just buy Russia whole and avoid the war nonsense.  

This is someone who just used WOT as a training tool with a straight face, and then somehow linked Soviet stuff 1945 to being relevant to Russia 2015.  Think we can discard it pretty out of hand.

It's pretty easy to say that when you aren't faced with the behemoth in actual combat.. I bet that small window would be incredibly hard to target and hit when you are fearing for your life and faced with an actual fire breathing M1A2... and they rarely operate alone.  Heh.. I think there can be no doubt about the supremacy of the M1A2 SEP v2 on the battlefield, virtual in CM or real.. I would take it comfortably against any other potential opposing force tank in existence.

U S A
U S A
U S A

Bil,
 
I wasn't sure in what formation or configuration the Americans would arrive in, but this one looks like fully deployed in battle array. Combat power writ large. On the positive side, it gives your remaining airpower lots of targets!
 
antaress73,
 
Methinks you misunderstand the nature of warfare. Numerical force superiority certainly helps, as does high tech (when it's working) but is no guarantor of success. The NTC is one of the major reasons the Army cleaned Saddam's clock, and the lessons learned there by the rotating units at the hands of OPFOR were brutal and taken to heart, as seen in the linked CGSC study of lessons learned at NTC. With perhaps the odd exception here and there, the key to American combat effectiveness lies in rigorous ongoing training using everything from a battle plan scratched in the sand with a stick to full-on engagements with MILES gear and live fire training on a simply enviable scale. But ultimately, it comes down to the men (and in some branches women) who must fight the fight. It is upon their professionalism, motivation and sheer aggressiveness, determination and willingness to do what it takes that determines who wins and who loses. It isn't, as they say, the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.
 
Give me such people in inferior equipment over conscripts and some contract soldiers in better tanks but lacking, say, battle commanders able or allowed to show real initiative, worked up from the bottom professional noncoms (not someone who spent six months in a sergeant academy) and the military and  technical skills to maximize combat effectiveness, not to mention keep their fancy toys running properly, and the nominally outclassed and outgunned will mop the floor with them. History is replete with examples of smaller, sometimes tiny (see particularly BG Claire Chennault's comment on that at first link) military forces clobbering the opposition. Flying Tigers. Alexander the Great at Gaugamela. Napoleon at Jena-Auerstedt. Here's a fascinating list of ten more.
 
Rinaldi,
 
Insane, but in a good way! Big Monty Python fan.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler

“Damn, this fricking jamming! – Outlaw 16, this is Power 6, over…”  LTC Shawn Falkner swore again in frustration over the whine of the M1A2SEPv3’s hydraulics, as he tried to reach his scout platoon leader on the Battalion Command Net.  The tank was sweeping forward, rolling smoothly over the broken terrain, its turbine engine whining and the rubber-shod steel tracks clattering on the occasional stone. 
“Three, this is Six, I’ve got nothing.  I can see the smoke plumes just like you can.  I assume they are in trouble, but unless the whole section was wiped out we should be able to reach somebody!”
MAJ Abrams in the Bradley to Falkner’s left responded tersely. 
“Roger.  I’ve got a smoke column to my front.  ****, it’s a HMMWV…”
Falkner keyed his mike: “Staff Victors, break for cover!” warning the lighter HMMWVs accompanying his command group to seek safety.
“Identify Tank!” his gunner suddenly screamed, followed an instant later by the loader: “Up!” indicating he had armed the 120mm cannon and was clear of the path of the recoil. 
“Jesus, Fire!”  the Colonel responded, and the smoothbore cannon roared, an instant before the speeding M1 dropped down a small rise.  Falkner just had a glimpse of the T-90 spitted on the sabot tracer, then a bright flash and suddenly spotted target dropped out of sight. 
“Infantry left,” the loader sang out, and Falkner grabbed the joystick for the roof mounted CROWs .50 cal, arming it, swinging it left and laying down a  stuttering lethal fire on the Russian mechanized troops.  The stabilized CROWs was deadly accurate at this short range.  As the Battalion Commander, he had more important things to do, but with communications so limited he had only managed a brief radio call with his company commanders 10 minutes earlier.  Suddenly a crystal clear call came over his headset, “Power Six, Blackknight Six, contact BMPs front, out!” 
Hot damn, at least I can hear CPT Farmer, he thought.  He’s in contact too.  Like an echo, the gunner sang out, “Contact, BMP, front!”
“Gunner, AMP, PC, point,” Falker ordered, directing a new ammunition.  It took a moment as the loader switched out the sabot he had automatically slammed into the breach after the first tank.  “Up!”
“Fire.”
“On the way!” 
A tremendous concussion rocked the tank the instant they fired.  Falkner thought for an instant they had been hit.  Normally, the 120mm cannon’s sound is greatly muffled inside the turret by the loud environment itself, along with the sheer  mass of the tank.  The ‘Cha-changk!’ of the breech cycling and dropping the spent aft-cap from the frangible shell casing to the turret floor is actually louder than the sound of the shot.  But not this time. 
“Crap! That thing frickin’ predetonated!  What…”
“Tree!” the gunner said. 
“I think we fragged the FSO!”  Falkner looked in horror at the up-armored HMMWV which had been leading their little gaggle.  He saw one of the armored windows was gone – blown inwards by the shock of the detonating round. 
“Up!”  the loader’s cry jerked him back to the fight, as the young PFC slammed another AMP into the cannon, and shoved himself into the corner of the turret, away from the heavy breech’s recoil. 
“Re-lase, to make sure, and check the GAS.” Falkner said into his mike, directing the gunner to double check the range and to ensure a clear gun-target path through the gunner’s auxiliary sight.  The GAS is essentially a rifle-scope, a simple telescopic sight fixed to the side of the cannon.  Since the main sights on the Abrams are offset above and to the right of the cannon, the GAS is used if there is any doubt to ensure the cannon is clear of obstructions (like the lips of berms or walls) and to check for a clear gun-target line.
“I got him,” the gunner responded.
“Do it.”
“On the way.”
“Cha-changk!”
 
http://youtu.be/6UHECovVSkA
 
Not done with the turn yet, but figured I owed you all a taste.  Power 6 rolls onto the map this turn.  The Russians are caught too far forward and too exposed.  More to follow, as the Battalion breaks out into the open and loses the hindrance of the jamming that has plagued them during their approach to the battlefield.  Apologize for trimming the trees in the vid, but it was the only way to glimpse the action.  The thermals see right through them, but we don't have a 'thermal image' option in CM yet.        

pnzrldr , I think you need to just hit the surrender button, your not going to catch up.

Don't worry. Someone is working on a Forum Mod as we speak.

Amen to that!