BlackMoria

Compared to the sediment expressed so far, I find they work quite well in the scenario 'First Clash'. The US forces get a Raven and a Grey Eagle. I positioned the Grey Eagle on maximum area coverage over a village with a number of unknown contacts and the Raven on linear search over a treeline just before one of my objectives. In the space of 10 minutes, the Grey Eagle has spotted 3 T-90 tanks (some of them in the treeline) and 5 BMP-3 and a AA vehicle buried in hedges and beside buildings. In the same amount of time, the Raven spotted 3 BMP-3s in the treeline near the objective. Not all the contacts came up immediately but as the 10 minutes ran, the contacts developed over time. All vehicles were stationary and I confirmed the only spotter of the vehicles was the observers running the UAV missions. So, they do work. What I suspect might be the case is people are not allowing enough time for contacts to develop. For the Raven in the case I outlined above, it took about 4-5 minutes for the first contact to show (stationary BMPs in a treeline) but by the end of ten minutes, I had three BMP contacts.

I wouldn't say you play too much Battlefield. It is just the the representation of vehicles and support weapons in Battlefield isn't based on reality except superficially.

I may get around to play this at some point, but I started it and looked the the narrow strip of land the enemy has and thought - Oh no, another one of the scenarios where the world end a few hundred beyond my deployment area. Then I looked that the forces I had to defend this large piece of real estate and deemed them inadequate. I looked at the ammo level and thought - Oh my god, I have to resupply in the middle of a battle. So I complained to my higher headquarters. I requested to defend forward of the bridges. Denied. I requested an immediate resupply prior to the enemy's arrival. Denied. I requested more troops to defend this area. Even a single M1. Denied I requested another FAC. Denied Then I sat for moment and considered if this would be even fun to play. Given my whimsy at the moment, my brain said 'No'. The I did what I considered the only winning move. I hit 'Exit' and then put Pink Floyd's 'When the Tigers Broke Free' on the stereo. Seriously, I might give this one a go at some point but when I looked at the map and rechecked the briefing, I thought this is one scenario I am not in the mood to play today.

I rarely lose but when I do lose, I am thankful it is not real life. I consider the facts leading to the loss, and then in the finest 'Have at thee, Varlet!' attitude, I play the same scenario again.

I liked this one as well. I scooted one Javelin team down the treeline on the far left, another team down the treeline on the river and another with the command squad on the far right (the risky approach as it is all open terrain). The command element and Javelin team on the far right ran into a patrol and had to withdraw, with one man wounded but the enemy squad was eliminated. The middle element managed to make it to position and with security being provide by the in-place scouts, managed to take out two of the AA vehicles, and then both teams withdrew. By the time middle and right groups returned to the extraction point, the far left group had worked their way along the left map edge and the top edge. They ran into a patrol but quickly won the fire fight, sighted the last vehicle and destroyed it, then booked it for the trees back along the route they took. By this time, they were tired so I opted to walk them back. That is when a BTR showed up and slowly worked it way down to the extraction point, parallel to the squad trying to make it back to the extraction. The rest of squads decided to clear out and withdrew. The walking squad made it out no problem but it was nerve wracking occasionally getting a glimpse of the BTR keeping pace a mere couple of hundred metres away, know that if they got spotted, the 30mm/100mm would make short work of them. Full extraction and one wounded, all three AA vehicles destroyed. I would have tried to bag the BTR but there was no missiles left.

This scenario I have played three times as the Ukrainians, doing three different defense plans. Two of scenarios ended in brutal street fighting and close quarter battles. One plan was the fall back to the victory zones in the city, repeatedly ambushing the Russian forces in street to street fighting. That one turned out fairly well in the end with solid victory but the casualties were high (but acceptable in regards to victory conditions) for the Ukrainians. Next, I tried a 'Hold the Line' type of defence. It went well until the second wave showed up and then I got slammed as the mass firepower of the second way decimate the defenders and the Russians pulled off a win. The third try turned out super sweet. Basic premise of that defense was mobile anti armor teams pushed out from the city and in essence, continually ambushed the Russian armor in the hedgerows and trees.. That resulted in a Total Victory and surprisingly minimal casualties for me. It worked very well, keeping the Russians out of the town (though Russian infantry did make it up to the edge of town) This is an outstanding scenario for learning and perfecting defensive tactics and force placement. The map is generous enough in size to allow pretty much any defensive plan to be attempted. The terrain will be a curse to you for long fields of fire, making this for the most part, a close to medium range fight, Try as I might with different layouts, it is nearly impossible for long range ATGMs shots due to the wooded windbreak lines of trees and the rolling nature of the ground. The older ATGMs of the Ukrainians are adequate when vehicles are in the open but very nearly miss every time when shot through even a thin row of trees, making most ATGM shot 500 metres of less the norm for this scenario. That said, with small anti-armor teams (RPG-7s) using the terrain to max advantage, one can make the terrain a nightmare for the Russians to push through. I will avoid spoilers but will offer up one very significant piece of advice - Target arcs are your very best friend for this scenario to control your fire and set the engagement ranges when it benefits you. The Russians are not a overwhelming force but the sheer firepower they have will result in them tearing your forces to pieces at range if your forces engage haphazardly. Finally, a big shout out to Pete Wenman (the designer) for this wonderful scenario. It is everything a great defensive scenario has to rivet someone like me to play again and again. It is such a nail biter that 55 minutes seems like an eternity when the Russians bring their firepower to bear on you. But it is possible to win and win big if your defensive chops are up to the job.

Real Time, Elite

Real Time for me. The only time I play WEGO is playing someone multiplayer. While I do miss the ability to play back a minute of combat from a variety of angles, I find one minute turns allows too much to happen that control is in the hands of the AI and while the AI is good, it can't handle all situations. I remember well one game where a squad of infantry ran blindly into the area of artillery airburst. The rounds started falling at about 10 seconds into the turn and I could do nothing but silently rage for the next 50 seconds while the pixeltruppen faithfully held to their orders and quick timed into the airburst and took a moment to rest and survey in it because it happened to be one of the waypoints. With real time, I could immediately react and keep the squad out of the area by vectoring them to safety.

That was a fun one for sure. I fared better. Only 4 KIA and 1 Wounded and stopped the Russians cold in their tracks. I anticipated the likely approach and weighted the defense to counter that approach. My assumption was correct and the enemy forces paid heavily for it. Definitely worth another play through or two.

I loved it to. The command squad really distinguished themselves with the amazing way they ran like madmen, jumping and dodging the rain of grenades and arty fire. That's the way to draw fire boys, and let the enemy reveal themselves. They get a guest slot on Dancing With The Stars after that performance. Victory and no casualties.

Way cool, MikeyD! Thanks.

That second posted documentary by Gwynne Dyer - A Profession of Arms has footage of me in it. I was doing my artillery officer training in CFB Gagetown and we were told a CBC crew shooting a documentary would be shooting some footage of us doing our training and other activities. Obviously, a lot of that footage was left on the cutting room floor but when A Profession of Arms came out, I watched for myself and I am in the footage of the Regimental mess dinner at the end during the credits. Unfortunately, the YouTube version above cuts off just as the credits start, so, so much for my 15 minutes of fame on these boards.

Wonderful to hear.

Trembling with anticipation!

Or just have him look at the latest stream from ChrisND, particularly the Black Sea Training campaign, where Chris explains the interface and how to play the game and then shows a actual introduction battle where everything learned is used. I don't know if that particular stream is up on Youtube yet, but if not, it should be in the next few days.

Finished up tonight. Total victory. My losses were zero. As I posted earlier, extracted the consulate without losses by doing a breech cover by vehicle and infantry smoke. Ran into the insurgents bum rushing the consulate and crushed them in my kill zones. Mad white knuckle driving through the city. I must of picked a good route as I ran into only two groups of infantry and two technicals. Got near the extraction point, took to the buildings just outside the zone and kicked the snot out of the insurgents in the extraction. Nice fun scenario and I am certain that if I did stuff differently, it would have played quite different, so I expect some replayability due to the different ways one can attempt to do the extraction and the multitude of different routes to the extraction zone. I don't know if there is more than one AI plan but if so, that makes this scenario even better. As I said, good fun scenario. Plays quick as the force size is manageable and the map not too small or too large. Plot short movement legs as I found the due to the density of the urban terrain, the pathfinding for longer legs can get your forces moving into areas you don't wish, particularly the vehicles. Also, two thumbs up for the subject matter - actually withdrawing nearly a dozen non-combatant consulate personnel represented by single person icons. Makes timing and covered movement during the exfil out of the consulate problematic, as it should be. Make the actual evacuation a nail biter.

For your amusement, I will relate this story from my peacekeeping tour in Bosnia in '93. It is funny (after the fact for me) but has a lesson in it. I was doing OP duty and had around 10 soldiers under my command. Our group was in a heavily sandbagged structure on a hilltop. It was just the crack of dawn and the night shift was going to ground to catch some sleep while the soldiers just waking up were going on shift. One of the soldiers was going to the latrine and only grabbed his weapon instead of also putting on the flak jacket and helmet. Now in '93, the Canadian Forces didn't have modern body armor so we were provided with bulky flak jackets. They were big, heavy and uncomfortable as hell to wear. The rule was, you didn't need to wear it in hardened structures but if you were outside, a helmet (soldiers refered to them as pisspots) and flak jacket was expected to be worn. Soldiers, including myself didn't like the wearing the flak jacket. Back to my story. So I look out the vision slit of the bunker and see this soldier heading for the latrine with just his rifle and blue beret. This has happened a few times now and I haven't said anything. Remember me saying there is a lesson here and that is the danger of complacency. One can get too accustomed to the routine and short cuts happen. The soldier come back and I dress him down for not wearing his flak jacket and helmet. As the officer, I must lead by example so I don my flak jacket and helmet as I need to take a wicked dump at the latrine. I head to the latrine, pants down and adopt the squat to push out the aftermath of last night's rations. Just then a mortar round impacts about a dozen metres behind me. I feel a hard hit in the middle of my back and I know I've been hit. I race for the safety of the bunker with weapon in one hand and trying to pull my trousers up from around my knees. It was quite the athletic event according to the soldiers, as they were amazed that someone can run that fast with their trousers around their knees. So there I am standing just inside the bunker door, my pants now fallen around my ankles but I barely aware of it as I am concerned that I am wounded. Flatly, in a loud voice, I say "That gentlemen, is why we wear our f^%$#* helmets and flak jackets when we go outside this f%$#@ bunker!!" I took about a two inch by half inch fragment into the flak jacket but was otherwise unharmed. Other fragment cut a very shallow channel along the left side of my helmet. Needless to say, for the rest of the tour, flak jackets and helmets where worn without complaint by the soldiers when they went to the latrine.

I was a Canadian peacekeeper, not American and it was the early '90s ('93 for me) when it was 'peacemaking', not 'peacekeeping' as the public envisions it. The late '90s was when it was more traditional peacekeeping. The Serbs and Croatians shot at us or would shell us with mortars. Both groups didn't like us being there, despite agreeing to the accords and articles that all sides have to agree to before the peacekeepers come in. With one exception, (the Medak pocket, where Croatian and Canadian troops actually fought each other), the nature of the shelling or shooting was more of harassment than an attack. Typical pattern was to drop a few mortar rounds on our OPs and then stop, or fire a couple dozen small arms rounds at us and then stop. As I said, more of a harassing fire to see how we react and to test our resolve and attempt to rattle us. That said, it doesn't matter if the shots or shells are harassing or a deliberate attack, when you get a bullet striking something beside your head or a mortar round land a dozen metres from you, it is unsettling and a matter of concern. One of the other officers from my unit took a Russian 14.7mm round through his lower leg as he sat in a vehicle. It took him about 5 months to recover from that injury to the massive shattering and splintering of the bones of the lower leg. It was the mines and booby traps you really had to be alert for. They were everywhere and most of the peacekeeping deaths were caused by these weapons. So when I went on patrols, not only did one have a head on a swivel around you for hostile forces, you had to constantly scan the ground in front of you before you moved your feet. Nerve wracking to say the least.

Being an artillery officer (now nearly 20 years retired), I received some training in shell crater analysis. Firstly, it isn't particularly precise. You can generally get caliber of the weapon, bearing/azimuth of the trajectory, and the sometimes the angle when the shell struck the ground. but unless you known something about what bag charge the round was fired at, you are not going to get any precision on location other than somewhere along the bearing and maybe within a 500 metres plus or minus. Fragments of the shell can tell caliber and perhaps manufacturer but only if you can recover enough fragments for that analysis. The real problem is we are not talking clean fixed lines of contact between forces. If the shell analysis indicated the rounds came from very near a town and that town is being contested, you can't tell which side fired it. That is generally the situation on the ground in the Donbass - forces in close proximity and roving around. Makes shell crater analysis giving you details only in generalities that probably don't offer much useful intel.

I've been mildly nauseated by battlefield smoke during my service so I suppose someone may react a little more strongly than that. Still, uncontrolled muscle spasms is not something I associate with nausea bought on by inhaling smoke but I am not a medical person so you may be right. Still, during my service, the drill is to mask up if the least bit suspicious. I assume Ukraine soldiers carry gas mask protective gear as a minimum but looking at pictures, maybe they don't as a general practice.

From the OSCE Observer mission site (latest 21 January report) "A Ukrainian soldier in a hospital in government-controlled Konstantinovka (56km north of Donetsk) told the SMM that he was being treated for injuries sustained at the Donetsk airport on 19 January. He said 80 Ukrainian soldiers in total had suffered the same injuries, manifested in uncontrollable muscle spasms, vomiting and difficult breathing. Some, he said, had become unconscious. Eleven of the soldiers had been transferred to a hospital in Dnepropetrovsk, he said." The symptoms look suspiciously like a chemical agent weapon of some sort was used in Donetsk airport, more so when some 80 soldiers get the same symptoms more or less the same time. This, if true, could mean a significant change in the conflict with potential larger ramifications if found to be true. I really hope this is not the case because the ramification of chemical weapons being used potentially can throw all previous political and military assumptions out the door.

Served in the Canadian Armed Forces for 17 years. Started in the artillery as a gunner, then went officer after a few years. Served in 1 Royal Canadian Horse Artillery and 3 Royal Canadian Horse Artillery at various times in my career. Current status is retired, rank of Captain. Memorable moments: Served as a peacekeeper in Bosnia in 1993. Back when it was more 'peacemaking' than 'peacekeeping'. Got lots of stories that I can tell about that experience. As a forward observer, adjusted and fired a 'Fire Mission Division' during one of the few Division exercises the Canadian military did during the 1990s. About 40 tubes of 105mm and 155mm fired some 160 rounds total rounds for one fire mission. I am one of only a few artillery officers who have fired a division fire mission from that time period. I don't think that Canada has done a Division live fire exercise in the last 20 years, near as I can tell, since I took early retirement in 1996. Did a winter exercise for three days of winter warfare training (winter infantry training and living in tents)where the temperature varied between -45 C and -55 C and one of those days, the temperature with windchill was -83 C. Discovered at those temperatures that a book of matches will burn out while floating in a bowl of white gasoline (used as fuel for lanterns and stoves). I remember the one year where I was unlucky enough to go on three winter exercises back to back and literally, except for two weeks, I humped the boonies and lived in a tent from the beginning of January to the end of March (nearly 3 months) on exercises in Alaska, the Northwest Territories (northern Canada) and Manitoba (center of Canada and the coldest of the provinces in winter). I have been mortared by the 1 PPCLI mortar platoon by accident, fired on by an American 155 gun battery by accident, shot at by a German Leopard 1 tank by accident, and bombed (with practice bombs thankfully) by the Canadian Air Force by accident. Yeah, training accidents with live ammuniton do happen and can be deadly serious affairs. Had some pretty close calls in Bosnia but someone was actually trying to kill me in those cases, but such is the case in a war zone. My wife says I got more lives than a cat.

Really? I could say the France, being somewhat nervous and concerned about the unfolding Ukrainian crisis and Russia's possible involvement in said crisis, maybe came to their own conclusions about the ramifications of that deal and needed no US 'convincing', as you seem to claim has happened.

Someone is being blinded by their biases.

Be that as it may, it is one more ball that Putin has to juggle to keep on top of things. Personally, I don't think think he is a good juggler and the balls may start dropping. And it will be the Russian people who will pay when the fumble occurs and the balls fall to the ground. Oh, about politicians and promises - let's just say in the West, politicians make them all the time and the voters get disappointed mostly all the time.