George MC

For sure. There are many ways to skin a cat! The vid is aimed at those new to CM so I went for simple - as the method I tend to use is less prone to clusterfukcs  plus keeps the video short! 
 

For 90 degree bends agreed. For curving corners makes no odds - the TacAI adjusts speed accordingly. If moving a lot of units in a convoy doing this will take forever. My approach enables the player to moves lots of stuff with min. effort. Its also simple (like me!) so IMO works well for thsoe new to CM.
There are LOTS of ways to achieve the desired endstate of a traffic jam free convoy. Usually for a convoy I'm less concerned re speed and more the unit makes it to where I want em to be without creating a clusterfcuk down the road... At heart I'm a lazy bugger
As I tend to play larger actions I tend to less micromanaging and tend to go with stuff that reduces the overall work load and achieves the desired effect.
The great thing is the game accommodates lots of different styles and every player evolves their own style to managing the admin associated with making stuff move and fight from point A to point B.
 

Agreed.  Unless it is a gentle bend in the road, it helps to make two waypoints at every turn.  Three if moving FAST.

I never place waypoints directly on road corners, only before and after them. 
IMO the units drive smoother around corners this way, and dont lose as much speed. 

Convoys and road marches have always been possible in CM.  My main issue is just the number of clicks and the significant care needed in plotting each individual unit.  The pauses really help in limiting bunch ups.

How To Enjoy Hassle Free Convoying in CM. 
https://youtu.be/3Lz97ZDXSWs
The video uses Red Thunder but techniques shown apply equally to all the CM games. 

How To Enjoy Hassle Free Convoying in CM. 
https://youtu.be/3Lz97ZDXSWs
The video uses Red Thunder but techniques shown apply equally to all the CM games. 

As mentioned earlier, in addition to pauses one can also give each successive vehicle a different movement speed (until the initial waypoint).  That will enable a more subtle separation than the 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45 second pauses that are available.  Also, as roads can usually accommodate two vehicles side by side, you can stagger the vehicles along a road, one on each side of the road with maybe a 10 meter separation. This works well when one has a large number of vehicles on the road, not just the 4 in the video.

I think that is correct for the commander's sight. The gunner's daylight sight on the T-64B is the 1g42. It's magnification and field of view are variable from 3.9x/20° to 9x/8.5°. By comparison the TZF 9 gunner's sight on the Tiger is 2.5x/25° and 5x/14°, so the T-64 has stronger magnification at the cost of a narrower field of view. Which of these would be better at spotting a machine gun team 450 meters away is anyone's guess. If we were talking about nighttime spotting or first shot accuracy the T-64 should be much better but I don't know that there would be a dramatic difference in daytime spotting. I agree with other posters that the OPs test is worthless for demonstrating anything at all.

Not that I’ve seen. Though I made this wee short film 
 

Ah thank you! This is I think is one of these scenarios I enjoyed making the most. Getting the Soviet AI plan to provide soemthing that resembled a Soviet echeloned attack took some fettling. Though I think the scenario is harder for the Soviets than it was in real life!
Yeah the noise of battle when i took this for its first tests was impressive! But artillery was a feature in this action and was remarked upon by all the eye witness accounts i referenced. Yeah the aircraft add another sound dimension and again were soemthing remarked upon by witnesses.
The Soviets were really understrength at this point especially the armoured units - so you pretty much have the whole of 8th Guards Tank Corps on the map by the end. Sounds impressive but they'd not many tanks left by then. I only had the first infantry from 76th Guard Rifle div from the first few echelons mainly cos the game would have choked and I ran out of AI slots! I am pleased that the sense of being attacked by waves works though as again that's how it felt to the German defenders.
In the actual action Fluegal's group ended up being pinned in the woods on the German right flank whilst Soviet infantry advanced past them. They ended up sitting doggo fending off some Soviet infantry close assaults till they could pull out during the night (this is covered in the Panzergruppe Flugel scenario - though the map used in that one is representative).
Anyways thanks for taking this for spin its a large scenario but good to hear it delivers the experience I was after!
Many thanks.
Tioraidh!

Oh, that's interesting, thanks for checking and filing the bug report!

This is the Twitch playthrough of the first scenario (Wadi Armour Clash) in the upcoming Slitherine Tourney. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2081184796 Interesting watching how these guys plan what they are doing. 

So just tested in CMRT and you see the same inconsistency. Test btt file attached.
SPW platoon and associated dismounts with exit points allocated (100) for the units to exit; units all R1 in five minutes.
If they arrive on the map (after 5 minutes) and exit - German player scores no points, neither does the soviet = as expected as player exiting units denies points for the enemy who have not killed them.
If they arrive on the map (after 5 minutes) and do not exit  - German player scores no points, enemy scores 100 points = as expected as units that do not exit and set as 'destroy' objectives will count as destroyed for scoring.
If the German player ceasefire before the units arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 59 points (!)
Remove the destroy objective from the SPW and keep points the same (100). So now only the dismounts count as a 'destroy' objective.
If the German player ceasefire before the dismounts arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 100 points - as expected.
Revive the SPW but remove the dismounts as a destroy objective - so effectively only the SPW count as 'destroy' objectives.
If the German player ceasefire before the SPW arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 23 points.
So different numbers but similar effects noticed. Infantry only count as full destroy objective - whether they arrive and fail to exit or game ends before they arrive. But add SPW then the scoring goes a bit out of whack if the game ceasefire before the tracks appear resulting in not full points being awarded. 
However this only becomes an issue if the game is cease fired before reinforcement units which are also a destroy objective in a exit scenario. In exit scenarios cease firing early if one player has units marked as destroy objectives can really muck up scoring. One reason I tend to make this clear within the briefing. Don't do it kids! 
FYI I've filed a bug report with BFC re this issue.
EXIT TEST_V1.btt

So just tested in CMRT and you see the same inconsistency. Test btt file attached.
SPW platoon and associated dismounts with exit points allocated (100) for the units to exit; units all R1 in five minutes.
If they arrive on the map (after 5 minutes) and exit - German player scores no points, neither does the soviet = as expected as player exiting units denies points for the enemy who have not killed them.
If they arrive on the map (after 5 minutes) and do not exit  - German player scores no points, enemy scores 100 points = as expected as units that do not exit and set as 'destroy' objectives will count as destroyed for scoring.
If the German player ceasefire before the units arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 59 points (!)
Remove the destroy objective from the SPW and keep points the same (100). So now only the dismounts count as a 'destroy' objective.
If the German player ceasefire before the dismounts arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 100 points - as expected.
Revive the SPW but remove the dismounts as a destroy objective - so effectively only the SPW count as 'destroy' objectives.
If the German player ceasefire before the SPW arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 23 points.
So different numbers but similar effects noticed. Infantry only count as full destroy objective - whether they arrive and fail to exit or game ends before they arrive. But add SPW then the scoring goes a bit out of whack if the game ceasefire before the tracks appear resulting in not full points being awarded. 
However this only becomes an issue if the game is cease fired before reinforcement units which are also a destroy objective in a exit scenario. In exit scenarios cease firing early if one player has units marked as destroy objectives can really muck up scoring. One reason I tend to make this clear within the briefing. Don't do it kids! 
FYI I've filed a bug report with BFC re this issue.
EXIT TEST_V1.btt

This is the Twitch playthrough of the first scenario (Wadi Armour Clash) in the upcoming Slitherine Tourney. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2081184796 Interesting watching how these guys plan what they are doing. 

So just tested in CMRT and you see the same inconsistency. Test btt file attached.
SPW platoon and associated dismounts with exit points allocated (100) for the units to exit; units all R1 in five minutes.
If they arrive on the map (after 5 minutes) and exit - German player scores no points, neither does the soviet = as expected as player exiting units denies points for the enemy who have not killed them.
If they arrive on the map (after 5 minutes) and do not exit  - German player scores no points, enemy scores 100 points = as expected as units that do not exit and set as 'destroy' objectives will count as destroyed for scoring.
If the German player ceasefire before the units arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 59 points (!)
Remove the destroy objective from the SPW and keep points the same (100). So now only the dismounts count as a 'destroy' objective.
If the German player ceasefire before the dismounts arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 100 points - as expected.
Revive the SPW but remove the dismounts as a destroy objective - so effectively only the SPW count as 'destroy' objectives.
If the German player ceasefire before the SPW arrive on the map - German player scores no points whilst Soviet player scores 23 points.
So different numbers but similar effects noticed. Infantry only count as full destroy objective - whether they arrive and fail to exit or game ends before they arrive. But add SPW then the scoring goes a bit out of whack if the game ceasefire before the tracks appear resulting in not full points being awarded. 
However this only becomes an issue if the game is cease fired before reinforcement units which are also a destroy objective in a exit scenario. In exit scenarios cease firing early if one player has units marked as destroy objectives can really muck up scoring. One reason I tend to make this clear within the briefing. Don't do it kids! 
FYI I've filed a bug report with BFC re this issue.
EXIT TEST_V1.btt

Ah nice one  it’s a handy wee AI plan device for sure. I’ve also used it for having the turrets of advancing tanks swing about as though searching. Just plot the area fire point out of their LOF. They’ll swing the turrets to face the plotted area fire point but not fire. 

But otherwise I tend to use it is mainly for effect as you have to make an educated guess where the player might be defending. Latest etc can make this more educated and less guess though!
 
So in this case I’m glad it gave the impression of engaging a more sentient enemy! Immersion is what I’m shooting for!

This is the Twitch playthrough of the first scenario (Wadi Armour Clash) in the upcoming Slitherine Tourney. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2081184796 Interesting watching how these guys plan what they are doing. 

Thy can be useful doing things like tending to wounded soldiers/ammo scavenging, replacing a wiped-out higher HQ, or any other duties like relaying spotting information from squads/teams and higher HQ (like a "runner"). That last use is helpful for calling in artillery, when the radio unit doesn't have LoS and you don't want to risk them in an exposed position. Security uses also are another slot you can drop them in, and you could do some extra-self-imposed rules, like moving them near prisoners to simulate moving them to rear-areas, etc.
I'm always checking the visibility icons to see what the "range" is in the UI. The benefits of any HQ will be greatly lessened when out of any given C2 contact range.

Look here:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/tp709x3im6alym9ge11us/h?rlkey=w26ftpv2jsox5f01mu095mzt8&dl=0
exit_points_test.btt is super minimalistic, only blue has units, a single platoon. Remove the M113s and red will get 100 points, leave them in and its only 62 or something similar.
hohkeppel_osm_v2.btt is a complex scenario where red has to exit. You can observe the same effect there.

Ah sorry, shouldn't have hastily made post before getting called to dinner.
I was describing my test setup to understands where the exact VPs come from (why 85 and not 82, for instance). So I did it step by step, I guess that was a little confusing.
Short version: I have all the units as reinforcements. If it is only infantry, the opposing side gets full points because I didn't exit any unit (although they didn't arrive on the map, yet). If the infantry has their APCs with them, the other side gets less points, although I still haven't exited any unit.
Yes, made sure that all units are assigned to the same VP group.

Brilliant!

Ah nice one  it’s a handy wee AI plan device for sure. I’ve also used it for having the turrets of advancing tanks swing about as though searching. Just plot the area fire point out of their LOF. They’ll swing the turrets to face the plotted area fire point but not fire. 

But otherwise I tend to use it is mainly for effect as you have to make an educated guess where the player might be defending. Latest etc can make this more educated and less guess though!
 
So in this case I’m glad it gave the impression of engaging a more sentient enemy! Immersion is what I’m shooting for!

Ah nice one  it’s a handy wee AI plan device for sure. I’ve also used it for having the turrets of advancing tanks swing about as though searching. Just plot the area fire point out of their LOF. They’ll swing the turrets to face the plotted area fire point but not fire. 

But otherwise I tend to use it is mainly for effect as you have to make an educated guess where the player might be defending. Latest etc can make this more educated and less guess though!
 
So in this case I’m glad it gave the impression of engaging a more sentient enemy! Immersion is what I’m shooting for!