MikeyD

Good news for you Dutch armor fans, an improved texture for CV9035 just slipped in under the wire. MUCH better looking than the original CMSF1 texture, and better looking than the texture in the game a week ago.
 

Nobody really know what's going on 'under the hood' in this regard, all we've got is a 'seat-of-the-pants' impression during gameplay. I recall when I first touched CMBN after playing CMSF1 the difference between body armor and no body armor was apparent. WWII soldiers felt practically naked scampering around the battlefield without any protection. Then you have CMBS where both sides are armored-up

Interesting factiod about Leopard C2.
When Canada found themselves in need of additional tanks they went so far as to pull a number of old Leopard 1s from 'gate guardian' duty, basically oversized lawn ornaments. These were Leopard 1A3s whose welded turrets as been replaced by surplus cast German Leopard 1a5 turrets. For Afghanistan duty a small number received a hefty MEXAS armor upgrade performed by the German firm IBD Deisenroth Engineering. So the C2s in the game are not your typical Leopard C2 but the rare bulked-up fancy version.
I didn't realize before now that MEXAS is a German product! I am surprised!

Well, at least they've finally taken down the notice: "New Site coming Soon!"

Playing CMFB awhile ago I noticed something unexpected. An M16 AA halftrack had run itself out of ammo so I moved it back away from the action. When I returned to it awhile later it had .50 cal ammo again. I never got an explanation of what happened. Was the M16 'borrowing' .50 cal from surrounding vehicles? I can't explain it and never saw a plausible explanation for it.

US Army infantry squads in CMBS carry the M4A1 carbine with x4 magnification ACOG sight and a 'full auto' option. In CMSF2 they carry an M4 carbine with x1 magnification sight and no 'full auto', just single shot or 3 round burst. The distinction is subtle but its enough to lower unit effectiveness compared to CMBS. Plus, in CMBS a squad gets a dedicated sharpshooter carrying some serous hardware. In CMSF2 the squad marksman maybe gets assigned an ACOG scope for his M4 if he's lucky.
In CMSF2 the 800 pound gorilla in the game is the Marines. Long-barreled M16A4 with x4 ACOG and full auto capability, full 13 man squad. You can feel the firepower difference playing Marines versus Army.

Playing CMFB awhile ago I noticed something unexpected. An M16 AA halftrack had run itself out of ammo so I moved it back away from the action. When I returned to it awhile later it had .50 cal ammo again. I never got an explanation of what happened. Was the M16 'borrowing' .50 cal from surrounding vehicles? I can't explain it and never saw a plausible explanation for it.

Every scenario has had work done to it. The better scenarios may have been little-altered (because they started out good). The worse (I call them 'first generation') scenarios have been really REALLY changed, to the point where a few of my least favorite older scenarios are now my most favorite! One scenario in particular, the AI orders went from a single group 'assault' command into the map center to now playing with ALL the AI gizmos. Orchestrating unit movements, AI area fire commands, retreat commands, triggers, reworked victory conditions, expanded and updated terrain maps, adding AA assets and fortification items, proper AI orders for both sides, etc. Just because you recognize the name of a CMSF2 scenario doesn't mean you've played it before.

CMSF2 comes with a full up-to-date Quick Battle generator and the number of new high quality maps continue to grow daily. That should take care of any 'new scenario' needs for quite awhile. If you want to play a night battle between Canadian infantry and Syrian airborne or a mountain battle between Syrian mech infantry and uncon rebels the battle is just a couple mouse clicks away. Heck, if you want you can go into the editor and make a huge water map then have your amphib vehicles attack each other like dreadnoughts!
...That last comment inspired me. 5 minutes work and I whipped up a quick 'dreadnaught' island-hopping scenario just for fun.
 

Haw haw! I did my 'Dreadnaught' scenario as a joke but I'm having much too much fun playing it. I think I'll expand the map, increase the force size and turn it into a proper 3rd party scenario for upload. The clincher was when I killed a BTR 'battleship' and it slowly sank beneath the waves and disappeared. That was hilarious. The premise is the forces start out of weapons range so must maneuver to close the gap and hold an advantage, just like in old-timey naval warfare.

I have this same problem playing WWII titles. I select Tigers to play and wind up greatly over-estimating my invulnerability. Which always gets me into trouble. Someone once said that (real world) battlefields look uninhabited. Because everyone is doing their best to be concealed, camouflaged, behind terrain features, generally not get noticed. Because if you get noticed someone's going to clobber you,

Just this week Steve finally added Stinger AA units to the TO&E of various Blue Force armies. CMSF2 Red force has always had SA-16 / SA-18 Igla AA missiles. The Shilka AAA vehicle, which comes with the NATO module, can now (very effectively) target aircraft, as can the ZU-23-2 pickup 'technical', also in the NATO module.

Most battles, even on larger maps, take place at what might be called 'knife fight' ranges. You don't even have to calculate range because the round trajectory's basically flat for the first 1200 meters. I'm not saying this for certain because it happens so rarely, but engagement times above 2300m might take longer, especially against not-moving targets. You can sit there and sit there and slowly [?] icons start popping up and eventually resolve themselves into targets. Its at these longer ranges that having many eyes scouting for trouble (and a strong command link) shows its advantage.

Just this week Steve finally added Stinger AA units to the TO&E of various Blue Force armies. CMSF2 Red force has always had SA-16 / SA-18 Igla AA missiles. The Shilka AAA vehicle, which comes with the NATO module, can now (very effectively) target aircraft, as can the ZU-23-2 pickup 'technical', also in the NATO module.

Every scenario has had work done to it. The better scenarios may have been little-altered (because they started out good). The worse (I call them 'first generation') scenarios have been really REALLY changed, to the point where a few of my least favorite older scenarios are now my most favorite! One scenario in particular, the AI orders went from a single group 'assault' command into the map center to now playing with ALL the AI gizmos. Orchestrating unit movements, AI area fire commands, retreat commands, triggers, reworked victory conditions, expanded and updated terrain maps, adding AA assets and fortification items, proper AI orders for both sides, etc. Just because you recognize the name of a CMSF2 scenario doesn't mean you've played it before.

Every scenario has had work done to it. The better scenarios may have been little-altered (because they started out good). The worse (I call them 'first generation') scenarios have been really REALLY changed, to the point where a few of my least favorite older scenarios are now my most favorite! One scenario in particular, the AI orders went from a single group 'assault' command into the map center to now playing with ALL the AI gizmos. Orchestrating unit movements, AI area fire commands, retreat commands, triggers, reworked victory conditions, expanded and updated terrain maps, adding AA assets and fortification items, proper AI orders for both sides, etc. Just because you recognize the name of a CMSF2 scenario doesn't mean you've played it before.

Every scenario has had work done to it. The better scenarios may have been little-altered (because they started out good). The worse (I call them 'first generation') scenarios have been really REALLY changed, to the point where a few of my least favorite older scenarios are now my most favorite! One scenario in particular, the AI orders went from a single group 'assault' command into the map center to now playing with ALL the AI gizmos. Orchestrating unit movements, AI area fire commands, retreat commands, triggers, reworked victory conditions, expanded and updated terrain maps, adding AA assets and fortification items, proper AI orders for both sides, etc. Just because you recognize the name of a CMSF2 scenario doesn't mean you've played it before.

Every scenario has had work done to it. The better scenarios may have been little-altered (because they started out good). The worse (I call them 'first generation') scenarios have been really REALLY changed, to the point where a few of my least favorite older scenarios are now my most favorite! One scenario in particular, the AI orders went from a single group 'assault' command into the map center to now playing with ALL the AI gizmos. Orchestrating unit movements, AI area fire commands, retreat commands, triggers, reworked victory conditions, expanded and updated terrain maps, adding AA assets and fortification items, proper AI orders for both sides, etc. Just because you recognize the name of a CMSF2 scenario doesn't mean you've played it before.

I had tested out various IEDs under ECM conditions awhile ago and ECM does work. It doesn't work for IED 'mines' or 'wire' IEDs, though,  so you're not entirely out of the woods. ECM, though, is set in QBs up front in the common force select window so both sides know there's going to be jamming. So you're unlikely to find an opponent buying radio IEDs when he knows he's going to be jammed.

I was most looking forward to playing CMSF2 red-on-red battles because 1970s technology Russian tanks are not the überweapons that 21st century tanks are. T55s vs T62s, T62s vs first generation T72s. The battles are less likely to abruptly end after 3 minutes of one-sided carnage. The closest equivalent in CMBS is playing the baseline T64 on the Ukrainian side, which behaves most like a 1970 Cold Warrior.

I was most looking forward to playing CMSF2 red-on-red battles because 1970s technology Russian tanks are not the überweapons that 21st century tanks are. T55s vs T62s, T62s vs first generation T72s. The battles are less likely to abruptly end after 3 minutes of one-sided carnage. The closest equivalent in CMBS is playing the baseline T64 on the Ukrainian side, which behaves most like a 1970 Cold Warrior.

I'm reminded of the old Henny Youngman joke. He went to a doctor and tol him "Doctor, it hurts when I do this." The doctor replied "Don't do that!" Some tactical situations are either going to be very costly or you're going to be very lucky, and rarely anything in between.

That's the advantage of using MOUT infantry in CMSF2. Each infantry squad comes with four demo charges.

CV935 in the game does utilize airburst ammo. I just double-checked it in the full game.  I think it did back in CMSF1 too.  The air bursts are just above ground height so its easy to miss. I didn't pay close attention but it seemed to be 3 round airbursts mixed in with regular HE hits.

After creeping as an anon in the forums for a very long time, this day deserves an actual registering in here to celebrate. Looking forward to playing SF in its new form. Refresh monkey mode can now rest, at least for a little.