ng cavscout

M-48's in overwatch, US campaign 1979 scenario 1.
 

Some very good advice here, thanks @chuckdyke!
It really helps me understand how the C2 system works 

the French 1st and 5th Armored Divisions were stationed on the German side of the border at Oberhofen and Trier. It's easy to come up with a scenario where France for various reasons refuses to participate, but the "standard" Fulda Gap scenario generally assumes the French would be fighting in Germany.
I voted for the two Germanies. While I prefer Britain personally, it just makes more sense to do Germany first for a war fought in Germany. Also the NVA should be easy to do since nearly all the assets are already there. And you already have German voice acting from a wide range of titles.
edit: it should also be fairly simple to do Poland and Czechoslovakia, whose units would have been included in the follow-on forces behind GSFG and CGF. 

Welcome to the world of Combat Mission testing my friend.    
I often replay an event from different angles and conduct multiple re-tests.  Sometimes I find the cause of an incident is different than I originally thought.  I generally save every turn when testing so I can refer back to it and share it to get the opinions of other testers. 
The important thing is you are testing and contributing to the forum.  Thank you.  +1 to your original post which has useful information. 
It seems you are interested in engineers and how they work.  Below are some of my notes on Engineers you might find useful:
 
Engineers can Mark Mines in the same action spot as the mines or from an adjacent action spot. 
Engineers can Mark a friendly minefield.
If engineers Mark Mines from an adjacent action spot they will crawl into the mine A/S when mine marking is completed.
The more eyes in an engineer team the easier to spot mines.  (5 man team finds mines easier than a 2 man team)
Regular engineers, that are not suppressed, can mark one minefield action spot in 3-4 minutes.
Engineers can most reliably and safely locate unidentified minefields using the Slow command.  
Marking a minefield substantially reduces the chance of triggering a mine for infantry traversing the minefield.
Antitank minefields can be marked but there is no effect. Infantry can traverse them without risk and vehicles don't benefit from marking.
Friendly mines will destroy friendly troops and vehicles. 
Mines cannot be placed on bridges.  They can go in the river bottom under the bridge but have no effect on bridge traffic.
AT and AP mines can be placed in deep water/deep ford/shallow ford and will detonate when a vehicle or infantry pass through the A/S.
US Breach teams contain engineers and can also mark minefields.  
Minefields can be neutralized by heavy artillery (150mm+), if it scores a direct hit.
Minefields can be neutralized by a blast from a demo charge if there is a blastable obstacle (wire) in the action spot.
Anti-personnel mines have a cumulative effect on vehicle mobility. ie: Number of Action Spots a vehicle can generally cross in an AP
    Minefield before immobilization: Armor= 2 A/S, light Armor= 1 A/S, Transport= Destroyed.
Red sign with a skull and crossbones = Active non-marked minefield.
Off white sign (yellow in CMBS) with a skull and crossbones = A marked minefield. 
Green sign with a white X = Neutralized minefield (all mines detonated)
Demo charges can be used to breach floors/ceilings but is impractical.  There is always a passage (staircase) between floors so it is
    unnecessary to create a passage.  OpFor can shoot through floors at the breach team.   
Try never to have a Blast order that incorporates "natural" troop holes. (If you blast a vehicle size hole in bocage, that includes a
     pre-existing natural troop hole, your vehicles may still not be able to traverse it.)
When using demos outside you may use Face command with Blast waypoints.  (Face command inside is not reliable)  
To use demos inside locate Blast waypoint on other side of wall. Including exterior above ground level walls. 
Engineer squads need to be split into teams or they will use multiple demo charges for a single breach. Test040517
In CMBS Breach kits (carried by non-engineers) can only be used to breach walls/buildings but not used against vehicles or barbwire. 
Engineer teams that are not suppressed have the following Blast times: Regular 15sec, Veteran 10sec, Conscript 37sec.
Engineer teams can shoot while executing a Blast order. The time to Blast is not effected. Test040617 
Non-engineer teams, with demo charges, don’t follow the standard engineer time limits for blasting.           
  

First impression is that it feels just right like a upgrade to a full military simulator............... If that makes sense, all tactics seem to be executed somewhat differently than previously. 

Typical - you send an important email and people only read the first line ...

OK!  Now my hopes are really up.  Have you guys seen Elvis' last posting on the Grogheads Forum website?
On 12 April "Zulu1966" posted:
If cold war makes an April release i shall eat my hat and several other peoples as well.
Today, Elvis posted:
Ya might want to start looking for the tastiest hat you can find. Just sayin. 
Hope that is not a teasing statement.  As an optimist I have cleared all social events from the calendar for this Saturday night in anticipation.

That is great loss to the gaming community.

The US Army by the book maximum effective range of the M16A1 and A2 is 460 Meters. In reality when we went to the range, the farthest pop up silhouette was at 300 Meters. In Desert Storm I fired my M16A2 at max 150 Meters. In my 2 tours during Iraqi Freedom I fired my M4 100- 150 Meters max. However both of those were very different from what war in the Fulda Gap would be like. 

Are you sure you didn't mix up your units of measure here? I am pretty certain they are 100 yards, 300 feet, 91.5 meters long.
But I might be wrong as we play real football up here, on a field 110 yards or 101 meters in length with CFL rules, Go Bombers Go!

It's more to do with the shorter barrel. Firing effectively at more than 300 meters in reality with a 5.56 mm carbine is not easy. 

When it's done.
 

But why do you want such precision, unless for competitive-tournament type play (when your opponent would have the exact same advantage). Different strokes for different folks, I guess. When I’m out walking in the countryside/woods/whatever, I don’t know if I have LOS to that house over there from that little hump of an elevation with some trees on it 75 yards to my left. From here it looks like it does, but I won’t know until I get over there. Same for my pixeltruppen. I can recon with my eyes, the targeting tool, and with my P-truppen, but I don’t expect to know with precision ahead of time if when I get to a spot I actually have LOS or LOF.

Makes me feel old

The entire soundtrack from Deutschland 83 sets the mood.
 
 

BFC posters sometimes remind me of Star Wars fans grilling actors at Comi-con over details of arcane Star Wars lore. Not only are they outraged that the poor actors don't know what they're talking about, the super-fans disagree amongst themselves about what the correct answer should be.

People may have the notion that BFC finishes a project then sits on it for a month or two while doing paperwork before release. No no no! 
Well... actually... for me Cold War is the closest that I've come to that. The art's all happily put to bed so I've been placidly sitting here watching everyone else run around like a proverbial one-armed paper hanger. Work, boys, WORK! 

Makes me feel old

Makes me feel old

Another good guess would be that the lads at BFC opted not to spend time endlessly modeling bunches of gun tractors that were:
1) Almost completely outside the scope of the tactical, sharp end of the stick frame of reference of CMBB
2) Almost never going to be purchased by players as a useless waste of points given the tactical nature of the game
3) Would, in any case, simply end up as so much burnt out, abandoned equipment in any given battle

Ask yourself this: When was the last time you seriously concerned yourself with spending 100 or so points making sure that the correct gun tractors were being used to move artillery pieces in a 30-60 minute battle in which you never actually had the time or luxury of moving artillery pieces around?

It boils down to whether people are playing an historical sim tonka truck documentary, or fighting a battle.

I can think of a few games in which I had to load up some Artillery and move, or rather, 'attempt' to move it. In no case can I think of how that job would have been made more 'personally significant' if it was carried out by a gun tractor, as opposed to a 'truck', or even a twenty-mule team.

Quite often the result was an abandoned gun, a burning 'transport' unit, and a certain amount of bad language over the failure to move my gun assets to a more 'advantageous' position.

Now, I can imagine that there are certain situations, and perhaps even certain advantages to be gained, by using one of the many, many fabulous gun tractors that the Soviets doubtless produced in an unending stream during the War.

But, in general, it simply doesn't mean a bloody thing within the scope, timeframe, and intended purpose of the game.

That shouldn't stop anyone from dancing around shouting 'Oh My God! The Russian Gun Tractors normally used kilometers away from the action to move field pieces seldom found on the immediate battlefield outside the time-frame of a normal fire-fight are not modeled in the game!' BFC fix, or face the wrath of Soviet Tractor Enthusiasts Everywhere!

What is this, a wargame, or a Monster Truck Rally?

Part of the Marine Corps Hymn is "From the snows of far off northern lands, to the sunny tropic scenes, you will find us always on the job, the United States Marines." Yes, you're all correct about Norway. I went there from Wichita, KS with my Marine Reserve Battalion on a NATO exercise (Operation Teamwork) in September 1976. We were told that it was the first time Marine Reserves were in an exercise outside the U.S., and at the time, it was the largest NATO exercise ever held. We operated north of Trondhiem, about 200 miles south of the Artic Circle. Our Allies were Norwegian Light Infantry, and the Aggressors were British SAS. I think the whole thing was on a hair-trigger as the Soviets massed troops on their northern border with Norway, and we had our ammunition ships sitting just off the coast from us to supply us at a moment's notice. I must admit that I was not impressed with the Marine planning staff that supposedly prepared our participation. Just before we left the states, we were issued Poplin Jungle Utilities that the U.S. troops had worn in Viet Nam. The advanced party to set up our base at Oerland was sent without the proper "colder weather" clothing or galoshes. Some ended up with trench foot so bad that toes had to be amputated, and about a dozen cases of double-pneumonia so bad they had to be medivac. We went from being used to 30C temps in Kansas and Missouri to 10-15C temps in Norway in jungle camos. Flying home, our Company was so ill that one of the flight attendants asked me if the men were really Marines because no one had made a pass at her. I explained that we had just been through a tough exercise and were all sick.
The bright spot was that the Norwegian public treated us fantastic (something we weren't used to just three years after the war ended in Viet Nam}, and they were astonished that we were in the reserves because we wanted to be, not because we had to be. They constantly expressed gratitude that we were there, in there words "to protect them when we didn't have to be." I still have a warm spot in my heart for the Norwegian people.

Oh Connie...

Probably this one?

 

I doubt it - I haven't finished my two scenarios for it.