Sergei

No. Or I suppose you could do a scenario specific mod that changes the compass' angle accordingly, but I don't see a point in it - I want the compass to align with the map for practical reasons, it doesn't matter where the 'real' north is when I'm leading my men into the meatgrinder. But that should be the least of your concerns anyway. Note that since you can't adjust the sun's position accordingly, all shadows will be cast the wrong anyway! Everyone's immersions will be destroyed!

I doubt proximity is an issue, Metis' minimum range is 40 meters. Make sure that the missiles don't hit any trees or such? Describe conditions. Strong winds can affect missiles. Also make sure that the ATGMs can see their targets for the entire flight of the missile - even if the target is stationary, a drifting cloud of smoke can momentarily blind the gunner. Statistically sometimes you just get a streak of bad luck, but there probably is a reason for most of those missed shots.

I'm amazed by Russia's confidence in the time table. With Russian economy's downturn and sanctions affecting arms tech trade, like the Mistral deal (eg. T-90's thermal imaging is by Thales, a French company), and how they haven't designed a completely new tank from ground up for decades, I would be surprised if they hit the deadline! I think they will do their best to complete the project unlike T-95 which never left prototype stage, but so far there's not much to be seen. Armata is not even just a new MBT, it's a whole family of AFVs from APCs to SPA. You can bet the General Dynamics CEO is having wet dreams of Pentagon making an order like that! It would be a nice addition to the game, for sure, but first you need to know what the vehicles actually look and behave like...

Blast only works against walls and wires. Against hostile targets they work the same as other grenades or at weapons, they will do it if they are in range on their own. Target can be used but at that range I think it's not necessary.

It says it in the upload screen. 250MB iirc

For AI this can be achieved through AI plans which exit unwanted troops on turn 1. So eg. you could have four platoons, each of which appears per AI plan.

Most ATGMs auto-deploy when they reach their waypoint. In general heavy weapons with little to no pack up times deploy automatically.

I just noticed that the cyrillic text in the rightmost building's windows is backwards. Actually, so does the latin script in the middle building's right side so maybe it's not something that you can change..?

In my experience, Shtora sometimes manages to kill the TOW. Not all the time, but that's what it looks like when an ATGM is jammed by counter measures.

BTR and BMP have firing ports on the sides of the crew compartment. It's a design choice to have passengers first occupy the seats with firing ports before taking the more vulnerable airguard positions.

Yes - I can't say for sure that all do, as one scenario might have just one plan while another might have full AI plan slots. Looking in the editor would tell.

You should also play this one H2H, I had a blast playing it with Ian. AI is one thing but a human opponent... the size is also just about optimal for TCP/IP play even for stubborn PBEM fanatics like myself (but of course, PBEM is always the best...).

What a strange request... myself, I play scenarios in a pretty much random order, picking tiny scenarios if I want something quick, tank scenarios if I want to see things burn, preserving scenarios with good PBEM potential for that etc. But hey, I'm not judging. Here's a list for you, anyway, took only a few minutes to check the scenario dates in the editor. Morning Coffee - 0530 1 June Ambush - 0900 4 June Gagarina Ave Checkpoint - 0550 7 June Going to Town - 1600 9 June Phase Line Green - 0400 16 June Hold the Line - 0500 16 June Gauntlets Crossed - 1200 16 June The Valley of Death - 1500 17 June Into the Breach - 0645 20 June Crossing the Dnieper campaign - 1530 20 June The Shield of Kiev campaign - 0615 28 June Taskforce 3-69 campaign - 1200 ? July (briefing doesn't give a more exact start date) Dueling Shashkas - 1405 1 July Galloping Horse Downfall - 0550 10 July Platoon House Aleksandra - 0705 10 July First Clash - 0530 14 July Bridgehead at Kharalyk - 0600 15 July Opportunity Knocks - 0110 19 July Rollin' on the River - 0740 20 July Cry Havoc - 0600 3 August Objective Delta - 0505 15 August August Morning - 0705 21 August Brutal - 0920 22 August Interdiction - 1515 30 August

Knock yourselves out! IanL, thanks for the correction, I'll edit my previous post.

pnzrldr, zip and rar file extensions are allowed so the simplest course is to zip 'em. I think it would be a good idea to allow all standard CM file extensions to remove the extra step.

BTR: traditionally you exchange files by e-mail but nowadays a preferred method is to use www.dropbox.com to automatically share files. You install their client and then you and your opponent share a folder that is automatically synced when one submits a new turn. This is made even easier if you install H2H Helper, it automates the moving files from CM PBEM folder to the dropbox folder and tracks whose turn is it anyway, passwords and such. I have attached the scenario below here. Chaos, it's probably simpler if you set it up and just tell BTR what to do to get started. Three Billy Goats Gruff 2.zip

Dawn, dusk and moon phases are modelled according to calendar, so date determines how long the daylight lasts and much moonlight you get in a night battle.

Select a vehicle, activate any movement order and hover cursor above a tile - if the vehicle can enter it, the cursor will remain green. If it can't be entered then the cursor turns red. edit: stop posting before moi, you ruffians!

I have a large or huge H2H scenario that is in the need of testing, Russian breakthrough vs. joint Ukrainian and US forces. The map is 2.7 x 2.1 km^2. On the unit scale it starts as a company vs company or so affair, which I'd rate as medium complexity, and in the end there will probably be a battalion or more on each side. "Probably" because many of the starting units may well be dead or useless by then. I have allotted 3 hours to the battle but it could be over in 2 hours. These are things that need to be learned through a play test. What I need is 2 or 4 players willing to duke it out via PBEM. Or TCP/IP if that's your cup of tea, who am I to judge. I hope you understand that as this hasn't been tested H2H there are no guarantees of a proper balance yet, although I can promise you that both sides will have the tools to knock the other guy's teeth in. It's the timing and other factors that I'm concerned about. Above all I'm interested in your findings after the first hour of fighting. Post any questions and/or your interest in assisting here or PM me!

This is the third thread I've seen lately asking about recon vehicles, so I'm just going to use the same response "All recon vehicles are challenging to use in Combat Mission because they are intended for operational or grand tactical level reconnaissance, ie. to report to brigade HQ if there's enemy forces in an area the size of a CM map and if they are moving, blocking roads or such. After that they're just poorly armed and armoured vehicles with slightly better sensors than usual and should be used accordingly, ie. with special care." If you have a huge map with large unoccupied areas then dedicated recon vehicles with good sensors may be of actual nominal use. But if not, ignore that they are recon vehicles and just consider their combat capabilities. Also be prepared to leave some of the vehicles in a safe place and use the crews for foot recon if it looks like a trap. Another thing is to think that cavalry's first objective is to determine where the enemy isn't, so don't send them headlong against where you suspect they will be but use them to secure flanks and approach avenues. Just sometimes you don't have that luxury...

Seriously though, Chris thought he could ambush a T-90 with a Stryker MGS in one of his streams. It... didn't work out well. Skip to 1h13m for the turn:

You need a tracked vehicle against the T-90. Say, a Gavin!

I have heard this one before. Both mortar calibers predate WW2, let alone NATO! The version I have heard is that they chose 82mm because Germans used 81mm mortars, but I really don't believe in that. Even if you captured your enemy's entire day's production of shells, which is unlikely, those would still not last for long, and they'd be awfully inaccurate and range would be shortened due to being of wrong caliber. So it's nothing to design a weapon caliber on. OTOH if your enemy overran your armies and captured a large number of your mortars, they would be able to fire their shells from the tubes. As happened in WW2 - Axis soldiers found out that they could use captured 82mm mortars against Soviets even if they had no 82mm shells. But due to the aforementioned inaccuracy it was best to use correct munitions or you would be only wasting shells and possibly hitting your own troops. http://www.jaegerplatoon.net/MORTARS5.htm

So you're going to do what James T. Kirk did?

Ground radars should be modelled but you might not notice the difference in practise. Radars can, depending on type, cover HUGE expanses of land - quite useful in the steppe or desert. Since you can't extend the mast though in CM and ranges are generally shorter I don't think it will show you much that you wouldn't catch through thermal sights or plain eye.