IMHO

Don't be discouraged It's just you stumbled upon one particular aspect of the game that is modelled in such a way that requires A LOT of tests In other departments you don't need to test so much to make conclusions.

You'd better describe your test setup in detail. Detection/Identification in CMxx is not so trivial so to confidently say that one unit consistently outperforms the other in this department you'd probably need 50+ or even 100+ experiments if the difference is too small. When you say you used "typical" Russian crew it means you don't control experience/leadership/motivation variables for Russian side. You don't know what values were assigned to the Russian crews. Means the only thing you can do with your results now - throw them in a trash can.

There will be no victory for RUS to claim however it ends up. The grand aim of RUS to sway UKR pro-Western choice is unattainable. And if it ends up with Ze "building a wall" around L/DNR then the latter will be a huge drain on an already weak RUS budget. And the wall around L/DNR is not a loss for UKR. The grand aim of UKR to bring L/DNR back on its terms is unattainable as well. If L/DNR is back then there's no fast track to the West - there need to be a national compromise. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/12/06/ukraine-better-without-donbass-costly-reconstruction-pro-russia-west/ Oversimplified and one-sided to a great extent, IMO, but to the point in many ways.

Have a look if you have time. It's the first so direct a statement in an A-list newspaper saying that Poroshenko is untouchable whatever facts one may dig up. It's a pity since if Ze will not be able to clean up the corruption mess then his popularity will fade away quickly

Mea culpa - I don't follow military developments so closely More interested in economy in general and Military Industrial Complex in particular. Sensing RUS elite sentiments - they're not particulary against UKR civil police keeping order in no man's land, they rather want to avoid UKR forces suddenly overtaking the positions that L/DNR vacated plus they want to have more or less a balance of responsibilities between UKR and L/DNR units. And the last but not the least they want the ceasefire to succeed and that can be achieved only through geniune disengagement. If lots of real combat troops are kept on no man's land (whatever side) then tensions will flare up sooner rather than later irrespective of intention of higher echelones of power. There's no less war fatigue on RUS side than it's in UKR. Seems like disengagement and POW exchange are the only two areas where an agreement is both possible and desirable for everyone. On all other issues the positions are world apart and there's no compromise in sight. Anyway the end of active phase of hostilities will be huge step forward for both sides.

@Haiduk, I recall ORDLO side was very much against National Guard since "terrbats" like Azov were the core of NG. So it seems they decided to go easy in anticipation of the Paris talks. Hope they'll be able to extend disengagement zones to the whole front there. National Guard or National Guard it's significantly quieter in the disengagement zones. And seems disengagement and prisoner swaps are the only outcomes to expect. And what do you think about the yesterday's article in Gazeta Wybozca claiming anti-corruption investigations against Poroshenko's people are launched by Putin?

@Haiduk, in case you know what was the end result of "volunteers patrolling the gray zone" conflict? Guess they're there but it was tacitly decided not to bring up the topic lest it poisons Normandy talks?

I tried to find something about OPs regarding air guards but I wasn't able nothing more than a couple of casual mentions. Yet two things I saw again and again: Air guards are used outside of built-up areas but not in high threat urban environment Air guards when used are armed with M240s, they are not left with mere M4s @MikeyD, @DougPhresh, @Attilaforfun are these points valid?

Somehow I miss the fun IMO Ukrainian approach to tank upgrades - mass modernization of line tanks - gives viable results at a fraction of cost when compared to hundreds of billions spent on a handful of Red Square parade Armatas.

But that's still a bit illogical. RL BRM-3K manning consists of the three-men crew and three-men recce group. So BFC manning schema assigns first two men to the crew and the third man to the recce group. And out of the next three men one compliments the crew and the other two go into recce group. Kind of breaking down each team.

Found out why, the "idle" man of the first three-men team is made a compulsory observer so that observer seat takes precedence over the leader seat.

Stumbled upon a strange irregularity in taking up Ldr seat in BMP-3 and BRM-3K. If one uses a three-men team to man BMP-3 then after some hacking around one can force one of the three men to occupy the TC seat in normal BMP-3 but there's no way to do the same in BRM-3K. One man of the first three-men team will become an idle passenger in BRM-3K and only if one loads another team in BRM-3K then one of men of this other team will take up the TC seat. Very inconvenient - if one wants more battle awareness then one needs to waste another team.

@Thewood1, do you happen to know any FM or text weighing pros and cons of an unbuttoned ride? May be some post-deployment write-ups?

Russian OTH radar "Container". As it uses low-frequencies it can see stealth objects up to 2K km away. But certainly just a detection not a weapons grade track. https://topwar.ru/152227-rls-29b6-kontejner-v-mordovii-zastupit-na-boevoe-dezhurstvo-v-tekuschem-godu.html

I've just had the same situation in CMBS as I wrote here. An infantry squad riding a Stryker saw an enemy infantry. And just like I said - in CMBS they do not unbutton automatically and try to shoot at the enemy. Only if you orders them to do so. That seems to be more logical behavior - after all APC is a battle-taxi first not a platform to deliver the wrath of fire on enemy heads. It seems Engine 4 CMSF2 is not quite Engine 4 I tried to play CMSF1 these days and CMSF2 feels much closer if not equal to its predecessor than to "real" Engine 4 CMBS. With CMSF2 I feel like being taken a decade back in terms of TacAI clumsy logic and stupid decisions

Why simplified? On Khlopotov pics the thing behind the turret is not a dispenser - only two of them to the left and to the right of the turret just like on the trials pic. Moreover if you zoom in you'll see trials containers have more projectiles than on exhibition pic. And the containers are not equal between themselves. Looks like they are testing two container versions at the same time.

I posted it twice in two other topics that were active today. PS Actually Bulat problems made quite a headlines in Ukrainian press in its time. Except for Poroshenko-aligned "patriotic" press that preferred to look away from slightest issues of his reign.

Facepalm. That's from the interview of the Deputy Head of Ground Forces of the Ukrainian Army. The interview is to the Ukrainian press certainly. PS A common problem of discussions with most of the Ukrainian fanboys: they prefer to limit information intake to upbeat reporting of their "patriotic" mass media and shun their own Ukrainian industrial press.

https://www.theonion.com/this-war-will-destabilize-the-entire-mideast-region-and-1819594296 Same can be said about Lybia, Kosovo etc.

The game is worth the candle million times. If you prefer the modern settings then the choice is between CMSF2 and CMBS. Comparing the two - CMBS has significantly fewer TacAI "irregularities", read it your pixeltruppen will be dying of their own stupidity not so often. Yet they will be - even Americans before you learn to understand TacAI logic. f you're into playing well balanced missions then the amount of content for CMBS is drastically lower. If you plan to play PvP or PvE in Quick Battles then you've got years worth of maps in CMBS. Just remember the engine is left all to itself in Quick Battles so do not expect a military genius. If have a preference for a game nation or some specific vehicles then you'd better put up with how they're represented in the game unless you play Americans. Americans are uber soldiers in the game and there's no way anything is about to be changed about the rest. Particularly Ukrainian side is the weakest yet even Ukrainians are quite playable you just need to achieve a total over-match in firepower and the number of eyeballs observing the battlefield. The things about BTR-4 and Oplot you mentioned are very very minor to the overall gameplay. You'll see way more significant limitations in the engine. Again irrespective of what I've said the game is absolutely way ahead of its competition.

@Haiduk, lets not start this again

@Haiduk, thanks for the input! Is there any information on how Abromavichus and Ze-team in general plan to handle weapons production industry in general and UkrOboronProm/shady weapons import mess in particular?

Nope, it's not about targeting with a wrong icon. I was transporting an infantry squad in a Stryker from cover to cover through an area covered by enemy small arms. All of sudden my squad identified the enemy infantry and decided to open hatches and to start taking shots at the enemy. Surely half of my squad died in no time. I was transporting them by Stryker exactly to shield from small arms fire. I was amazed as I've never seen this kind of behavior in CMBS and I don't remember this kind of troubles in CMSF1 (though TBH it's been awhile since I played CMSF1). The problem solves itself by assigning "fake" target arcs but that's another little point in a long TacAI checklist.

Yeah, let's wrap it up. @Oleg's post seems to be designed to flare up the argument that turned somewhat stale by now.

@Oleg, you're kind of using to your advantage the fact that most of the people here don't speak Russian. The video is an interview with locals saying that UKR forces are shelling apartment houses. And here are UKR forces positions inside residential disticts.