Holien

This might help, or not...
I am currently enjoying FOG2 and have played in two Slitherine run tournaments using the system. 
It allows the tourney organiser to create a scenario and map that everyone plays. These have been played both ways so you and your opponent plays two games each person the two different sides.
You sign up for the tourney via a Slitherine portal and when the games start you are randomly assigned an opponent.  Everyone in the tourney is playing on exact same map and force choices. You choose how and what to buy within the constraints of the points available. 
The number of rounds can vary (set by organiser) after round one points are tallied and displayed on a Web page showing ranking. Next round a new set of forces / map and you play the opponent with a similar score, Swiss style.
Rinse and repeat until final round and someone is crowned the winner.
Looks automated capturing the results and ranking / pairing players. 
If I get time later on my PC I will post some screenshots.

@John Kettler
A couple points on what you found.
Russian Nuclear Exercises: This is concerning, but I wouldn't freak out just yet. The 2019 exercise was simply an exercise (although any large-scale nuclear exercise is concerning, of course), and I suspect that what happened in March was just a you-know-what measuring contest to show the new president what kind of toys Russia has available. Russia wants to continually show off their new equipment, as it would, in theory, give them an advantage over the US in a nuclear exchange. What a lot of people don't get, however, is that these new toys may not actually mean much. Despite all the hype about the S-500 and other ABM systems, a US nuclear strike/retaliation on Russia would convert the overwhelming majority of the country to a parking lot, even if Russia manages to strike first with their various fancy missiles, torpedoes, unnecessarily large warheads, etc. Putin's obsessed with getting his name in the history books. This requires a few people to be around to read those history books. You must remember that simply possessing a capable nuclear stockpile (even if you have no intention of ever using them) is of massive strategic value.
Mass Graves: After talking to a few friends and colleagues from Russia and who focus on Russian governance, I'm reasonably certain that preparations for mass graves were strictly COVID related. It's an open secret that Russia's official covid fatality numbers only cover a fraction of the true number of deaths. Hell, just about every Russian I know has lost a family member due to covid. If I remember correctly, the document was released shortly after the Omicron variant of COVID was discovered, when we knew it was more transmittable but did not know that it caused less severe illness. If the Russian government expected a new, more dangerous covid wave, it makes sense to begin preparations for the digging of mass graves as was necessary as previous waves threatened to overwhelm morgues across the country. Further, while the number of burials detailed in the manual may be useful in the event of casualties due to a conventional war, 1000 a day is a joke when you've got millions dead in a single city alone as you would during a nuclear exchange. The document mentions CRBN dead, but I suspect that the N in this case is something like a Chernobyl- type incident, rather than a nuclear detonation. Hell, if there's a nuclear detonation due to a strategic nuclear exchange, burying the bodies is probably pretty low on the to-do list.
 
There's a lot of evidence that indicates that Russia could be launching an invasion of Ukraine, and there's no professional consensus as to whether or not Russia will do anything. Time will tell about that part. But I don't see a nuclear exchange any time soon being a realistic possibility.

Yes, Russia wanted to avoid war so they decided to forcefully occupy parts of Ukraine, as part of a peaceful demonstration against war.

There. Brought that up to date for ya  
As to "immigration broke the NHS": that's utter fallacy. Immigration from the EU has been propping up our economy (and the NHS, or at least its associated social care sector) for years. And the disintegration of the sense of community over the past couple of decades can be pinned on the divisive rhetoric (aka blatant [emphatic expletive] lying) of the Tories, their Brexiteer friends and their pet attack dogs at the Daily Fail and other tabloid press.
 

The translation is way off ...
Him:  'See anything?'
Her:  'No love'
Him:  'Are you sure ... we're being fired at ...'
Her:  'I can't see sh1t'
Him:  'Well something's out there.'
Her:  'What do you f*****g think this is - Steel Beasts?'
 

Integration is never straightforward or easy...
 

Sorry no, not sure how legal that would be?
Anyway they should have been delivered successfully yesterday so maybe the new owner can help with specific requests? 
I think they have found quite an appropriate new home.

Crap. Disappeared down a Sagger shaped rabbit hole… interesting overview off the Sagger 3 http://www.military-today.com/missiles/malyutka.htm
quote from above link: 
A single missile could hit its target with a probability of only 50-60%.

You can rest assured that everything is crappy as humans and organisations are involved.
The beauty with freedom is that we stand a chance of highlighting the crap to have a better chance of it being slightly less crap than those that can not talk about how crap their stuff is.
😉

Hm... It finished at once - try to open it in youtube. I did it, all works fine. 
PS. If you click on "repeat" after video suddenly terminated, the video will play properly in the forum window.
PPS. I renewed the link - all works fine in the window.

I think this would be quite appropriate here.
 
 

Well I would argue it means something as far as CMCW is concerned and we won't be seeing it in that title or that era because it simply was not, nor is not realistic in that timeframe.  Was not "talking down" to be honest...was trying to educate but like most in the younger generation I am sure you guys have it all figured out and history offers you little (ok, that last part was talking down a bit).
I had a boss a long time ago that said, "there is nothing more dangerous than a one war military"...he noted France after WWI as the prime example.  The problem was (and is) that once a military becomes enamored with one type of fighting for too long they tend to only see the world through that lens; history shows repeatedly how this never ends well.  Good hard won lessons become doctrine, repeated utility of that doctrine leads heavy investment and lost corporate memory of anything else...and then it all becomes dogma if things go on long enough.
I suggest that you read up on the recent Ukrainian conflict or the very recent Azer-Armenian conflict.  Both demonstrate that the speed and lethality of the modern battlefield has accelerated once again and I am not sure where that leaves our current tools but I am sure that it looks nothing like the wars we have been fighting since the end of the Cold War. 

love your improvement ideas. I'd like to add another one, though.
When I am in the mission, scouting terrain (especially in CW with many beautifully huge maps) I can't count how many times I wished I had topographic overlay. How much easier would be to read possible routs of advance, defensive positions, covered approaches...  Really wish it would be standard to add a topographic map either in the briefing, or even better, as an overlay on the terrain that can be toggled on and off.

I would agree this would be useful for the game and a good sales feature, mind you they would have to ensure the grammar police checked it out before publishing!!!

Hi not sure what Video Card you have but I was looking for a solution to FOG2 not having a replay function and it was an easy solution I found which puts me on track to becoming a youtuber!!
Alt F9 to start recording and Alt F9 to end recording, free software came bundle with my Nvidia card.
I even have it set up so that if I am not recording and I see an Ohh Wow moment I can just hit record last 5 minutes... Bit like a dashcam working always...
Geoforce Experience is the software.
Shadow Play 
Here let me introduce a young someone using it for something I would (can no longer play)...
 
So for CM to introduce something that is pretty well done already would IMO be a waste of their time which could be spent on the next engine or an Early War module with French Tanks!!!
🙃

Hi not sure what Video Card you have but I was looking for a solution to FOG2 not having a replay function and it was an easy solution I found which puts me on track to becoming a youtuber!!
Alt F9 to start recording and Alt F9 to end recording, free software came bundle with my Nvidia card.
I even have it set up so that if I am not recording and I see an Ohh Wow moment I can just hit record last 5 minutes... Bit like a dashcam working always...
Geoforce Experience is the software.
Shadow Play 
Here let me introduce a young someone using it for something I would (can no longer play)...
 
So for CM to introduce something that is pretty well done already would IMO be a waste of their time which could be spent on the next engine or an Early War module with French Tanks!!!
🙃

Ok, well lets unpack this.  I, for one, do not think you are a troll (perhaps trying hard to impersonate one but...), you are a paying customer who appears uninformed and we aim to both educate and entertain.
So looking at the the ol' scenario list AND not counting the extra versions based on dates (more on this later) AND the US Campaign (1982) ones we are at 23 standalone scenarios.  Now one could say that the Soviet Training Scenarios do not count, which based on the number of YouTube videos is pretty unfair, but let's be brutal on ourselves (sorry Justin).  This would bring our paltry total down to 19 standalones.  Now BFC policy for a base game release is 15-20 with emphasis on the 20, if we can get to it.  So here we fell one scenario short of the upper end of content range.  Now in our defence CMCW requires large maps in order to really show things off, much larger than other titles, so that played a factor.  
Now as to the "why the multiple years?" question.  Well we did that because CMCW covers off a 4 year period in which available equipment varies significantly year to year.  These differences create pretty interesting and noticeable variations in gameplay.  For example in 1979 you could see M48s vs T55s and in 1982 we have M1s vs T80Bs, the balances is very different between these dates.  So we thought, "hey there is a lot of kit here and maybe players don't really know the ins and outs of all of it.  We should create different time versions so they can easily see and learn how different equipment stacks up."  
Now as to "rushing".  I am not sure what your scenario design and building experience is, or is not; however, it is no small task to create multiple versions of the same thing.   For example, the work that went into the 1982 vs 1979 US Campaigns was such that it probably would have been easier to simply do two completely separate campaigns.  The testing and play balancing is a long process, as is the deploying of units and AI.
Finally, as to the the "cheating" US Campaigns ported over as standalones, there are 10 in total.  Well the thinking here was that these should really be bonus content.  First, not everyone is going to finish the US Campaign, or play all its battles, so this gives the player a chance to play and try any of them up front.  Second, it allowed us to offer them for H2H play, which should be very interesting for some.  Again, as to "rushing", porting the campaign scenarios over into standalones actually took more time as Red side briefings and Human vs Human considerations had to be made.  The US Campaign alone has over 190 square kms of map work btw, again very big maps required all tied to the actual ground in the region (seriously, check it out on Google maps). 
To this we add one NTC campaign, and two versions of both the Soviet and US campaigns, I would sincerely hope that the average player can squeeze out at least of 60+ hours of quality play time, before hitting the QBs or Scenario editor.  
So there you have it.  As per content guidelines, based on past titles, we are safely in the upper end of content requirements by about any metric.  I will leave the qualitative judgement to all you fine grognards.

I was hoping for this one myself ...

Some might say it is appropriately metaphorical for this thread ... 😉

Just found another quirk which might be worthy of mention for anyone testing. I just loaded up a multiplayer setup to look at but not complete setting up my forces. I just wanted to see map to ponder my set up later today.
I tried to exit but the program locks that out so only way to exit was to crash the whole program. Ctl alt dlt...
Doing some research it would seem this is an anti cheating feature to stop save and reload scumming. 
With such large setup for some CM scenarios you are going to have to allocate time to complete it fully else it doesn't get saved. Just something to be aware of in the CM implementation of PBEM++

Just finished this yesterday if you are looking for a small infantry action with a novel scenario Objective this one is for you.
I really enjoyed the narrative and it was a tense game where I managed to win a minor victory. 
I won't spoil the events but something turning up at X when I had X on wrong side of the road really messed up my plan...
I will also say that I hate RPGs (unless I have them)!!! The Americans really do not have the same firepower when it comes to these annoying weapons... 
The sense of running away was perfectly conveyed...
The minor niggle was trying to learn how to use the camera in amongst the buildings to see the action, I have yet to perfect the view and getting good camera angles...
Thank you to the designer for some fun moments....
Also I would think this might be tough vs a Human Russian Oppo, but it still might be good fun....

Just finished this yesterday if you are looking for a small infantry action with a novel scenario Objective this one is for you.
I really enjoyed the narrative and it was a tense game where I managed to win a minor victory. 
I won't spoil the events but something turning up at X when I had X on wrong side of the road really messed up my plan...
I will also say that I hate RPGs (unless I have them)!!! The Americans really do not have the same firepower when it comes to these annoying weapons... 
The sense of running away was perfectly conveyed...
The minor niggle was trying to learn how to use the camera in amongst the buildings to see the action, I have yet to perfect the view and getting good camera angles...
Thank you to the designer for some fun moments....
Also I would think this might be tough vs a Human Russian Oppo, but it still might be good fun....

Just finished this yesterday if you are looking for a small infantry action with a novel scenario Objective this one is for you.
I really enjoyed the narrative and it was a tense game where I managed to win a minor victory. 
I won't spoil the events but something turning up at X when I had X on wrong side of the road really messed up my plan...
I will also say that I hate RPGs (unless I have them)!!! The Americans really do not have the same firepower when it comes to these annoying weapons... 
The sense of running away was perfectly conveyed...
The minor niggle was trying to learn how to use the camera in amongst the buildings to see the action, I have yet to perfect the view and getting good camera angles...
Thank you to the designer for some fun moments....
Also I would think this might be tough vs a Human Russian Oppo, but it still might be good fun....

You’re wrong. And being antagonistic does not help anyone or anything, especially yourself. 
 
The LOD issues are being addressed in the first patch. In fact, I believe as of right now most of them are fixed. 
 
The reason the game shipped with them is because, for techno wizardry reasons I will never understand, when the final release candidate was built, something caused some LODs to get a little wonky. We figured that it was not worth delaying the release of a game for a minor graphical issue that has no effect on gameplay, and only occurs on certain models and in lower graphics settings. 
 
I think we made the right call. The response to Cold War has been overwhelmingly positive. And I think BFC hitting a release target has been very positive as well. Further, most feedback on bugs has been very polite and professional, and I think we have done a good job of responding and addressing these issues. A patch is being worked on as we speak that will fix these issues, and some other issues that were the result of very constructive feedback. 

Use them EXACTLY as you would in the WW2 titles. M113's are just like the M3 halftracks... battle taxis that can become coffins.  Know that the tank isn't the undisputed champ of the battlefield, though.  Infantry now have access to ATGM's and just about anyone can carry a LAW or RPG (think about how the Germans passed out one shot Panzerfausts to as many squad members as possible from 1944 onwards.)
IFV's are slightly different in that both the BMP and the Bradley have the ability to dish it out.  They still lack the armor to shrug off some hits.
I'm highlighting this.  You have got to get flank shots.  Stick them hull down and watch out for Ivan's arty trying to blind you.  If those T72's gets past your WEZ (weapons employment zone) on the Shillelaghs you are going to have major trouble.  The 152mm shells fired by the Starship are low velocity....bad news for killing tanks.
 
....I'm doing an AAR of this battle on Youtube.  The majority of the action for the scenario is included here.  Part two is imbound and will be more or less a cleanup with general observations.