c3k

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 These were Leopard 1A3s whose welded turrets as been replaced by surplus cast German Leopard 1a5 turrets.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!

I'm not sure what you are basing this comment on.  The US Navy uses the 5"/54 (127mm) Mk45 on current warships.  The loading system is automatic so the gun can maintain a fire rate of 16 to 20 rounds per minute (not taking into account cooling times), compared to the Marine Corps M777/155mm howitzer, that fires at a rate of 2 to 5 rounds per minute.  As far as accuracy is concerned, we conducted numerous gun fire support missions with the US Marine Corps and UK Royal Marines with exceptional accuracy.  We were hitting main battle tank sized objects from 10+ miles out.  As far as time to call in fire, you may be correct.  I don't have data to support or debunk that opinion.

Speaking from experience (I'm a former Bradley gunner and commander) The TOW launcher can be reloaded fairly rapidly (in around a minute for both tubes) but the Bradley will be out of action and behind cover for that time. Reloading the 25mm takes considerably longer as there is a specific way the HE and AP belts must be loaded into their individual storage bins in a specific pattern and are fed into the appropriate feed chutes and then cranked into the gun itself using a ratchet. This is a relatively simple task, but it takes some time (between 5 and 10 minutes) to perform and that is without any problems popping up. For example, the protective plastic caps that cover the dart on APFDS-T rounds can break off and cause a jam in the feed chute. An issue that's easy to solve, but can add a few minutes to the process. My actual point after all this rambling is that it's within the realm for a Brad crew to reload TOWs within the time frame of a CM scenario, but not reload a completely empty 25mm. And definitely not a resupply from the battalion ammo section.

No, really.

 

 

 

 

 
I'm burning "opsec" to post these, but Its a fairly dangerous AI bug to fire ATGMs into a hedge, on AF, with no sightings of hostile armor even available, and plenty of autocannon ammo, GL ammo available. And this asswipe fired off BOTH Barriers.
Repeats on every play thorough. Never seen this before.
Turn available on request.
 
https://imgur.com/a/En70IYV

Isolate small portions of the battlefield. Establish overwatch, suppression, and then move in.
To isolate, tanks do very well to dominate long streets. Of course, the enemy likes stationary tanks.  
Isolate a block, move up. Watch it. If you can, get some units to flank it. If you cannot control the back of the block/building, at least cover most of the exits. 
Then, use firepower to suppress and move forward. It only takes 15-30 seconds of suppression. The goal is to get the defenders to duck down. Then, your guys move up and look in the windows. Like fish in a barrel. Next, SLOW or HUNT into the building with a tight covered arc so your men can see what's out the back.
That, at least, is one technique.
 

Isolate small portions of the battlefield. Establish overwatch, suppression, and then move in.
To isolate, tanks do very well to dominate long streets. Of course, the enemy likes stationary tanks.  
Isolate a block, move up. Watch it. If you can, get some units to flank it. If you cannot control the back of the block/building, at least cover most of the exits. 
Then, use firepower to suppress and move forward. It only takes 15-30 seconds of suppression. The goal is to get the defenders to duck down. Then, your guys move up and look in the windows. Like fish in a barrel. Next, SLOW or HUNT into the building with a tight covered arc so your men can see what's out the back.
That, at least, is one technique.
 

If you haven't downloaded and tried the Demo, well, you're a slacker.
Get it!
(Hey, it's free.)

They can go FAST (usually), and QUICK, but they will tire much more rapidly. I'm not sure what the definitive results are of being tired, other than movement issues. I can see how it may be tied into morale, reaction, and accuracy. <-- supposition, and maybe something to look into.

Ah I see that you are following my current newbie AAR. 🤣

I wonder if they'd consider monetizing the TOE?
Want a Tiger? Pay a buck. 
Oh, you want another? Pay another buck.
Keep at it until you collect the entire battalion! Then, you can unleash them on your opponent in a QB.
(Everyone starts with a halftrack and a platoon.)
Just a CMx3 thought...

It's time for...
SPACE LOBSTERS OF DOOM!!!

Michael

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.

Here is a second showcase video, this time showing a successful Syrian armored assault against defending Germans. This was taken from a modified version of the NATO scenario "Bier un Brezel." Some of the better Syrian equipment is on display here, such as the T-72AV equipped with the TURMS-T as well as the BMP-2. This should pain the Syrians in a more favorable light compared to the first showcase video. Hope everyone enjoys!
 

One of the interesting aspects of force structure (as reflected in the TO&E), is the ammo allocation.
The Abrams has ~12,000 rounds of machinegun ammo. That's a LOT of suppression and some killing. A Target Brief makes the main gun fire. Not too many rounds with high explosive available. However, a Target Light would just fire the machinegun. (I'd keep the TC buttoned in any urban setting where the flanks and nearby high-rises are not secured.) The coax machinegun will suppress friendlies. So, Target Light, Pause for a predetermined time, move (reverse or slow) a slight amount and add a Face command at that waypoint. That will produce suppressive machinegun fire which will lift after the tank gets to the new waypoint.
Maximum force may not necessarily mean use maximum explosive every time, but could mean to leverage every unit to the maximum amount for each successive objective.
The UK gives the Challenger a lot of coax ammo. (I forget how much, offhand.) Additionally, they've made that coax a chain-gun. (Meaning, the loading system is externally powered, not utilizing the power of the cartridge. This makes it extremely reliable. Misfires are simply cycled right out.) Having an ultra-reliable, well-supplied coax probably means it is meant to be used. A lot.

Just to let you guys know I have updated the sites to now accommodate uploads for CMSF2.
As usual any problems tag me here and I will reply ASAP.
Bootie

My experience comes from being a CV9030 gunner.
 
Let us start with a very real live example. CV9030 company is moving along a road surrounded by dense forest. Enemy contact is possible but not imminent. The company is "traveling" so mounted and expected to move somewhat quickly. Leading CV9030 is moving slow enough to be 100% ready to open fire instantly, the gunner is constantly "pre-aimed" to the next corner on the road ext. and the gunner will engage on his own initiative.
So let us say a meeting engagement happens. What happens in the lead tank?
- Gunner sees the enemy AFV and opens fire.
- Commander knows without words what is happening (gunner shooting + direction the gun is pointed) and acts out his part of the script. Says to the intercom: "reverse, fast!" and flips a switch that pops smoke. Gunner gives a report as fast as he can while/after shooting: "IFV, destroyed"
- Commander informs the platoon/company radio shortly: "contact, heavy" (heavy meaning mechanized force) Also sometimes lead tank intercom is directly connected to platoon radio so the information is as fast as possible and if the lead tank is lost the information is not.
- Commander gives the driver instruction on the reversing (left, right, hard left...)
- Commander and driver have packed up a short distance to the side of the road and the commander gives "dismount, left" order for the dismounts. Same time more information to platoon/company radio.

The Alamo playthrough is now finally ready in full HD.
 
And the link to the German Leopard 2 wrecking trough two enemy vehicles with one shot at 1:36:31: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAx81M54ZSw&amp;t=1h36m31s
Enjoy!

Select the IED, then draw a target command:
Target the ground nearby to activate it and the triggerman will try and detonate it whenever something gets close enough.
Target a specific enemy unit and the triggerman will try and detonate it when that unit gets close.

Bear in mind that if the triggerman is a potato, can't see, is suppressed, dead or generally unable to push the button, nothing will happen.
There are also Blufor electronic countermeasures to bear in mind: the British Warriors in Breaking the Bank definitely have little ECM sets on them that may- or may not- prevent IEDs from being detonated.

This is a quick, dirty video explanation which I would embed if I could remember how:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXwfJbSag1g&feature=youtu.be

Note that the triggerman is a green and -1 leadership potato.

^^^
Great vid. The team should NOT have gone back around that corner into the beaten zone.
Of course, one big issue is the lack of "memory" for our pixeltruppen. However, I'd think a "?" or hard-contact would be something to leverage to force them not to run that way. Meaning, if that team "knows" there is an enemy there, the team should avoid that enemy (increase distance or keep LOS from occurring or get out of LOS by the quickest means).
...and then prioritize moving towards the friendly edge.

^^^
Great vid. The team should NOT have gone back around that corner into the beaten zone.
Of course, one big issue is the lack of "memory" for our pixeltruppen. However, I'd think a "?" or hard-contact would be something to leverage to force them not to run that way. Meaning, if that team "knows" there is an enemy there, the team should avoid that enemy (increase distance or keep LOS from occurring or get out of LOS by the quickest means).
...and then prioritize moving towards the friendly edge.

In the particular case of the video below, I don't see how the unit is thinking only of itself based on the knowledge it has available to it when it runs back toward the enemy a second time instead of down the road or behind the wall. It simply doesn't make any sense given the in-game situation (e.g. the unit is aware of enemy contacts North). Would you agree, or am I missing something? 
Battlefront wrote: "However, we have been at a point now, for a while, where it's getting harder and harder to find reproducible, addressable corner cases.  That's good."
Agreed. And the discussions in this thread may have contributed to the identification of a reproducible corner case in the Wilcox scenario. 
If it's not sufficiently addressable, then that's not good, but only mildly not good. I realize that expecting a video game like this to be completely free of errors is not realistic. As a customer and proponent of the CM franchise I will continue to poke and prod with evidence, reason, and an open mind in an attempt to contribute to the improvement of the game experience. 
 

Of course, guerrilla-friendly terrain is in no way restricted to cities, even in the 'arid'  Middle East. Consider a few square kms patchwork of vehicle-unfriendly marshy fields, dikes, walls and irrigation ditches unchanged since Assyrian times, with LOS broken up by unkempt orchards and palm groves, walled farmsteads and dense clusters of reeds.
Look closely at the second map, or go to Google Earth. This is incredibly challenging ground to secure, even with overwhelming force available. Not quite bocage, but close.
And as I've preached umpteen times, terrain is the "third player" in the game; it can equalize or cripple pretty much any force.

How close they managed to get before being seen (the right-most squad is Move-ing one square forward)

A couple of thoughts.
First, practice it. Save a game, try it. Do it again. Your men will die. But, as long as you're learning, they'll die grateful that their sacrifice was not in vain.
Second, HUNT is a poor order for building entry. HUNT translates into "move slowly and carefully until enemy contact and then stop". The LAST thing you want to do in a building entry is stop. Even if the bad guys have the "fatal funnel" totally bore-sighted and booby-trapped, YOU KEEP MOVING. Giving your men a HUNT command means they will stop right when the enemy opens fire. They'll die. Your men, that is.
ASSAULT is similarly handicapped in that it means, "one team moves, then it holds position as the other team(s) leapfrog up and join and then they all accordion forward again." So, your squad moves by team. Not good.
You want to dynamically enter and dominate the space. Enough about my dating habits, let's turn towards the game.
Setup some overwatch. Give them Target for 15 or 30 seconds. They'll use high explosives (LAWs, etc.) so be careful about fratricide. If that's an issue, give a Target Light, a Pause (for 15, 20, 30 seconds) then a move with a Face at the end of it. Stagger it so SOMEONE is always guns up at the enemy location.
So, 2-4 overwatch/suppression elements, timed to lift their fire as the maneuver element becomes adjacent to the building.
The maneuver element should actually have two parts: close support and entry. Move the close support team adjacent to the building, on a wall with windows. (Not the big picture windows! That's a sure way to die.) Give them a 15 second target command into the building. 
The final element is the entry team. They'll move adjacent, pause while the close supporters are doing their thing, and then they should QUICK into the building. Do not give them a FACE command. (A 360^ covered arc would be the only command I'd give, and only to keep them from engaging units outside the building envelope, and only if I knew/suspected that would occur.)
The timing would be:
Teams 1-4 (or about two squads) firing for 15-30 seconds. As their fire ends, two teams, independently, move adjacent to the building. One team area fires into the building for 15 seconds. The other team waits 15 seconds while FACE into the building. That same team then enters with QUICK.
As you can see, it can take about a platoon and you're only entering with a team.
A lot of suppression, a lot of eyeballs on overwatch, and a few trigger-pullers to kick down the door.
Oh, and have someone set up to shoot down any squirters.

A couple of thoughts.
First, practice it. Save a game, try it. Do it again. Your men will die. But, as long as you're learning, they'll die grateful that their sacrifice was not in vain.
Second, HUNT is a poor order for building entry. HUNT translates into "move slowly and carefully until enemy contact and then stop". The LAST thing you want to do in a building entry is stop. Even if the bad guys have the "fatal funnel" totally bore-sighted and booby-trapped, YOU KEEP MOVING. Giving your men a HUNT command means they will stop right when the enemy opens fire. They'll die. Your men, that is.
ASSAULT is similarly handicapped in that it means, "one team moves, then it holds position as the other team(s) leapfrog up and join and then they all accordion forward again." So, your squad moves by team. Not good.
You want to dynamically enter and dominate the space. Enough about my dating habits, let's turn towards the game.
Setup some overwatch. Give them Target for 15 or 30 seconds. They'll use high explosives (LAWs, etc.) so be careful about fratricide. If that's an issue, give a Target Light, a Pause (for 15, 20, 30 seconds) then a move with a Face at the end of it. Stagger it so SOMEONE is always guns up at the enemy location.
So, 2-4 overwatch/suppression elements, timed to lift their fire as the maneuver element becomes adjacent to the building.
The maneuver element should actually have two parts: close support and entry. Move the close support team adjacent to the building, on a wall with windows. (Not the big picture windows! That's a sure way to die.) Give them a 15 second target command into the building. 
The final element is the entry team. They'll move adjacent, pause while the close supporters are doing their thing, and then they should QUICK into the building. Do not give them a FACE command. (A 360^ covered arc would be the only command I'd give, and only to keep them from engaging units outside the building envelope, and only if I knew/suspected that would occur.)
The timing would be:
Teams 1-4 (or about two squads) firing for 15-30 seconds. As their fire ends, two teams, independently, move adjacent to the building. One team area fires into the building for 15 seconds. The other team waits 15 seconds while FACE into the building. That same team then enters with QUICK.
As you can see, it can take about a platoon and you're only entering with a team.
A lot of suppression, a lot of eyeballs on overwatch, and a few trigger-pullers to kick down the door.
Oh, and have someone set up to shoot down any squirters.