Vanir Ausf B

From a wargaming perspective a full-on Russian invasion of the Baltics is a lot of fun but in reality is one of the least likely conflict scenarios. A more probable (albeit still remote) scenario would be Russia seizing a small chunk of land bloodlessly, thereby presenting NATO with the politically uncomfortable proposition of shooting first followed by the militarily difficult task of fighting Russia on Russia's own border. Again, not likely to happen but a less stupid way for Russia to challenge NATO's legitimacy than sending 30 battalion tactical groups hurling towards Poland.

I can't reproduce it. Shaders are ON every time I start. Win7 64-bit, Nvidia GPU.

That NATO could eventually muster sufficient firepower to retake the Baltics is not in question. What is in question is if there would be political will to do so. The Baltic states are not comparable in importance to West Germany, Belgium, France ect. in coldly-calculated strategic terms and it's debatable if NATO would collectively be willing to risk nuclear escalation in the same way they were during the Cold War. And Russia could be punished in non-military ways. But I agree that this is more about reassurance of nervous eastern NATO members than any belief that Russia is really going to invade (the US portion of the build-up is actually called the European Assurance Initiative).

The US is also considering the permenent return of one armored brigade combat team to Europe, which is in addition to the ABCT rotating through as part of the European Assurance Initiative and the prepositioned equipment for a 3rd ABCT that could be put into action within 10 days notice. In other words, while the article's headline is true it probably won't be within 2-3 years.

Feature. I presume the change will be in the other titles when they are updated.

Yeah, the later model Panthers most likely have armor quality ratings below 100%. I can't get my old CMx1 games to work anymore to check what BFC set them to back in the day but it was probably either 90% or 85% which translates to 99mm and 94mm effective resistance for the 110mm thick front turret. The 10 degree slope would add a few millimeters so probably 97-102mm effective resistance at 0 slope. The mantlet aka gun mount would be 100mm x .90 (quality modifier) x .96 (cast armor modifier) = 86mm effective resistance near the mantlet apex although the curvature would make hits near the top and bottom edges bounce. US 57mm armor piercing round M70 penetrates 100mm of RHA at 0° at 750 meters so frequent penetrations of the late Panther front turret should be expected.

Probably not in the CMFB v1.01 patch since there are no British forces in CMFB but I'll look into it for Normandy

The sample size is far too small to place a number on it. But obtaining a similar result to your anecdotal evidence on the first test iteration reinforced my feeling that I don't need to spend any more time on this. Regular, Normal, +0, all teams out of C2.

I just did a quick test in Red Thunder v1.03. 10 panzerschreck teams shooting at 10 T-34/85s at about 195 meters. I ran the test only one time. First shot hits: 3 Second shot hits: 4 Third shot hits: 1 Fourth shot hits: 1 The last schreck fired all 6 rounds without hitting.

That is also a bug, but it has no relation to the M36 issue that I am aware of.

Could you be more specific? The M36 was reported to BFC last week but I am not aware of other vehicles with the same issue.

No adjustment that I am aware of. I'd actually be in favor of one. The first shot accuracy of these weapon types in-game seems to assume the shooter has no idea what the range is when in fact they did have rudimentary range finders on the launchers.

Reading that article through Google Translate is as amusing as it is baffling.

They show up as ammo dumps.

Preferably it should, but it doesn't. AT gun crews stopped saying "deploying" a couple of years ago (Red Thunder, IIRC). It's just how they work now. I don't know if it's considered a bug or not but BFC does know about it.

There is a difference between "playable" and "plays well". BFC requires the former for all three (both sides vs. AI and H2H) but only requires the latter for one. In fact, I am pretty sure most scenarios that ship with the game are primarily intended to be played one particular way and say so in the description.

2000 was a long time ago, but I thought that was what they did...

No need to be that explicit. If you just say "squad level" everyone who has played ASL will know that ASL is also squad level.

You have two options when you share a Dropbox folder: "Invite people to collaborate" and "Send link". If you choose the latter then you can share any file in that folder with anyone who you give a direct link to. For example: https://www.dropbox.com/s/8svvyzlahounxc4/Verdenne%20No%201%20Abt%2016%20Pz.btt?dl=0

How well is that game selling? Probably not as well as Combat Mission. Frankly, I have seen many, many former SL/ASL players say that CM is a much more realistic game system and I think Battlefront made the right decision not to chain themselves to a boardgame rules set.

Got the files. You said "they remain 'limbered' even after a few turns of the unit having a 'deploy' order and nothing happens", but in fact they only arrive at the position shown in your screenshot shortly before the end of the last turn you sent (127) and are still rotating into place as the turn ends. The deploy time is nearly two full turns (1.8 minutes) so I am not sure why you are expecting them to be deployed already. It's going to be a couple more turns (131 at the earliest).

Can't replicate. Do you have a save game file?

I'm guessing "yes", but could be wrong. Do note that the casualty reduction from ground conditions really is quite small, about 5% small in fact.

If true that would be a bug, one that I cannot replicate.

Did the air controller that called them in get killed by chance? Because micro UAVs cannot be targeted by SAMs. I don't know about the 500kg bomb, but I have seen the 1525kg bomb dropped on a Abrams with APS