Vanir Ausf B

How can that be when the effect you refer to isn't present during the orders phase? Unless you are playing real time? I play Iron mode exclusively and have no idea why any one playing WEGO would want anything different. It's like extra realism for free, IMO.

Use the Fast movement order.

Good information. But any tandem-warhead munition would (I presume) have similar penetration. While I am certainly open to the possibility of RPO being under-modeled, I think we need to stop and consider the implications of what is being proposed. Specifically that they are: 1) "almost guaranteed to explode inside regardless of whether they hit a window or a wall" 2) "in-game effects imho should be that if you have a squad holed up on a floor, and a RPO explodes inside that floor, no member of that squad would be able to keep fighting" If this is how it worked in-game Russian infantry would be nearly unstoppable in urban warfare. They would quickly annihilate any opposition. If that reflects reality so be it, but I am skeptical of overwhelmingly effectiveness.

Why mothball T-90s while T-72s are still in service?

This will make a great QB map. Thanks!

Keep in mind that soldiers in Black Sea (at least US and Russian, I am not certain about Ukrainian) are more resilient than in other CM titles because of body armor. I have tested RPO against US troops in buildings. Like with any other explosive ordinance, the building type has a large influence on results. Against heavier structures the rocket needs to penetrate into the interior to do much damage, which it only does occasionally. But when it does it will usually inflict 50%+ casualties. A valid complaint, IMO, but it's not just RPGs or Russian equipment. I think unguided AT rockets and rifle grenades are too inaccurate in all CM titles. But BFC disagrees so it will probably not change. On a per-round basis I do not find the M25 to be particularly deadly. But it does have a high rate of fire and built-in laser range finder. In fact, get ready to hate the M25 even more because it will be more accurate after the next patch (right now it often takes half a dozen shots before it dials in the correct range, which should not be necessary with a LRF).

The only chemical weapon ISIS has been reported to use is chlorine gas, a common industrial chemical.

In my specific example all strikes were conducted via direct observation. I had drones but because of the weather they never spotted an enemy unit.

Stryker = halftrack with a roof.

I destroyed 5 Tunguskas with Excalibur in a recent PBEM. Granted, I think my opponent may not have been up to speed yet on how PGMs work so YMMV.

It looks like mass production won't begin until 2018 at the earliest. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/mobile/opinion/article/putin-can-t-buy-votes-with-tanks-forever/517254.html

Russian martial music isn't what it used to be.

Correct.

Also, a small time-saving tip: in QB maps you don't have to create objectives for both red and blue. You can just make them for blue (or maybe just red, I haven't tried) and the game will automatically assign them to both sides.

Nice map! I'm going to make an attack/defend version. When looking over your ME version I noticed you had the objective point values in the objective names. Apologies if you are already aware of this, but in QBs the victory point values you assign to objectives are not what they are actually worth. There is a pool of available victory points for objectives and enemy units destroyed and the size of that pool cannot be altered except by changing the battle type. For meeting engagements there are 400 victory points available for terrain objectives and the values you assign to objectives in the editor divvy up those points by comparing the relative values in proportion to each other. So for example, you assigned the central overpass objective 400 pts and each of the other four objectives 100 pts each. In actuality the central objective will be worth 200 pts and each of the others 50 pts.

AFAIK all vehicles can traverse light forest. Plot very short movement lines, however. Otherwise the TacAI tends to be creative about the path it takes.

The Soviets wouldn't have even had an air force to speak of after the first month or two. As for ground forces, if you add up the US, UK and and French troops in Europe on VE day they are nearly a match for the Red Army.

If it pushes the time frame past 2017 it could matter a lot

OpenGL is faster/more efficient.

Just checked. Xbox runs on DirectX. So basically Microsoft platforms. PS4 does not use DirectX. It has a custom API called GNM.

Just the fact that it only works on Windows platforms. And maybe Xbox, I'm not sure about that one.

Pics are interesting. Save game files would be much better.

No need. It's already been fixed for the next patch.

I think it's more than just that. I set up my own test with isolated tanks (each tank could spot one enemy tank). I probably ran the test a dozen times and never got a tank to react. It's possible that it could be tied to crew experience. I was testing with Regular crews. EDIT: Nope, not crew quality either.

The only time I see tanks slew towards a "?" contact is when it has 2 of them. They seem to routinely ignore single contacts.