Erwin

Ah, ok... thanx...

"I for one am happy to have these problems so we can have such a good game. " Absolutely - except it takes more and more time to administer the game and keep everything up to date, and that means less and less time to actually play. That's exactly what happened to PESE - until one just gave up.

Sorry, still confused. "...in real wars if you moving such force into attack you basically know about all of those key spots where enemy is concentrating." Well yes, I agree that one SHOULD have reconned the area and have info as to the enemy's defensive deployments, but in this game one rarely knows what one is facing. It's unwise to proceed without scouts and recon. (Or are you making points about the realities of RL war and demonstrating how the CM2 game is not a good simulation of RL war?)

I share a similar frustration. I must have more than 100GB of mods downloaded from when CM2 first came out. Now so many don't work with patched versions, but which ones? It would take me months to examine each mod cos there is no efficient way to do that, and no help re what mods are totally obsolete. I envy newcomers who can start with fully up to date versions of all these games. Having all these titles as separate games requiring their own engine etc. is such a waste of HD space and creates more and more work. Just keeping up to date with all the activation codes is a PITA. I really hope that CM3 can incorporate all CM3 titles so there is no duplication and the "feel" will be more akin to how we experienced CM1 - everything in one game. Otherwise, it would be a concern that the series could collapse under the aggravation of complex time-consuming installations, mods, updates and patches - kinda like what happened to PESE. And that was only one game.

Interesting comments. Can you clarify a couple of items: "...even when you have 3 times more units than your enemy, you still can expect up to 50 (in some cases even 70%) of casualties." That seems shocking. Maybe I am spoiled by "acceptable" western casualties. But, doesn't having a "guaranteed" 50%-70% casualties rather affect your forces' morale?? "But if you going to use some decent manpower you should always pretend that area of your attack was investigated prior to your mission." That sounds suicidal in CM2. Am puzzled by that statement.

Ironically, the remnant 1 and 2 man squads or teams are good for recon - hard to spot.

Am listening to Russian celebrations at Trump's inauguration. It will be interesting how he finesses his popularity with getting the Russians out of occupied territories. There is real window of opportunity.

Interesting format. I have 30" in 2560x1600. How come your horizontal is higher res but your vertical is lower?

Thanks Jason. Just found this and it's very very helpful even to a vet like me. (Yes, as jon says, plz remove immediately b4 others read it.)

Re : US Marine M32 multiple grenade launcher not being used so much. What made it unpopular? (We love it in CMSF lol.)

For those too lazy to click: "The tank’s designers, who sought to achieve an optimal combination of protection, agility, and fire power, have always stressed the need for maneuverability on the battlefield, making the armor on its flanks and back lighter than on other other Western tanks such as the U.S. M1A2 Abrams or the British Challenger 2. Also, the Turkish Leopards don’t have explosive reactive armor or active protection systems to block incoming rounds. Active protection systems deal with threats such as rocket-propelled grenades or anti-tank guided missiles by combining electronic detection of hostile fire with jammers, smoke screens and interceptors intended to destroy the threats."

It was a shame that CMSF didn't sim the telescoping arm of some of these AT systems. Made them useless deathtraps when it could have been fun to use em properly.

BF is a tiny company that started by making games that they are passionate about. They still do. Up to a point they have to be commercial. But so long as they make enuff $ to continue with their passion, it's admirable that they don't feel the need to pander to lowest common denominator mass market demands (like just about every other game company). There has to be a massive groundswell of demand to get BF's attention, not individual gripes. They are about the longest lasting wargame company surviving, so they know what they are doing.

Ah, I see. I wuz confused by it being called a Stuart III. Lovely mod btw. Thank you again.

Yes, there are workarounds for all sorts of strange/unrealistic behavior in CM. However, one points these things out in the hope that this sort of phenomena will be fixed in future iterations. BF is very good in that respect. We consumers just have to be patient.

Didn't see that. Thank you! BTW: Is this the same mod that was available some months ago, or a new updated mod set? Also, I noticed that the "Stuart III" (Aussie) silhouette is not - looks like one of the French tanks (with the white top).

Can you advise on how to d/l from the above link. I see 27 individual mod items, but each downloads as an .htm file. Is there a way to d/l all in one big download?

Makes sense that turret could be slow if M10 was designed merely as a mobile AT gun. Maybe am thinking of M18. I recall in CM1 the TD's seemed to have quick traverse (and speed) to make up for lack of armor. But that may have been a CM1 inaccuracy. Why were TD's considered a failure if the concept was merely a highly mobile AT gun? Yes. they were vulnerable from the top, but no more than a leg AT gun.

To my eye, one Iraqi town looks any other once you get into the tactical house to house fighting. It's nice that a map may have accurate buildings, water towers etc, but to a gamer that is not relevant at the tactical level. A portion of the Ramadi map could represent any ME town. (And I didn't mean that I was asking you specifically - you've done your bit for this game and it's greatly appreciated.) I tried creating scenarios in CM1 but that was MUCH easier than in CM2. Don't have the talent or patience to try to figure out the CM2 editor. That's a real problem for content creation in CM2 and why we have a steadily decreasing quantity of user-made scenarios after each new CM2 release. (One presumes that due to burn-out, there are very few of us from the "old days" even posting here any more.) Aside from heroic dedicated folks (like yourself), most of us want to play the damn game, not spend hundreds of man-hours figuring out how to design giving the complexity of CM2. I belong to the camp that would pay BF for professionally made campaigns as those are the most massively time consuming projects. My comments earlier were addressing the irony of CM2 touting itself as a great simulator, but we don't see scenarios being made (like Mosul) that deal with current events that would be interesting to simulate. For some reason we sim potential Ukraine conflict no problem, but not current Iraq or Syrian situations. Have cognitive dissonance about that..

+1. Have been shocked at the long ETA times and very poor accuracy of Russian arty. I find this hard to believe given the Russians' history of depending on arty. However, if this is accurate, then that alone gives the Russians a huge disadvantage in any conventional conflict (let alone their carrier aircraft debacle). What on earth is NATO worried about?

Thank you again...

Still that means they are only 50% at most exposed. Not much worse than being in a foxhole or firing over a wall. Hopefully, they get a sig defense benefit vs being in the open.

Thought the TD's had a fast traverse. This one seems slower than a Tiger.

Any chance of dirtying up those berets? The fresh from the depot look is nice. But as with their uniforms, after a day of combat the berets would look really grubby.

Beautiful work - as always. Presumably they will work in CMBN?