OBJ

@Tux @The_Capt you and many others are closer to this than I am ever going to be. Which of the drone-tank or drone-aircraft analogies will turn out to be more accurate I have no idea, if either. I do agree with you if last century analogies do prove related that specialized equipment, organization and doctrines were developed to counter both tanks and planes. I have every reason to believe as you do there will be counter-drone equipment, units and doctrine, very likely counter drone drones Combatants will strive for 'drone supremacy' likely across all domains.

Thank you Dan, you're probably much more up on this than I am. My naval interests are relatively new. For those like me with new naval interests the little I know is there's two current 'big ideas' in USN circles with respect to full scale conventional war with China over Taiwan: 1. Air-Sea Battle, Air Force long range strategic bombers takes out Chinese A2/AD capability to allow the carriers to operate within the 1st island chain and range of their strike aircraft chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/ASB-ConceptImplementation-Summary-May-2013.pdf Dated 2013 but a primer on the strategy https://breakingdefense.com/2023/01/back-to-the-future-resurrecting-air-sea-battle-in-the-pacific/ Suspect given the source, but with bias filters on still nice brief summary 2. Submarines are the only platform capable of effectively engaging a cross strait invasion force in the time window needed to defeat the invasion before/as it lands, there aren't enough submarines, many of the submarines we have need to be reconfigured to launch cruise missiles not ICBMs, and US submarine doctrine needs to be turned on it's head (in the shallow waters of the South China Sea make and use noise, don't try to be silent) chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.hudson.org/Fighting+into+the+Bastions+Bryan+Clark+Timothy+A+Walton.pdf

Definitely not good. Just another heart breaking tragedy, but this one with such painful irony. Probably just me, but it's not clear if this is primarily an ROE issue or maybe more as you point out a unit discipline issue. The accounts I read say IDF shot two of three dead when first encountered with makeshift white flag, the third retreated, yelled surrender language in Hebrew, and was pursued and shot dead. Pure speculation on my part, personal response to the micro tragedy this is, but for the Israelis maybe easiest and quickest to get this out of the news cycle by explaining this as an ROE violation, which it certainly would be as shooting escaped hostages is probably outside their ROE, than admitting the condition of Israeli reserve infantry units after 40-50 days of sustained urban warfare, especially after what I understand to be the intentional hostage baited ambush which killed 9 IDF members, including a COL and a LTC.

Thanks Steve, The Bobiverse series just landed on my Christmas list

Hey, LLF, I was able to get to the threads through the link you sent, but not what I suppose are images. Andrew Perpetua thoughts on infantry Co/Bn mortars interesting and seem pretty supportable given cost and ability to logistically support alternatives. No idea if Musk is mucking around again.

Really appreciate the thoughts on this by @chrisl and all others after. I just started looking but haven't found anything that looks like force structure or doctrine for massed use of drones. Maybe not surprisingly there does not yet seem to be a 'FM 7-7X, the Drone Platoon in the Attack.' The impression you get is field practice in Ukraine is way ahead of published military thought. Maybe someone here knows the Ukrainian or Russian drone equivalent of JFC Fuller or Immelmann/Boelcke. I might differ with others on AI. I think the integration of autonomous AI into conventional war kill chains in recon/strike complexes is inevitable given the advantages in response/decision cycle time. I did find this interesting, thoughts on drone 'swarm tactics.' Author is an Italian Air Force Lieutenant attending USMC U. https://www.usmcu.edu/Outreach/Marine-Corps-University-Press/Expeditions-with-MCUP-digital-journal/A-New-Way-of-War/

Ah, from my limited experience this seems like a perfect discussion topic for this forum. Coming late to the party, it does seems theoretically possible that the application of mass FPV drone precision fires could create the needed defense suppression for clearing lanes through the minefields and other obstacles to the full depth of the prepared defenses. But there are questions I hope have not already been asked or answered elsewhere in the forums: 1. How does the attacker mass the needed intelligence, logistics, and FPV drone fires units, obstacle clearing units and follow on penetration units without being detected by the defender 2. What mass of FPV drome fires would be required over what physical space over what period of time to allow successful mine/obstacle clearing and penetration to the full depth of prepared defenses to make this work 3. What would the composition of exploitation combat and logistics forces be 4. What would the scheme of maneuver and support be after full penetration of the defenses 5. What would be the defenders anticipated responses and how would each be countered 6. Where are EM, Cyber and AI in this discussion Unfortunately I have no sources to quote, even to support my generic questions let alone answers, but I will start looking. I also look forward to what I fervently hope will be a rich discussion of likely near future tactical combat. Who knows, @The_Capt and others may one day, if not already, be cited just as J.F.C. Fuller and Basil Liddell Hart were in their day, along with the modern equivalent of expanding torrents

Apologies if a repeat, did not find a duplicate reference, so...2021 JFQ paper on defense again becoming dominant in warfare, all domain and inter-domain discourse to include space, cyber and EM, global economic and military implications, multi-domain warfighting, the difficulty of synchronizing cross domain attacks, acknowledgement no one really knows what new technologies are capable of until they are employed, implications for the US/west success in resisting Chinese and Russian armed aggression. Also this, in the EM discussion, which was new to me, possibly not to others here, 'At the tactical level, the United States has demonstrated a drone that can create an EMP directed at specific targets.' The paper reinforces the opinion expressed here the world is seeing the emergence of defense as the current dominant form of warfare. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/jfq/jfq-103/jfq-103_10-17_Hammes.pdf?ver=OMgkzdhCeQLSxaHs_SvOdw%3D%3D Defense becomes dominant again JFQ 103 Q4 2021.pdf

I agree, @Brille In my limited experience, the vehicle TAC AI, when recognizing it is outmatched by a spotted enemy, will attempt to retreat/move to cover, firing at the spotted target while retreating.

Just one reference, there are plenty more from many other sources. If you are interested google, 'theories on historical cycles of global violence.' In a quick read through this one seemed reasonably objective even with a clear 'western' bias: https://jfsdigital.org/articles-and-essays/2023-2/vol-28-no-1-september-2023/ukraine-war-and-historical-war-cycles-was-it-to-be-expected-exploring-the-futures-of-the-war-in-ukraine-through-historical-war-cycles/ Good to be liked by a moderator

@The_Capt and everyone else please don't misunderstand me. I am a beneficiary of, former uniformed defender of, and proponent of the world order as it evolved in the aftermath of WWII, warts and all, peaceful stability and progress for all being the goal. None of Xi's China, Putin's Russia, the Ayatollah's Iran nor Kim's DRNK appeal to me. There are other regimes purporting to be democracies I don't think I'd enjoy being part of either. I consider myself all too aware of America's internal fragility and dependence on international stability. I cannot see why anyone would applaud the present world order starting to give way, unless they think they see something better for themselves. If they see a better way for all, I hope they will share it widely. To me all anyone has to do is read any of the books similar to Graham Allison's 'Destined for War' or Kevin Rudd's 'The Avoidable War,' or the novel '2034: A Novel of the Next World War,' by Ackerman and Stavridis, to wish western world leaders had ignored the academics and economists that thought in 2000 if enough Chinese got rich enough they would demand and install a pluralistic liberal western democracy. This thinking led to China being given most favored nation status and invited into the WTO, and then becoming, 'the world's factory,' all the while retaining one party communist rule, a system that selected Xi as President in 2012. There is also a body of thought on historical cycles of global conflict that might lead one to conclude, 'we're due for another one soon,' 'one' being another global war, soon being 2025-2050. Some might see a chain from Ukraine(Putin)->Gaza(Netanyahu)->Taiwan(Xi)->global war. If you want to put Iraq(Bush) at the head of that chain you can certainly do so. Regardless of where the chain starts it it has the possibility of ending with most of the Global South looking on and hoping most of the fallout stays in the Global North, while grappling with a collapsing or collapsed global economy and levels of human suffering certainly far exceeding those of 1945 given the global population then was 2.3 billion and is now 7.4 billion, 6.6 billion of the 7.4 billion living north of the equator. It's always hard to know whether as an amateur observer and prognosticator you are being pessimistic, optimistic, or realistic. I strive for the last but often find out I have been one of the other two. In this case I hope I am being overly pessimistic. Given Steve's prescience, we can only hope the next CM title isn't 'CM: Pacific 2030.'

Just to pile on to what @SlowMotion said, there is now a 'Target Briefly' in the 'C/Combat' panel. From your shoot/scoot waypoint you can plot a 'target briefly' command to engage at least the area/action point you want to engage, setting your 'Pause' duration to match the 'Target Briefly' duration, or not, before your unit reverses/moves into cover.

@The-Capt, I have a tremendous amount of respect for you, both from what you have said of your personal experience of war here and the opinions you have expressed here. However, we differ in our view of just how strong the rule of law and world order are around the globe in the present day. I do not think the IDF is concerned they will be prosecuted by the Israeli judicial system for their conduct of the war against Hamas. I believe a perception within the IDF that conduct commensurate with what we have seen since 7 Oct was criminal would have led to different behavior from the start. For what it is worth the IDF says: Additionally, as a democratic country committed to the rule of law, Israel subjects the IDF’s military justice system to civilian oversight. https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/military-advocate-general-s-corps/the-idf-military-justice-system/#:~:text=Additionally%2C as a democratic country,justice system to civilian oversight. The IDF has lived with near continuous conflict with Arab neighbors since 1948. All of that history and experience undoubtedly shaped the IDF we are seeing today. To my knowledge, and I have looked, there are no IDF generals, retired or otherwise, speaking out, publicly or privately, against the way Israel is conducting the war against Hamas.

With respect to in-conflict and post-conflict war crimes accountability, what entity in the world has the practical ability to hold in theater on the ground war crimes investigations and prosecute and punish those found guilty? If the ICC, Israel is not Serbia, neither is Gaza, or the West Bank. I suppose the ICC could issue arrest warrants as was done with Putin, and potentially condemn those found guilty in absentia, but that doesn't seem to have had much practical effect in Ukraine. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-khan-kc-cairo-situation-state-palestine-and-israel https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/09/02/qa-international-criminal-court-and-united-states The list of those not agreeing to be accountable to the ICC is interesting and informative (2nd article, underlining is mine). 'The US is not a state party to the Rome Statute. The US participated in the negotiations that led to the creation of the court. However, in 1998 the US was one of only seven countries – along with China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen – that voted against the Rome Statute. US President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute in 2000 but did not submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification. In 2002, President George W. Bush effectively “unsigned” the treaty, sending a note to the United Nations secretary-general that the US no longer intended to ratify the treaty and that it did not have any obligations toward it. However, since then, US relations with the court have been complicated but often positive.'

Re planning movement based on LOS along the planned path, I hadn't done this previously, but wish I had. Tedious but resulted for me in a much better appreciation of a) what approach had the most cover, b) where along my planned avenue of approach I was visible to various potential enemy positions. I did same as image for multiple units, I just don't know how to show the direct fire lines for all units at once. This allowed me to plan smoke to get across what otherwise was a wide open kill zone. Worked right up until a spoiler event those that have played the scenario undoubtedly are aware of

Not sure, this maybe outside the scope of this discussion and this forum, but, lets see. In addition to us as a community having an abiding appreciation for the game/simulation that is Combat Mission, should we, as a community with direct experience of world events over the last 20-70 years, be tying this thread and the one on UK together into a robust discussion of the theories on cycles of human violence? Would we benefit as a community in this forum from a wider discussion and understanding of these theories, their implications, and potential to impact us as a community? What would the discussion mean for Combat Mission, the game, and the community? Just one reference, there are plenty more from many other sources. If you are interested google, 'theories on historical cycles of global violence.' In a quick read through this one seemed reasonably objective even with a clear 'western' bias: https://jfsdigital.org/articles-and-essays/2023-2/vol-28-no-1-september-2023/ukraine-war-and-historical-war-cycles-was-it-to-be-expected-exploring-the-futures-of-the-war-in-ukraine-through-historical-war-cycles/ There are a couple quotes I thought worth including below the graphic. The take away I got was, at least in this article, the consensus seems to be there will be another global conflagration somewhere between 2025 and 2050. 'In conclusion, the cyclical nature of violence and conflict is a complex phenomenon that can be attributed to a variety of causes, including economic and political troubles, generational shifts in social psychology, and theories of social cohesion and natural life cycles. While there is no fateful date that can be directly blamed for the outbreak of violence, the similarities between past and present cycles can provide insight into the potential duration and disintegration of civilizations. Through the study of these cycles, we can better understand the history of human conflict and even think about future trends.' 'In the atmosphere of all-encompassing hysteria and bullying, it’s imperative to remind people that life goes on and that staying human is the first and foremost necessity. Any representative of Homo sapiens belongs to humanity first (…), and some national or ethnic entity, way down the list.' 'The real mystery lies in why, despite being aware of the tragedies of our past, we continue to repeat history.'

I have been struggling to understand the concept of proportionality in the context of the current conflict in Gaza. This article was helpful to me. Apologies if it was previously shared. I did a search on the thread and didn't find it. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jillgoldenziel/2023/10/31/proportionality-doesnt-mean-what-you-think-it-means-in-gaza/?sh=522a0e59345b This was also helpful, current case study of IDF strike on Jabalia Camp with background on US/NATO practice in Afghanistan/Iraq/Syria. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/assessing-israel-s-approach-to-proportionality-in-the-conduct-of-hostilities-in-gaza

Thank you Steve, truly wonderful. I haven't tried the other upgrades, but will now. Merry Christmas, put an extra finger-full in your eggnog for me

Thanks Steve Battlefront.com, Inc. Purchase Order - 310222 I also tried activating after turning my protection off, still no go. I'm sure i'm going to be very embarrassed when I find out what i'm doing wrong.

Hi Hilts, Try searching on 'activate' in C:\Users\<Computer name>\Documents\Battlefront\Combat Mission. You should get a short cut to 'Activate Modules'. See if that works, although you are taking advise from a guy that can't get the CMBN v4 upgrade to work yet. Also look in C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\Battlefront\Combat Mission Battle for Normandy, should be there too.

Nope, bought the bundle, only tried CMBN, so far, was already patched to 3.12. I open CMBN, I can see lower right corner, says 'v4.00 Game Engine 4' Get the error messaage 'License Failure: Base game 4.0 is required. Please run the Activate New Products utility and enter the license key. Visit...' In the CMBN directory, I hit the 'Activate New products' short cut, opens the 'Activate New Products - CMBN' screen, I enter manually, I paste, my bundle upgrade license key, and get 'Invalid Serial Number.' ?? Needless to say this is very embarrassing given after Steve's fix everyone else's seems to work.

Spoiler - Custer's Stand Loving this game, but came across an issue with a veteran 3 man M1919A4 MG team in 'deployed' status, in a cathedral bell tower, level 8 of 8, giving up 'deployed' status to reposition on the same level, when an enemy attack comes in. The MG team repositions on it's own losing 'deployed' status, even though they had LOS to the area of attack. I did a forum search on 'deploy' and found issues, but nothing quite like this. I know heavy weapons positioning in buildings can be an issue, but haven't seen this before. I have a saved game of the turn the enemy attacks, will do forum search on how to submit, too large to attach here. MG team in question is in the Eastern cathedral.

Reading Evans, aircraft production figures; 'US '42 - 48,000; '43 - 86,000; '44 - 114,000 Sov '40 -21,000; '43 - 37,000 Brit '40 - 15,000; '41 - 20,000; '42 23,000; '43 - 35,000; '44 - 47,000 Ger '40 - 10,000; '41 - 11,000; '42 - 15,000;'43 - 26,000; '44 - 40,000 Similar ratios for tanks So the Germans were outnumbered roughly 5 to one, had their operational orders read by their enemies before they could issue them (Enigma), still managed to be on the strategic offensive into '42, then lasted for three more years on the defensive. They must have been doing something right, don't you think? Perhaps it was their incredibly effective use of hampstertruppen.

AMEN Brother!