John1966

Well then probably not a good idea to lose all your tanks in the first ten minutes. 🧐

Just started this last night but after 4 minutes I'm going to do something I never do - Start again!
The thing is, I read the briefing and it said move fast as you don't want to hang around in a kill zone.
No I don't. In fact I don't even want to enter a kill zone.
I looked at the map. Yep, I know a kill zone when I see one and that is definitely a kill zone.
Now, ordinarily I'd not have gone near the "colossal crack". I'd have gone through one or both villages. But from what the briefing said, I thought that might be cheating (sort of). Certainly not historical. Not playing it as intended. So, in all good faith, I charged up the centre using "Fast". Left a few further back with "Hunt" for targets that revealed themselves (which was actually quite effective).
But 4 minutes later with more than half a dozen Shermans brewing up, I thought, "Why is this a 2-hour scenario?"
If it was important to charge up the middle with a rolling barrage and a smoke screen, surely it'd be a 30-minute scenario?
So I thought, sod the briefing, I'll do this my way.
Now about to start again.
🧐
 

It's years since I played this, so I've forgotten what the briefing said. But, having read your post, I must have taken one look at the map and said "sod the briefing". 
In the meantime, if anyone is interested our colonial convict pal Ithikial did put out a 21 episode video of this battle on youtube about six years ago.

I think "sub-quoted" might work. 

I'll settle for a picture of a partisan.

We've all been there.
Last night's was particularly annoying. The 5-man para team with the PIAT lying in the long grass next to the road. The Stug drives up right in front of them little more than 20 foot away presenting a side shot. It's screwed.
Except the guys with the PIAT haven't spotted it. In fact, they continue to not spot it for a minute. How long it would have taken to spot it we will never know because halfway through that minute the Stug starts to slowly turn, leisurely lining up a shot, before blowing the team to kingdom come.
Their last words were, "What tank?"
Now, I know there's little point moaning about one-off incidents but I'm sure we've seen this lots of times (something similar happened in my previous game). How do five guys fail to spot 24 metric tons of noisily slow moving steel right in front of them? It had even fired. They would have seen it, they would have heard it, and, at that distance, they'd have even smelled it.
The fact that the buttoned up tank pointing the wrong way with multiple targets spotted the guys in the long grass just adds insult to injury. In isolation, I'd accept that. Perhaps they were a crack crew. Perhaps Wittmann himself decided to take a Stug on a jolly that day. But not when his tank is apparently invisible to nearby enemy infantry.
I have no idea what goes on "under the hood" in terms of spotting round calculations, but would it not be reasonable to suggest that tanks should automatically be spotted by non-cowering infantry with a clear LOS if the tank is under a certain distance away? Would it break the game?
Surely infantry's biggest advantage over AFVs is the fact that they're harder to spot than the AFV?
If the AFV is on a distant hill, fine. Easily missed. Behind a building, fine. Intervening foliage? Fine.
But in the open and a short distance away, it should be spotted every time.

Well they probably would if they had spotted it... 
Never give the PIAT to the short -sighted guy. 👓
🧐

Agree on all points. Also the fact that they were armed with a PIAT would lead you to believe they'd have orders to engage any armor that got within range. 

With 1-10k in ammo, no vehicle of mine travels anywhere without first firing a few rounds at every terrain feature or structure on it's path. I don't need contact markers and I'm sure you can find others like me who spend a lot of ammo firing at nothing!
It's worthwhile for the times you discover that you aren't firing at nothing.
It's not gamey and part of SOP by more players than just little old me... just saying.
Feel free to be smug when such fire is harmless to your position but don't then shed tears when it isn't.

The "?" symbols are very inaccurate without solid spotting.  It is anything but gamey to shoot at them.

There are a number of aspects to this which I probably won't cover off entirely but here goes ...
In the early CMx2 days, a lot of people complained vociferously and frequently usually in threads called 'Extra Time for Scenarios' about early AI surrenders along similar lines to your original post i.e., 'I'd tee'd up the perfect plan to nail the enemy only to have the scenario end' - or as you put it ...
"Well I was all lined up for the final strike on the German Tigers. Been getting everyone in position for over 10 minutes."
It took people a while to work out that if you added a few extra units that the player never saw, you could create a scenario that would allow the player to execute their 'perfect' plan.  That is one of the reasons that the trick is widely used by scenario designers.
From a design point of view, I admit it probably isn't perfect and maybe the game should take into account other factors such as objectives held or the morale state of the opposition, although of course with the latter - that only becomes apparent at end game and still leads to the frustration at not being able to execute the 'perfect' plan.  Having a morale dimension would also completely kill certain scenarios at birth - my Ap Bac Scenario for the Heaven and Earth module absolutely would not work if morale played strongly into the equation as about 70% of the total ARVN force have shocking motivational and leadership factors.
Conversely to early surrenders, players don't like schlepping across the map for half an hour having knocked over the enemy and secured all of the objectives at the end of a mission to root out a single unit in a tactically insignificant location, and slot it, in order to achieve a victory.
FWIW, my scenario design philosophy has always been about the narrative and I am mindful of the fact that anybody who elects to download and play a scenario is making a choice.  This means you have to accept that it is transactional between player and designer and ultimately you have to try as best as you can to satisfy player needs.
That means your narrative and design concept has to either hit, or balance some quite often divergent factors and of course no scenario is ever going to tick everyone's boxes, but the closer you get to achieving that aim the better.  As a simple example of this - if I call a scenario 'the Battle of Waterloo' then it ought to include things like La Haye Sainte, an allied defending force, a French attacking force and some Germans rolling up late on in the game because that is what the player is expecting.  I would also do my best within the editor to make sure that the map and forces resemble the real thing as well as ensuring that the moving parts in the AI plan bear some resemblance to real events.  If I fail to do this adequately, the transaction between designer and player fails because the player is expecting to refight Waterloo.  Similarly, if I call a mission (or have as its premise) 'Platoon attack' I would design that mission so that the player gets to execute a platoon attack and can actually culminate that attack.  This means that the enemy doesn't surrender when it loses a handful of soldiers.
Since I learned the 'reinforcements that never arrive' trick I have found that it gives me more control over achieving my scenario narratives.  It certainly isn't the only trick by the way but it is one that I consistently use with what I would like to think are fairly successful results.
The transactional piece for me looks vaguely like this:
Players want to win. Players want to feel challenged. Players want to feel that they are a commander in a realistic environment. CM players expect scenarios modelled on real engagements to bear some resemblance to them. To achieve that, you give them the tools in terms of time, forces available to them (e.g., sappers if there are minefields), clear mission command-style orders, a strong narrative, a realistic setting and you set the objectives/VPs accordingly.
It is usually the latter that is the most nuanced mainly because objectives and VPs are how victory is judged and what the victory-focused player will therefore judge the outcome.  It is also nuanced in terms of surrender points - I'm happy that the AI will trigger a surrender at the point where the player has closed in on the last objective but will make absolutely sure that it doesn't happen before that because the player rightfully feels cheated.  The same is true of unit objectives of any description - you can't give a player the goal of 'destroying all the Tigers' and then have the AI surrender before the player has even seen them.
Your comment about reaching the point where you'd expect them to surrender is absolutely valid but is subjective - some will call a scenario/surrender unrealistic if it doesn't happen at the point at which the force suffers 30% casualties - CM has it modelled at around 60% - yet this didn't seem right to you based on the fact that some gucci armour was on the map in the engagement you were fighting.  There is a lot of truth in what @sburkesaid - you only know you were 'cheated' after the scenario ended and to a large extent are judging based on that godlike information given to you at ceasefire.  I recall testing one of @George MC's scenarios recently and had got to a point in the scenario where I thought - "I'm not getting anywhere here, I'll hit surrender and see if I can edge a win," - an excellent example of how friction and the essence of manouevre warfare works - shattering the enemy's will (or in this instance mine) had come into play.  As it happens, I thought - "I'm testing this scenario so I should play it through in order to give the best feedback" and about three turns later I got the sense that the enemy had culminated and that I could actually continue with a reasonable chance of achieving the set objectives.  About five turns later, the enemy surrendered.  In short - a brilliant example of scenario design which ticked most of the transactional boxes for me.
To conclude - balancing these factors and explaining it in the narrative to manage the player's expectations and then testing the scenario to make sure that the thing works is key to the whole scenario design piece.  Adding a few extra dudes that the player doesn't see to stave off the early surrender is a proven and effective tool that people use to best deliver a 'really good scenario which I recommend' comment versus 'the AI surrendered early' comment.  Not perfect of course and it would be better if the designer could control the ratios and maybe use a combination of tools.

Yeah, I just played a scenario where my British paratroopers were trying to get a King Tiger that just wouldn't stay still. Ended up with about 30+ of them literally chasing it round the corner and down the street several blocks. It was like a deadly version of Benny Hill.

Yes I've had an AI pak line deployed once on an obj and they never came into play. They could have definitely gave me a run for a draw. I've also taken a fight to the last AI squad, actually a battalion HQ, and only then did a surrender occur. So there more going on there.

Not getting those 5 minutes back...
 

I don't think that sentiment applies any less because it's 2020.  Why would it?

I often get this. No idea what is going on. I assume it's because the call time isn't actually a guarantee, just a best guess.

Well they take an awfully long time to arrive and aren't too accurate when they do, but they make a glorious bang.

Last night I was playing an MG scenario as the Brits (inevitably) defending (I won't name it).
It was the usual thing. Taking on tanks with infantry and running out of ammo against repeated German onslaughts.
But I thought I had it in the bag with about 20 minutes to go. Why haven't the Germans surrendered though? There can't be more reinforcements, can there? Yes, there could.
Massive attack right down the middle and one to the right. As luck would have it I'd called in a long call time arty strike on the right "just in case" and the Germans walked right into it.
But my middle was completely exposed. The previous attacks had drawn my paras to the flanks where they were depleted and low on ammo. The reserve had been committed elsewhere. There was no-one to plug the huge gap.
I scrabbled around looking for anyone who could cover. The gap was largely open until it crossed a road at the foot of the hill the Germans were rushing down. Once they crossed that they were into the woods and there'd be little I could do to get them out. I pulled in mortar teams who'd run out of shells, HQs, AT teams, ATG crews out of HE, dismounted jeep drivers, anyone with bullets who could fire at the German flanks.
Then I looked at my rear. There was the battalion HQ and a nearby Bren carrier.
Major Cousens boarded the carrier with his team and started the journey round the woods to the road at the bottom of the hill. It would take three minutes to get there.
The guys who were firing on the attack were doing a good job but it wasn't quite enough. The lead Germans were reaching the road.
Then the Queen of the Battlefield roared into view at full speed. The gunner spraying the Germans crossing the road. As it continued, the Major and his HQ stood up in the still fast moving carrier, firing their Stens into the wheat field the other side of the road. There were red crosses everywhere.
When I hit the end of turn, the Germans surrendered. We made tea.
Nothing will make the Germans surrender quicker that a British major with a Sten riding the Queen of the Battlefield at high speed.
I felt thoroughly British. 🧐
Wish I took a screenshot.
🤔
 
 
 

Actually, now I think about it, I was aware they were in RT but I haven't got that one yet.
But Warts 'n' all is talking about a Market Garden scenario.

The screenshots are from CM Red Thunder but they show some flamethrowers at work in the game.     
 

I remember reading in Anthony Beevor's Arnhem about a para hailed as a hero by his comrades for going out under fire to the drop canisters looking for tea. Found some too.
Got a bollocking from his officers though.

Wonderful - I love carriers

https://combatmission.fandom.com/wiki/What_the_Germans_say
 

Last night I was playing an MG scenario as the Brits (inevitably) defending (I won't name it).
It was the usual thing. Taking on tanks with infantry and running out of ammo against repeated German onslaughts.
But I thought I had it in the bag with about 20 minutes to go. Why haven't the Germans surrendered though? There can't be more reinforcements, can there? Yes, there could.
Massive attack right down the middle and one to the right. As luck would have it I'd called in a long call time arty strike on the right "just in case" and the Germans walked right into it.
But my middle was completely exposed. The previous attacks had drawn my paras to the flanks where they were depleted and low on ammo. The reserve had been committed elsewhere. There was no-one to plug the huge gap.
I scrabbled around looking for anyone who could cover. The gap was largely open until it crossed a road at the foot of the hill the Germans were rushing down. Once they crossed that they were into the woods and there'd be little I could do to get them out. I pulled in mortar teams who'd run out of shells, HQs, AT teams, ATG crews out of HE, dismounted jeep drivers, anyone with bullets who could fire at the German flanks.
Then I looked at my rear. There was the battalion HQ and a nearby Bren carrier.
Major Cousens boarded the carrier with his team and started the journey round the woods to the road at the bottom of the hill. It would take three minutes to get there.
The guys who were firing on the attack were doing a good job but it wasn't quite enough. The lead Germans were reaching the road.
Then the Queen of the Battlefield roared into view at full speed. The gunner spraying the Germans crossing the road. As it continued, the Major and his HQ stood up in the still fast moving carrier, firing their Stens into the wheat field the other side of the road. There were red crosses everywhere.
When I hit the end of turn, the Germans surrendered. We made tea.
Nothing will make the Germans surrender quicker that a British major with a Sten riding the Queen of the Battlefield at high speed.
I felt thoroughly British. 🧐
Wish I took a screenshot.
🤔
 
 
 

Last night I was playing an MG scenario as the Brits (inevitably) defending (I won't name it).
It was the usual thing. Taking on tanks with infantry and running out of ammo against repeated German onslaughts.
But I thought I had it in the bag with about 20 minutes to go. Why haven't the Germans surrendered though? There can't be more reinforcements, can there? Yes, there could.
Massive attack right down the middle and one to the right. As luck would have it I'd called in a long call time arty strike on the right "just in case" and the Germans walked right into it.
But my middle was completely exposed. The previous attacks had drawn my paras to the flanks where they were depleted and low on ammo. The reserve had been committed elsewhere. There was no-one to plug the huge gap.
I scrabbled around looking for anyone who could cover. The gap was largely open until it crossed a road at the foot of the hill the Germans were rushing down. Once they crossed that they were into the woods and there'd be little I could do to get them out. I pulled in mortar teams who'd run out of shells, HQs, AT teams, ATG crews out of HE, dismounted jeep drivers, anyone with bullets who could fire at the German flanks.
Then I looked at my rear. There was the battalion HQ and a nearby Bren carrier.
Major Cousens boarded the carrier with his team and started the journey round the woods to the road at the bottom of the hill. It would take three minutes to get there.
The guys who were firing on the attack were doing a good job but it wasn't quite enough. The lead Germans were reaching the road.
Then the Queen of the Battlefield roared into view at full speed. The gunner spraying the Germans crossing the road. As it continued, the Major and his HQ stood up in the still fast moving carrier, firing their Stens into the wheat field the other side of the road. There were red crosses everywhere.
When I hit the end of turn, the Germans surrendered. We made tea.
Nothing will make the Germans surrender quicker that a British major with a Sten riding the Queen of the Battlefield at high speed.
I felt thoroughly British. 🧐
Wish I took a screenshot.
🤔