Baneman

+1  An Englishman firmly agreeing with a Scot!

Nope, uh uh, sorry.
The lack of adjustment has been on pretty public display since 2016.
Which strengthens your point.

6th Army? Heh. Maybe Putler should have promoted him to field marshal ...

Nope, uh uh, sorry.
The lack of adjustment has been on pretty public display since 2016.
Which strengthens your point.

Nope, uh uh, sorry.
The lack of adjustment has been on pretty public display since 2016.
Which strengthens your point.

This is a small thing (hopefully) but I'd really like some extra knobs to play with particle effects in the game. Perhaps a way to configure explosions and smoke effects (while keeping the core gameplay effects, naturally) with things like:
Multiple variants of smoke or explosions. Right now we have 1 explosion (explosiona) and 4 types of smoke used in different contexts (smoke black, smoke grey, smoke white, smoke dust). I'd like to be able to make multiple explosion animations or multiple variants of a single smoke texture to give some more variety to the effects. Ability to set explosions to render at the proper z-level. Currently explosions render on top of the transparency pass, so you see them clear as day through smoke, trees, glass, etc. I'd like to be able to have them look properly obscured by smoke and dust.' Define explosion animations for different calibre rounds. This would be like #1 above, but like we have explosion sounds for small/medium/large etc. the possibility of making different animations, for example, for autocannon hits, for tank gun hits, and for aircraft bombs would be pretty cool. Ability to define the orientation of explosions. This would be best combined with #1 again, but if we could create animations that are oriented normal to the surface of whatever the object is striking we could make some very realistic looking explosions. Ability to make explosion animations for specific materials. Like how impacts can cause different sounds depending on the material hit, I'd like to be able to make a different explosion for dirt, concrete, metal, etc. Longer explosion animations! To the best of my knowledge we're limited to less than 30 frames. I'd love to be able to make something just a little bit longer to really blend for example smoke to fade out. So... "small" ask right? 😄

Another of Putin/Russia's strategic goals met.
( I'm assuming that the plan was to stop selling oil and gas to Europe ... right ?  😆 )
"BREAKING: Germany agrees to a long-term gas supply deal with Qatar"
https://twitter.com/spectatorindex/status/1505630820056563712?s=20&t=2m5ed8y8ZNiyc4wy_6AwdA

Yes, but it was never about NATO expanding east, it was countries that happened to be east of the NATO group of the time that felt threatened by a future Russia and wanting to join.
There's no reason to join a defensive organisation unless you distrust your neighbour  - and given Russian behaviour, they weren't wrong to want to join.
Do you really think that Russia wouldn't be bullying the Baltics just as in Georgia, Moldova etc. if those countries had stayed out of NATO ?

Yes, but it was never about NATO expanding east, it was countries that happened to be east of the NATO group of the time that felt threatened by a future Russia and wanting to join.
There's no reason to join a defensive organisation unless you distrust your neighbour  - and given Russian behaviour, they weren't wrong to want to join.
Do you really think that Russia wouldn't be bullying the Baltics just as in Georgia, Moldova etc. if those countries had stayed out of NATO ?

Yes, but it was never about NATO expanding east, it was countries that happened to be east of the NATO group of the time that felt threatened by a future Russia and wanting to join.
There's no reason to join a defensive organisation unless you distrust your neighbour  - and given Russian behaviour, they weren't wrong to want to join.
Do you really think that Russia wouldn't be bullying the Baltics just as in Georgia, Moldova etc. if those countries had stayed out of NATO ?

Yes, but it was never about NATO expanding east, it was countries that happened to be east of the NATO group of the time that felt threatened by a future Russia and wanting to join.
There's no reason to join a defensive organisation unless you distrust your neighbour  - and given Russian behaviour, they weren't wrong to want to join.
Do you really think that Russia wouldn't be bullying the Baltics just as in Georgia, Moldova etc. if those countries had stayed out of NATO ?

Yes, but it was never about NATO expanding east, it was countries that happened to be east of the NATO group of the time that felt threatened by a future Russia and wanting to join.
There's no reason to join a defensive organisation unless you distrust your neighbour  - and given Russian behaviour, they weren't wrong to want to join.
Do you really think that Russia wouldn't be bullying the Baltics just as in Georgia, Moldova etc. if those countries had stayed out of NATO ?

Great news! The bomb shelter under Drama Theater in Mariupol survived the hit of 500 kg bomb. Now the rubbles removing have started to reach the entrance of shelter. There is still unknow about possible casualties among people which were inside the buiding and out of shelter. 

Isn't there at least one Moscow in the States ?
That could make for some tense double-checking of your targeting co-ordinates !

Absolutely. The International Legion are enlisted personnel in the Ukrainian army. Ukraine is a recognised nation with a seat in the UN. I can't speak to Canadian law specifically, but International Law, such as it is, recognises them as legitimate combatants subject to the various Conventions.
If someone just wandered across the border and started shooting Russians, then they'd be a criminal. It's the imprimatur of Ukrainian acceptance (and the control that implies) that makes the volunteers "legal".

Mr Picky would also say that Calvary is where Jesus was crucified or something like that 😜

So we are probably overdue on a discussion on what is going on at the tactical level.  I have held off trying to do an analysis because things were simply too turbulent to draw any real conclusions, still are in fact.  However, I  will offer a hypothesis of what I think is occurring and we can try and go from there.
In the west we have been watching these "Russian wars" with a lot of interest over the last 8 years. The reason for this is that we are all very paranoid of becoming a 21st century version of the WW1 generals - discovering on the battlefield that our doctrine has become completely obsolete.  In WWI at the tactical level it was machine guns and fast firing artillery at long ranges, at the operational and strategic it was railways, telegraph wires and canned food preservation.  They all added up to totally different war than anyone was expecting that included the end of some pretty major stuff like cavalry.
So in this war we have all been watching and scratching our heads as to "what just happened?"  At the tactical level back in 2014, and was confirmed in the short Azer-Armenian war, that something had changed.  The Russians had linked UAVs and massed fires at the tactical level, the Azerbaijanians mimicked this in 2020, and the effect was to be able to crush massed enemy armor formations over the horizon and then move in mechanized forces for what was essentially a "sweep up" close battle.  Everyone was expecting the same for this war.
The Ukrainians, being at the receiving end in 2014 have likely figured out that playing by the old rulebook will not work.  So my hypothesis is 1) the Russians have been trying to follow their doctrine of long range Find, Mass Fires Fix/Attrit and Heavy Close clean up to Finish, but 2) The Ukrainians have adopted tactics that negate #1.
The evidence for #1 is the fact that the Russians have appeared to stick with the BTG which is a concept with massed fires at the tactical level baked-in:
  
(https://www.globalsecurity.org/jhtml/jframe.html#https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/images/btg-image01.jpg|||Battalion Tactical Group)
In western doctrine a BG will have integral mortars and likely a Arty Bn in close support.  The Russians added 6 x MLRS to this mix and if you look at Soviet doctrine, MLRS are normally at Regimental/Div level.  This matched what we saw in the field in 2014 and 2020 very closely.
The evidence for #2 is all over social media.  The Ukrainians, learning quickly from 2014, look like they have dis-aggregated. More importantly and to the point, they have largely abandoned defensive mass but have not lost lethality.  I think the Ukrainians are still forming mass for offensive actions but the defensive is a lot of small units dispersed all over the place with weapon systems that are light, portable and have really extended range and reach; they have become the swarm the Russians are trying to hit with a shotgun.  Further, by dis-aggregating the Ukrainians look like they have turned some ideas about maneuver on its head.  Rear areas are not not "rear" anymore, it is all FEBA because small units with next gen ATGMs are cutting Russian logistics to pieces, making all the Russian mass heavily dislocated (or perhaps contributing to Russian mess ups).
We spend a lot of time slagging Russian failures, and there are quite a few and well earned, but we should also keep an eye on Ukrainian victories, because they might very well be happening on their own merits and not all on Russian screw ups.  For example, we may be seeing a lot of abandoned Russian MBTs because there are no refueling or recovery assets left due to Ukrainians adopting a new path very effectively.
So what?  Well the question is, "are we seeing an anomaly or trend?"  As we look over at our own heavy steel, we have to ask ourselves "what if our next opponent looks and fights like the Ukrainians and not the Russians?"   The answer to that question may be a blip in military force development but is also may be a signpost much in the same way 1914 was because the technology that enables the Ukrainian tactics is accelerating - smart, very long range autonomous systems that can overwhelm current mechanized protection/shield at a system level.  
Personally, I think it is too soon to call it.  There may be times ahead where mass demonstrates it merits and they may be decisive; however, it is all worth watching closely because none of us want to the a "horse cavalry commander" in the next war. 

Seriously   ....  think maybe a little bit before you post . There is clear evidence out there  freely available that these "Bioweapon" labs are actually remnants form the Soviet era which the Americans are helping the Ukrainians to clean up .
https://theparadise.ng/fact-check-the-russian-army-is-destroying-u-s-controlled-biolabs/ 
"While biolabs exist in Ukraine, it is misleading at best to call them “U.S. biolabs.” Laboratories that store and study dangerous pathogens are present throughout the former Soviet bloc, with many dating back to the Cold War. The U.S. did not build any of these facilities. That said, in 2005, the U.S. Department of Defense and the Ministry of Health of Ukraine entered into a mutual agreement to work together to safeguard the labs as part of a broader effort to prevent bioterrorism. The installations are run by the Ukrainian government, with some funding for upgrades and repairs provided by the U.S."
As a fellow New Zealander  - although one out of the country for a very long while now - please try to show our education system in a little more of a positive light .
 

Hmmm, notice how the CM spotting model is NOT broken ! 😲
The first and 2nd vehicles drove past that ambush position which is no more than 10 AS's from the road and covered by only spindly trees and saw nothing !

Hmmm, notice how the CM spotting model is NOT broken ! 😲
The first and 2nd vehicles drove past that ambush position which is no more than 10 AS's from the road and covered by only spindly trees and saw nothing !

Hmmm, notice how the CM spotting model is NOT broken ! 😲
The first and 2nd vehicles drove past that ambush position which is no more than 10 AS's from the road and covered by only spindly trees and saw nothing !

Hmmm, notice how the CM spotting model is NOT broken ! 😲
The first and 2nd vehicles drove past that ambush position which is no more than 10 AS's from the road and covered by only spindly trees and saw nothing !

Hmmm, notice how the CM spotting model is NOT broken ! 😲
The first and 2nd vehicles drove past that ambush position which is no more than 10 AS's from the road and covered by only spindly trees and saw nothing !

That moment when you have to replace your "strongest army in the world" with nobodies from the middle east

Every single country has biolabs researching pathogens, unless it's an absolute backwater ****hole with zero medical research budget.
Because to produce meds you need that stuff you are targeting with meds to test meds against.
Saying that "omg a country has biolabs with dangerous viruses" is a great argument only for absolutely uneducated people who have zero clue about how medicine works. E.g. not very intelligent conspiracy consumers.