akd

Friends, Grognards, Forummen, lend me your eyes...
If I have thermals and you do not, then there will be conditions under which I can actually see a target and you can only know that it is roughly where I tell you it is, possibly no more than this bearing, this distance since you also may not be able to see relevant reference points.  No amount of time is going to cause you to develop innate thermal vision and see the target yourself under those conditions, well unless we are speaking on evolutionary scale time.

Friends, Grognards, Forummen, lend me your eyes...
If I have thermals and you do not, then there will be conditions under which I can actually see a target and you can only know that it is roughly where I tell you it is, possibly no more than this bearing, this distance since you also may not be able to see relevant reference points.  No amount of time is going to cause you to develop innate thermal vision and see the target yourself under those conditions, well unless we are speaking on evolutionary scale time.

None of those other units have thermal weapon sights.  They all have NVGs.
Read my post above again regarding information sharing.
 
It has a thermal weapon sight for the M249.
Yes, it has a much more powerful thermal imager than the weapon sights carried in the rifle squad.
The squad as a whole will be better because it is observing with 3x thermal sights instead of just one.
I think your conceptual problem here is that the thermal weapon sights are tied to the individual weapons and are not shown in the special equipment panel, whereas NVGs (light intensification, not thermal) are shown.  That's why I said the issue was obscure, because it is not readily apparent and takes careful testing to understand.  Possibly we could address this via a mod by denoting the thermal capability on the weapon icon itself?
 

None of those other units have thermal weapon sights.  They all have NVGs.
Read my post above again regarding information sharing.
 
It has a thermal weapon sight for the M249.
Yes, it has a much more powerful thermal imager than the weapon sights carried in the rifle squad.
The squad as a whole will be better because it is observing with 3x thermal sights instead of just one.
I think your conceptual problem here is that the thermal weapon sights are tied to the individual weapons and are not shown in the special equipment panel, whereas NVGs (light intensification, not thermal) are shown.  That's why I said the issue was obscure, because it is not readily apparent and takes careful testing to understand.  Possibly we could address this via a mod by denoting the thermal capability on the weapon icon itself?
 

None of those other units have thermal weapon sights.  They all have NVGs.
Read my post above again regarding information sharing.
 
It has a thermal weapon sight for the M249.
Yes, it has a much more powerful thermal imager than the weapon sights carried in the rifle squad.
The squad as a whole will be better because it is observing with 3x thermal sights instead of just one.
I think your conceptual problem here is that the thermal weapon sights are tied to the individual weapons and are not shown in the special equipment panel, whereas NVGs (light intensification, not thermal) are shown.  That's why I said the issue was obscure, because it is not readily apparent and takes careful testing to understand.  Possibly we could address this via a mod by denoting the thermal capability on the weapon icon itself?
 

First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works:
When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker).  If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the receiving unit gaining a positive contact for itself.  But this is most important: the unit must still spot the contact itself with its own sensors. All spotting has a highly variable "human factor" applied that can lead to significantly different outcomes in the same circumstances.  Anecdotes comparing times to spot are useless for drawing comparative conclusions about spotting beyond possible / not possible.  I don't care if 3 times in a row X spotted Z one minute sooner than Y, that does not mean X is better at spotting Z than Y.  Now repeat this 100 times carefully controlling all other factors and perhaps we can talk about quantitative differences in spotting ability. (Does this suck? Why yes, from experience it really does.) Second, what Erwin is encountering in George's scenario:
The US Mech Inf squad has access to 3x thermal small arms sights: 1 on each M249 and 1 on the Marksman's rifle.  A split off scout team from a full squad includes one M249 gunner, so it too has a thermal optic.  Here is what's a bit weird: the model switch showing these actually on the weapons is tied to a hard day / night time that does not vary based on conditions, but the thermal optics are still considered to be in use when they provide an advantage over day optics.  In this case, they seem to be allowing units with thermal optics to see further into the morning haze. Of the infantry units discussed in the scenario, only units with Javelin CLUs also have access to thermal optics. The units without thermals lose LoS at 1668m (at scenario start on my test map using the same date, time and conditions as George MC's map), so if a unit with thermals has shared a possible contact beyond this range with a unit without thermals, it will remain a possible contact for the receiving unit with no chance of becoming a positive contact unless conditions change or the unit alters its spotting equation (moves, acquires a new sensor). 

None of those other units have thermal weapon sights.  They all have NVGs.
Read my post above again regarding information sharing.
 
It has a thermal weapon sight for the M249.
Yes, it has a much more powerful thermal imager than the weapon sights carried in the rifle squad.
The squad as a whole will be better because it is observing with 3x thermal sights instead of just one.
I think your conceptual problem here is that the thermal weapon sights are tied to the individual weapons and are not shown in the special equipment panel, whereas NVGs (light intensification, not thermal) are shown.  That's why I said the issue was obscure, because it is not readily apparent and takes careful testing to understand.  Possibly we could address this via a mod by denoting the thermal capability on the weapon icon itself?
 

First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works:
When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker).  If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the receiving unit gaining a positive contact for itself.  But this is most important: the unit must still spot the contact itself with its own sensors. All spotting has a highly variable "human factor" applied that can lead to significantly different outcomes in the same circumstances.  Anecdotes comparing times to spot are useless for drawing comparative conclusions about spotting beyond possible / not possible.  I don't care if 3 times in a row X spotted Z one minute sooner than Y, that does not mean X is better at spotting Z than Y.  Now repeat this 100 times carefully controlling all other factors and perhaps we can talk about quantitative differences in spotting ability. (Does this suck? Why yes, from experience it really does.) Second, what Erwin is encountering in George's scenario:
The US Mech Inf squad has access to 3x thermal small arms sights: 1 on each M249 and 1 on the Marksman's rifle.  A split off scout team from a full squad includes one M249 gunner, so it too has a thermal optic.  Here is what's a bit weird: the model switch showing these actually on the weapons is tied to a hard day / night time that does not vary based on conditions, but the thermal optics are still considered to be in use when they provide an advantage over day optics.  In this case, they seem to be allowing units with thermal optics to see further into the morning haze. Of the infantry units discussed in the scenario, only units with Javelin CLUs also have access to thermal optics. The units without thermals lose LoS at 1668m (at scenario start on my test map using the same date, time and conditions as George MC's map), so if a unit with thermals has shared a possible contact beyond this range with a unit without thermals, it will remain a possible contact for the receiving unit with no chance of becoming a positive contact unless conditions change or the unit alters its spotting equation (moves, acquires a new sensor). 

None of those other units have thermal weapon sights.  They all have NVGs.
Read my post above again regarding information sharing.
 
It has a thermal weapon sight for the M249.
Yes, it has a much more powerful thermal imager than the weapon sights carried in the rifle squad.
The squad as a whole will be better because it is observing with 3x thermal sights instead of just one.
I think your conceptual problem here is that the thermal weapon sights are tied to the individual weapons and are not shown in the special equipment panel, whereas NVGs (light intensification, not thermal) are shown.  That's why I said the issue was obscure, because it is not readily apparent and takes careful testing to understand.  Possibly we could address this via a mod by denoting the thermal capability on the weapon icon itself?
 

That's some solid analysis, so all seems good in this regard. Thanks!
 

Perhaps it isn't as black and white as you sketch it. BF might indeed be interested in feedback from customers. Also AKD is interested, why would he otherwise ask you for the file?
For about a decade there have been things like wetransfer where you can just drag and drop stuff without registering at all. Upload a file, choose to get a link instead of email share and paste the link here. Done in 30sec.

 

First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works:
When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker).  If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the receiving unit gaining a positive contact for itself.  But this is most important: the unit must still spot the contact itself with its own sensors. All spotting has a highly variable "human factor" applied that can lead to significantly different outcomes in the same circumstances.  Anecdotes comparing times to spot are useless for drawing comparative conclusions about spotting beyond possible / not possible.  I don't care if 3 times in a row X spotted Z one minute sooner than Y, that does not mean X is better at spotting Z than Y.  Now repeat this 100 times carefully controlling all other factors and perhaps we can talk about quantitative differences in spotting ability. (Does this suck? Why yes, from experience it really does.) Second, what Erwin is encountering in George's scenario:
The US Mech Inf squad has access to 3x thermal small arms sights: 1 on each M249 and 1 on the Marksman's rifle.  A split off scout team from a full squad includes one M249 gunner, so it too has a thermal optic.  Here is what's a bit weird: the model switch showing these actually on the weapons is tied to a hard day / night time that does not vary based on conditions, but the thermal optics are still considered to be in use when they provide an advantage over day optics.  In this case, they seem to be allowing units with thermal optics to see further into the morning haze. Of the infantry units discussed in the scenario, only units with Javelin CLUs also have access to thermal optics. The units without thermals lose LoS at 1668m (at scenario start on my test map using the same date, time and conditions as George MC's map), so if a unit with thermals has shared a possible contact beyond this range with a unit without thermals, it will remain a possible contact for the receiving unit with no chance of becoming a positive contact unless conditions change or the unit alters its spotting equation (moves, acquires a new sensor). 

Going to link these updates on Steam forums.

First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works:
When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker).  If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the receiving unit gaining a positive contact for itself.  But this is most important: the unit must still spot the contact itself with its own sensors. All spotting has a highly variable "human factor" applied that can lead to significantly different outcomes in the same circumstances.  Anecdotes comparing times to spot are useless for drawing comparative conclusions about spotting beyond possible / not possible.  I don't care if 3 times in a row X spotted Z one minute sooner than Y, that does not mean X is better at spotting Z than Y.  Now repeat this 100 times carefully controlling all other factors and perhaps we can talk about quantitative differences in spotting ability. (Does this suck? Why yes, from experience it really does.) Second, what Erwin is encountering in George's scenario:
The US Mech Inf squad has access to 3x thermal small arms sights: 1 on each M249 and 1 on the Marksman's rifle.  A split off scout team from a full squad includes one M249 gunner, so it too has a thermal optic.  Here is what's a bit weird: the model switch showing these actually on the weapons is tied to a hard day / night time that does not vary based on conditions, but the thermal optics are still considered to be in use when they provide an advantage over day optics.  In this case, they seem to be allowing units with thermal optics to see further into the morning haze. Of the infantry units discussed in the scenario, only units with Javelin CLUs also have access to thermal optics. The units without thermals lose LoS at 1668m (at scenario start on my test map using the same date, time and conditions as George MC's map), so if a unit with thermals has shared a possible contact beyond this range with a unit without thermals, it will remain a possible contact for the receiving unit with no chance of becoming a positive contact unless conditions change or the unit alters its spotting equation (moves, acquires a new sensor). 

First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works:
When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker).  If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the receiving unit gaining a positive contact for itself.  But this is most important: the unit must still spot the contact itself with its own sensors. All spotting has a highly variable "human factor" applied that can lead to significantly different outcomes in the same circumstances.  Anecdotes comparing times to spot are useless for drawing comparative conclusions about spotting beyond possible / not possible.  I don't care if 3 times in a row X spotted Z one minute sooner than Y, that does not mean X is better at spotting Z than Y.  Now repeat this 100 times carefully controlling all other factors and perhaps we can talk about quantitative differences in spotting ability. (Does this suck? Why yes, from experience it really does.) Second, what Erwin is encountering in George's scenario:
The US Mech Inf squad has access to 3x thermal small arms sights: 1 on each M249 and 1 on the Marksman's rifle.  A split off scout team from a full squad includes one M249 gunner, so it too has a thermal optic.  Here is what's a bit weird: the model switch showing these actually on the weapons is tied to a hard day / night time that does not vary based on conditions, but the thermal optics are still considered to be in use when they provide an advantage over day optics.  In this case, they seem to be allowing units with thermal optics to see further into the morning haze. Of the infantry units discussed in the scenario, only units with Javelin CLUs also have access to thermal optics. The units without thermals lose LoS at 1668m (at scenario start on my test map using the same date, time and conditions as George MC's map), so if a unit with thermals has shared a possible contact beyond this range with a unit without thermals, it will remain a possible contact for the receiving unit with no chance of becoming a positive contact unless conditions change or the unit alters its spotting equation (moves, acquires a new sensor). 

Seems impossible for some to manage simple file sharing, even with handholding.  Can Erwin or anyone else confirm that the original scenario described is actually  "NATO TV 98-5 Steelers" not " NATO TV 95-5 Steelers"?  Search for the latter yields nothing across the vast internet.

99% sure I know what's going on: part obscure aspect of sim, part poor understanding of how spotting works.  Will double check this one to make sure.

1. Yes, your mortars are likely having their LoF block by nearby obstacles.
 
2. re: pack howitzers, BFC has not implemented variable charges for these weapons, so they are always firing using a full charge (which is best for direct fire).

No.
If you want both Afghan National Army and Taliban in a scenario you need to add [taliban] and [ana] without brackets to the modtag file in the editor. Each mod has its own tag.
Here is what I usually use :
trashsoft
mudhouse
mudwall
poppies
ana
taliban
rubble
Yeah I could have used a single modtag for all the Afghanistan related mods but I chose to do it this way because it is more flexible. For instance someone might not want to have poppies replace grain tiles. Also, I will probably never do it, but I thought maybe one day I'd do stone houses that are more common in mountainous regions. So a scenario designer could have stone textures for houses if needed instead of mud houses. Or someone might design a scenario in Africa and find that mud walls and houses fit but he might not want Taliban fighters etc. So It gives you more options and adding 5-6 tags instead of an all encompassing one doesn't take much more time.

IR (thermal) is simply not working on LAV-AT-A2.  Reported.

From 1943 on sub-units of MGs and mortars were generally parceled out to brigades as “brigade support groups,” e.g.:
https://www.saskatoonlightinfantry.org/during-the-war.html

From 1943 on sub-units of MGs and mortars were generally parceled out to brigades as “brigade support groups,” e.g.:
https://www.saskatoonlightinfantry.org/during-the-war.html

Seems more of a well-orchestrated demonstration than a serious tactical exercise.

Seems more of a well-orchestrated demonstration than a serious tactical exercise.

German and US is APHE.  British is AP solid shot (or unfilled AP).  In theory, APHE should generate a smaller number of larger fragments that have higher penetration and travel further, so you’d really need to do some extensive testing versus HE to determine a difference in outcomes based on range from the burst.