Sgt.Squarehead

That sounds very cool.....Keep us informed! Did we get the Ford GPA to go with the Schwimmwagen in the end?

It was my understanding that 'Wounded' units returned.....I could well be wrong though. I've been trying to work up a campaign that both works how I expect it to and that I'm satisfied with from a creative perspective, ever since I started this game.....Still working on it!

@Hapless The game doesn't care about dead vs. wounded casualties or account for them in VPs, but in a campaign it can become much more important (depending on the campaign script).

This might be because the Pz.IV Ausf J Late is already in the TOE, but I wouldn't rule out seeing some changes to the models & textures with this pack.....I too would be a bit disappointed not to at least have the option of 'Thoma Schurzen'. Could that be down to one of the countless name changes? Might it be referred to as the MP-44 or similar in earlier titles?

Sweet! So I guess it must be time to sart nagging about the forthcoming CM:BS module..... @BFCElvis could you remind me what that's called again?

The problem with over-reliance on Destroy Unit objectives is it prevents you from using Exit Zones for that side, because anything marked as such an objective must exit the map or the enemy scores VPs for them.

I believe so.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with @Haiduk again here, Snipers (& IMHO ATGM Teams) are spotted too easily in CM generally. Also US AFVs get a laser warning too soon when facing Russian ATGMs, these weapons are beam-riders and do not rely on back-scatter, thus (as I understand it) there is no need to directly lase the target until immediately before impact.

That was the route I was following with my CM:A Blue Campaign 'Abdul Gul's War'.....I drove myself mad constantly updating and reimporting the core unit file as I tweaked it or added new units, but I've recently discovered that I probably needn't have (in CM:SF2 definitely so). Yes, to some extent, but only so long as you really want to start your scenario with a bang.....Rather than me attempt to make a poor explanation here, you can see one way to do it (with a simple pre-made test scenario) in my thread, here: It seems the AI is mostly mad for M249 SAWs, but it will grab anything sexy, up to and including a Javelin CLU and missiles! Basicaly the upshot of all this is simply that you need to provide some dead-dudes (with the required gear), on the same side as the guys who you eventually want to use it. PS - Discussing this has just made me realise that I can almost certainly use this technique to get both NVG & Breaching Charges into the hands of Uncons....Oh happy day!

Nah, I'm mostly a fiddler with existing things, but I do like scenarios that start with a bang.....Or several, preferably really big ones!

I might be willing to contribute to it! Me too (mostly Runequest & Traveller).....Feel exactly the same way.

It get's even crazier in the modern games.....I've had Syrian tanks turning their turrets to track enemy vehicles within 200m, then suddenly loosing sight of them, in the open, in daylight. That just shouldn't happen, even a humble T-54 is more than able to track a moving target and lay the gun onto it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/****tytechnicals/comments/l7g58c/howitzer_on_a_toyota_hilux_technical_used_by/ And this time it really is a howitzer!

This is a misconception.....Your own units use exactly the same targetting AI, unless you are directly giving them Target orders. Left to their own devices they are equally capable of find 'one pixel gaps'.

Yup, just checked on a fresh test map, this does not work in CM:SF2 (or not with the tank that I tried, the T-55).

Not in CM:SF2 for sure.....I created a scenario a couple of days ago to test this, but forgot to post the result, two T-55s opened up in the editor, but firmly closed when the scenaro starts. I should note that this scenario was built on my old CM:SF1 'Hornets' Nest' map which was ported from CM:SF1.....There seem to have been some odd occurences with those. I'll make another very quick test on a fresh map, just to be sure.

I've never seen them referred to as the RAF before.

Fairly sure it a poted or re-made CM:SF scenario. It's a brutal little fight and that's a fact.

Impressive looking map and the scenario sounds great too.....Playing Red in CM:SF is a real challenge as a rule.

I had a nightmare with the twin bridges in the second mission of the CM:SF Canadian campaign.....In the end I was moving vehicles to one end of the bridge and giving them a single movement waypoint to the other side. Every time I added extra 'legs' to the movement order 'Bridge-Bug' would set in and the vehicle would stutter back and forth during the replay and dump the uncompleted move order for the next turn. FWIW

Reckon I might set up a test of AT-3 Sagger & RPG-7s against our M48A3 just to satisfy myself once & for all as to what to expect (on the ERA front).....It's quick to make and lots of stuff exploding would probably suit my mood at the moment!

The turret counterbalance weights are the big angular bits sticking out of the back of the turret: Those ain't stowage bins!

Valid comment, but let's be honest, Russia was very far from the only external power messing around in Ukrainian poitics.....Many of the US 'Maidan Crew' are now back in office.

Respect.....Knew you would.

Errrr.....Yep! @BFCElvis.....I suspect some of your help & advice may be needed.