Sgt.Squarehead

You using a phone Ian?  I fear your 'Flees' became 'Feels'. 

Could it be that the focus on US forces reduces interest from other areas? 
The CM games are almost unknown to the wider UK public as far as I can tell, certainly the only people I know personally who play CM either introduced me to the games, or were introduced to the games by myself. 

Yeah, me too:

 

Could it be that the focus on US forces reduces interest from other areas? 
The CM games are almost unknown to the wider UK public as far as I can tell, certainly the only people I know personally who play CM either introduced me to the games, or were introduced to the games by myself. 

You must've meant to this for Sgt. Squarehead who's reply to my post was that I was "talking out of my posterior". I agree he did seem quite angry.  😂

What actually is the point of this thread? 
It seems to me that it amounts to "I don't like some scenarios because [insert issue of your choice]". 
Rather than denigrate the work of someone who has put in hours of effort, usually free & gratis, why not just go into the editor make the changes you desire and then (with permission from the original designer), share your modified version so we can all discuss it's merits (or lack thereof) compared to the original. 
It's really not that hard and it might just tempt you into designing something truly original of your own.....Then you can share the unmitigated joy of having it slagged off by non-contributors. 
 

Soon(ish). 

I’m with the Sarge on this. Not much point to this thread until those that don’t make scenarios, and yet feel privileged to complain about them, make their own, better, ones. Or at least contribute by testing them for the scenario makers. (Added the last sentence because Erwin does a lot of testing for scenario makers.)

AFAIK no. 
That sometimes operational level units are given less than perfect orders from above. 
How would you know? 

The Sgt mostly works in CMSF so you may not be familiar with his work, but he has done some really creative fun stuff that has imho pushed design for that title up a notch. He is a very good example of someone who has decided what he’d like to see and then applied it.  Now keep in mind his work just like anyone else’s may not appeal to everyone.  However it is damn good work. As to being a customer, well that only applies if you paid for it.  That is true for one that comes with the game, but not for user created stuff which will be the vast majority of content over time. For those in effect you are getting something for free and then complaining about it as if you have some customer rights.  You don’t. You can only 1decide even at free it isn’t worth it to you or 2 provide specific feedback/suggestions to the designer in a manner that is productive and collaborative. #change your tone. 😁

Amen to that.....Twenty plus hours in the editor/testing, trying to get one part of one AI group to do what you want, does little for your patience with BS threads like this. 

Yeah have to agree here. Put up a scenario designed the way you think it ought to be, hell take an existing one and “correct” it, but stop sitting in the cheap seats and trashing other folks work. 

Alamo. Some real close combat.

Good point.....I'm pretty (absolutely) sure you are correct. 
However if we are using this concept to assist players new to the CM games, that's probably not the end of the world.  It allows the designer the scope to set up some genuinely nasty side-challenges (to keep the experienced player occupied) while letting the novice have a real chance of overcoming any errors that they may inadvertently make through inexperience.
Overall I approve. 
PS - Going to experiment with the hidden Occupy Objective, fairly confident it's a goer, but it never hurts to check.

I'm not totally sure, but I think that having more troops in total means also having better force morale overall. So those reinforcements would greatly bolster morale, even if they are not used...

Cheers, it's still a WIP, I guess it's probably my farewell to CMSF1, so I'm trying to put my absolute best into it.....The map has taken me ages, it's slightly larger and more complex than that of 'Ashsh al-Dababir' (a whopping 400mx400m) and I'm now at the point of tweaking it for best AI performance. I also still have to add quite a few more flavour objects to give it that 'lived in' feel. 
The first third of the fighting is fully scripted, I'm now experimenting with various timings and attempting to get the pacing right.  Almost everything is intricately snowballed in this one, it's an amazingly useful technique.....I'm hoping that this scenario should prove surprisingly busy (for a game with only eight AI & Reinforcement slots) even for experienced players. 

Hopefully CM3...................

Two reinforced companies, 320mx320m of urban Mosul, an hour & a half to clear it:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wfjnp2xy78c1e2g/Ashsh al-Dababir.btt?dl=0
Give it your best shot. 
 

Two reinforced companies, 320mx320m of urban Mosul, an hour & a half to clear it:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wfjnp2xy78c1e2g/Ashsh al-Dababir.btt?dl=0
Give it your best shot. 
 

Going clear back to when CMBO was in development, there has been a lot of effort put forth trying to properly understand the nitty gritty of Panzer armor, an effort which I believe far eclipses far harder to get info on the Soviet side of things, though quite a bit of work went into understanding terminal effectiveness of vs Russian AP projectiles and their various limitations and causes thereof. Happily, while looking into T-34 books, this popped up, and am I glad it did! This thing is gold clean through. It looks at gun barrels, armor plate and shells. It's got such things as US analyses of armor samples taken form a T-34 and KV-1 sent to the US by the Soviets and some of the scariest live fire comparison tests ever. If you think I'm exaggerating, take a look at what happened when the Soviet cast iron 82 mm mortar projectile went against our own steel 81 mm mortar projectile. Tests against 1" thick pine witness boards found the Soviet mortar shell put out an almost incomprehensible 9 X more hits  and 8.1 X more total perforations at 40 feet as a result of a hurricane of shell fragments our 81 couldn't begin to match. No wonder Ivan was in love with mortars! Artillery shells using cast iron or steel bodies are also covered.  As for tanks,, coverage is much more than the early T-34 and Kv-1, in fact extending through the IS-2,. It delves into AP shells and shot, including arrowhead, where direct comparisons are made between it and US HVAP down to the level of tungsten carbide core weights. This paper can be read readily, but the level of technical information is eye watering, a condition worsened by the fact that the text was typed and that this was microfilmed, making reading fine print in the tables exciting and making the photos hard to see in the bargain. This was originally SECRET, with a distribution which was a Who's Who of American military ordnance. If Herr Tom loses his mind reading this paper, I'm not responsible!

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/011426.pdf
Paper Presented at Meeting on
Trends in Soviet Metallurgical Developments
Central Intelligence Agency Washington 25, D. C.
I!
16 April 1953

Regards,
John Kettler
 

you know you have spent too much time in LLFs Ramadi map and looking at satellite views of the city when you can recognize in Videos from 2004 where exactly a unit is....  at 2:15 is when they hit Rte Michigan about a 1/2 km from the map edge of LLFs map (near Gov't ctr).  The other thing that is freaky is to watch civilian behavior when there is gunfire and rpg rounds going off. People don't quite run for cover like i'd expect.  Crazy.
 

You too huh? 
Goddam myopic piece of electronic junk! 

from Rheinmetall
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHiqrgac1Ak
 

Hmm, that's true.  I used JTACs in TOC because they were dedicated UAV operators assigned to the UAV Operations Center inside the FOB.  Maybe a Fire Support team, renamed UAV Operations Team, would have been better at spotting and hitting targets................ off to test.  
Sure Erwin, NOW you think of that .  

Also, recall that using the Elite JTAC and Elite drone, the FFE on a Point Target was very disappointing - arriving all over the place in a large diameter like a wide area target.  Precision Strikes using the Elite JTAC/Drone combo were better, but it often took two Precision missions to get close enuff to kill.