Lethaface

Compilation of Special Unit Kraken clips, some unseen. I guess recent if leaves just turned.
Includes Russian T-72B3 obr. 2016 with mine rollers and huge amount of extra junk on it. Oh, and Russian BMP drivers making damn sure they don’t have to come back to pick up their dismounts.

I would only add that there is a Data/C4ISR phase in there somewhere, or maybe throughout.  As one side achieves data superiority the slide to asymmetry will become inevitable.  In fact the thing may be settled by the time one gets to conventional phase.  Then the losing side may go to hybrid, then insurgency - this is essentially war in the micro-social space.  Conventional warfare - or what we thought was conventional - is becoming more punctuation, not core.  
This will likely bleed into maritime domain as well.  Large concentrations of ships are large targets that no bubble can fully protect - we just have not seen it yet.  So we can expect a dis-aggregation in that domain as well.  The real loser could be amphibious as trying to mass sea-land transitions is going to be extremely hard to do in this environment.  Imagine what we are seeing in Ukraine on the open littorals.  

No, it rather means that a conventional mechanised warfare will be largely obsolete and replaced by drone warfare. I imagine a full-scale non-nuclear conflict (assuming no war in space and no significant naval element) would have the following aspects (in the chronological order): the air phase- the drone phase- the conventional phase- the assymetrical phase.
Whoever wins both the air war and the drone war, will have sufficient control over the battlefield, that the opponent will be reduced to digging in deep and trying to survive for as long as possible. No offensive action other than local counterattacks mostly on foot would be likely.  The winner of the air war and the drone war will still have to reduce the loser's strongpoints , Zaporozhe style, which leaves some room for conventional warfare as we knew it: with tube artillery, unguided MLRS and a smattering of tanks and IFVs. This is were the non-loss-averse side could have some advantage, as they could last under the enemy fires longer. But most likely the one who controls the battlefield through drones would win eventually.  Once this conventional phase is won, then the loser could stop defening ground and resort to guerilla warfare.
 

About yesterday assault of Avdiivka. 
There are rumors Putin yesterday visited HQ of SMO in Rostov and generals decided to make him a "gift" with massive assault of Avdiivka, which had to break UKR defense, but...
UKR servicemen and TGs claims this was heaviest assault of the city, which by number of involved vehciles even spat out the assault of Oct 10. Then Russians used many infantry, supported with heavy aviation and artilelry trikes and armor. In this time they attacked very strong with mass of armor in three directions on northern flank. Their primary objective was the slag heap again. 
Russian armored columns had from 5 to 30 vehicles! 
Also a difference with previous assault - in this time Russians reportedly attacked most;y with regular units with support of DPR, when at Oct 10 main forces of attacks were Shtorm Z and DPR units with some suport of Russian regulars
Here is known episode with BTR column from other point of view  - in elimination of this attack participated at least elements of four units - 1st tank brigade, 3rd SOF regiment, 116th TD brigade and some artilelry unit.
I suppose BTRs are belonged to 15th motor-rifle "peacemaking" brigade of 2nd CAA, Central millitary district, which was moved here from Svatove direction together with 21st motor-rifle brigade. And both were deployed on northern flank. 15th one of few motor-rifle brigades, armed with BTRs, not BMPs 
For yestrday GS isuued these crazy numbers - of course this is exaggregation, but level of Russian losses for Oct 19 was really colossal
By the news of last hours, Russians continue desperate attacks not counting with losses. Reportedly they had some success near slag heap and it in grey zone now. Putin needs a victory to 4th of November - Day of National unity. 

Watching that video tells me several things, both IRL and in-game:
IRL:
1) tanks are done in their current role, which means' they're overall done, unless 40-plus-ton pieces of armour that can only be significantly hardened from the frontal aspect can somehow be rendered invisible in an active/passive multi-spectrum detection environment.  We are in the "what can be seen can be killed, and everything can be seen" era.  No combination of APS or point-defence is going to stop DPICM or its replacement AWP, or suicide drone swarms, etc.  Of course there are counters to everything (suppressing artillery, counter-drone swarms, advanced camoflage, etc.), it's just that a meshed defensive system seems to beat big offensives consistently, and the much-noted lack of air superiority isn't really relevant.  Air superiority would not have changed the outcome from the video, although it might have made it less likely (the artillery might have been suppressed / destroyed before the armoured push through the minefield) - and with cheap manpads etc., I'm not so sure that air superiority in the sense of full overmatch is even achievable in a peer-to-peer conflict.
So I'm not seeing the point of MBTs in future warfare.
For extra fun, the future of UGVs - not mini-excavator-sized tracks, but goats (not the men who stare at them): Marines are preparing to send 'robotic goats' with rocket launchers into battle (msn.com) 
2) Mines are back, baby!  One assumes every major armed forces is reviewing their mine-laying technology and inventory.
In-Game:
1) in CM:BS it takes minutes to adjust indirect fire.  In the video, it looking like it was being adjusted in real-time - so when do I get my real-time indirect patch?
2) in CM:BS and other titles, heavy armour (MBTs) are almost immune to indirect fire, even large calibres, and pretty close to the same for IFVs and other light armour, which has been mentioned before in this thread. Please fix or do sumfink.
 

Also, a lot of experts are yearning to see a large scale mechanised attack because that is what they think proper war looks like, and everything else must be an aberration or at best, coping with inadequate resources. I imagine a French or Prussian liaison officer looking with disdain at the Union attack at Cold Harbor in 1864 and shaking his head at the inability of the colonials to press home a bayonet charge or better coordinate attack columns etc.

As someone who has done game design then you know that your own experience is not necessarily reflective of everyones experience.  Take a look at the Cold War forum.  A few people before you have come out not liking the Soviet campaign, or even Scenario 3 but it is not overwhelming by any stretch.  In fact most of the feedback we have received has been overwhelmingly positive from the community we built the game for.  And we do have some new folks getting into a whole new era of warfare they did not know about before.
As to skill, well I beat Scenario 3 (after more than one try) and felt like I had to use skill.  I even learned something about how the Soviet system could work in this situation.  There is a counter-point, and based on feedback I know I am not the only one.
So I read your points and do not even entirely disagree but as far as CMCW is concerned, but the core community has already spoken.  We must be doing something right.  Handholding is a plague on modern gaming.  So much so the retro Rogue-like movement is very alive and well.  For this community, spoon feeding post-game solutions or explanations kinda takes away from the community as a whole in trying to figure a game out.  Go online and see how many videos have been made of folks playing CMCW.
So I am not claiming CMCW or the Soviet campaign are perfect.  But they are squarely in the red rings as far as the primary audience is concerned.  Not going to mess around with that solution to much - if it ain’t broke don’t fix it…kinda thinking.  As to market growth.  Look, first rule of game design as far as I am concerned is the same as warfare - know what game you are in.  CM is a niche within a niche.  It will never, and has never gone mainstream.  This is a point of pride for all these weirdos, some who have been with this whole thing for over 20 years.  We welcome new gamers with open arms.  This has to be one of the last non-toxic gaming communities left.  But we aim to target the fan base.  If we can do that and pull in some new interest, great.  In many ways CMCW pushed the envelop of what CM can do.  We used huge maps and large forces…that was a turn off for some.  But we adhered to realism and authenticity.  We made a game designed for the community, by members of that community.  The only reason I got engaged in this discussion was that you seemed to infer that we did not do QA/QC and that is why you had a bad experience.  Not how it went down.  Deliberate design decisions.
So when we get BAOR done, it will have an easier, middle and hard campaigns. Some scenarios bordering on unfair but a lot of real war scenarios are unfair.  We won’t be dropping hints or suggestions…let the grogs grumble.  But the right people will love it to death, and maybe some new ones too.  
 

Just going to pull on this one here.  So we knew from the start what audience this game was going to appeal to - I personally think that is probably the most important rule of design.  We knew exactly who we were designing for from the start - the obsessively detail orientated grognard.  If anyone else wanted to play the game, great, but the core audience was not the casual gamer.
So this meant that our audience within this community already likely knew more about Soviet doctrine than we did.  We decided very early on to focus less on hand-holding and more on realism over form, and let the customer pull the "fun" out of that.  This is very niche market focus.  So our core demographic is not looking at this scenario wondering what is going on, they already know that three battles in on this axis of Soviet advance is going to get pretty hard.  They also are not looking for luck, they are looking for a realistic starting position and then the ability to see how they would fair within it - that is the "fun".
Now of course we knew we could not make them all brutal so trade-offs were made and we scaled them to ensure we did not totally alienate.  The Soviet Campaign was specifically designed to cater to the truly crazy type who would find this fun...you were warned.  We put a LOT of content into this game - this on top of what CM delivers wrt editors and multiplayer options.  So we did not feel bad about making the really hard campaign.
*Spoilers below - read with caution*
Now as to your experience, well you are making some pretty wide assumptions here.  The first being that no skill can win this fight.  That is not true.  We beta-test every campaign and scenario and they do not pass until someone can beat them through skill.  Our beta testers are one skilled bunch an they found this one challenging, we scaled it back quite a bit to balance it better.  But they could beat it through skill.  They came up with some pretty creative ways to do it but it can be done.  My way, when I went through is what I typed up awhile back.. I went left.  The only real cover exists far left or right.  Left axis through the trees is a hard push but you avoid the Bradleys, while pounding them and has a lone US infantry platoon dug in which can be overrun.  Once you do that you are behind the urban area and can advance outside of the killzone.  The fact we dropped you right into a killzone at outset should be obvious, the challenge is to get out of it and still advance.
So you did not find this one fun?  Well there is a big ole editor and a bunch of master maps, go make one you do find fun.  There is also a really large community that does this for you so I encourage you to explore it out.  Just know we knew exactly what we were doing when we built the scenario.  This is not a failure in QA/QC, it is the direct result of those processes. This was not neglect or laziness, it was deliberate.  Scenario 4 in the campaign is also pretty hard, you are on defence on that one.  5 is more fun, we decided people needed a break.  And Alsfeld is one massive game of smash face in a culminating battle - I found that one to be a blast but not too many actually get to it. 
So difficulty does not preclude "fun"...for some.  And it was those "some" we were doing this game, and the Soviet Campaign in particular, for.  If that ain't you, well no worries, lots of other content to go and play.  A lot of really well balanced scenarios you can enjoy - (although I would really stay away from Valley of Ashes played from the Soviet side if you found this scenario "not fun", that one is brutal). 

Heh, you guys were warned. The Soviet campaign is not to be taken on lightly.  It was designed to be brutally realistic.  If a player can pull “fun” out of it (and they have), well good on them.  I think one has to be a special masochist to really enjoy some of these fights, but they are extremely realistic.  We pulled straight from Soviet and US doctrines, and period plans.  Eirterfeld is straight out of a staff wargame from back in the day.  We knew the CM crowd was not “casual” to begin with so catering to the upper end of challenge was a design decision early on.  
I saw one video of someone actually completing the Soviet campaign, respect.  So if you did not enjoy it, well that was kinda expected.  The US campaign is much more forgiving.  The NTC one is pretty kind as well.  The Soviet one is basically the CM version of Punishment mode, especially March or Die.  We knew this when we built and tested them.  Trust me, we dialled them back off historical difficulty.  Soviet tactical forces did not get a lot of time and space to plan,  So if Div or Regt Recce failed, and by the halfway point of a fight they would, then lead tactical units - who by this point are 2nd ech - were going to be driving into a lot of fights that look like this one.
S’ok to hate the Soviet Campaign…it can take it.

From the Deep State Telegram Channel:
https://t.me/DeepStateEN/2646
🗡 The enemy lost at least 63 armored vehicles on the northern front of the Avdiivka direction
 
🛰 After analyzing the changes on satellite images, the loss of more than six dozen pieces of equipment was recorded. Almost all of the equipment was destroyed in the area of Krasnohorivka (A) and at the entrance to the settlement. As the classics would say - an illustration to the General Staff's reports.
 
🔥 These images show the entire "success" of the enemy's actions, which was mainly present in their information space. On the battlefield, despite their superiority on all counts, the katsaps lost the battle. Of course, it is difficult to estimate the enemy's losses in manpower. In this area alone, the number of dead ruzzians is measured in hundreds.
 
😑But there is also unpleasant news. This attack is yet another proof of the ineffectiveness of the armored fist tactic, when one side concentrates its equipment and tries to achieve success on the battlefield by using its superiority. Our destroyed columns near Mala Tokmachka, Verbove, Robotyne, Staromaiorske, Novodonetske and Rivne, as well as the enemy's destroyed columns near Vuhledar, Novoiehorivka, Makiivka, Andriivka, Marinka, and now Krasnohorivka (A) and Vodiane-Pervomaiske, are further proof of this thesis.
 
✈️ This is all a consequence of the growing effectiveness of aerial reconnaissance and artillery. The same cheap quadcopters equalize the capabilities of both sides. And so far, there is no technology that can provide an advantage. The goal of our military-industrial complex is to find the key to victory, otherwise history will simply repeat itself.
 
🖼 Full-resolution image.
 
📍 Location of the village - deepstatemap.live/en#13/48.2069/37.7256

Possibly most effective use of DPICM seen yet:
 

I'm not paid by the hour but I'm comfortable. Job is also quite a bit more secure than those type of casual/contract arrangements. Sadly, when you get to my level it's really no longer a 9 - 5 type of job. I also don't get overtime but time off in lieu at a ratio of 1:1 in hours so it's paid back eventually once there's a bit of slack in the work coming through. You aren't working more hours for less pay is what I'm getting at. There have been times where I've been owed effectively two additional weeks off at a point in time on top of annual leave due to overtime.
It's good to get payback after years of career progression but I'd drop it all in a heartbeat if I won lotto and could become a 'full time' wargamer and hobbyist with less cares in the world.  There's quite a few GMT made hex wargames I'd love to set up an play through over the course of many weeks. Would also drive my partner nuts.  

Yes.  
Please be aware that the Battle Packs are led and being made by volunteers who have day jobs/mortgages/bills/significant others etc. I can't speak for the others, so maybe they have less demanding jobs, are retired or have secretly won the lottery and are living an Armchair General's paradise I'm just not sure.  Just please be aware we aren't employed by Battlefront working full time on content creation.
The first half of this year virtually nothing progressed because of my real life work skyrocketed, dominating my waking hours. If you can pull a 10-12 hr work day five days a week and then back that up with an additional few hours a night in the editor let me know.   Progress jumped ahead as I took much needed extra time off work in August. Two of three planned campaigns are now in the testing phase. My own testing for my vision of the Carentan campaign also didn't play out as expected. It just wasn't fun. I had to rejig that. It all just takes time.
Maybe I'll be able to post a bone or two soon.
I keep @BFCElvis in the loop on developments as they occur.
My personal secretary trying to keep my life balanced and on schedule, seen here looking up at my monitor trying to work out the differences between a StuG III (mid) and StuG III (late).

Heh, was going to be my comment.  12000 effective fighting force is a freakin division.  A Division on the enemy side of the Dnipro with a secure sustainment link is terrifying for the RA defence.  I am not confident we are seeing that level of operation but a boy can hope and pray.

"“We regularly consult with Ukrainians about what they need. But I’m not going to announce anything that might be included in future packages,” said Pentagon Deputy Spokesperson Sabrina Singh."
 
Excuse my french, but thank-bleeping-finally. 
Edit: Now that I reread it, it occurred to me she only meant with regard to that specific question, not a new policy about packages in general. My bad.

Agreed. First and foremost this is a humanitarian disaster, I got send a video of aftermath but didn't want to watch it.
Edit: to be fully clear, same goes for any civilian casualties on any side. Israeli, Palestinian, Jew, Muslim, whatever; we are all human.

My soul has also been scratched enough so no desire to watch that footage in detail. And indeed, whomever was behind this the blame has probably been cast already in the hearts and minds of those involved.

https://wapo.st/3M5cxQv
You should be able to read this. I have a subscription and can gift 10 articles a month. There is a running update so you should be able to come back to this posting, click on it, and see newer updates. If you scroll on down a fair bit, there is a very short video of the rocket/missile hit, said to be verified by WaPo. Sounds like the zzzipp of a rocket (of some kind) passing close by the video taker, and then hitting. The article lists chronologically the conflicting claims and news updates.
Take it for what it's worth. Doesn't prove anything, but *to me* it sounds like a rocket, and not an air to ground missile with a large warhead. Could be a Hamas rocket, could be an aircraft fired rocket. Whoever fired it, the rocket might have hit something explosive.
I agree it would be supremely stupid to do something like this right before Pres. Biden gets there. Doesn't mean mistakes or misfires on either side don't happen. We have enough evidence of that from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Dave

Yeah, you're right. Neither side is very honest.

Depends on the amount of explosives, of course. Hamas has been known for storing ammo and weapons in places full of civilians, and a relative small amount of stored rockets could have exacerbate the possible Israeli bomb-detonation.
Doesn't really matter what blew up, even if it was Hamas-stuff, because this horrible death-toll could be a game-changer in the sense that "the Arabic/Muslim"-world is going to retaliate now. Somewhere, somehow.
And we probably all thought that the Ukraine-war was the biggest threat to world-peace..
 

Agreed. First and foremost this is a humanitarian disaster, I got send a video of aftermath but didn't want to watch it.
Edit: to be fully clear, same goes for any civilian casualties on any side. Israeli, Palestinian, Jew, Muslim, whatever; we are all human.

Agreed. First and foremost this is a humanitarian disaster, I got send a video of aftermath but didn't want to watch it.
Edit: to be fully clear, same goes for any civilian casualties on any side. Israeli, Palestinian, Jew, Muslim, whatever; we are all human.

That video is said to be an old video, although I agree that it is best to reserve judgement for a bit.

This late afternoon: Israel airstrike hits hospital area with loads of refugees. Slaughterhouse, also young kids, already 200-300 deaths, possible more trapped under rubble.
Whether Hamas was under this hospital or not, this number of deaths doesn't justify that.
O most recent update, deathtoll already 500 deaths.
And these deaths are by far not the last in this endless conflict. You can expect that Israel and "the West" are going to have to deal with suicide-bombers, lone wolf shootings, knife-attacks and the lot.
And the most terrible thing is that most of those Hamas-****ers are in more or less safe places..

I mean... it's the Egyptian army that controls the border crossing.