Lethaface

Campaign & voices done, manual update started. @mjkerner has also done some work on the Special Forces uniform from @puje ...
                        
     

I wonder whether for CMx3 a slightly more nuanced system is needed; A movement command that just acts to chose the speed of the unit, and a 'state' that you can perform that move in. 
So you might have 3 'states'; Stop on contact, retreat on contact, engage on contact.  If you used a 'walk' move command with the first 'state' you'd have something like current hunt, if you wanted to just peek over a ridge with a vehicle and then pull back asap if you see something, the second would be useful.  The third for an assault - or something like clearing woods.  How successfully the unit carries out the order would be a matter of the current tiredness/training/experience/suppression as expected.
This would seem to increase fidelity without increasing workload too much. 

No, not at all. Some screenshots are obviously in order to explain this better.

One Squad Syrian AB + 1 BMP 1 added

Going to the Deploy forces screen from within the editor shows the HQ already in the BMP,  radio icon visible.

2nd Squad - Radio Icon Visible

3rd Squad - Radio Icon Visible

HQ moved out of BMP to the ground nearby - Radio Icon Visible

2nd Squad's radio has vanished - Radio Icon Not Visible

3rd Squad's radio has vanished - Radio Icon Not Visible

Hello,
here is the second
It comes with two camos which are random. if you don't want them :remove it and rename the file.
For the 3d model  if you don't like just remove the .mdr file
The 250-3 is quite rare, you will find it inTanks as an observer.
I will surely use camo for the 250/10 because I like it and it will not be really used.
You can also use the camo for the 250/1 by renaming the files
Thank you again for the remarks that I took into account (German material ...)


[](https://goopics.net/i/1y00e)
...i came with a big supplement (it took me time)
The Flak 36 with 3 camos:
One: freshly landed in Sicily from AfrikaKorps
+ the same but with a hasty camo + a vanilla version of CMBN rework. For the 3d i have an idea
The flak At are not posed at random in the plain. They are  a small defense post. I tried to reproduce this and I managed to get around the problem of elevating the terrain by a little trick.
Please give me your opinion to know if it's interesting that I continue on this track and on the other flak.



 
 
for the 250/3
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ib700amh7zghoqh/250_3jpload.zip?dl=0
for the Flak36
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rek7l5hpzbz2tiv/flak36load.zip?dl=0
See you very soon for the 250/10
PS : I have a question I can't find the 250/7 in Game
 Someone tell me or and where is it available ?
Satomas aka Saturnin
 

Hello, I'm an old CM player(Saturnin). By nostalgia  I make a little comeback with CMFI (i lost my old accunt, dead mail adress). To celebrate this I offer a small Mod.
I hope it will please you.
Here is the sdkfz250-1. I wanted it with more battle dress looking
It comes with: 2 camos, random material and options (hatch open or not, ...) a multitude of possibilities to test.
For that it is simple.
If you want the two camouflages leave as such.
If you want one in particular discard the one you don't want and rename the BMP file to: sdkfz250-1-hull.bmp
If you dont want  the stuff 3D it simple discard the ALL .dmr file
Many thanks to Aquila-SmartWargames and
sbobovyc for the lesson of 3d  and all their work.
That's great
As a small supplement I also made Protze. Because without Protze life is not the same
I will finish the series of 250 / ... I think and may be the 251 / ...
See you soon
Have fun
Satomas aka Saturnin
 





For the moment I have not found a solution with Cmmods. I go through dropbox until the solution
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vxwhi4ss3y8834t/sdkfz%20250%201.zip?dl=0 for the 250/1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yq0oi125gxoy3oa/ProtzV1.2.zip?dl=0  for the Protze
A bientôt

The Stummel was about as typical as Assault Guns got and that was a category of weapon system many Armies found extremely useful. It's just crucial that you know what you're using it for and against what. It's easy to accuse the Stummel of many things that it certainly was with its limited traversing and weak Stuk L/24 gun mounted on a vulnerable half-track chassis without so much as a machine gun. Why then did so many  vehicles like it exist nonetheless? The SU-76 was also an open top gun carrier that the Soviets built the hell out of so why build so many examples of an ostensibly inferior AFV?
It's because like MikeyD says, it wasn't a tank, it's a gun carrier. It's a way to get the infantry the StuK L/24 gun fighting right alongside them and as a bonus, the weapon's crew is even protected from basic return fire such as a mortars, rifles and machine guns. This is a job that the far superior Sturmgeshutz used to perform but unfortunately because the StuG was so superb it was frequently held at higher levels for more important tasks. 
In the Red Army the SU-76's job was originally assigned to light tanks like the T-70...but the Red Army ended up deeply unsatisfied with the performance of light tanks. They were too expensive and demanding on logistics for which the return was the unimpressive firepower of their light guns. So they got rid of the turret and duct taped a ZiS-3 to the chassis. That's just the nature of the war's economy-of-force rules lol. 
 

Personally, I think the balance is about right.
Tanks are invincible, dominant forces on the battlefield, right up until the moment they aren't. That's true for close assault, handheld AT weapons and larger AT assets.
Making any movement in a sufficiently dense urban environment is a die roll - you're taking a risk with each step, and it's something that you have to work hard to keep on top of. It's possible to do it flawlessly, and wonder what the fuss was all about, but it only takes a couple of dodgy decisions for you to be wrecked.

There are parts of the simulation (gun elevation, for example) which are not modelled. Generally these are a little more minor, and the broad strokes of the tactical exercise remain intact. It's reasonable to argue about what's missing here, since there's definitely room for improvement, even if you end up with diminishing returns.
The strengths of infantry over armour in an urban environment are the inherently short ranges of everything, which only favour the infantry, concealment, which only favours the infantry, and to a lesser extent the effect of elevation - getting hits in on open-topped vehicles or thin top armour with AT weapons. Not every AT weapon is ideal for that (PIATs are pretty exceptional in that environment), but they can all do it to some extent. The strengths of armour over infantry in the same environment is that they give access to a dominant amount of MG fire and HE on a mobile, protected platform, and therefore can shut down any firefight pretty quickly.

So... yes. Tanks are amazing, and they're useless. Tanks are more vulnerable in cities than on the open field, but they're not immediately dead, and have a useful role to play.

I prefer historical accuracy and rather lean towards how BF/CM is handling things. In alot of tactical wargames infantry is reduced to "nice to have them around but not really threatening or battle decisive" when tanks are present aswell. Drive them up to the inf and blast them into pieces. In CM on the other hand you need to excercise the combined arms approach and thus protect your tanks from infantry and locating infantry can be difficult depending on conditions and environment aswell.  
Having enemy infantry swarming your tank was one of the worst situations a tank crew could find itself in. Some tanks came with close defense system such as dedicated mgs or firing ports but AFAIK they never prove to be an effective deterrent and even less a proper replacement for infantry support. There is a reason why some German tanks installed sohisticated solutions like  the "Nahverteidigungswaffe" which tried to protect their heavy tanks from infantry attacks by launching explosives, its quiet interesting to see it in action in CM. If infantry swarming them wouldn´t be a threat to their Tigers/Kingtigers they wouldn´t bother with it.
In the beginning the effectiveness of grenades also wondered me but when someone on these forums came up with the explanation that it represents an abstraction of the various close infantry attack tactics that were used against tanks and that the generic grenade counter/throw also represents an abstraction of various dedicated or DIY AT ordnance such as dedicated/improvised mines, charges, liquids, throwables it started to make sense to me. If true putting an explanation into the manual could avoid alot of the confusion. 
Interesting are also the results. I had Medium Tanks such as the T-34 knocked out after 1-2 grenade/close infantry attacks and I had T-34 that survived 12 of them and kept me constantly on the run. Something gave me the impression that there might be some hidden values running under the "grenade count" hood but on the other hand I don´t want to know in order to keep the "magic" which makes every close infantry attack exciting about what might happen. 
What for me is left to debate is if effect on enemy tanks is achieved too fast, if despite mobility killing them they had the means to completely knock out heavier tanks that fast or at all, force the crew outside, and if so many infantrymen would have the knowledge, guts, and equipment to undertake such an endeavour. Pretty sure there are some of these that can be at least partially answered with "not really" but I guess some of this might be tied to 1) current engine limitations 2) limited development resources, and balancing 1) and 2) out with the other aspects of the game in order to still offer the best historical accuracy possible.
But nevertheless I still think CM has one  of the - if not the - most authentic Infantry vs tanks warfare representations.
There are even ideas to go farer as somebody mentioned the idea to allow infantry to use their explosive ordnance/close infantry attack ability from buildings which I think is not that bad of an idea but might end up absolutely over the top with infantry occupied build-up areas becoming apocalyptic for tanks to drive through and on the other hand would neglect the exposure of infantry as they wouldn´t have to leave the safety of the building for that. Perhaps thats was the decision-making reason why the ability is denied from interiors.

I didn't edit my post quick enough .... we already have SS & Luftwaffe in CMFB.  I'm currently in the CMRT editor and am thinking about RT stuff. 
+1   A CM title that includes both Western forces and the Soviets would fantastic IMO.  My hope is that the last release for CMFB will be an equipment pack introducing Soviet forces/equipment into CMFB.  Call it meeting on the Elbe River or something.  Then the US, Commonwealth and Soviets would all be in the same Combat Mission game.   No BFC created scenarios would be needed.  Just an equipment pack of already designed equipment ported over from CMRT.  Scenario designers and mod creators could do all kinds of cold war, neo-colonialism stuff.  Patton goes east 1945, Fulda Gap 1948, Korea, Suez Crisis, etc.    Just put them in the same game.  

Logvinovo part I
 

 
This is a fictional scenario very loosely based on the events of february 2015 in the Donbas region of Ukraine during the Debaltseve offensive.
You command a company sized hybrid force made of Russian volunteers and low quality separatist units supported by a T-72, a BMP2 and a couple of APCs tasked with a dawn attack on the small village of Lohvynove (or Logvinovo in Russian).
 


Historical background :
To the best of my knowledge there was never a proper assault of Lohvynove. Due to a snafu in the command chain, the Ukrainians withdrew the units defending the position, only leaving a handful of men of the 54th recon battalion with a single APC there. The unit that was supposed to replace them never came, leaving this key location practically undefended. When the Ukrainians realised their mistake, it was too late.
It is not clear whether the separatists were aware of it or if a reinforced infiltration group just seized the opportunity to capture the village.
Obviously this wouldn't have made a very fun or interesting scenario so I had to use a good dose of creative license. Without going into too much detail, basically the scenario is based on the premise that the defence of the village is somewhat reduced but not to the extent it was in reality.
Disclaimer :
I chose to use Russian names because the battle takes place from the separatists side. The briefing mentions "Kiev junta". This is purely for flavour and immersion and doesn't reflect in any way my own political views on this conflict.
Credits :
Haiduk for his information on the battle and the composition of the forces on both sides. All mistakes and differences from the real events are of my own doing.
Install :
Extract in : documents/battlefront/black sea/game files/scenario
Download :
https://www.dropbox.com/s/132e335d8ajn8px/CMBS scenario Logvinovo part I.rar?dl=0
 
 

All wars are started with the assumption that you have a good chance of winning. It's only in hindsight we know who was right. If Russia had buckled after the losses they suffered in the first part of the war, we'd all be agreeing now that of course they would.

lol how many accounts and narratives of World War 2 do we all rattle off today uncritically as gospel when it's just Cold War posturing from both sides? The Anglo-Americans with their concepts of rule-by-consent and citizen-soldiers absolutely never would've been able to stomach the kinds of human losses the Soviet Union did. They'd've all more than likely ended up going the way the French did as a peace/collaborationist faction used the confusion and chaos to seize power, legitimately or not, and then seek terms with the Nazi thugs. The unfortunate truth was many leaders in Western Europe in 1940 were more worried about preserving their Armies than the states those Armies were responsible for protecting. Not only was there a visceral fear of a communist coup running in rear areas, but for many of Europe's old-fashioned Monarchist leaders the collapse of Democracy presented them with many opportunities to roll back the achievements in social progress and equality yielded throughout the industrial booms of the 19th century. With the Gestapo's thugs ready to assist in rounding up liberals and intellectuals. Churchill was certainly not that type of Leader, but if the situation was bad enough it just wouldn't be up to him anymore. He'd have ended up like Paul Reynaud, valiantly vowing to fight from the end in a prison cell he was thrown in by his own countrymen...
In the midst of crisis Paris and London consented to allowing their Generals to withdraw from understandably hopeless situations. This created a tendency for Generals to withdraw all the way to Paris and then keep right on withdrawing into the Loire or the Bordeaux...with fatal consequences for the Third Republic and even worse consequences for the Republic's many Jewish and minority citizens it was responsible for protecting. A year later the Soviet Union would tolerate no withdrawals, and told its Generals what to think...or else. Who's capital withstood the full weight of a Nazi onslaught in the end? Yes it led to many disasters, yes it led to much resentment between Stalinist authorities and its soldiers in the Red Army. The greatest disaster of them all however would be from a Nazi victory.
It's true that Lend-Lease aid wasn't really perceived on the battlefield until around late 1942 or so. However, the Russian narrative plays down the most important element of Lend-Lease aid which was not hardware, but food. When the invasion began the civilian economy nearly collapsed due to the loss of huge swathes farmland and food stocks. Soviet agriculture was barely out of a phase in it's history where a bad harvest might well lead to famine even if Stalinist authorities weren't actively manipulating food supplies just to punish recalcitrant Ukrainian nationalists. Soviet authorities couldn't hide when foreign made equipment was at the front, but what they did hide for years was the docks of Arkhangelsk spent their first year packed with vital food supplies and rations for soldiers and factories workers barely subsisting on watery soups and a foul tea made of pine-needles to ward off scurvy. The last functioning thread of the civilian economy in the dire year of 1941 was literally the food network and that is largely thanks to huge imports of food stocks from the Anglo-Americans. If the civilian economy collapsed then war production would collapse with it with catastrophic consequences for the war effort. 
Victory over the Fascist Menace was obtained through the collective effort of the Allied  powers and the coalition they assembled to triumph over it. Any one of them could've survived on their own, but precisely none of the Big 3 would've been able to achieve victory without the other 2. 
 

Alarmeinheiten (Alarm unit) is an almost complete new scenario for CMRT.  It is actually a mini-campaign but with only one actual, three hour long, battle scenario.  The first scenario is a “choice” scenario where the player is able to choose some of the vehicles he will command in the “real” battle scenario.  It includes ammo dumps so it is recommended to play on Iron or Elite. 
Description: Command a German alarm unit (Alarmeinheiten).  Maneuver the alarm unit in multiple attacks and counter attacks across a 13½ square km map.  Axis vs Soviet AI only.    
The original idea was to attempt to get many of the rare and seldom seen vehicles into the scenario.  Upon reviewing the scenario @Sgt.Squarehead pointed out that while it might be fun it would not be realistic to have so many different rare and limited vehicles fighting together in the same units on the same section of front at the same time.  As a result, the “choice” scenario was created.  The player can choose mostly standard and common vehicles or many limited and rare vehicles.  The three hour long battle scenario will then be fought with the choice made in the first scenario.  The four AI plans are the same for both.  Only some of the player's vehicles are different depending on the choice.                
The scenario was inspired by @theforger excellent CMFB Mission to Maas scenario which I recommend.  See link below.
https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-final-blitzkrieg/cmfb-mission-to-maas-v2/
The map used for the scenario is a modified Der Ring Der Five Panzer map made by @George MC.  George gave permission to use his map which is about 13 square kilometers.  Der Ring Der Five Panzer is an excellent scenario which is so huge it plays like a static campaign.  I recommend this scenario.  See link below.
https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons-scenarios/der-ring-der-5-panzer-division/
The scenario currently has three of four AI plans completed.  It also has placeholders for partisan units and an SS unit.  It should be ready for release soon after CMRT Fire & Rubble is released. 
Some of the recent screenshots posted in the CMRT screenshot thread have come from testing this scenario.  Below are a few more screenshots.
A dust trail from the alarmeinheiten on the move responding to a Battle Position in danger of being overrun.

Elements of the alarmeinheiten approaching the assembly area prior to a counter attack to relieve a besieged Battle Position. 

  

I've not done much with the helicopter landings actually... although that's probably a good thing as I only recently came up with some practical ideas on how they could actually be implemented.
There is a concept [hotlz] tag as part of 0.96... but any full implementation will likely be a 1.0 thing.
Either way, here's the usual "tidbit"...
 

I just found this pro-Houthi Yemeni battle vid channel   
I have watched several videos and the Houthis v the Saudis and their allies would make really good scenarios for CM2. (I realise making games out of other peoples' misery is in pretty bad taste. I do find it hard to reconcile my wargamery side with my humanitarian ethos sometimes). Amazing rocky terrain - ideal for irregulars.
 
NOTE: these videos are from the Houthi side - they indicate their soldiers with green arrows and the enemy (Saudi irregulars?) with red. I think these are total eye-openers. It would be interesting if anyone on the forum can understand Arabic, as the commentary would no doubt be enlightening but I cannot understand it.

NOTE 2: I have heard, but have no corroborating evidence, that the Saudi army can't get any decent soldiers - so  has to rely on desperate people, eg Pakistani poor. The only reliable units are held back against insurrection. Certainly if I was a Saudi tankman trained on an M1A2, and then sent into battle with a T55 I suspect my morale might have a negative modifier. 
This channel's battle footage shows the Houthis being brave and competent against a what I can only describe as a pitiful, unprofessional enemy. Yet there is a truly astonishing amount of arms, ammo and equipment that the Houthis are capturing intact - it's like being in dusty aladdin's caves of war materiel. See for yourself. At around the 9 min mark 15-20 lightly damaged armoured vehicles and about a dozen softskins including a Grad MRL truck are abandoned by the side of the  road.  I'd guess most of them are repairable. If a Western battalion or brigade let this amount of vehicles fall into enemy hands it would be called a major defeat, wouldn't it?

lol...
 

New vegetation mod for CMBN has been made available by @Falaise 

https://www.thefewgoodmen.com/cm-mod-warehouse/combat-mission-battle-for-normandy/cmbn-scenery/cmbn-terrain-vegetation/

Hello everyone :
Here is a very interesting 1st person video of French CAESAR artillery in Irak during a fire mission : 
https://youtu.be/x_rQ0IaRag0

2 guns firing 6 shells each in less than a minute, very physical for the guys, even though the semi-automatic system helps a lot.
You can notice they're firing almost at full charge, which means they must be targeting a target close to the max range of the gun (42km). 
In this video you can also see a pair of guns doing a MRSI fire mission. First shot at high angle and next one with a lower angle so both rounds arrive at the same time : 
Hope you enjoy !
 
 
 

Yes, I'm having that as well.
I think C2 across all titles could use some revisions. Modern radios, ones that are rated for distances much, much larger than CM maps are failing even with point-to-point LOS (which you don't need for many modern military radios anyways)

First party of 15 T-72AMT (T-72A upgrade, developed by Kyiv tank plant) directed to army. Next 10 will go to the end of January and 6 in February. Thus, full tank battalion in 31 vehicles will receive T-72AMT.
What new in T-72AMT:
- V-84-1 (840 h.p.) engine instead V-46 (780 h.p.)
- "Nizh" ERA
- 1K13 gunner's sight, which allows to use TLATGM "Kombat"
- upgraded commander's day/night observation device TKN-3UM with 3rd gen.EOP ("tank" type target detection up to 1000 m in half-moon light or up to 550 m in young moon light)
- driver's night vision device TVNE-4BUP (not less 100 m of nigt way visibility)
- remote controlled HMG
- "Aselsan" digital radio
- SN-3003 "Bazalt" GPS-navigator
- slat armor, protecting engine part and optoinaly, protecting rear of the turret
- tracks of T-80
There is an opinion, that IR-projector "Luna" is useles thing, which creates weak zone, not protecting by ERA block 

Well it took me forever but I finally did it! Finished the whole campaign. That was a pretty epic finale there. I was pretty aggressive and forced a surrender with 37 minutes left to go on the clock.
Here's the final tally for the whole campaign:

 
That's 319 casualties for me plus 19 tanks. Most of those other vehicles were destroyed by aircraft.
Soviets took 1,549 casualties plus 90 tanks, 12 assault guns and a ridiculous number of trucks and jeeps. I shot down a Soviet plane in the final battle, making it 2 planes shot down overall, which was a nice surprise. The Soviet planes did absolutely nothing in the final battle except strafe an empty truck and then immediately get shot down. 
In the final battle I took 125 casualties and 9 tanks lost. Several of those tanks were lost due to a couple of horribly botched flanking maneuvers on my part. Most of the enemy tanks were in a big line across the map. Their tank line was very strong, but I managed to break through on the far left and right flanks, so I tried to slip a couple tank platoons deep around into the enemy rear areas to encircle them, flank the rest of their tanks and roll up the enemy line. Turns out the map designer placed some assault guns hidden deep in the rear in a second line right up against the map edge to prevent just such a thing. Whoops! 
The enemy took 467 casualties in the final battle, 23 of them POWs. Plus 18 tanks lost and 7 assault guns. The artillery you get is pretty devastating. One of my observers alone caused 88 casualties, and I didn't even use all that much artillery. I was playing on the highest difficulty so the call times were pretty long. I had the enemy surrounded toward the end, and I was getting ready to dump all the rest of my artillery onto the final enemy positions in the center of their line. I had 150mm shells falling into the middle of a bunch of their positions and I was attacking from every direction when they finally surrendered.
Based on this campaign, if I were to criticize my own playstyle, I would have a few points:
a) I should be more cautious. I tend to start each scenario very cautiously, sneaking everyone around and doing careful recon and doing very well overall in the initial phases, but once the battle is halfway through or so, I start getting more and more impatient and I get aggressive and start throwing everyone into the meat grinder. It's especially hard to be cautious in a campaign like this, where the scenarios are so massive.
b) I should use more smoke. I always forget that I even have smoke, and I'm not very good at using it even when I remember that I have it.
c) I should be more liberal with my ammo and artillery usage. Even though you have to conserve ammo in this campaign, it was never a problem for me at all and I always had a ton left over. Your infantry gets thousands of rounds of extra ammo in their trucks and half-tracks and they can always go back for more. I always have a lot of artillery left over as well. There was a huge amount left over in the final battle. It just takes so long to first find the enemy, then get observers into good positions and then it takes even longer to wait for them to call it in. I get impatient and then I just attack anyway. The artillery is often very effective though when I do end up using it. One of the highlights of the final battle for me was when a T-34 got hit by 120mm mortars twice in almost the exact same spot. The two shell holes were only inches apart from each other. I had only intended to force the T-34 commander to button up, not expecting any of the mortars to actually hit, but I ended up blowing up the tank twice over.

The tank riding, no prisoner taking, one eyed, Forward Observer.  
 

Combat Mission Shock Force 2 PBEM AAR
MSR Titan
By IICptMillerII

INTRODUCTION
 
This is an after action report (AAR) of a play by email (PBEM) battle I recently concluded. The battle is in Combat Mission Shock Force 2 and features a combined arms task force attacking down a major highway against a near-peer opposing force (OpFor).
The map is taken from the first mission of the excellent campaign “Forging Steel” by GeorgeMC. All credit goes to him for designing the superb map. I have modified the BluFor and OpFor, as well as their respective objectives, but otherwise the map remains untouched.
This AAR features several mods. Chief among them are:
Veins Smoke and Effects mod Drakenlords Fire mod Sahrani Liberation Army (SLA) by myself playing the OpFor US 3rd Infantry Division Multicam uniforms by myself A number of the graphics used in this AAR (mainly the maps and task force layout) are large image files and are best viewed in full size, with the ability to fully zoom in on them.
All sprites of vehicles and soldier models used in the map and task force layout graphics are taken from the game “Armored Brigade” by Matrix Games and are slightly tweaked by me. All credit goes to the artists who created these sprites.
 
MISSION
Task Force Miller is ordered to assault down Highway 3, named Main Supply Route (MSR) Titan, in order to allow follow on forces to continue the attack.
Mission Specific Tasks:
Secure Bridges 31 and 32. Destroy any enemy forces in the vicinity of MSR Titan Do not suffer more than 30% casualties Desired End State:
MSR Titan, to include Bridges 31 and 32 secured and not directly threatened by the enemy. Task Force Miller combat effective and capable of conducting follow-on operations.
 

 
ENEMY
S2 (Intel) indicates the enemy is present in battalion size and are made up of elements from the 16th Guards Tank Division. Specifically, elements of the 47th Guards Tank Regiment appear to be deployed to our front. S2 anticipates a mix of dismounted and mechanized infantry (mounted in BMP-2s) in battalion (-) strength supported by at least one company of T-72AV tanks. It is anticipated that at least one additional company of tanks, maybe more, could be present on the battlefield, possibly as a quick reaction force (QRF).
The enemy is well equipped, well led, and well trained. They are expected to stand and fight and will not give ground easily. Entrenched enemy units not immediately threatening the MSR should be bypassed or be destroyed with indirect fires.
The T-72AV is a very capable tank and is well crewed. It is capable of frontally penetrating our M1A1’s at combat ranges. It is not a threat to be taken lightly.
Additionally, enemy infantry may be equipped with the AT-14 Kornet anti-tank guided missile (ATGM). This weapon can easily destroy our M2 and M3 Bradley/Cavalry fighting vehicles and can severely damage, disable, and even destroy our M1A1’s.
 

 
TERRAIN AND WEATHER
The weather is overcast, though rain is not expected. The Air Force has assured us that the weather will not impede their ability to support the task force.
The landscape is a mildly arid temperate climate. The dominating terrain features are Hill 113, and the gorge that runs North-South, crossing under MSR Titan at Bridge 32. The gently hilled terrain is a mix of grassland, agriculture, and light forest. The forested areas are not expected to prohibit tracked vehicles, though caution should still be used if passing through.
MSR Titan runs East-West along the 2240 Easting. It crosses two obstacles, unnamed gorges, at Bridges 31 and 32.
Several settlements of varying size are scattered through the area of operations. Only one is named, Kronenburg. The rest are designated by named areas of interest (NAIs). The most significant of these are likely to be NAI’s 5, 8, 9 and 12. These are larger settlements located closest to the MSR.
 

 
TROOPS
Task Force Miller is a combined arms task force composed primarily of two companies, one mechanized infantry and one armored. The armor company is Alpha Company equipped with M1A1HC Abrams tanks. The mechanized infantry company is Charlie Company riding in M2A3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles (BFV). Neither the tanks nor BFVs are equipped with explosive reactive armor (ERA) packages, so they are more vulnerable to HEAT rounds, specifically modern tandem HEAT warheads. These units come from 1st Battalion, 64th Armored Regiment. The parent division is the 3rd Infantry Division.
Also attached is 1st Platoon, Alpha Company, 5-7th Cavalry. The scouts operate the M3A3 Bradley Cavalry Fighting Vehicle (CFV).
Supporting Fires:
The task force’s Joint Tactical Air Controller (JTAC) is assigned to the headquarters element of Alpha Company, and rides in a Humvee. Charlie Company has its Fire Support Officer (FSO) in its Bradley Fire Support vehicle (BFIST), part of C Company’s headquarters.
We have been given priority fires for the following assets
Battery A, 1-41st Field Artillery. x6 155mm Paladin self-propelled guns 1 flight of AH-64D Apache Gunships (2 helicopters) Armed with: 30mm HEDP x1000 70mm HE Rockets x38 AGM-114 Hellfire x8 1 flight of A-10C Thunderbolt II’s (2 fixed wing aircraft) Armed with: 30mm APDU x1350 500lb bomb x4 AGM-65 Maverick x4  

 
TIME

The time is 0830. Task Force Miller has 2 hours to accomplish its objectives.
 
INITIAL SCHEME OF MANEUVER 
The initial scheme of maneuver, illustrated by this map, is as follows:

 
Cavalry Scouts (White)
Scout team 3 will advance to NAI 2 and establish overwatch positions North-East to screen the task force’s left flank. Scout team 1 (dismounted) will observe to it’s North-East to provide another set of eyes from a different location to spot any threats that immediately appear as the task force deploys.  
Tanks (Red)
3rd platoon will advance down the MSR and establish hull down overwatch positions that will allow observation down the entirety of the MSR and its immediate surroundings. 2nd platoon will advance forward into hull down positions and establish a base of fire position to cover the infantry 1st platoon will advance forward directly in front of NAI 1 in order to directly observe and engage any threats spotted there and allow the infantry to move up, dismount and begin sweeping the NAI.  
Infantry (Blue)
For now, all infantry platoons will remain mounted and stationary in defilade as the tanks and scouts move forward to their initial positions. Once the tanks/scouts are in position, the platoons will fan out and deploy against their respective initial objectives. 1st platoon is tasked with clearing any discovered threats in the immediate vicinity of MSR Titan. 2nd platoon is effectively the reserve element and will respond to developing threats as needed. 3rd platoon is tasked with sweeping NAI 2 if the enemy is discovered there.  
Preparatory Fires
1 section of 155mms (2 guns) will fire a light mission against NAI 1 to suppress any enemy forces deployed there that could threaten the initial deployment of the task force. The remaining 2 sections of the battery will be on call for fires.

I can't speak to this particular weapon, but I know firsthand for mortars, once the tube is hot and the baseplate is firmly in the ground, it takes a while to be able to break it down and strap it on your pack. Packing ammunition and fuses back into the tubes, disposing of charge bags if using separate QF ammo, those can all take time as well. I'm not saying that is true for this artillery piece in particular, but anything hot or removed from packaging on the gun position is going to take longer to move.
Regarding the LOS, I believe I've seen the muzzle flash originate from lower down on the model somewhere down on the tripod. I'd have to take another look but this mismatch might explain the issue.
Finally, I found a very interesting write-up on Elefants in Italy. Kudos to the OOB team for getting this so right. I can't imagine trying to figure out the rarity of 11 vehicles in an entire theatre of operations!

Nikishyne / Nikishino
North-east of Donetsk and south-east of Debaltseve.
map size : 2100 X 1900 m
type : village
Nikishyne saw a lot of fighting in 2015 during the battle for Debaltseve. I might post more in depth background info later. But at the end of the battle, it was basically a field of rubble with barely any house intact.
Google Earth view :


View from the South West :

From the North East :


Notes :
Again the setup zones aren't that big. They're sufficient for a small force.
I added objectives and setup zones for a meeting engagement so people could give the map a go and have some fun either as a pbem or a hotseat game. Historically the setup zones don't make a lot of sense though. I am aware of that. As far as I understand, the Ukrainian forces were reinforcing the village from the North and North-West and the separatists were coming from the South or South East. I picked these setup zones because I think they offer the most interesting tactical options and are more or less fair for both sides but they're not historical at all.
Download link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/j5vfid5og72t0c7/cmbs map nikishyne.rar?dl=0