Lethaface

No. Each UKR soldier will tell you, that BTR-70 is a piece of sh...t in comarison with M-113/YPR-765
BTR-60/70/80 have too weak side hull armor, which can't maintain proper protection from 7.62 and often against 5.45 AP from close range, when M113 protects. Inner compartment of BTRs is too narrow for soldiers in modern equipment and body armor, because both and BTR and BMP series were designed in ColdWar era, when soldiers haven't such equipment and in design was put an avarage height of Soviet soldier in 1960-1970 as about 160-165 sm, this is one more answer, why RUS and UKR soldiers ride on the top of armor. Not only because if it hit, all will burn alive (it's enough exaggregation if it not 125 mm HE), but because of full squad of troops will waste value time, trying to disembark from narrow compartment under fire. So, UKR soldiers always ride inside M113 to enemy positions, because it much safer, and disembark time is much shorter, than from inside BTR-70
Enclosed turret of BTRs doesn't give enough protection, but instead strict natural LOS of gunner. M113/HMMMWV guneer can better to observe battlefield, when he gets targeting from comamnder or spot the target himself. 
One guy from "Azov" NG brigade wrote brigade try to get at least several dozens of M113 and he amazed, why it so hard. Even 3rd assault briagade "Azov", using M113/YPR, as he told indeed have very small of them and all M113, which you can see in their videos are the same several APC. 

Thanks guys, some good hard fought battles. Shout out to all my opponents. I got lucky by having active players for all 3 rounds.

CM players on this site (lets recall this is a gaming site) are entirely aware that a King Tiger, IS-2, Abrams or T90 (depending on the title) is not immune to damage or destruction on the battlefield. Nobody here is so naive.

As a (fellow) human I wonder if your breakfast is on the sour and salty side. I mean I agree that the stuff you mention could be improved upon. But this game was released about 10 years ago and implemented a (at the moment) fictional war in Ukraine. 
If you lose the hyperbole and just present the issues as possible improvements which could make the came much more close to the real 2022 conflict, I guess it's more pleasant to read and more chance of getting interaction or being listened too. Or if you like more critical posts: you use an unnecessary volume of words in un unpleasant tone to get your point across. It's really a shame because it was so close to being a good post, but ultimately it sounds like a broken record. We shouldn't have to put in the time to read those extra words, which bring nothing to the table and just clutter up our forum experience with negative vibes.  
FWIW BFC has said they don't plan to retroactively update CMBS to be like the 2022 war. But there might come a new game depicting the '22 war.

Had some fun with these little scraps as well, we too were behind schedule mainly due to my agenda but we managed to finish the games just before the bell. 
The oppo matching is more advanced than I was expecting ;-), given the positions I assumed a rematch against @MeatEtr but we have now been paired with the #3 and #4. Good for variety I guess.
I have been coupled to Dawg327, not sure if he is on this forum. First file send and GL & HF!

Robotyne...russian advance...
 
https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1679856225855369222?s=20

You don't even have to go back that far in time to find when the Russians last looked West. A lot a Russians very conveniently like to forget that they started World War 2 on the same side with Germany. In September of 1939, they helped invade Poland. Two months later (and still allied with Germany), they started the Winter War with Finnland.

Well if bfc published CMBS today with the premise to depict a historical representation of the Ukraine war, then you would be rightly disappointed maybe. 
But as it stands now you can be disappointed all you want but that's somewhat on you. You bought the game based on the facts bfc has given you: An alternate, fictional war in Ukraine (that wasn't even happening at that time). 
If you haven't informed yourself beforehand, you are the one to blame. 
Its like going into a fish restaurant and being disappointed about getting a fish for your meal while you would have liked a steak instead. 
Don't get me wrong your points itself surely make sense and probably would be great to see but this game is a finished product with maybe some tweaks, modules and battlepacks in the unclear future. Maybe bfc will give it a credit in one of those but probably not. This game is several years old now. Other companies would have already dumped it and be getting to their next game. 
And though I would myself like to include some of these ideas for historical accuracy, I doubt that it would make that much fun in a quick battle. Getting hammered by roaming drones half of the time is hardly anything tactical challenging. 
I somewhere read that bfc isn't all that fond of air assets getting involved in the ground combat at all. So thats maybe partially why Syrians don't getting hammered by Nato airforce in CMSF2 most of the time, rather being attacked by normal ground forces. So I doubt that bfc will adjust drones to be more common. But they should be at least available for Ukraine too, I give you that. 
 
CMBS may be the weakest game in the series for me too but that's mostly about the lethality of things. Tanks and infantry can be wiped out in an instant if one is not careful enough. 
Often you split your infantry to small spread out teams to reduce casualties by one artillery barrage or a tank round. 
Artillery is more common and deadlier than in any other game in the series. 
So comparing to real events I think bfc nailed the feel of a modern battlefield, while not depicting the historical war entirely. 

As a (fellow) human I wonder if your breakfast is on the sour and salty side. I mean I agree that the stuff you mention could be improved upon. But this game was released about 10 years ago and implemented a (at the moment) fictional war in Ukraine. 
If you lose the hyperbole and just present the issues as possible improvements which could make the came much more close to the real 2022 conflict, I guess it's more pleasant to read and more chance of getting interaction or being listened too. Or if you like more critical posts: you use an unnecessary volume of words in un unpleasant tone to get your point across. It's really a shame because it was so close to being a good post, but ultimately it sounds like a broken record. We shouldn't have to put in the time to read those extra words, which bring nothing to the table and just clutter up our forum experience with negative vibes.  
FWIW BFC has said they don't plan to retroactively update CMBS to be like the 2022 war. But there might come a new game depicting the '22 war.

Finished off the two games with Alwaysfish this morning.  Big shout out to him for some good fights and for cranking out the turns from across the pond with me over the past 2.5 days as we were at about 30 minutes left on the game clocks on Monday afternoon.  I'm retired so I have the time but he might be fired because I think he has a job!

I don't follow Twitter so I don't know the reliability of this account, but in Taiwan as far as I can tell this news comes from an unnamed source that allegedly spoke to 中國時報 China Times, which is owned by 旺旺集團 Want Want Group - a senbei rice cracker conglomerate that has links to the CCP and has been buying up a bunch of media in Taiwan and pushing a pro-China agenda. You can read a whole chain of English-language articles about them and why many people consider them to be compromised here: https://newbloommag.net/tag/want-want-group/
Of course, being reported by pan-blue media doesn't mean this story is not true, it's just important to bear in mind the source when reporting on news coming from "the biggest medias" in Taiwan, and the context in which particular sources tend to report. Pan-green 自由時報 Liberty Times, for example, also reports on this briefly but describes it as a rumor.
We might never know for sure because the line from the MND is a "no comment" comment that all retired weapons are disposed of according the law. Presumably China would treat it as crossing some kind of red line if Taiwan were to overtly provide military aid to a country being invaded by their "no limits" partner, so this kind of under the radar aid is perhaps the best we can hope for beyond the wink wink nudge nudge civilian drones and other support vehicles.

Although It's just anecdotal I've been on the MH-17 flight quite a number of times (flying to/from Malaysia) and indirectly know some people who perished on the flight (I also witnessed part of the impressive ceremony through the country). At the times I was on the flight I was more worried about it going over Afghanistan.
Apart from that; the way the Russian regime handled MH-17 was rather infuriating for anyone involved. At the same 'time', our intelligence services have had quite some interactions with their Russian counterparts before and after that incident. So the way Russia behaved was not a surprise.
Also on another note, as a human I'm not convinced those who shot down that airplane did intentionally destroy a civilian airplane full of passengers. But 'we' certainly didn't forget, nor forgive.
 

And that happens when you cut a small snippet of a quote and use it out of context to make your point.
The (relevant part of) the full quote:
I don't see any threshold applied there. He just states that currently the usefulness of a limited number of F-16s is probably not that high for the ongoing counteroffensive because of Russian air and AA capabilities. That perfectly fits our understanding of the current situation. Ukraine already has air capabilities, they just can't use them all that much at the moment because we basically have denied air space (for both sides btw). A handful of F-16 will not immediately and fundamentally change that equation, right? As he goes on that may change over time.
If that's your definition of a moron...
Now I have to defend US generals because you guys are too lazy to look up original sources? Really?

The V1 vibes are ridiculously strong with this one.

Pretty enlightening thread. I share the Ranger trainers shock that these Ukrainian soldiers don't use maps and roll around using cellphones and Chinese-made tablets. If they are able to do so then perhaps Russian EW isn't as good as expected. Still, they should be able to navigate using a map so they can get around when their high tech GNSS gear is jammed. Looks like that training was useful at least. 
Also, I got a pretty big laugh at this guy complaining about showing up at 0600 for a 0900 range time. Classic US Army right there.

Oh, cool. The old stabbed-in-the-back/we-wuz-robbed mythology. That always works out well in the end.
Edit: which kind of raises an interesting thought experiment. He Who Shall Not Be Named(tm) arose out of abject anonymity to controlling (albeit briefly) most of Europe barely two decades later. I wonder if there's some corporal currently dodging cluster munitions in Luhansk that's destined to be running Russia by the end of the decade.

I keep reading about how Ukraine is fighting this war on the West behalf. No, they are fighting this war to stop Russia from invading/annexing their country. They are fighting it for their own behalf (fortunately).
Yes we also have interests in it, but please stop the framing. Ukrainians are doing the dying, they have decided to do it, we didn't need to convince m or pay m to do it.
 

FWIW, I don't think the root interest of this war was centred on the West. The root interest was centered around the vested interest surrounding Ukraine (which also lead to CMBS), perhaps the perceived weakness of the West was instrumental in Russia going forward with the ordeal; I'll give you that.

Imo you are overestimating Russia. They had the size of Italy's economy. Their economy is/was reliant on 57% raw material export, the rest largely being internal services. Yes they have a lot of resources, but not that much industrial / technological infrastructure. We (including East Europe) did indeed also f up ourselves on the security/defense spectrum, some more then others, but I believe the 'Russia can invade any minute' theory is a fallacy. I also do think that politically and strategically the non-USA assets of NATO are relevant. Perhaps not as relevant as they could be, so there is work to do.

I personally wouldn't object 😉

Although It's just anecdotal I've been on the MH-17 flight quite a number of times (flying to/from Malaysia) and indirectly know some people who perished on the flight (I also witnessed part of the impressive ceremony through the country). At the times I was on the flight I was more worried about it going over Afghanistan.
Apart from that; the way the Russian regime handled MH-17 was rather infuriating for anyone involved. At the same 'time', our intelligence services have had quite some interactions with their Russian counterparts before and after that incident. So the way Russia behaved was not a surprise.
Also on another note, as a human I'm not convinced those who shot down that airplane did intentionally destroy a civilian airplane full of passengers. But 'we' certainly didn't forget, nor forgive.
 

That would mean anyone on the planet fighting against an oppressor is fighting a war on our behalf. From a philosophy pov I could see some merit in that idea, but in practical terms it becomes rather vague or result in a sort of perpetuous world war.

PS Maybe we in the West sometimes communicate to ourselves (and or others) that we have more to do with with the plot of 'as the world turns' than we actually do have influence on it.

FWIW, I don't think the root interest of this war was centred on the West. The root interest was centered around the vested interest surrounding Ukraine (which also lead to CMBS), perhaps the perceived weakness of the West was instrumental in Russia going forward with the ordeal; I'll give you that.

Although It's just anecdotal I've been on the MH-17 flight quite a number of times (flying to/from Malaysia) and indirectly know some people who perished on the flight (I also witnessed part of the impressive ceremony through the country). At the times I was on the flight I was more worried about it going over Afghanistan.
Apart from that; the way the Russian regime handled MH-17 was rather infuriating for anyone involved. At the same 'time', our intelligence services have had quite some interactions with their Russian counterparts before and after that incident. So the way Russia behaved was not a surprise.
Also on another note, as a human I'm not convinced those who shot down that airplane did intentionally destroy a civilian airplane full of passengers. But 'we' certainly didn't forget, nor forgive.