Combatintman

Your opinion obviously and what makes a good map is horses for courses but dragging this back to Berlin, @benpark   the creator of the stock maps for Berlin had started work on them sometime before January 19, 2015, and in March 2018 was unhappy enough with them that he scrubbed his work and started again.  Modding is modding and there is great work done by modders as this threat amply demonstrates but "pretty boring" in stock releases is pretty much what has to be the standard because everybody has to be able to experience the game unmodded and stock scenario designers and map makers have to work within those constraints.
To use CMFB as an example, the maps created by @benpark and @Pete Wenman(and others I'm sure probably) were absolutely superb - I have walked that ground on numerous occasions and the boring stock maps are superbly realistic which give you a sense of actually being there.  
@Pete Wenmanmade the map discussed in this thread for the Market Garden Module in which @Free Whiskyhad high praise for the quality of the mapping and a similar sense of "visiting history".
 
Sometimes real ground is "boring," but it is what it is ...

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

Great ... so you want to take this degree of control and refinement out of the editor then?

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

It is about 10 minutes work - set what you think your most common value across the unit is going to be when you pick the battalion in the editor then refine from there.

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

Great ... so you want to take this degree of control and refinement out of the editor then?

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

It isn't - there's just a lot of people bumping their gums about the game's soft factors who haven't looked hard enough into the editor to know how they can be applied.  Most squad-sized units in most armies are commanded by NCOs - you want NCO-led units to be rubbish - select the squad-sized unit(s) and turn the experience, leadership and motivation factors down to whatever level you deem appropriate.  You want the officer to be good (I'm still waiting btw 😉) then turn those factors up for the platoon HQ, Company HQ and Battalion HQ.

Right.  So a innocent random post-1944 "Red Army" FYI?  The whole "into meat grinder" remark and the heavy implication that "Russians sucked 1941-1942 but had it coming because...Russians" and "all victories after 1944 were not-Russians" were simply colour commentary?
I think we are all pretty clear on the point being made, it was not subtle...never is.  My point is that diminishing and sullying the sacrifices a nation made over 70 years ago in an existential war on their own soil because of this war is not cool.  The two events and strategic contexts are completely different unless one subscribes to the "every Russian man, woman and child is evil, everywhere and forever", which the narrative appears to suggest.
Russian leadership is definitely evil and needs to be removed - those responsible held to account.  Russian military has lost its footing on the slippery slope of war and it is a stain they should wear from here on out - again those accountable held responsible.  The Russian people who openly supported this war are wrong or misled, and they will need to come to terms with that...much in the same way the US had to come to terms with Vietnam, Indigenous genocide or slavery, or the UK in India, South Africa etc, or French in...well pick a spot in Africa. 
The Russian people who have died resisting, or have fled their nation, or continue to resist as best they can should be supported in hopes the seeds of a better Russia lay within their hands.  And at some point in the future the Russian children who pick up this mess that they had nothing to do with will need to try to make their country functional again and hopefully ensure this sort of war does not happen again. 
Of course if this was just an innocent "FYI" from the OP, then we are all golden.  To that I would only humbly suggest that his comments - pretty much from day one of this thing - may be easily misconstrued.

Well yes but the encouraging thing about the incident when examined through the prism of "we're going to nuke London" and similar threats that have been bandied around since the get go is that Russia could have reacted very differently to this e.g., "the aircraft was spying on Russian forces and was in airspace close to a warzone ahem ... special military operation zone that improved its chances of doing so and was; therefore, operating at risk," or something even more bellicose followed up by announcing an exclusion zone on pain of being shot down over the Black Sea for NATO military aircraft.

I know, but the subtlety of this reaction is important to grasp.

Well yes but the encouraging thing about the incident when examined through the prism of "we're going to nuke London" and similar threats that have been bandied around since the get go is that Russia could have reacted very differently to this e.g., "the aircraft was spying on Russian forces and was in airspace close to a warzone ahem ... special military operation zone that improved its chances of doing so and was; therefore, operating at risk," or something even more bellicose followed up by announcing an exclusion zone on pain of being shot down over the Black Sea for NATO military aircraft.

Well yes but the encouraging thing about the incident when examined through the prism of "we're going to nuke London" and similar threats that have been bandied around since the get go is that Russia could have reacted very differently to this e.g., "the aircraft was spying on Russian forces and was in airspace close to a warzone ahem ... special military operation zone that improved its chances of doing so and was; therefore, operating at risk," or something even more bellicose followed up by announcing an exclusion zone on pain of being shot down over the Black Sea for NATO military aircraft.

I know, but the subtlety of this reaction is important to grasp.

Well yes but the encouraging thing about the incident when examined through the prism of "we're going to nuke London" and similar threats that have been bandied around since the get go is that Russia could have reacted very differently to this e.g., "the aircraft was spying on Russian forces and was in airspace close to a warzone ahem ... special military operation zone that improved its chances of doing so and was; therefore, operating at risk," or something even more bellicose followed up by announcing an exclusion zone on pain of being shot down over the Black Sea for NATO military aircraft.

I even used a stack of flavour objects mate 'cos I know you love 'em ...

Village mate and not much of one at that - I've lived in two that are four times the size of Chervone ... I know to a lot of map makers four structures = a village, 8 = a town and 12 = a city but not this callsign.  One of my particular scenario bugbears and why in the main all of my maps are based on real places as this avoids such schoolboy errors.

My version is 2.16 so you need to patch - deffo nothing to do with the battlepack.

How do you think I tested this ... 

Getting there .... here are the designer notes:
Overview
The genesis of this mission was the various discussions about what a dispersed light infantry force augmented with good ISR able to cue indirect fire assets was capable of.  As such, some might contend that this is not a scenario at all but more a test of the concept fielded by the Ukrainian military.
With that in mind, this, “mission/scenario” may not be to everyone’s taste but I’m pretty sure ISR types, targeteers and “dropshorts” (gunners) will love it.  For those of you not in any of those categories, there is still something in the mission for you.  Potential takeaways being:  learning how to plan ISR and cue fires against a fairly predictable enemy which of course, at that stage of the conflict, the Russians were at the tactical level; seeing how important so-called “soft factors” (training and morale) are in warfare; and, I hope to get a sense of how the war was fought during that particular phase of the conflict.
Map
Chervone is a real place, and I chose it because when I started making this mission in May, there seemed every chance that a Russian BTG would venture south along the road which runs through Chervone as part of an attempt to drive south to Barvinkove as part of the wider operation to take Sloviansk.  I also wanted a large map to give the player plenty of space to work in with a mix of terrain types.  Chervone, although it never ended up being contested, fitted the bill.
Units
According to a few sources, the units named in the scenario were in the area at this time and could plausibly have fought over this piece of ground in May 2022, but I make no claims for accuracy in this regard.  37 Guards Motor Rifle Brigade, according to one source was T-72 and BMP-2 equipped so the major equipment types for the Russians are more or less correct.  Due to the limitations of picks in the editor, I have had to use US UAVs and their controllers for the Ukrainian side and the overall Ukrainian force structure was designed more or around testing the agile light infantry supported by ISR and indirect fire assets concept than any attempt to model an actual TO&E.  As we saw so much of the Stugna ATGM in a lot of early footage, I opted to include these rather than the better-known US Javelin.  The advantage of this of course is that it avoids another slightly untidy US substitution.  The named units; therefore, are simply to give a narrative and backdrop to the scenario.
Dedication and Thanks
I cannot finish without mentioning “that thread” on the Battlefront Forum.  Some have been critical of the time devoted to it but without it, this mission would not have been possible.  While it is true that some of the discussions have gone down rabbit holes, it is a treasure trove of resources and links for scenario makers and special thanks go to our friends from the conflict zone for their invaluable insights, unearthing content in both Russian and Ukrainian, and helping outsiders like me make sense of it.  As a dedication and a reminder that war is a visceral endeavour that affects real people, I dedicate this mission to my friend and erstwhile colleague Alex, who I will not name in full for obvious reasons.  He left Kabul on 25 February to return home and ensure that his wife and young child got to safety before joining a Ukrainian Territorial Force unit.  Very much a case of out of the frying pan and into the fire and I am pleased to say that his family are safe in a third country.  He is currently a JTAC and as of a fortnight ago was supporting offensive operations in the Kharkiv area.  This one is for you mate and I very much hope to be working with you again in the near future.  Otherwise, as with all of my stuff, I hope you find the fruits of my labour enjoyable.  Regards Combatintman.

I have the battlepack but I thought that the battlepack was just battles which is why I didn't specify it as a requirement.  I'll check mate and amend accordingly - thanks for the heads-up.

Glad you enjoyed it - thanks.