Combatintman

The NORTHAG Centre of Gravity was said to be the Minden Gap and the crossing over the River Weser at Bad Oeynhausen which was pretty much on the 1 (GE) Corps and 1 (BR) Corps boundary.  Either of the two corps could have been on the wrong end of the GSFG/WGF main effort but I suspect the Germans would have got more of the good news from the Soviets than the Brits mainly because of where the 2nd operational echelon (20 GA) was located (NE of Berlin).

You won Rumpenheim Rumpus - I say yes if the scenario designer sets the scene correctly and ensures the assets are there ...
Is artillery perfect in CMCW, I can't say because I haven't delved into it in minute detail.  There are enough threads out there that suggest it could be improved and I know that at least one indirect fire issue with the title is being seriously investigated.

You won Rumpenheim Rumpus - I say yes if the scenario designer sets the scene correctly and ensures the assets are there ...
Is artillery perfect in CMCW, I can't say because I haven't delved into it in minute detail.  There are enough threads out there that suggest it could be improved and I know that at least one indirect fire issue with the title is being seriously investigated.

Good stuff here - these are always the best threads.  The pedant in me though has to point out that the abbreviations for the 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards is 5 INNIS DG and 1st Battalion the Rifle Brigade is 1 RIF BDE.

That's fine but I do.  The claim is not proven by John but that is the thing that people will see when they look at the forum whether they read the detail and look at the linked YouTube link or not.  The effect could discourage people from buying the title which is fine if the claim is based on facts.  He does not know how the Mig-27 behaves in CMCW yet he is willing to imply that there is an issue with its behavior.  I take back the use of the word trashing.  As you pointed out, it is emotive and I apologize unreservedly to John and you for the use of the word.  My point stands - John has inferred that there is a problem with a game he has not played - he cannot prove that there is a problem and had made no attempt to do so and he should; therefore, not have made the inference.  Had the thread been titled 'An interesting video about Mig-27 gun runs' or similar then I would not have commented.  I am not bullying John, I am calling him out on unfounded claims.

That's fine but I do.  The claim is not proven by John but that is the thing that people will see when they look at the forum whether they read the detail and look at the linked YouTube link or not.  The effect could discourage people from buying the title which is fine if the claim is based on facts.  He does not know how the Mig-27 behaves in CMCW yet he is willing to imply that there is an issue with its behavior.  I take back the use of the word trashing.  As you pointed out, it is emotive and I apologize unreservedly to John and you for the use of the word.  My point stands - John has inferred that there is a problem with a game he has not played - he cannot prove that there is a problem and had made no attempt to do so and he should; therefore, not have made the inference.  Had the thread been titled 'An interesting video about Mig-27 gun runs' or similar then I would not have commented.  I am not bullying John, I am calling him out on unfounded claims.

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

Good stuff here - these are always the best threads.  The pedant in me though has to point out that the abbreviations for the 5th Royal Inniskilling Dragoon Guards is 5 INNIS DG and 1st Battalion the Rifle Brigade is 1 RIF BDE.

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

As you have not played CMCW from my readings on the forum you have no idea what the behavior of the Mig-27 is in game.  How are you defining 'Possible' in a rating scale?  An organisation I work for defines possible as 35%-65% of occurrence.  Perhaps you should have titled this thread - 'A random video I found on the internet about the Mig-27' rather than trashing a game you haven't played by inferring that something about which you do not have enough knowledge to make a judgement on is wrong with it.

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...

 

Except its a BTR-70 ...

You don't need to see in the shed to know what's in there - if the target is on the collection deck it will get covered often enough to tell you what's going on.  Baying and shedding is what it's called in the imagery analysis game.

Here speaks a designer who knows their trade by the sounds of it - a vision, narrative and an understanding of whether to prioritise history over balance as well as an acceptance that not everyone will like it.

I told you to keep hold of the grab handles ...