banned

Damn, what a map!

A huge problem re C2/communication delays given the tight time limits of the vast majority of scenarios.  I don't think one can play this way normally.
However, I definitely play like there are real human lives at stake and am always asking myself what would I do in a given situation, or what can one reasonably expect from the "guys".  So, no suicide missions... eg recon till you get shot "just to see what's out there" etc.
One of the many aspects of MOS's TOC that is hugely enjoyable is the 4 hour time limit - gives one plenty of time to play as realistically as one wants.  It's currently at Beta 9, so you can be sure it's being tested thoroughly. 

Is there a way to disable the user interface or do you cut it out of your screenshots?

Well the trick is with an active transmitting radar on the target you may not need your own radar to pick up its position, just a passive radar receiver, that is exactly how anti radiation missiles these days work which are designed to knock out AA radars. The missile´s sensor head picks up the radar´s emission, at best the pilot invests further time to allow for a better target solution, next you launch the missile and it homes onto the enemy radar source, going fire-and-forget at some point, and hits without the target noticing in most cases. AA radars have also Radar-Warning-Receivers but these don´t react to these passive emission-guided weapons.  Although newer ARM´s often have an additional radar which is often used to pinpoint its terminal guidance. This also makes it possible to hit the target even when it goes dark i. e. switches of its active radar.
To get back to topic, if it is really an effective way to combat tanks on basis of their APS emissions I can´t tell for sure but for now it looks like this has no priority. Sure it brings the huge possible advantage of engaging ground vehicles un-assisted beyond visible or IR range but at the moment combat aircraft nevertheless have complete superiority over tanks (when enemy SAM and Air threats are covered of course). A conventional optical/infared AGM (like Maverick or KH-29) needs a closer distance but can do the same job, probably cost less then an ARM, and can engage a bigger variety of targets with or without APS.
However the ability to pick up these enemy APS emissions with passive radar receivers could come with a huge tactical advantage alone already for ground and air forces.
But never say never when it comes to military technology, who knows, as this systems become continuous proliferated somebody may one day see reason to design specific weapons to exploit the radar emission of APS systems.

Windows 10 Home here 1709 16299.431 running SF with all modules 1.32 and CMA 1.03 in admin modes (they´ll launch even without admin mode) with active avast without problems and no exceptions were needed. This machine went trough the same windows update cycles last year like yours.
I just peeked at the rest of the comments so perhaps you already answered these:
- what is the current error message
- You mentioned a reinstall was attempted. Where on the hdd is it excactly installed with complete path?
- You´re sure you´re running a correctly patched CMSF 1.32 and CMA 1.03? How many .brz files are in your data folders.
- Did you try to kill off any background processes in the task manager that are not crucial for operating windows? I am also talking about can things like additional management software provided from your computer/hardware manufactures.
- supplementary to the previous suggestion, did you check the software list if there is any unwanted installed?
- is your value 1 or 0 for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows\LoadAppInit_DLLs

Four hours.  Its set up to be a static campaign where you work a four hour shift in a Tactical Operations Center.       

I can try loading it.

I crop the UI (at the bottom of the screen) out of the screenshot in Paint.  As you probably know - "alt"  "I"  disappears the floating icons.  

It is not my definition of terrorism but one of the most common technical one you would find in a lexicon.
Also I give a single damn about what you and your friends do. Using a odd racial attribution like this in order to classify if the term "terrorist" applies or not is just completely off. Pointing that out has nothing to do with arrogance.
Also why should terrorist organizations be beyond CM´s scope? CM does not have to model the terrorism incident per se but isn´t it possible they could see assmyetrical conflict with regular forces? You basically already see an abstraction of that in Combat Mission Shock Force. The Uncons potrayed there basically can be everyone from displaced regulars, insurgents, to members of said organizations.
Also you are the one that should carefully reread what people are posting here. Point me out where I say  "all partisans = terrorists". Do you see the term "insurgent" there or did you conveniently skip that?
I don´t know what the hell triggered you to come up with this odd stuff.
I´m off for a round CM.
 

Going through what I hope is the last Beta test.  Long scenario (static campaign) so it takes awhile.  But it's looking good so far. Just minor easy to tweak stuff so far.  Thanks for the interest.  

You´re not pedantic but just wrong.
The term "terrorist" has absolutely nothing to do if wether a conflict is hypothetical or not but is defined by the means of "terror" someone uses to reach his goals, like specifically targeting civilian population with bombings in order to inflict fear or dissent for example. Politically of course it is often used to (incorrectly) disgrace organizations or individuals which the other side would probably call freedom or resistance fighters.
Regarding the rest you´ve wrote there. I think you got something completely wrong here. Organizations like the German RAF or the Irish IRA are also commonly designated as terrorist groups, so what in the hell has this suddenly to do with the skin color? No offense, but next time spent at least some time contemplating before posting, for your own good. Also nobody with at least minimum cultural aspiration describes Middle Eastern ethnicity with "brown people".
Back to topic:
Yeah also hope that Combat Mission Shock Force 2 will see success (I am pretty optimistic that his indeed will happen) and see further expansions.
 
   

First guess was answer Early War, not often covered in wargames and it sounds fun first to think about playing with late WW1 stuff but thinking about it, there is a reason why its not so often covered. There are not that my sophisticated Weapons systems - especially tanks - for the nations specifically the Germans. Scenario-wise also difficult, French didn´t put up much of a fight, Poland was not capable doing so while being attacked by two major powers. The annexation stuff that happened before the invasion of Poland as also the later invasion of Norway are not that relevant from CM´s perspective.
Operation Barbarossa is scenario-wise interesting but there wouldn´t be much for us to see. Russian wise there is stuff to add, I would certainly be excited to see soviet KV1/2´s. However for the Germans there would be absolutely nothing new to discover equipment-wise, except for older versions of known vehicles. Better to be left in Red Thunder.
I must admit I am not that interested in Afrika Korps but this theatre have seen many known commanders, operations, tank battles, on par equipment used against each other, fierce fighting and shifting fronts, many nations participating there. Especially for the Allies there would have the option to introduce many vehicles not seen in the CM European Theatres like the different Crusader tanks. Furthermore lets not forget that we would see completely different terrain sets in a Afrika CM giving the seasoned CM player some visual but also tactical variety (open fields, infantry may be better traversing contested space mounted etc.)
So in conclusion the choice for me is easy: definitely Afrika Korps

Thank you very much George!

Damn it was a really bad idea to come back to the CM forums several weeks ago. Now I can´t leave this place anymore, so much great stuff to be found here.
Looking forward to see the release of this scenario. Some of its ideas sound quiet revolutionary.
 

I play 100% real time with heavy usage of the pause function.

I was playing the as delivered SF1 campaign missions using the SF2 executables.

Yes you guys are right, wrong choice of words here. My apologies to Vergeltungswaffe and to you mjkerner.
Look what I mean mjkerner when you give group movement orders you pretty sure noticed that you get waypoints that are in relation to each other like the units are, which is a wonderful function. However sometimes when setting waypoints trough corridors or you want several vehicles follow the road the classic RTS "all waypoints go to one place, to a single tile" function would come in handy especially for curvy roads. Could be toggled with Shift like the Target Arc command.

Yes you guys are right, wrong choice of words here. My apologies to Vergeltungswaffe and to you mjkerner.
Look what I mean mjkerner when you give group movement orders you pretty sure noticed that you get waypoints that are in relation to each other like the units are, which is a wonderful function. However sometimes when setting waypoints trough corridors or you want several vehicles follow the road the classic RTS "all waypoints go to one place, to a single tile" function would come in handy especially for curvy roads. Could be toggled with Shift like the Target Arc command.

Yes you guys are right, wrong choice of words here. My apologies to Vergeltungswaffe and to you mjkerner.
Look what I mean mjkerner when you give group movement orders you pretty sure noticed that you get waypoints that are in relation to each other like the units are, which is a wonderful function. However sometimes when setting waypoints trough corridors or you want several vehicles follow the road the classic RTS "all waypoints go to one place, to a single tile" function would come in handy especially for curvy roads. Could be toggled with Shift like the Target Arc command.

Well it isn´t that easy to setup waypoints for a road with multiple vehicles especially if there are bends to overcome. BF should add some sort of toggle (shift key) to the movement commands which disables the (otherwise really useful) relative placement of waypoints but instead "focuses" all waypoints onto your designated tile. This would allow for somewhat convenient and effective convoy waypoint routes. I am pretty sure we´ll soon see this feature as programming-wise it isn´t really that hard to do.

I believe not. It’s whether they have communications links that will.