kevinkin

"Using the recently developed Battle of Stalingrad Virtual Staff Ride, Army University Press developed a multimedia historical documentary of the battle through the lens of current doctrine."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K0SFr2gPbc
Excellent detail with computer graphics. Published July 2018. 53 minutes in length. 
Kevin

"Using the recently developed Battle of Stalingrad Virtual Staff Ride, Army University Press developed a multimedia historical documentary of the battle through the lens of current doctrine."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K0SFr2gPbc
Excellent detail with computer graphics. Published July 2018. 53 minutes in length. 
Kevin

https://blog.haschek.at/2018/the-curious-case-of-the-RasPi-in-our-network.html

http://companyleader.themilitaryleader.com/
Nice site if you are not already aware.
Kevin

http://companyleader.themilitaryleader.com/
Nice site if you are not already aware.
Kevin

Chapter Three of the full RAND report discusses wargaming and wargames including commercial board and PC games. The link to the report is at the bottom of this article.
https://warontherocks.com/2018/12/the-will-to-fight-and-the-fate-of-nations/
The report mentions Combat Mission and a ton of other games we are all familiar with.
I will not try to summarize the massive report. It has 10 authors for goodness sake. But I know some folks here will be interested in the findings.
Kevin
 

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Books/Large-Scale-Combat-Operations-Book-Set/
Just an amazing amount of free reading in the set.
Kevin

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Books/Large-Scale-Combat-Operations-Book-Set/
Just an amazing amount of free reading in the set.
Kevin

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Books/Large-Scale-Combat-Operations-Book-Set/
Just an amazing amount of free reading in the set.
Kevin

oy vey.
We would all be interested in the last time you played a Combat Mission battle. What did you think? Did you have fun? We all have fun with CM. We enjoy the best that any wargame can offer. But no. You have to be miserable in each and every post. As if Steve and Charles care about your negativity after so many years. Please take your misery and self-righteous attitude elsewhere. Your contributions are not productive. You come across as an old guy drowning away their wasted life in a gin mill dreaming they were actually good at wargames and had friends. 
Kevin 

The wargamer site is owned by the Slitherine Group of companies. They tend to begrudgingly acknowledge Battlefront products. I have it bookmarked, but take everything over there with a grain of salt.  
Kevin

This appears to be some the text that the video I posted above is based on:
https://prodev2go.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/rus-ukr-lessons-draft.pdf
Fifty pages written in 2015. It's very good but lacks the graphical presentation (e.g. maps) that the video has. But I think it is an important piece of work regarding modern warfare.
I will post these  links over in the Black Sea forum too. 
Kevin
 

I will post this link here since the CMSF2 forum is getting a lot of traffic these  days. 
https://mwi.usma.edu/video-dr-phillip-karber-ukraine-russian-way-war/
From a West Point  presentation to cadets in April.
Impressive one hour talk on the Russia Ukraine war circa 2014. The speaker was in Ukraine 30 times and conducted  "staff rides".  Good idea to pause the video and read the slides. Beware: there  is a lot of detail. There is a portion that compares an Ukrainian '"thunder run"  to Jeb Stuart's audacious cavalry ride completely around the Union army during Seven Days.  Mentions one Ukrainian helo pilot that was shot down 3 times in one day with MANPADs and survived to tell about it.  
This may have been posted in a forum already. If so, I am simply behind schedule. 
Kevin

This is a recent opinion piece from West Point:
https://mwi.usma.edu/getting-beyond-door-kicking-four-tasks-urban-warriors/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB 9.19.18&utm_term=Editorial - Early Bird Brief
Nothing will teach you how to play CM better. But it's a quick and interesting read.
Kevin
 

This is a recent opinion piece from West Point:
https://mwi.usma.edu/getting-beyond-door-kicking-four-tasks-urban-warriors/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB 9.19.18&utm_term=Editorial - Early Bird Brief
Nothing will teach you how to play CM better. But it's a quick and interesting read.
Kevin
 

https://codenames.info/
Lists the names and describes many WW2 operations most of which are little known. It's a labor of love by the writer. I wish he listed his sources, but there is no reason to think anything is wildly inaccurate. Take a look. 

No apologies needed.  My point was that if the player can put aside 100% accuracy in available weapons, the east front can be gamed using CMRT across '41-45 - especially infantry combat. Perfect? No. Fun? Yes. A cool example is setting up infantry battles using the winter mod to simulate the January '42 Soviet counter offensive.  To me, it's a lot about having a nice map within an interesting tactical context, not just having exactly the right equipment. I know many will disagree - but that's OK. I put together a winter mod scenario based on the book Hell's Gate  (Cherkassy Pocket ) and it was a blast to make. George MC made a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdZ8mr16qKg
 
 
 
Kevin

And all I was hoping for was getting a semi-intelligent discussion on '42 East Front re: our beloved CMRT.  Mission Accomplished!  

How many unique shader files/modes have been posted so far. Would like to keep track of and try them out systematically.
Kevin

If you have not already take a look at :  Brief overview of where CM is headed
 
Kevin

Based on some interesting recent threads I have been experimenting with asymmetric victory conditions for the summer '44.
The Soviets wanted ground and to kill Germans with minimizing their own causalities third on their to do list.
The Germans, on the other hand, wanted to trade ground (at least tactically) and kill Soviets with minimizing casualties being
high on their list. So for Terrain Objectives/Enemy causalities/ Friendly causalities here are the test ratios;
 
Soviets: 125/50/25
Germans: 25/50/125
 
What this tends to produce is a tactical situation where the Germans move into ground around the object and "snipe" as the Soviets probe into a rail yard (the 125 points). Towards the end of the time limit, the German must decide to contest the rail yard or not. So this yields a fairly quiet battle by CM norms and I ask - is this boring to most?
 
Kevin 
 
PS: I have it set for 35 mins right now; Soviet T34s with riders vs, German armored recon supported by assault guns an off board mortars. 

Based on some interesting recent threads I have been experimenting with asymmetric victory conditions for the summer '44.
The Soviets wanted ground and to kill Germans with minimizing their own causalities third on their to do list.
The Germans, on the other hand, wanted to trade ground (at least tactically) and kill Soviets with minimizing casualties being
high on their list. So for Terrain Objectives/Enemy causalities/ Friendly causalities here are the test ratios;
 
Soviets: 125/50/25
Germans: 25/50/125
 
What this tends to produce is a tactical situation where the Germans move into ground around the object and "snipe" as the Soviets probe into a rail yard (the 125 points). Towards the end of the time limit, the German must decide to contest the rail yard or not. So this yields a fairly quiet battle by CM norms and I ask - is this boring to most?
 
Kevin 
 
PS: I have it set for 35 mins right now; Soviet T34s with riders vs, German armored recon supported by assault guns an off board mortars. 

Based on some interesting recent threads I have been experimenting with asymmetric victory conditions for the summer '44.
The Soviets wanted ground and to kill Germans with minimizing their own causalities third on their to do list.
The Germans, on the other hand, wanted to trade ground (at least tactically) and kill Soviets with minimizing casualties being
high on their list. So for Terrain Objectives/Enemy causalities/ Friendly causalities here are the test ratios;
 
Soviets: 125/50/25
Germans: 25/50/125
 
What this tends to produce is a tactical situation where the Germans move into ground around the object and "snipe" as the Soviets probe into a rail yard (the 125 points). Towards the end of the time limit, the German must decide to contest the rail yard or not. So this yields a fairly quiet battle by CM norms and I ask - is this boring to most?
 
Kevin 
 
PS: I have it set for 35 mins right now; Soviet T34s with riders vs, German armored recon supported by assault guns an off board mortars. 

Not complaining at all...
But it always amazes me how quickly a tactical discussion elevates to the geopolitical but the geopolitical post never seems to evolve into a 
discussion of small unit tactics or AI movements. Human nature I wonder. But again no complaining here ... 
 
Kevin

The discussion of how weapons and combat are modeled is always fascinating. And why wouldn't be, having elements of the computer, real and historical worlds. But I wonder if we should also look at the battles and combat scenarios we fight the model in. Perhaps the length of battles is to short to accommodate the players available playing time. This produces combat with too many losses than would be tolerated in situations unless very very dire. Rushing to objectives will certainly magnify the effectiveness of all arms.  We rarely have the time to explore the map with prep fire followed by a carefully reconnoitered advance. Even in multi hour battles, are the maps too large to cross without taking huge casualties since the attacker has to rush? In large scenarios, many may not have the inclination to repeat the battle using a more deliberate pace of operations if they were mowed down in the first try.Maybe we should judge the combat model in light of what we are asking the troops to accomplish.    Just another angle on the topic.   Kevin