QuiGon

I hope this is still on the list, because I find it pretty odd that the radio just magically gets rescued if the radio operator gets WIA/KIA on retreat, while all other equipment has to be picked up manually through buddy aid.

I would absolutely love some sort of CMBS upgrade now that we have the real thing going on. I have the winter terrain pack mod and everything. Need more to play with. 
Airborne groups for both Russia and Ukraine are going to be incredible especially since they have seen so much use in the war thus far. 

Fun fact about the Luchs recon AFV:
It basically had two roles during the Cold War:

1) Frontline recon: In this role it would have done classic frontline recon for the armored units of the Bundeswehr. Nothing special about it.

2) Deep recon: This is a somewhat uniqute role for an armored vehicle. In this role Luchs AFVs would have been tasked with slipping through the frontline and conducting recon up to 150km behind enemy lines. Moving at night, observing from a hideout during the day.
It's been designed with this role in mind:
- It's silhouette is broadly similar to that of a soviet BTR
- It was equipped with a HF long range radio to be able to stay in contact with the HQ over long distances.
- It's incredibly silent, so much that you often hear the sound of the tires, before you hear the engine. On excersies with these vehicles, specific resting areas had to be designated for the infantry as there had been a deadly accident where a soldier got rolled over by a Luchs during an exercise while he was sleeping.
- It has a dedicated reverse driver, who would steer the vehicle while in reverse. It could drive just as fast in reverse than it could drive forward (100 km/h).
- It was ambhibious to cross rivers on its own.

I still find it mind boggling to this day, if I imagine I had to drive around behind enemy lines in such a big vehicle.

Fun fact about the Luchs recon AFV:
It basically had two roles during the Cold War:

1) Frontline recon: In this role it would have done classic frontline recon for the armored units of the Bundeswehr. Nothing special about it.

2) Deep recon: This is a somewhat uniqute role for an armored vehicle. In this role Luchs AFVs would have been tasked with slipping through the frontline and conducting recon up to 150km behind enemy lines. Moving at night, observing from a hideout during the day.
It's been designed with this role in mind:
- It's silhouette is broadly similar to that of a soviet BTR
- It was equipped with a HF long range radio to be able to stay in contact with the HQ over long distances.
- It's incredibly silent, so much that you often hear the sound of the tires, before you hear the engine. On excersies with these vehicles, specific resting areas had to be designated for the infantry as there had been a deadly accident where a soldier got rolled over by a Luchs during an exercise while he was sleeping.
- It has a dedicated reverse driver, who would steer the vehicle while in reverse. It could drive just as fast in reverse than it could drive forward (100 km/h).
- It was ambhibious to cross rivers on its own.

I still find it mind boggling to this day, if I imagine I had to drive around behind enemy lines in such a big vehicle.

I just found this video on youtube and thought it might fit well here, although it probably has not much new information for most of you:
 

I just found this video on youtube and thought it might fit well here, although it probably has not much new information for most of you:
 

I just found this video on youtube and thought it might fit well here, although it probably has not much new information for most of you:
 

I just found this video on youtube and thought it might fit well here, although it probably has not much new information for most of you:
 

I just found this video on youtube and thought it might fit well here, although it probably has not much new information for most of you:
 

I just found this video on youtube and thought it might fit well here, although it probably has not much new information for most of you:
 

Excuse me, but what should I expect to see in game? So tanks without rangefinders won't attempt stadiametric or coincidence rangefinding, but shoot a round out to 1200m and walk the rounds until they hit the target? Is this going to result in a net increase or decrease in long range accuracy?
It sounds like a choice, but I want some clarification on how this is handled. Thank you.

Even if it's not the priority for the game, I think QBs need an overhaul for the next patch. The point totals mentioned in this thread for the next patch still feel a bit low (should be about 30k vs 30k default imo), and I'm really surprised that some of the larger maps from the US campaign aren't available as QB maps.

Customizable points and the return of Combined Arms preset would go far to get me to play QBs again.
 

Just have an "unlimited" option in the pulldown menu. The opponents can use a honor system on limits they have chosen.

A "Balanced Battalion (task force)" Is 34909p In a defencive battle on a huge map in 1982. And that is with M60 tanks, not M1´s. I don´t think 22,500 is enough!

Thanks, that's quite an improvement, although a maximum of 18,020 points for a meeting engagement is still not enough IMHO. I'm currently playing a ~30,000 point PBEM meeting engagement on a 4 x 4.5 km map, using the Scenario Editor to put the troops together, which is rather cumbersome as it doesn't show a budget. A flexible solution, where we can define our own budget would be really helpful

Thanks, that's quite an improvement, although a maximum of 18,020 points for a meeting engagement is still not enough IMHO. I'm currently playing a ~30,000 point PBEM meeting engagement on a 4 x 4.5 km map, using the Scenario Editor to put the troops together, which is rather cumbersome as it doesn't show a budget. A flexible solution, where we can define our own budget would be really helpful

Thanks, that's quite an improvement, although a maximum of 18,020 points for a meeting engagement is still not enough IMHO. I'm currently playing a ~30,000 point PBEM meeting engagement on a 4 x 4.5 km map, using the Scenario Editor to put the troops together, which is rather cumbersome as it doesn't show a budget. A flexible solution, where we can define our own budget would be really helpful

~13,000 points for huge quick battles is nowhere enough for the big maps (especially if air and arty support is involved). I would love to see if the budget points for quick battles could be increased, as even a single US mech bataillon without additional support costs more than 20,000 points.

~13,000 points for huge quick battles is nowhere enough for the big maps (especially if air and arty support is involved). I would love to see if the budget points for quick battles could be increased, as even a single US mech bataillon without additional support costs more than 20,000 points.

~13,000 points for huge quick battles is nowhere enough for the big maps (especially if air and arty support is involved). I would love to see if the budget points for quick battles could be increased, as even a single US mech bataillon without additional support costs more than 20,000 points.

That's actually what I ended up doing. The search function lead me to it. It's much more cumbersome though than just setting a bigger QB budget.
And the problem doesn't end there. I'm playing a MP match of CM:CW this way, so I put together my force in the quick battle purchase screen with a budget of 30,000 points that we agreed on. Then I went to the scenario editor to put the same force together there, that I created in the QB setup, but... I couldn't! The formations available in the scenario editor are quite a lot different than the ones available in a QB (even if same month and year is set)!!!
For example: In a QB the US has infantry, mech and armored categories, while in the scenario editor there are only infantry and mech categories available to the US. Armor is missing there, instead armored formations are mixed in with the mech infantry. That leads to the next problem: I chose a mech infantry bataillon (task force) in the QB setup, where each company consisted of 3 mech rifle platoons and a 4th weapons platoon. Now in the scenario editor unit setup, the mech infantry bataillon (task force) is a totally differnt formation, where the 3rd platoon in each company is a tank platoon...
This inconsistency makes it really difficult to play it as you proposed 😔

That's actually what I ended up doing. The search function lead me to it. It's much more cumbersome though than just setting a bigger QB budget.
And the problem doesn't end there. I'm playing a MP match of CM:CW this way, so I put together my force in the quick battle purchase screen with a budget of 30,000 points that we agreed on. Then I went to the scenario editor to put the same force together there, that I created in the QB setup, but... I couldn't! The formations available in the scenario editor are quite a lot different than the ones available in a QB (even if same month and year is set)!!!
For example: In a QB the US has infantry, mech and armored categories, while in the scenario editor there are only infantry and mech categories available to the US. Armor is missing there, instead armored formations are mixed in with the mech infantry. That leads to the next problem: I chose a mech infantry bataillon (task force) in the QB setup, where each company consisted of 3 mech rifle platoons and a 4th weapons platoon. Now in the scenario editor unit setup, the mech infantry bataillon (task force) is a totally differnt formation, where the 3rd platoon in each company is a tank platoon...
This inconsistency makes it really difficult to play it as you proposed 😔

That's actually what I ended up doing. The search function lead me to it. It's much more cumbersome though than just setting a bigger QB budget.
And the problem doesn't end there. I'm playing a MP match of CM:CW this way, so I put together my force in the quick battle purchase screen with a budget of 30,000 points that we agreed on. Then I went to the scenario editor to put the same force together there, that I created in the QB setup, but... I couldn't! The formations available in the scenario editor are quite a lot different than the ones available in a QB (even if same month and year is set)!!!
For example: In a QB the US has infantry, mech and armored categories, while in the scenario editor there are only infantry and mech categories available to the US. Armor is missing there, instead armored formations are mixed in with the mech infantry. That leads to the next problem: I chose a mech infantry bataillon (task force) in the QB setup, where each company consisted of 3 mech rifle platoons and a 4th weapons platoon. Now in the scenario editor unit setup, the mech infantry bataillon (task force) is a totally differnt formation, where the 3rd platoon in each company is a tank platoon...
This inconsistency makes it really difficult to play it as you proposed 😔

The small size of QBs is one of my major gripes with the CM series. I would love to fight battailon(+) quick battles, but even if the battle size is set to "huge" it often doesn't provide enough budget points to do so. In CM:CW for example, a huge meeting engagement gives you ~13,000pts, but even a single M113 equipped US Mech Infantry battailon costs ~20,000 pts. I really wish there would be a bigger option than "huge" or even better: an option to set custom budgets.
 @Battlefront.com please add this. I would really really appreciate it! 🙏
It's been requested over and over: