A Canadian Cat

^^^ +1 to that. This having to watch while all hell breaks loose is a major feature that I love about WEGO.

Hummmm, he's been around at TFGM. I'll try to get his attention.

Wow that that is quite a claim. I admit to not knowing much about therobaric munitions but that sounds to good to be true. I thought it was more effective in confined spaces and less effective in the open. For my education could you point me to a good source to explain how it works.

Nope new look. Sounds like an update of the software threw away the chosen colour scheme so Steve created a new one. So not just you. Personally I like it.

We have to deal with it. Typically by setting exclusion directories. The anti virus vendors do a good job of tracking trends and anticipating patterns but it does lead to false positives. It is unavoidable to a certain extent (some do better than others). With a large publisher they will fix the pattern to eliminate false positives that are hit. With thier customers they will too (my company gets our exes signed by one). Other vendors are left out. BFC is an other vendor

Google says: https://support.microsoft.com/en-ca/help/4028485/windows-add-an-exclusion-to-windows-defender-antivirus

Not until today. Now yours is the second post about that. Must have been a Windows defender update. Grrrr. I don't even know how to get defender to ignore files.

LOL ??? Niether of those vehicles are going to be in service anytime soon and the time frame for CMBS is now so I don't see what "politics" has to do with anything.

Yes, just getting the double click can be challenging: let alone quadruple click.

LOL yeah I don't recommend doing that.

For the sake of argument lets say you have a three battle campaign and you also have a fourth scenario file that holds your core units. As you create your three battles you start by importing the core units to each. Then you remove a portion of the formation for some of the battles and then as you are creating the third battle you decide you want to reduce the experience of a platoon. You are free to do so. But that means the platoon in the third battle will have less experience than the same platoon in the first battle. Instead what you can (should ?) do is open the core units scenario file and tweak the experience down for that platoon. Then synchronize the core units into all three battles so they all have the same soft factors. Just that you can synchronize the core units with your campaign battles if you make changes (the above example would be one reason). All of this is before compiling yes (mind you you can compile the cam file more than once to test - you just get the campaign settings as they are at the moment of compiling). You have to change the core unit file and then synchronize that change to all the campaign scenarios that use core units by re importing the core unit file. The changes that will be synchronized and updated in your scenario are the formation's structure (added units will appear, removed ones will disappear) and the soft factors (experience, motivation etc will be changed to match the core units file). What will not change is the AI group they are assigned to and all the other things in italics will not be changed. This allows you to change the character and the contents of the core units without loosing your AI planning, setup etc.

Core units preserving casualties only works within a compiled campaign. You can load units from one scenario into another scenario but all that is doing is creating a copy of those units in the new scenario. Separate scenarios remain separate. Not sure what you mean there. Casualties are only tacked during the pay of a campaign. Customization of experience levels or deletion of sub units would be discarded after synchronizing. No. Not sure what you mean there at all. If you add another scenario then your campaign is now one battle bigger. I do not know what you mean by loosing results if you recompiled it because your casualties and results are tracked as you are playing an already compiled campaign.

Are you looking here: http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/search-2/#search/category=CM+RED+THUNDER+[MAPS]? Hummm that does seem like a smaller than usual set of after market QB maps.

Send me a PM. There are two of us over at the Blitz that take turns organizing things. We usually have a pitch meeting before making the pick so I can get requests like this into the loop.

Then thank you both - this is helpful. Nice summary. As @sburke said these are very likely side effects of the desired change to have troops caught in the open under direct or indirect HE fire should displace to avoid just staying put and becoming casulties.

Very cool work, thanks for doing this. I look forward to your small arms test. My request would be to also include the scenario file and a saved turn with the orders you gave for the video recording set. Being able to see the turn execute and repeat it is helpful.

I'm pretty sure you ment UI there. What @MikeyD says about force size is spot on too. The OP says he is not enjoying commanding large numbers of units so he has to reduce the number of units he is playing with, or change they way he is playing with those units. I'm not seeing other alternatives. Perhaps there are others. I look forward to hearing any. Personally I don't think, "you have no choice" or "just learn to like it" are super helpful, even if they might be a valid perspective. I suppose taking a break could work - I've done it from time to time especially during set up. I'm not sure if I would like to play every turn with a break or two.

It can be. Yes, probably. Yep same. I use a lot of bulk orders - usually on the platoon level. If you select the whole platoon and give them all orders all I do is check quicly that no squad has ended up crossed. And to add some pauses so they leap frog each other etc. Only when elements actually engage do I consider splitting. Even then I only do it if they don't spread out well on their own. Or if there is a specific job that requires it. I have my squads recombine as well once the job is done before going on the march again.

Me. It's my last name.

Oh that's cool @Swant thanks for the info. What that will do is leave the v4 .BRZ files there but put an older version of the game .exe.

The quickest way is to do the full installers for 3.0, if they are still available, and install them. Choose a different directory so you have both installed if you like. I do not believe that a 4.0 save will work with 3.12. I am unsure if the program will prevent it from loading so you can try. Personally I think the odds are against it working.

How about this: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/BlackSea/Campaigns/The Charge of the Stryker Brigade.html

Very true the job was way to big for that unit. Correct. The AT unit drove off and left the Artillery Observers behind. They joined the I&R platoon and were hoping to assist them by calling in support if and when the Germans showed up but they were denied when they tried to call and later the field telephone line was severed so they could not even ask by the time the second assault came. Agreed.

Idea #2 by a long shot...

An amazing feat for sure. And amazing mistake made by the German commander too. It should be noted that the recon platoon had scrounged M1 Garands for everyone (on paper they only had carbines) and secured a .30ca (or was it two I forget) and a .50cal which they were also not supposed to have. Plus a lot of ammo. So they were considerably better armed than their on paper organization. That was due to their leader who correctly interpreted that they were going to be stuck doing an infantry platoon's job.