Panzerpanic

You guys are a riot.  I am back from Jamaica, weather and the water was gorgeous of course.
I will post the next turn report tonight... probably on the later side though, so don't wait up   
How is Baneman's thread going?  I had expected it to have another thousand views and another 100 posts by today.. but alas, doesn't seem to be much happening over there.

The man apologizes for taking a vacation.
What is this world coming to?!

Bil, excellent AAR as always
You are the best source that BF has as to how to promote and showcase these games.
I always enjoy that fact that you put out there a clear description as to what you are tactically thinking and trying to accomplish.
And your tactical skills seem to reward you better in the modern battlefield over the WWII one.  
You generally get no second chances or much luck on the modern battlefield. Death is easy and quick and each decision is rewarded with that or success in a very few moments.
thanks for your efforts as always
I will go back to the shadows now

I am not sure how to make it any clearer.  CMSF units are 2008 oriented.  If you don't get how that changes things relative to WW2 titles I am not sure any amount of explaining on my part is gonna help.  Watch the AAR and maybe that will help. I am also confused as to why you feel it needs to add some new capabilities if you never owned it in the first place.  I think you'll just have to decide for yourself as to whether it has value based on your own priorities.  Not every version of CM is for every player. I love CMSF and getting 4.0 features in the game is a dream come true.  Even little things like target briefly make the game totally new.  But that is me, if the premise and combat/timeline for CMSF didn't appeal to you, CMSF2 is not gonna change that.

In my experience,  bmp 3 make wonderful bomb who can even destroy tank near it. You can say its a good fire support also when it see something.

I don't usually quote an entire post, especially one as large as this, but an exception is certainly warranted.
@Bil Hardenberger, you have surpassed your usual high high standards with this one! Embedded gifs (or whatever magickry you used) highlighting the action? Outstanding.
Great overview, perspectives, command analysis, etc.
Now, I have to give Baneman some credit: expending his uncons to make you expend your ammo is a BRILLIANT tactic. Do your Uncons have grenades? Knives? Nearby rocks? 
In a serious vein, if your Uncon defensive position is running low on ammo, what is your plan for them?

I missed that completely! Thanks to point it out.
 
Still i cant wait for that AAR!

A frustrating but completely understandable situation. Very much appreciate the explanation as well as the plan for going forward. I think having more incremental patches instead of single large ones is a good direction to go in. 
Thanks for the update! Sounds like summer is going to be quite the season of releases. Very much looking forward to it all!
Can you elaborate at all on what the patch will be fixing/tweaking?

Hello, Steve, and it's Good to hear from you, and throwing of these Bones...
I always thought the CMRT Basic Russian Infantry were a little over-generous with SMG's & SVT's...From I can remember a Basic Russian Infantry Squad should have around 5-6 Mosin Nagant Rifles, 1x SVT, 2x SMG, 1x LMG (something along those lines).

Not to bee too cheeky, but honestly the best way to manage lots of units is to play turn based.
I understand why you like real time. When I first started playing CM I only played real time as well. There are some benefits to it, one being that playing the game itself flows much better. However, especially with larger scenarios, the game really does shine in turn based mode. I would recommend giving it a try a few times and seeing what you think. You can always do turn based on larger scenarios and real time on smaller ones.

The ability to choose reinforcement in quick battle. I would want to do some quick battle where i receive reinforcement but for now its not possible. Also more choice in the time section.

The ability to choose reinforcement in quick battle. I would want to do some quick battle where i receive reinforcement but for now its not possible. Also more choice in the time section.

This. Fire is a feature that would take an absurd amount of time to code and get right, especially when you consider all the dynamics that would have to be applied. At the end of the day it just isn't worth all the time and effort it would require. Besides, there are better features that can be worked on than fire.

If all the infantry the carrier is meant to protect are hors d'combat, it has already failed in its primary mission and everything else is a moot point. 

Amen to that brother ! 

WOOOHOOOO, love it.  Getting rid of the ol' CMSF QB selection will be worth it alone.  That was by far my biggest complaint about an otherwise awesome game.

Very big topic with many sub-topics and circumstantial situations.  Probably why you found so many related posts.  I will try to give some general answers to encourage discussion in this topic because I do think this is interesting.  My answers are far from conclusive but here they are:
Command & Control: 
To fire indirect on map mortars must be within close visual C2 (12A/S) of their COC or within voice C2 (6A/S) of any authorized HQ, XO, FO team or within 2A/S of a radio equipped vehicle. (Off map mortars always have their COC & C2) 
A requesting HQ, FO, & some XO teams do not need a radio, COC or C2 to make a request for arty (field telephone abstraction).
Rank determines ability (authority) to access arty (that doesn’t require an FO).          
As long as the CO is alive a HQ can always request and adjust artillery even without a radio or C2. 
Some XOs can call in artillery and mortars.  This includes tank platoon XOs.  The tank platoon XO is normally in Tank #1.   
If I have on map mortars that I am going to use in the indirect fire role I typically try to deploy them in the Setup phase and check that the HQs can access them before I start the game. 
How to decrease delay:
Only off map artillery/mortars have delay option & have it the entire mission.  On map never has it (including during pre-planned setup). 
When an arty/mortar mission is delayed the UI continues to display the delay time even after fire is adjusted making it seem the adjusted fire will take longer than it actually will. 
There are some threads that discuss adjusting a fire mission constantly to keep it in a delayed state until you want it to fall.  I have never gotten this tactic to work properly.  I just mention it in case you come across it.  Maybe somebody else is able to make this work and will comment. 
Also related to Time: 
FFE times, in the support panel, are rounded to the nearest minute. This can make elite, crack & vet. appear to fire at the same time.   
In WWII titles there is no difference in the artillery call times between a backpack radio, a command vehicle radio, a Bn. and a Plt. HQ.  
Command vehicles only improve arty support response time in CMBS.  (Maybe in CMSF2?)  
Experience is the only soft factor of arty & mortar assets (on & off map) that effect FFE times.
How to improve accuracy? 
To paraphrase something @womble said that helped me: The accuracy is determined during the "Spotting" phase.  Your observer needs to be able to see the fall of shot. He can be hiding during the "receiving" and "preparing" phases of the mission but should be heads-up and eyes-on during the "spotting" phase. If your observer has a bad line of sight to the target area (and the splashes of the ranging shots), you'll get a less accurate mission. Trying to hit an area or line where you can only see the two opposite points you clicked to define the line risks shells falling where they can't be seen.
The Spotter also needs to be spotting (head up eyes on) when adjusting fire. 
 
Limitations and considerations of the "Cancel' and "Adjust" order.
Most of what I can think of was said above about "Adjusting"
Cancel just ends a fire mission.  This can stop rounds from being wasted and allows friendly troops to advance into the area.  I found this most useful to keep from losing control of off map artillery when a spotter comes under fire.   I have had several incidents where a spotter directing fire was KIA.  After that happened I was never able to adjust or have a different spotter take over that off map arty.  Essentially losing the arty for the rest of the mission.  So my SOP is if I'm foolish enough to get my spotter in a jam I try to be quick enough to cancel the mission he is calling for so I don't lose both spotter and tubes.  
I like to use a off map arty fire mission shooting at a low tube count and a low rate of fire and adjust it around the map as needed. 
Other helpful hints.
Off map arty/mortar ammo count shows total available rounds & of that total x amount may be fired as smoke or precision.  
Pre-planned fires can be plotted anywhere on the map and do not require TRPs.   
In WWII titles personnel airburst rounds must be requested during preplanned bombardment or in range of a TRP to work.
In CMFB a (VT) equipped asset can fire personnel airburst rounds anytime without a TRP.  
Personnel airburst will destroy transports & light armor.  Personnel airburst will damage tracks on armor but not other subsystems. 
Artillery/Mortar status: Receiving, Preparing, Spotting, Firing, Adjusting, Firing.  
Additional artillery/mortar status: Not positioned=Not Deployed, Denied=No authority, Out of Contact=Tubes Need C2, Empty=Empty
If an on map mortar’s indirect LOF is blocked the target cursor will read “No Line of Fire”. A direct fire block will read “No Line of Sight” 
Light mortars (US 60mm) can be very useful in the direct fire role using Target Light. 
A Point Target will follow a moving target as long as the spotter has LOS.  A Point Target will not cease fire if the target is destroyed.
Artillery smoke is NOT IR blocking. 
The below was a bug that I think is still out there but I did not test it again before posting this (It may also be in CMFI since 4.0): 
Arty/Mortar adjust bug in CMBN, CMRT, CMBS & CMFB: If one observer has two or more fire missions all firing at separate targets
and adjusts any one of those missions to a new target ALL the fire missions adjust to the new target not just the one fire mission.   
If anybody notices anything I screwed up please mention it so I can update my information.  
 
 

Deep trenches, that protect from artillery! Different types of trenches. Communication trenches, trenches with MG nests. Soviet style foxholes. (For firing prone) Covered MG nests. Stationary telephones.

Another development I would like to see - which wouldn't require a total rewrite of the game engine - would be enhancements to Quick Battles.
I play a lot of these. It would be cool to be able to give some structure to a QB to make it more like a scenario. Being able to mix nationalities would be fun (for example I like the Italians, because they are interesting, but they don't put up a very good fight without some German support) - and it would be cool to be able direct parts of each force (randomly or non-randomly) to arrive as reinforcements.
Also, when you give the enemy fortifications in QBs, the AI doesn't tend to position these very effectively.
Apart from that, the AI generally does a reasonable job of positioning defenders in QBs. Given that, a nice feature, which would enhance the replayability of scenarios, would be an option to override the positioning of defenders in scenarios - so they are placed by the AI like in QBs. Often you have a really great scenario and you'd like to play it again (I sometimes get in the editor and change my force mix or nationality), but knowing where the defenders will be detracts from this.
If QBs could have some of the features of scenarios, and scenarios could take on some of the randomness of QBs, that would multiply the enjoyment we get out the games while we are waiting for new releases  

OMG! In third time here this ridiculos fake about "ERA, which destroys tank" from known T-64 hater GurKhan!
Well, maybe good that this moved to separate topic.
So about GurKhans approvals:
1. Bulat is failed project
BM Bulat was designed at the end of 90th years in order to improve combat capabilities of T-64B to T-80UD level. But economic crisis of that time didn't allow to release this project in full volume. MoD demanded to make upgrading as cheap as possible and designers offerd two variants - T-64BM1 (cheap upgrade) and T-64BM2 (more cheapest). Malyshev's tank factory after Pakistan contract acomplishing, almost stopped all works, so to support it, government decided to order upgrade about hundred ot T-64B into T-64BM. Yes, many specialists understood, that tank will have some problems (especiually with engine when mass significantly grew), but it anyway will better than older T-64B. NOBODY couldn't imagine that Bulat will fight in real! By this reason MoD rejected thermal sights and some other things, whih made a taknk more expensive. But in crisis years Bulat was a real achievment, because it "widely advertized", like wrote GurKhan. SInce 2005 to 2013 87 tanks were upgraded, 10 of them in initial "more cheapest" T-64BM2 variant (not represeneted in the game)
2.Ukrainian army refuses from Bulats
No. "Moving tanks in reserve" and "refusing" are different terms. Bulats can be useful in for example new tank brigade of new formation (14th TB now exists mostly on paper, but with real HQ). Many Bulats are now on Malyshev' factory in awaiting of repair, but factory still busy on BM Oplot-T for Thailand. 
3.  Nozh ERA is dangerous for the tank itself
Damned fake. GurKhan have posted photos of Bulats, which blewed up on mines with ammo detonation or which were destroyed by direct hit of MLRS or large-caliber artillery on statinary positions and shouted like idiot: "Ha-ha! Nozh suck! Stupid ukies made ERA, which blow up tank itself!"  
Photos, which he posted in own article:
This one was lost 21.07.2014 in Georgiivka village. During engagement with enemy tank he got HEAT shell from own vis-a-vis between turret and hull. There was a fire in tank and crew withdrew to village. They almost didn't try to extinguish fire and just abandoned own vehicle. When fire became strong and got ammunition it detonated and teared off the turret. Fragments of explosion also wounded two paratroopers on the checkpount nearby. 

This one was lost in 4th-5th of Sep 2014 in Dmytrivka. Base camp of several units, among them 1st tank brigade was hit by MLRS "Smerch" salvo. This tank tried to escape, but was hit with close explosion or with sub-ammunition of MLRS rocket. Left side of tank burned out with ERA blocks, of course. All three crewmen were killed. 
 
If Nozh so bad and dangerous, that Ukraine refuses from Bulat, how then GurKhan will explain that in new upgrade project of T-64BV this ERA will substitite old K-1, but will be mounted in K-1 containeres? And why he doesn't want to see real work of Nozh, like on photo below? 
Debaltsevo bulge. This BM Oplot got HEAT from enemy T-72 mod.1989. Crew alive, tank in service. Strange, but all ERA blocks didn't detonate like said GurKhan

Shyrokyne area. T-64B1M (Congo contract with improved placement of Nozh ERA) of "Azov" regiment. ATGM hit. Tank stil in service

So, single reason of future retiring (but not immediate) of Bulats is not "dangerous ERA", but 17-years old solutions and issues, tied with its.
Now developed new upgrading program of T-64BV, which for less money will increase capabilities of these tanks: thermal sight, new digital radio equipment, new improved optic, GPS navigation, Nozh ERA in K-1 boxes (easy repair in field conditions). First upgraed vehicles will be transfered  already in next year.

Thats why we need a cold war combat mission!!!! 

Thats why we need a cold war combat mission!!!! 

Maybe its to.much to.ask but what i would like to see is european cold war! Personnally at the end of the 80 with everyone with their best weapons. But any setting, (50 to 89) in europe will be awesome.

Maybe its to.much to.ask but what i would like to see is european cold war! Personnally at the end of the 80 with everyone with their best weapons. But any setting, (50 to 89) in europe will be awesome.