HerrTom

We didn't add any additional game play rules to the battle other than the ones stated. I am pausing the replay turn a lot to try to get good angles for screenshots. Nothing is going to get me lambasted worse than setting up an idea like this and then posting horrible pictures. I am also watching the turn over and over again, from as many different positions as possible, all in an attempt to understand what each unit can see or not see. 
As for letting the AI choose what targets to shoot at, right now that is how the battle has been going, mortars being the sole exception. I am actually a little afraid of giving a unit a target command only to have them blindsided and ambushed by an enemy I never saw.

I've been experimenting with a 'night vision mode', to complement Ramblers mod, since "A day at the Beach'.
I'm still not happy with it, but it's getting there...
 

A column of T-55s on the move in the early morning darkness.

Doesn't need to be present day with all the cool toys either. I was an artillery officer, before the days of GPS and digital anything, so my experience is actually much closer to WW2 and Korean War techniques than present day. We would call fire on grid coordinates that were not observable. You can calculate firing data to anywhere. Look at the map, hear some vehicle noises and conclude they MUST be coming down that road that's behind the treeline. Of course, both in CM and real life, you could be way off, but it takes no longer to compute firing data to an unobserved point than to an observed target. Either way, the FO is passing grid coordinates. The difference is that unobserved, you FFE immediately. No adjustments possible. Another example would be looking at the map and making an educated guess as to where their mortars are set up, like at the edge of a far treeline. Linear FFE on the treeline.
Now normally on offense or defense you would have recalculated TRPs, and then could call shift missions off of those, and you can do that in game. Not too many scenarios give you TRPs, but in QB they are certainly available to purchase.
So there's my FA perspective, from someone who was a FIST Chief, Battery Fire Direction Officer, Brigade Fire Support Officer, FA Battalion Asst S-3 (S-3 is operations), and Battalion Fire Direction Officer. I've called for, planned, calculated a whole lot of explosions  (this pedigree is for the guy in the other thread who seems to be under the impression that BF had never talked to a military or former military person 🙂  )

Absolutely, my friend, anytime. I am glad the thread has helped so many people. I almost didn't write it, glad I did.
 
Mord.

RDX for example has a detonation temperature of around 3,600K which will produce black body radiation somewhere around this colour - but real combustion also produces other light emitting reactions beyond simply being hot.
What you'll see (in slow motion) is a bright flash of gas for the combustion products of the explosive which then quickly cools down and finishes burning, which will transition it to smoke of various sorts.  Dust and dirt if around will also begin to obscure the explosion.
I've got one that matches the last picture I posted a little better:
https://i.imgur.com/4TzBgGS.gifv

And Mord, I still have the orange one  
Video in-game showing a mortar barrage will eventually be here:
 
It's uploading in the meantime.
 

Nope. That is far to dangerous

While going about my mellow Saturday afternoon,  I had a thought on the number of paper-and-chipboard wargames I have in my closet:  How would I turn them into a Combat Mission scenario/campaign/game etc.?
Some of them are pretty ripe (I think) for interesting missions.  My personal favourite is actually the first wargame I ever played: Berlin '85 published by SPI.  It details a potential (and at the time, future) attack on West Berlin by Warsaw Pact forces in the 1980s.  It's been criticised as having a somewhat bloody CRT, though from playing CM it seems urban combat on the battalion level is a deadly affair!
I can imagine some interesting scenarios detailing the initial assault over Checkpoint Charlie or defence of the airport at Gatow or Tempelhof for some heavily mechanised urban warfare.  It might even be pretty doable using CM:SF2!
So, what would you do if you had the time/energy/inclination? 😎 

I am 50 years old today! Maybe for my birthday, Steve can finally move this to the mods section?
And yes, this was also a shameless plug to announce my major milestone.
 
Mord.

IMHO it's not that artillery is too strong. It's that the modeling is a bit off. It works in strange ways. Arty causes too many casualties far from the impact, and arguably too few for close hits. 150mm shell bursting in small trees directly above the heads of two scouts: 1 lightly wounded? A guy running out of a building just as an 88mm shell hits the wall next to the door: apparently no damage? At other times, a rifle grenade will cause a casualty inside a building 60 metres away, and that's while the guy is looking out the window on the other side of the building
I don't know how explosions are modeled in this game, but it seems to be very abstracted.

1. CM Fulda Gap

2. CM Blitzkrieg: Poland, West, Balkans, Barbarossa

3.CM Middle East

Fulda Gap with a new engine😋

Combat Mission Fulda Gap with M1A1, M60A3, T64s and of course T80s
 
But my preference is a faster and prettier engine, with 64bit and true multicore support

You moved to Utah, Steve?

With a good deal of Homererotic undertones.
 
Mord.

I thought that that SLA Marshall study has been found to be highly flawed? If so it completely dismantles this guys opening premise if he's basing it on the book. BTW I like this dude I watched him one day for about an hour talk about a "white cannibal". He has interesting vids.
 
Mord.

But game performance does not improve noticeably while the game is paused - a time when no simulation calculations should be going on.
For this reason, I believe the performance problems are due to the graphics engine.

Ive found a combo of street fighting with an exterior flanking force (usually through the little village at left, then across the river and up over the slope in front) is good. But that force must NOT break out too soon. 
Also, Peter has some nasty AI plans in there, so keeping that flanking force as a mobile, last ditch reserve is very useful. I once had to return the entire force (1.5 pltns plus 2 atgm teams) to deal with a very bad MBT charge up the main street. 
Brilliant scenario, one I very consciously emulate and keep in mind when designing.
Its cray-cray v. humans

I must admit, Other Mord is pretty badass! Not quite as BA as (regular) Mord but close!
 
Mord.

Correct! Operation Opportune Strike. or atleast based on it, taking into account the game engine etc etc. 
There is actually a lot of footage on YT, some of them clearing the village but mostly of when the team took up overwatch over the village and started engaging targets in the village proper and calling in CAS. One of the vids:
PS: and ive actually recreated this area on the map, on the area where i suspect this position to be,
And sure any advice you can give me is welcome. ill maybe shoot you a DM with the oob and my plans for the scenario later on 👍
 

I use DaVinci Resolve, and it's quite powerful, but I'm not sure how easy it is to compose text. There are tools to do it but haven't done it in a while.

After tweaking a bit the NightVision.fx shader of reshade

 
 

I do wonder how often players these days go into the editor to play. You only see a few people (a.k.a. tpr) doing 'test scenarios' to test theories anymore. You certainly don't see many players excitedly uploading a new scenario they just built for everyone to try. Which is a shame. The editor is your playground.  Here's a screenshot of a scenario map I threw together just last night after supper (no, really). If you're worried that opponents will take unfair advantage of you because of their better knowledge of terrain, I'd bet most players wouldn't have a clue which terrain type was under feet on this particular map

I am gonna do the same thing I did a few years back when this argument came up. Here's a pic. Now, I challenge anyone to tell me how the UI is supposed to explain this terrain in a simple picture or label that noobs (or anyone else for that matter) will completely understand.
 

 
There's a HUGE difference between the terrain in CMX2 and CMX1. The combination possibilities are massive.
So, for anyone keeping count, that's a red dirt tile, with half a house in the action spot, a low wall, two trees, a shed, some brush, and an extra tall grass and weed tile bleeding into it. There's no label that will fit. "Red dirt" doesn't cut it, there's a house and trees and a wall. "Red dirt with house" doesn't fit, there's trees and a wall. Nor does "red dirt with trees", etc. etc. Now multiply this ONE tile (with this particular combination of objects) by the twenty-three other ground tiles that could realistically replace "red dirt". That's twenty-four combinations just for this one picture. BUT that's only a one story house. That's only two trees. What about a two story house? What about three trees? Or one tree? Or bushes instead of trees? Or bushes instead of trees with a tall wall? See where I am going here? The only way it flies (without going crazy with descriptions) is if the tile is a completely plain version of itself; red dirt with nothing else, tall grass with nothing else. Other than that, WTF?
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBIUKPeq4Y0
 
Mordest Gump.

Napoleon and Hitler spring to mind