Armorgunner

So comprehensive that a second CM:SF2 install is recommended! 

Hey, give the guy a break! It´s apparent to everybody,  that he doesn't know the drill. From his Point of view!! I can understand. That he thought you were joking, about raping mothers.
But he certainly knows now though 😄 

Will probably do that... and also get the 2x16MB RAM.  As with cars, I have never never regretted going for the best, but a compromise can irritate one for years.  
Am often at war with myself over being frugal/sensible and not wanting (or needing) the risk of regret.
Discussing all this with you guys has been very helpful... and a fast education.

You need two trench lengths (or lengths of barbed wire) at minimum in order to orient the trench the way you want. You can then take away the extra trench and *hopefully* the one remaining will stay in the position you want.
Trench protection is abstracted though its hard to say what is being abstracted and how much. When I did a quick test of them in CMSF2 awhile back the trenches seemed to be giving the same amount of protection as the in-ground 'ditches', in that if you aren't cowering in the bottom of the trench you're likely to get shot in the head while trying to engage the enemy.

It's simple really... I lose a battle and the game is broken beyond repair! I win a battle and the game is perfect! 🤪

This was a comment made by a danish guy at Stealbeast Forum, about the 35mm KETF ABM round. When the Danes bought the CV9035.
"the keft round is very leathal. we had a coorperation with the dutch army on testing the ABM rounds, so the dutch army had a wrecked leopard 2 that we tested the munition on, and it dented/damaged the barrel enough to make it less usable or able to disable the main gun. along with all the vision blocks, GPS, commanders sights, but as a test against small vehicles or infantry and buildings. its just as leathal. and know taliban didnt like that abm round at least.."
I have no doubt, what he says. After Reading other posts from him. I´m for shure, thats he´s an army guy. And if tungsten splinters from a 35mm, can wipe out all externals on a Leopard 2. I asume, it is an old one like A4. What would 155mm AB do? Or direkt hits? Or Close to direct hits? 
Too bad, he didn´t mentioned the number of rounds needed though.

So, 12mm penetration on RHA with a brinell hardness of 300 for M995 5,56AP round at 100m.
And 20mm penetration on RHA with a brinell hardness of 300 for M993 7,62AP round at 100m 
And a new link for the 5.56 M995
http://www.amkat.se/index.php?Env=Ammo&Menu_A=30&Menu_B=10&Menu_C=50&Menu_Value_A=5,56x45&Menu_Value_B=AP&Menu_Name=AP

Do you have a reference/proof? Sorry just find it hard to believe in 20mm RHA penetration for 7.62  Don't have the data for SLAPs but for full caliber cartridges 7.62 packs almost six times less energy than .50BMG.
Update: Sorry posted at the very moment you provided the data for 5.56. Yeah, if 5.56 can defeat 12mm of 300HB I guess 7.62 can go through 20mm. Thanks for the very interesting information!

Yes it has been submitted.

Had a further look at the Demo, playing Alamo mission. I replaced the MG 3 sound file, which anyway was way too bassy with a MG42 file, which sounds more metallic and brutal. It maybe cuts through too much, but that can be adjusted. Drop unzipped file  to data/z and test.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p3ruxx8xyj781lp/gun 7 mg3.zip?dl=0
Btw. unlike the MG 42 in the WW2 titles, CMSF2 apears to just using one single shot file, triggered with each individual shot. Means whatever ROF is set in the game, it should be always correct. Me thinks it´s around 1000 RPM something.

No idea at what the MG 3 rate of fire is set in the game, as I just have the demo and didn´t came to test play german weaponry. Common sources tell it´s at 1200 RPM. Made a quick audio file (MP3) serving as comparision for what the various RPM sound like. Stitched together from the Demo´s "gun 7 mg3.wav" file.
Ordered from low to high: 400 - 500 - 650 - 900 - 1200 - 1500 RPM

https://www.dropbox.com/s/svpt4w3u5z2f6ug/RPM Compare.mp3?dl=0

"and I think you, as an armor gunner, will appreciate the subtleties in armor protection" 
I know. This is a quote, of a quote. But anyway!
To to be clear. I Was doing my military service as a gunner, of an IFV (  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansarbandvagn_302 ) When I stayed in the rapidly decreasing size of the army in the first half of the 90´s. As a NCO later on I was the commander, In the PBV 302. And Strv 104 ( Modified centurion with (in the case of war) Swedish made ERA. Developed with the first US made "Blazer ERA" in mind. So only effective  against HEAT munitions. After education to 2nd lieutenant. I came right in to the beginning of the trials for new Swedish tank. Which ended up with the Leopard 2S "Strv 122". And the last years in service, as a second lieutenant, I was a commander of a platoon of Strv 121 (Leo 2A4) Which Sweden bought 160 of, in the deal whith Germany, together with the 120 Strv 122 (Enhanced Leo 2S A5) 
All tanks in the very comprehensive testing, were equipped with Heavy Swedish "Åkers krutbruk" made addon armour. So all tests was made with that armour applied to the modules, being fired uppon. 
 
But since the Army Went down from 850.000 in the late ´80s. To 400.000 in the second half of the 90´s. To todays army of just 40.000 total.. So today, and for a long time. I am not in service.
(Edit: All numbers are the total Armed forces. Not just the army, sorry for that)

@FoxZz keep fighting the fight mon brave - I'd love to see the French in modern titles.

Thanks Bil Very good Reading. Yes i know there is very advanced shot vs armour calculation in CM games. Thats why I was frustrated. when the defences of the tanks in SF2 looked like they did. But sburke, and IanL gave me a satisfying explanation

In the CMSF2 BETA AAR I had an M1A1 hit a Challenger II on the front turret and that shot bounced.. however, fire from another Challenger II easily penetrated an M1A1.  There is much more beneath the skin of this game than you may realize @Armorgunner .
For an example, and this is WW2 related, but if you read the following post which is a quote from Charles:  CMBN BETA AAR - An Explanation you will see a comparison between the Sherman and the Pz IV and I think you, as an armor gunner, will appreciate the subtleties in armor protection, quality of armor plate, and angle of shot that this engine simulates.  The modern games, CMSF2 and CMBS go to the same lengths to simulate reality as closely as possible.
Bil

I have tested it out in the past, and the M1A2 fares better in every regard. It spots better, and when it takes a hit it is much less likely to be penetrated than the M1A1HC. I've also used the scenario in question to test out the differences between the Leopard 2A4 and the 2A6. Same thing, the 2A6 fares much better than the 2A4. 
I'm not sure where you're getting the impression that all of these tank variants are the same, but I can assure you that it is a misunderstanding on your part. As MikeyD mentioned, the 'Defense' UI graph is merely a rough estimate, a generalization that is made between the tank and various enemy munitions. It is not a comparison between tanks. 
If you really want to see for yourself, open up the editor and pit the M1A2 against the M1A1HC, or the Leopard 2A6 against Leopard 2A4s. The differences in protection levels will become quite clear. 

You are right. It changed in the activated unit window. And in game to. Thanks for the input Waffelmann. Then I belive its a minor UI bug only. Thank god for that.

I had a similar experience in the editor.
BUT:
the  tank-types changed in the "selected-units"-window, not in the variant on the bottom....

The action per se may not be all that exciting, but as a look at the nits and grits of operating and maintaining tanks, it's quite educational, with late model Abrams, the LeClerc, Challenger II and Leopard A5s(?) on show. There are great opportunities to hear engine sounds and cannon fire unhindered. One thing I particularly noticed is that the Abrams tanks are green, but the CROWS are in Desert CARC, making for a somewhat odd appearance. There's also some coverage of the tankers doing retrievals and MOPP IV ops.
Regards,
John Kettler

In 2006. The U.S. Army’s Asymmetric Warfare Group was formed. In 2017, the Group released the "Russian new generation warfare handbook" Based on recent Russian combat involvments. Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria. 
Very good reading. To understand the Russian army of today.  Their abilities, and their inabilities.
Link to the unclassified version of the "Russian new generation warfare handbook" : https://info.publicintelligence.net/AWG-RussianNewWarfareHandbook.pdf

Hi Armorgunner !
Yes, I am !!!  Txema, the WWII tanksim fan :-)
But I just cooperate with the STA modding team, helping in several matters (testing, translations, discussions...). The STA team has several very talented and dedicated modders like Lockie, Will73, Deviator... These modders have done and continue doing an incredible work on Steel Fury Kharkov 1942, to turn it into "The" WWII tank sim :-) It is amazing what they have achieved with that tank sim, and they keep improving it and amazing the players time and again !

Great CptMiller, thank you very much for the information !
However I can not understand why Battlefront is taking so much time to release a patch fixing that issue. The problem was reported and discussed already in April, and some players that purchased Engine 4 have "downgraded" to Engine 3 to avoid that problem that is game breaking for them... I have not purchased Engine 4 due to that reports and I decided to wait for the patch... I guess other players are doing the same. Why not fix that obvious problem of Engine 4 with a patch soon? It can make some campaigns unplayable for a significant number of players... 
Txema