Artkin

This is what I've got so far.
map B: Budenivka district 1500 X 1100m

I think I am going to try and focus on the southern flank; I have been studying Suriyak maps to find the actual directions of the attacks in each sector. I want to do one of the Optyne road and another one near the Mig monument at the entrance of Bakhmut which is actually right next to this map here.
Ideally we'd need the Azom complex and some iconic tower blocks. Some AFU counter attacks could be nice too in the Kischiivka sector for instance.
If there are some people who are interesting in participating to the project but are not familiar with Bakhmut, this is a good resource. With daily updates showing the frontline inside the city and where exactly fighting took place. I mean clearly the whole city was a battlefield but in order to frame the maps correctly, it helps to know the directions of the thrusts. Often you can see block by block where the fighting occurred. 
 

Dude he wasnt even fit for his first term.

They caught them with their Pantsir-S down.
 
Ok, sorry.

It seems a little too short.
Luckily, I saw an online article for special pills GUARANTEED to make it longer.
After I get them I will offer the British spike bayonet to CMMODS.
 

honestly Phil
I don't think there is anything to change 😍
I think I'm going to redo the Scottish Corridor 😋

Oh. Russian Ground Forces have MLRS on two levels. First level - Brigade\Division, second level - combined arms army (separate artillery brigades). Russian combined arms battalion(BTG) can have in possession MLRS battery taken from brigade's MRLS divizion (Battalion) (just like BTG has SPH artillery assets from brigade's artillery battalions or division's artillery regiment). Usually it's BM-21 on battalion or brigade level and BM-27 or BM-30 on army level. 
But there is reason in your words. Newest russian BTG are more powerful, it's something mid between batallion and regiment (by soviet standards) and more likes US combined arms battalion by sized. As Viktor Murakhovsky (an expert at Russia's Military Industrial Commission) wrote (too long to translate, it's google's work)
 
We already have a weakened artillery. 
 

Some pictures emerged on Russian TG's of another S-400 command set that successfully intercepted NATO-made missile; still not confirmed.
 

Careful there. Such bombing campaigns against civilians have never worked. They still don't. My bold above sounds like you are using the same justification that everyone else used when justifying their civilian bombing campaign.
 
I would argue that major difference was that that bombing campaign did not target civilians to "break their morale". Yes, I am well aware that many civilians died I'm not saying it didn't hurt I'm saying that even the civilians living in those cities could see that they were not the direct target of the bombing.
So, apples to oranges and concluded that bananas was the winner, comparison there.

I think we discussed this a while ago and at the time I found the following papers and presentation made interesting reading/viewing for anyone focussing on German losses at Prokhorovka.  The gist is that 5 (yes, five!) German panzers were lost at Prokhorovka:
Ben Wheatley (2021): Citadel, Prokhorovka and Kharkov: The armoured losses of the II SS Panzer Korps Sonderverbände during the battle of Kursk, July-August 1943, Journal of Intelligence History, DOI: 10.1080/16161262.2021.1889278
Ben Wheatley (2020): Surviving Prokhorovka: German armoured
longevity on the Eastern Front in 1943–1944, Journal of Intelligence History, DOI:
10.1080/16161262.2020.1750841
Ben Wheatley (2019) A visual examination of the battle of Prokhorovka,
Journal of Intelligence History, 18:2, 115-163, DOI: 10.1080/16161262.2019.1606545
and
Roman Töppel (2017) Prokhorovka, 12 July 1943, The Myth Is Dead – Long Live the Myth!  I have his paper, but he also presents it here on Youtube:

Yet, for all the years it took to be published, I expected a lot of custom-made maps to be included. Moreover, for all the tables it contains, there's still more detail in the KOSAVE study, from which the book itself originated.
Don't get me wrong, it's a great book and I do not regret buying it. But, give its size and scope, I expected it to be the definitive (i.e. containing all the available detail) book on the southern pincer of Operation Zitadelle.
In my humble opinion. Glantz's book is good for a general overview of the entire operation, its origins and the strategic aftermath. Lawrence's book gives a detailed operational analysis of the actions in the southern part of the bulge, Zamulin's book is worth reading because, while accepting the fact that Rotmistrov's counterattack was a total disaster, it does try to explain why and how the Red Army managed to stop the German.
I think that the above mentioned books are complementary and are all worth buying and reading for an Eastern Front aficionado. After reading them, I came to the conclusion that:
1) The Germans were not fools in deciding to launch Operation Zitadelle 
2) The Soviet Army did indeed stop the Germans, although it didn't as it initially planned to 
3) The redeployment of some German élite divisions to the West was an effect of Zitadelle's failure, not a cause
Anyway, this is what I got from these readings. Your mileage may vary...

Much appreciated. Love these gems hidden by Google's corrupt search engine. I will post anything I find also. I'm usually looking for various unit histories throughout the week

I'm feeling that book craze too. I ordered 15 on the eastern front yesterday. 

The book, "Down to Earth, The 507th Parachute Infantry Regiment in Normandy" just arrived. Had a very quick look. Large size, glossy pages, very heavily illustrated with photographs both black and white and coloured. 283 pages of which less than 50% appears to be text as a result of the heavy illustration. So initial impression is that as far as text goes, I do not expect it to be nearly as detailed as Nordyke's book.
The portion of the book relevant to my 82nd Airborne Normandy campaign game consist of chapters 8 through 14, 83 pages, of which the text equivalent amounts to about 40 pages. Let's see if there's anything new here.
 

here is the prototype...
I now need to tweak the texture to make the bayonet stand out visually from the rifle metal and enhance the pointed part. Ouch! it is sharp...

 

For Phill's mod France 1940 with the battle of Stonne:
I reworked the camouflage from the textures of BF.c and Aris, I didn't redo everything. The camouflage of the "Indochine" tank roughly represents his historical model. The tags of the "Eure" tank reproduce those of the meager documentation I had, but its camouflage is not faithfully reproduced, sorry... In the probably distant future, I will completely repaint the tank with Blender (which I have done in part), but I am not yet familiar with this application (you can make a class action for visual aggression and obtain consequential damages, I will plead guilty...).
 
View BF.c (Indochine):
https://www.mediafire.com/view/siyggo0dmw184k2/B1_1940_aris.jpg/file
View (Eure):
https://www.mediafire.com/view/fg4tnk9f0b0i8fp/B1_Eure.jpg/file
Zip Indochine:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/ri8lep2xexj93p2/B1_1940_Aris.zip/file
Zip Eure:
https://www.mediafire.com/file/m5gxw9ispdg07yd/B1_1940.zip/file
 

Shut down twitter already. FFS.
No I will never make an account on your **** poser website. No matter how many blocks on information you pose. 

Shut down twitter already. FFS.
No I will never make an account on your **** poser website. No matter how many blocks on information you pose. 

Shut down twitter already. FFS.
No I will never make an account on your **** poser website. No matter how many blocks on information you pose. 

Shut down twitter already. FFS.
No I will never make an account on your **** poser website. No matter how many blocks on information you pose. 

Shut down twitter already. FFS.
No I will never make an account on your **** poser website. No matter how many blocks on information you pose. 

Here's a film about U.S. Army helicopter operations during Reforger 76. 
I hadn't realized quite what nap-of-the-earth flight means, in an operational setting and in heavily-wooded Western Europe. At 2:00, a Cobras rises above a hedgerow and launches a TOW against a target, then moves to an alternate firing position with its skids just a few feet above the ground. The helicopter is operating more like a more nimble M113 than like a fast jet. Suddenly, the argument that the attack helicopter is the real descendant of the WWII tank destroyer really clicks.
The film later shows an antitank ambush by helicopter-inserted TOW teams, their launchers mounted on Mules. (Makings of a scenario, there.) There's also footage of an air assault operation. This leaves me wondering—where did the infantry force for an air assault come from? Manuals don't say where the troops come from, and as far as I can tell, there were few, if any, light infantry units slated for deployment in Central Europe. Dismounted mechanized infantry, stripped from their vehicles? Was this at all a common tactic?
 

Popped up overnight on Sinocism: https://www.chinausfocus.com/publication/2023/51.html
This is a English translation (PDF) of a study done by a Tsinghua University-based thinktank on Chinese people's perspectives on international security. It's a worthwhile read, although it should not be surprising that the findings show that the Chinese people apparently support the party line on every topic.
Ukraine section:
On favorability:
Imo this shows exactly where the government stands, regardless of what they might say to western leaders.

I would-
-Place defensive positions in sensible terrain, with a retreat position situated behind, with some cover between the two positions. The fall-back position should have a few HMGs and mortars set up, if this is an existing position and not hastily put together.
-Split your forces into two basic forces: "Cover, then Retreat" (AI 1) and "Retreat First" (AI 2). Both are in the initial defensive position. These forces have Ambush to a set distance, dictated by the terrain, and the following factor...
-Place a Trigger at the distance (generally a line the length of the map to punish edge dodgers) at which things will be impossible to retreat out of if the enemy is getting the upper hand. Your defensive fire should kick in at around double this for the AI to have any chance of retreat.
-Connect your Trigger to AI 2, and make an order to move (I generally use Assault) to the fall-back positions. Use a Withdraw Facing (it's used by holding down CNTL or ALT, I forget - but it should be pink) with the end-point of this order. The Assault will have the AI group use bounding movement. To simulate a break-down of cohesion, you could have them all tumble out of their positions at Fast or Quick. Less chance of survival that way. The Withdraw order will allow the use of smoke in the direction placed, and will also dictate that the retreated units will face the enemy on arrival.
The remaining force can be ordered to do the same with a closer trigger to the defensive lines. Or they could both be placed further out.
Fine tuning is done in Scenario Author Mode, Turn-Based. Just blast through, and watch for issues. Tweak. repeat, until the result is looking good.

There's absolutely no need to be practicing in forests unless you expect to escalate eventually. That's a crazy way of living. There are definitely lunatics out there, I don't disagree. Publicly boasting confederate flags isn't too uncommon in the US, but specifically nazi flags are. It usually doesn't last long once it's publicly scrutinized. I know I've never seen one in my state, but the coast is a different animal than the inner states. Too many people here for that to fly.
I think nazi worshipping is a bit unique since Hitler is often idolized. I grew up with a kid who was like that, but he never owned any nazi memorabilia. He was also a crazed drug addict with a real ****ed up family. I'm not sure if he's still alive. These kinds of people are not the prominent sort nor are they representative of the US population... not even a fraction.
And I can see people leaning toward the confederates given how little trust the people generally have in our government. Of course neither are solutions to whatever problems we have here.