Bufo

LOL security from what exactly? The narrative that Western Europe or Eastern Europe or the US is some how a direct territorial threat to Russia is just made up.

Nice on topic for the thread!!! 
Stir the pot...🙄

looking to get the thread closed or you want to see more vids?

Here's an update. I just checked and with the new patch comes the correct finished BMP-3 IR searchlight box texture. All fixed.

You mean between 1965 and 1991. So much more exciting period.

Oh, shove it. If someone sees that the topic is about suppression from small arms, that's the discussion they should see when they open the topic - not a bunch of grumblings about health insurance and car repairs. 

This topic was a lot more interesting before the usual suspects starting making off-topic comments.

Hi!
What you have described here applies only for the Hot-Seat mode, not PBEM games. I really cannot understand why there is difference, but anyway. Obviously you can cheat this way in the hot-seat mode but not in PBEM.
Here is a small sheet I made the explain the difference:

So I spent a lot of time to put together an artillery table for Russia and the USA. Currently Ukraine is completely missing. My main motivation was that whenever I was putting together an ORBAT, I had no idea about artillery strike call in times and available ammunition. Now I can check and compare it very easily.
I am sharing it with everybody in case also somebody else finds it useful.
Please note there is a sheet for each nation, and everything was recorded with Elite difficulty settings and Regular experience levels (for both arty and spotters).
Link to CMBS Artillery spreadsheet

Hi!
What you have described here applies only for the Hot-Seat mode, not PBEM games. I really cannot understand why there is difference, but anyway. Obviously you can cheat this way in the hot-seat mode but not in PBEM.
Here is a small sheet I made the explain the difference:

Hi everyone
I'm quite new to this game and wonder a bit about playing a pbem game. What I'd like to know first, before I invite someone or reply to someone's invitation to such a game, is how likely it is that my opponent will "cheat" when he is doing his moves.
As far as I understand there are two possibilities when one is involved in a pbem game.
Person A - Gets the save and makes his moves before he sees the real-time result of his moves and the ones from Person B and then saves the file.
Person B - Gets the save and looks at the real-time result from his own previous moves and the ones from Person A as well as makes his next moves before he saves the file.
In this way Person A is able to make his moves and only after that see the result of his and the opponents moves. If he doesn't like the result because one of his armored cars, tank or whatever is being destroyed by an enemy tank, anti-tank gun or an anti-tank rifle he can simply order the tank or whatever, which is being destroyed, to use direct shots towards the area from where the enemy shot came with the result that the new real-time result is better than it was earlier. Or he can decide to use a mortar crew to use direct shot on a position he didn't think about and only during the real-time realizes is filled with enemy squads. There are of course many new decisions Person A can make to improve his possibilities to win the game after he has seen the result. The above ones are only two of them.
What I wonder is how often do you think those things happen? And maybe you have noticed a little odd thing happening and been thinking to yourself that your opponent probably changed his moves after he had watched the real-time result? Or maybe you could be honest enough to let us know when you changed your moves to get a more favorable result and also why you did it?

Soviet Infantry Battalion moving into attack position in the cover of the hill.

Now that is literally a pixeltroop 😀
What is the resolution you use?

Soviet Infantry Battalion moving into attack position in the cover of the hill.

Fulda Gap. 

By the time CM3 comes out most of us will have kicked the bucket... not to mention the designers themselves.  

I've described in my post above that I don't think it's just due to the "recklessnes" of players. In my opinion, it's also a matter of map-design (primarily quick battle maps) in combination with a lack of properly functionable defensive structures. So, in my opinion, it's not just because players don't break off the engagement, but also because the rate of casualties inflicted during the actual engagements is relatively high. 

Hi guys!
Good suggestions! I also like command friction and the idea that units should not react to occurances they don't know of. I have no idea myself how it could be translated into a system that could be managed by the game/pc though.  
In my opinion many realism-aspects affect the context/setting of the typical CM match: 
Night battles. People often underestimate how many attacks were carried out at night. (This is also linked to point 2: If the enemy is in defensive positions, you don't want to engage in daylight, as it will be easier to detect your appraoch and stop it - by means of MGs and artillery, usually) Play fewer meeting engagements as this would be an extremely rare situation. Play scenarios with clear attacker and defender roles. The big problem here is that CM lacks the fortifications that would be neccessary to portray such an engagement (lack of proper trenches & dug-outs). The trenches we have right now don't provide sufficient cover against artillery and small arms fire. In most cases, a defensive line can simply be "bombed out" instead of requiring a capture by fire & manoeuvre.  Many maps are a bit crowded. Of course it depends on the historical region (--> bocage in Normandy is an exception, obviously), but there is a lack of more open maps that allow heavier weapons and some defensive assets to play out their advantages.* For example, this is also true for the bunkers which are available in the game right now: In order for their cover to be of any help, the distance to the target need to be really big; otherwise, too many bullets will hit the bunker's opening. Also, MGs were preferably used at ranges at which ordinary rifles could not return fire and at which it was not so easy to pinpoint the location of the MG nest. Because of the short lines of sight (= high lethality of weapons) that are so common in CM, I feel that spotting is more important than it should be, requires you to fiddle around and micromanage a lot, and it also adds randomness to the game. Another factor related to map design is that in many terrain features (e.g. woods) have a rather small footprint or are cut off by the edge of the map which turns them into an "obvious" position that can be neutralized quite easily. It's very easy to saturate a clump of trees with arty or HE. By contrast, a 1x1 km wood is a bit more difficult to neutralize. Generally speaking, from a realism point of view, Combat Mission matches strike me as way too bloody. The amount of casualties is insane. The reasons for this are probably a mixture of the things listed above: the typical CM engagement is an engagement in daylight at very short range with no proper means of defence for the defender (trenches, dug-outs). The one  (BIG) advantage that the defender has is the short range of the engagements which enables him to trigger devastating ambushes (spotting the enemy first, destroying him before he can react).
This is what I've described as a lack of "soft contact" in Combat Mission games. You usually only get "hard contact", with one asset getting out immediately after being spotted, with few if any chances to react. In some cases, it can be extremely frustrating to play under these circumstances. 
I'd also prefer if an infantry unit that gets fired upon while moving with the standard movement-order would go prone immediately, not run to the next waypoint.  
------------------
* Once I've finished my Catania scenario for Command Ops II (https://forums.lnlpublishing.com/threads/the-battle-for-catania-primosole-bridge-sicily-july-1943.5326/)], I will continue my work on a large map (http://community.battlefront.com/topic/133505-thats-one-vast-valley-hard-edged-realistically-scaled-map/).

Let me preface by saying I'm not posting these videos  to nit pick or be negative or to say this is a bug or it isn"t. I truly love this game system, but i have lots of questions and I want feedback to better understand what is going on and posting a video makes things so much easier.
Why isn't the entire team occupying the foxholes?
Do the team members not in the foxholes gain the cover bonus?

They are not included now, but I will add them later.
Maybe I will make another table for the drones.

So I spent a lot of time to put together an artillery table for Russia and the USA. Currently Ukraine is completely missing. My main motivation was that whenever I was putting together an ORBAT, I had no idea about artillery strike call in times and available ammunition. Now I can check and compare it very easily.
I am sharing it with everybody in case also somebody else finds it useful.
Please note there is a sheet for each nation, and everything was recorded with Elite difficulty settings and Regular experience levels (for both arty and spotters).
Link to CMBS Artillery spreadsheet

So I spent a lot of time to put together an artillery table for Russia and the USA. Currently Ukraine is completely missing. My main motivation was that whenever I was putting together an ORBAT, I had no idea about artillery strike call in times and available ammunition. Now I can check and compare it very easily.
I am sharing it with everybody in case also somebody else finds it useful.
Please note there is a sheet for each nation, and everything was recorded with Elite difficulty settings and Regular experience levels (for both arty and spotters).
Link to CMBS Artillery spreadsheet

So I spent a lot of time to put together an artillery table for Russia and the USA. Currently Ukraine is completely missing. My main motivation was that whenever I was putting together an ORBAT, I had no idea about artillery strike call in times and available ammunition. Now I can check and compare it very easily.
I am sharing it with everybody in case also somebody else finds it useful.
Please note there is a sheet for each nation, and everything was recorded with Elite difficulty settings and Regular experience levels (for both arty and spotters).
Link to CMBS Artillery spreadsheet

What new and overhelming Russia demonstrated in Ukraine and Georgia? Most of their success is a consequenses of not so "newest doctrines", as rough mistakes of the opposing HQs and superior in forces. Russia is capable to create outstanding TV-picture of strong modern army, but they have the same problems like all post-soviet armies. Experience of engagement in Sector A in 2014 showed that Russian troops is not "invincible machine" - if their opponents are ready to stand and fight and retain controllability, Russians can't achieve own "primary victory conditions".

Sad to see that the issue of infantry firing off AT-assets against close enemy infantry in open terrain hasn't been addressed