Bearstronaut

What is curious is why the Russian navy would go to the trouble of recovering WW2 tanks from the bottom of the Barents Sea.  What else did the ship carry??

To be fair, Game of Thrones is an adaptation of a book series. They couldn't just end it in the middle of the series. Although, I will say that the quality of the show decreased sharply after they outpaced George R. R. Martin's writing.

To be fair, Game of Thrones is an adaptation of a book series. They couldn't just end it in the middle of the series. Although, I will say that the quality of the show decreased sharply after they outpaced George R. R. Martin's writing.

You Brits have an odd sense of humor... and I damn well appreciate it.

The general thrust that most CM scenarios are not scenarios where recce units excel I would agree with fully, but in addition to that the 1:1 nature of CM + the rather static animations makes gun turrets more dangerous than they probably should be. The gunners in most vehicles stand essentially upright with a decent portion of their bodies exposed to enemy fire and switch between unbuttoned and buttoned in a rather binary fashion.

 You can see it in this video where both the men firing from the half-track, the man sitting in the track, and the .50 gunner are relatively high up.  More so than would be absolutely necessary. The Bren gunner is firing from a fully standing position when huddling below the armor deck and resting the Bren on the vehicle would likely be more stable. Around the 1:10 mark the gunner engages infantry within 20-30 meters of him who are using an identifiable object as concealment. The gunner maintains an upright position on the gun while engaging and remains upright between bursts. He is not receiving return fire, but if he was it seems possible that he could drop down behind the gun and spray the object with fire dynamically popping up and down to check his fires.

Compare that to this video from a gunner who is taking fire. (2:28 mark or so)
 

After receiving near misses the gunner is only exposing himself to fire a burst at the enemy and is otherwise below the armor. This sort of dynamic up/down action isn't seen in CM and even the base stance in CM is relatively high. In CM the gunner also has to be up on the gun to fire it. In most combat videos you see the gunner will also be on the gun when firing, but occasionally you will see a gunner firing from a position that keeps him largely below the armor.


This is a limitation of programmer/animator time, and I wouldn't expect to see gunners dynamically moving while firing on targets. However, I think its important to understand this  limitation so that the player can make decisions not only around tactics but also with better knowledge of the tool they are using.

I didn't interact much with you guys. I was tucked away in the SIGINT shop at the SCIF in Korea for 3 years. 

Ah another MI guy! What kind of analyst is 96B? I was in from 2010 to 2015 and was a 35P. I believe my MOS used to be known as 96G.

Roadblocks are still used today in order to slow the enemy on different levels.
On the lowest level you can use a roadblock to slow down the enemy so you can hit him. Say for example you only got light AT-weapons and need to fire on a road. hitting a vehicle moving 40-50km/h on 100-200m distance take some skills, and with heart racing, combat around etc it becomes even harder. Putting up a road block behind a bend or whatever either halts the enemy or slows them down to make the shots easier.
You talk about moving the obstacles really quickly. well it might look that way, but dig down 1-2 mines in that road block and see how fast it takes to remove it after the first mine detonates.
Obstacles and mines are "normally" defended, which means that when a enemy encounter a minefield or obstacle they deploy for combat, and moves slower untill they know there is nothing. this takes time, and thereby buys you time. That also makes them much more accesible for indirect fires, a FOO and a bunch of roadblocks can pin down the enemy for a good while for example.
On a bigger level many roadblocks can either slow enemys advance to buy your side time to do a propper defence or make the enemy accesible for a counter attack and so on.
Roadblocks are a very useful weapon in the way i have described and its particuly so when you look at the time it takes to make. Ad hoc roadblocks can take just about 5 mins (driving out some trucks in the road, throw a visible mine infront of it) or just a few hours work (saw or detonate trees accross the road, blow up the road etc and depending on what you go for it doesnt have to be manpower heavy either.
I am a combat engineer in the swedish army and we have plenty of heavy forest to use and canalising terrain so we use roadblocks ALLOT mixed with mines and proper minefields to delay the enemy, to make them change direction (into prepared better defences) or to hold them where they can be counter-attacked, so its a great tool really.
 

I would love to play a scenario about the ROKA 6th ID defending Chuncheon. Or a campaign about the KPA 105th Armored Division against the US 24th ID at Taejon. Or a campaign about the Marines trying to escape destruction at Chosin. The Korean War is a fascinating conflict. It really is a forgotten war in western countries. I spent hours exploring the Korean War museum in Seoul when I was stationed in Korea. Probably one of the best museums I have ever been to.

Aye, first 8 months would be a good tight window. Lots of unique factions, too. Not just NK and US, but also PLA, GB, Canada, Australia, etc. Lots of room for DLC. Maybe winter stuff for 1951?

A Korean War Combat Mission would be great. Mountainous terrain like CM:FI and US WW2 TO&E and doctrine vs. Soviet TO&E and doctrine. Of course, it would be best if it only covered the first 8 months of the war before it degenerated into a stalemate.