Grey_Fox

Also it looks like your German tanks have an FO team nearby that may be assisting them in making the spot. Units in CM that are in communication with one another will share spotting information. That FO team looks to be in the same formation as the tanks, and probably has a radio, which means it is probably in communication with the tanks.

Both the Tiger and the T64 are using unenhanced optics. Visibility out of either one of them relies on fundamentally the same technology, periscopes and vision blocks. Both provide the commander with a cupola. Neither has thermals or CCTV screens. So on the face of it I would expect their spotting ability to be more or less the same.
But, as others have pointed out the Tiger has more crew members to assist in spotting. And, probably more importantly, spotting in CM is random. There is a chance that a given crew member will make a spot on a given target in a given amount of time. But there is no set amount of time in which the crew member will make the spot. This is realistic, but it does also mean that you need to run your tests more than once in order to get any sort of meaningful results. Each time you run the test it will take each tank a different amount of time to make the spot. After ten or so tests you will start to get a somewhat reliable average of how long it takes each vehicle to make the spot. The fact that it took the T-64 longer to make the spot in a single test could very easily just be statistical noise.

Odds are it's because the OS doesn't realise that CM is a game, and so is using the integrated graphics chip.
If you have an nvidia graphics card, go to the nvidia control panel and add the CM games to it. Make sure to disable FXAA. 

On the forum and in various discords, the topic has been raised more than once as to whether there was a ground-based radar on the BRM-1 in our gaming time of 1979-1982. Last week I started researching the topic and came across a reconnaissance vehicle operating manual from 1982. All that is known about the radar itself is that it began production in the mid-1970s. Perhaps the information provided will give us in the future a ground radar on the BRM-1K in one of the patches, since I can judge that a ground radar could initially be on all reconnaissance vehicles.
Documentation of BRM-1K operation

 
 
In addition, I studied the topic of thermal imagers in the USSR and learned some interesting things.
The first Soviet zero-generation thermal imager to go into small-scale production was 1PN59 "Posobie-1", which consisted of 50 sensitive elements and had a scanning frequency of 16 Hz, and a target recognition range of 2000 m. This device was installed on PRP-4 (1984) - a mobile reconnaissance point used for reconnaissance and target designation of missile and artillery systems.
The second thermal imager of the first generation was 1PN71 "Posobie-2" with 64 sensitive elements and a scanning frequency of 33 Hz. The target recognition range increased to 3000 m. This device was installed on PRP-4M (1988).
The first two thermal imagers did not find widespread use in sighting equipment and were used only for monitoring the terrain on highly specialized reconnaissance vehicles. However, even if one wanted to, 1PN59 could not be used as a sight due to the low scanning frequency.
Directly for equipping tanks, work was carried out on "Agava-1" thermal imager, which already had 100 sensitive elements and could recognize a tank-type target at 2000 m. "Agava-1" successfully passed tests, but the military abandoned it due to unsatisfactory characteristics, so the timing equipping Soviet tanks with thermal imagers moved back again. After this, the development of an improved version, "Agava-2" began. The number of sensitive elements was increased to 256 pieces, and the target recognition range increased by 20-30%. “Agava-2” suited the military, but its mass production took place in the early 90s, when the country no longer had time for thermal imagers, however, this sight will be installed on some Russian T-80U/UK tanks.
 

Image from the screen of thermal imager 1PN59.
 
 
 

I think this is a major factor in a lot of the complaints about spotting being broken. 

I did some digging (and by that I mean I asked around), and none of the armoured vehicles in CMCW equipped with thermal imagers would have allowed the commander to view the commander's thermal imager repeater while turned out.
The M1A2 *might*, if they were to position themselves very very awkwardly to look at the screen, but otherwise it shouldn't be modelled. Which doesn't mean it isn't modelled, but it shouldn't be.
Also, the reason the M60 TTS imager was superior was that it was displayed on a screen, while for the M1 it was displayed in an ocular sight.
 

I used to work with tanks through the seventies and eighties. We were trained to basically unbotton from M47 all the way through M60A3, for situational awareness. We only had residual light amplifiers in the latter, though. It changed with Leo 2 of course. Especially in the american tanks visibility from the buttoned-up cupola was very bad. So far the real live expierence.

Will there be another CM game made which will allow people to play with modern TOEs?
WW2 is all well-and-good, but it is nice to play with equipment that was invented less than a century ago.

TBH thats not at all how i think about it.

I know this image is just supposed to be an illustration but if i look at it with this plan overlayed it looks to me like a failed attack. Specifically 3rd pln will be unable to advance due to flanking fire while 1st and 2nd pln will both get pulled into the same forest and get artied.
This is what id expect the defensive setup to be. assuming the brown line marks a hill and the green area is forest.

Id also expect position 2 to be lightly defended but have a trp on it to destroy attacking units there and then run a counterattack from position 3 hugging the north west side of the hill.
So for a plan id go with something like this

1st platoon attacks position 3 with 2nd platoon following behind and supported with all arty. 3rd platoon runs a supporting attack on position 2 to tie it down.
this automatically takes all troops on position 1 out of the fight, hits the likely highest troop concentration with arty, clears the way to the objective and cuts the fallback path from position 1 and 2.

This was actually rolled out to IIRC CMBN several years ago, but the people on the forum cried like bitches until it was reverted because they like to pretend they could call in precision air strikes in 1944.

I think this is a major factor in a lot of the complaints about spotting being broken. 

@BFCElvis Every few days or weeks people show up on the unofficial CM discord server asking for help with the AMD cards, and every time we can only tell them that they either must roll back drivers, or if they can't roll them back (which the newer cards can't be) then they should seek a refund.
This issue has been going on for over a year now, and I think it's about time that there should be an announcement or warning on the BFC store page and related sales sites like Matrix, Slitherine, and Steam, that currently CM is not supported on AMD cards.
You already do this for integraded chips on the battlefront.com site, but I think it should be explicitly mentioned for AMD cards as well. Very few people know what OpenGL is or what cards support it.

I think this is a major factor in a lot of the complaints about spotting being broken. 

I think this is a major factor in a lot of the complaints about spotting being broken. 

I didn't even read that link before trying it myself.
Yeah, you're 100% correct. Even the simple test I ran was... yeah... CMBS, midnight, Abrams tank one end of the map, a company of T-72s 500m further away, all tanks looking off to the left. The Abrams didn't spot a thing for half an hour. The moment I unbuttoned the Abrams though... the TC hadn't even raised himself to get his eyes outside the hatch before he'd spotted the first T-72 and had the whole tank oriented onto it. That was extreme, really hoping there'll be some improvement on that.
That's completely changed my outlook at least, I'll unbutton even the most modern Western AFVs unless I know for certain that the enemy will only be right ahead from now on.

Following a round of testing done primarily by @Millien on the unofficial CM discord server (link in signature I believe), it appears that the CITV on an abrams is not drawn from the CROWS viewer:



 
Nor is the Primary Gunner's Sight used to draw line of sight from:

 
Instead, it appears that the line of sight for both the PGS and the CITV is drawn from the main gun barrel.
Additionally, the CITV does not provide a 270 degree field of view - instead it would appear to effectively act as a repeater for the gunner's thermal imager. Unless the turret is facing towards an enemy, the CITV does not appear to be used. Testing instructions are to use non-multispectral smoke between tank and hostiles, hostiles should be at a 90 degree angle, and wait.
As such, this would appear to throw into doubt the perceived wisdom that Abrams should be used turned-in to take advantage of the tank's thermal imagers.
Thanks to @Millien for performing the tests.

Soviet doctrine was to fight buttoned-up and rely on mass to identify and destroyed the enemy.
US doctrine was to stay turned-out as much as possible.

Soviet doctrine was to fight buttoned-up and rely on mass to identify and destroyed the enemy.
US doctrine was to stay turned-out as much as possible.

Worth bearing in mind that unlike in real life the CITV only covers the front 90 degrees of the Abrams in CMBS and presumably CMSF2, so there are circumstances where being turned out may be advisable.

Incredibly disappointing. 
 
Not even a chance of getting some bits and bobs as a vehicle or battle pack?

Any possible further bone about a modern game, pretty please? Understand quitting on Black Sea, but I would LOVE to see something set that incorporated some of the lessons from the war set in 2030 or 2035, don't really care where.

Will there be another CM game made which will allow people to play with modern TOEs?
WW2 is all well-and-good, but it is nice to play with equipment that was invented less than a century ago.

Thanks for answering me so clearly on this one! However, this is devastating news. CMBS is my favourite CM game but it always lacked a bit variety. I can understand your decision but this makes me incredibly sad.
As for Slitherine/Matrix, they are soon releasing Broken Arrow. A game that features the realistic destruction of entire building blocks via rocket strikes, painstaking detail when it comes to authenticity of units and overall a very smiliar landscape to Eastern European countries. I don't really see them squirming there. Maybe because that game could be their first mainstream hit?
And personally, I've never understood why contemporary conflicts are taboo while it is completely fine to have SS Todeskopf troops in your fun wargame or bomb the Vietcong without any notion of all the civilian casualties. I probably know all the arguments why this war is okay to depict but not that one. And I can even comprehend most of them. But Wargames are not some casual fun games. They are - more often than not - simulators and show us the workings of modern equipment and tactics. And, at least for me, they even have an anti-war element to them, much more than most of so called anti-war movies. And in that regard, they transcend the regular piety rules that apply for entertainment media.
Anyways. It is great to hear that there is enthusiasm for other modern settings from your side. I do know that it's not gonna be a game featuring the IDF though.

The forces amassing over there are getting ridiculous.  Is this just sabre rattling by Israel or are they going to pull the trigger?

It is completely broken. Just look at this they get within 50 meters of each other in broad daylight and be doesn't even see it. It's laughable that anybody would consider this to be realistic behaviour.
Completely unplayable, I want a refund.