Centurian52

I understand what you're getting at, but maybe using 'genocide' in that specific context isn't your best play?
I also feel that stealing land from one country to give it to two others while evicting the legal occupants is probably not a great way to maintain the moral high ground or credibility.
 

...more scenario design source imagery here.
because we are no more in the 70's, it is absolutely useless to have such line of "defense" right now, with all direct intel, you should move every day of your position and change patterns of modification and ratio of véhicules & troops around etc. 
Because now... it's going to be a "ball trap" party! 
Ukr hide quite well the fact that they could suddenly unleash all that support on such "defensive" groups (or line of defense in trees) but all you got to have nowadays in order for an M777 (or equivalent) to strike half of this in couple hours is.some accurate GPS loc data and some M982 Excalibur artillery type of projectile. and actually ukr have their own production of such ammunition so for 70grand you can smoke a T-72 for example.
"Ball trap party". That's a keeper....

There is a point when this narrative starts to sound like they are trying to convince themselves.  “This isn’t happening, this can’t be happening!”
First stage is denial, then anger, bargaining, depression and finally, regime change.  It’s a process.

So, again, do not get too focused on the tactical here.  The UA currently looks like it is balancing two simultaneous operations at either end of the front, one in Kharkiv and one at Kherson.  They are seeing gains in both and look like they are balancing resources to each of them...at the same time.  This is by no stretch "basic competence" for any military, to the point that  I highly doubt 3 out of the 5 EYES militaries could pull this off right now without a lot of prep time - and even the UK may be stretching it.
C4ISR, logistics - especially transport, force generation and projection and deep strike are all being coordinated at a high level between these two operations, and they look like they are doing very well.  No more "oh but the Russian's suck" on this one, what the UA is doing is on the upper end of difficult for any military, let alone one that has been in a meat grinder over the summer.  The last time the west did anything even remotely like this was Gulf War (Iraq 03 was a single axis), and we had air supremacy and it still took months to pull off, and we were not being attacked the whole time. 

Clips from liberated town. One cannot fake it; looks like NW Europe after Falaise.
 

Nice to see CM1 still has life. A well-modded CM1 looks competitive to CM2 when viewed from levels 3 and above.  And it is SO much easier to create maps etc.

Since the M60’s armor won’t keep out anything more than a dirty look I’d take increased speed as an alternative. I think the  Germans were on to something with the Leopard 1 design criteria. I’m looking forward to trying them out in CW. 
As far as the French infantry go, I’d expect them to play similar to Brits or Germans of the same time frame. Battle rifle armed line troops supporting GPMGs and AT rockets. 
H

It would probable play similar to a SLR. The only real difference would be a smaller magazine. For 1982 scenarios, the French would have used a mix of FAMAS or Mas 56s for 2nd line formations. This could be modelled similar to the AK-74/AKM equipment settings for the Soviets. Historically, elite formations would have been procured FAMAs rifles first sometime in 1978. As the Foreign Legion was fighting in Operation Shaba I and II at the time, they wouldn't have been part of the lucky few. 

I guess I'm not really expecting the Chieftain to perform phenomenally better than the M60 in the timeframe of CMCW. I believe it's still using the same L15APDS ammunition in 1979-1982 that it had in 1965 (I don't think the L23 APFSDS comes out until 1985), so despite having a bigger gun I don't think it will prove any better at killing T-64s than the M60 (I think the L15 should perform better than the M728, but not quite as well as the M735). Its Stillbrew armor package won't come out until 1986, well after the timeframe of CMCW. I have, on rare occasions, seen rounds bounce off of the needle nosed turret of the M60 (exception, not the rule). Perhaps a higher proportion of rounds will bounce off of the thicker armor and steeper angles of the Chieftain's turret, but given that it's still just homogenous steel against late 70s/ early 80s ammunition I expect the overwhelming majority of rounds will still get through. 
I expect if CMCW had been set in the late 60s/ early 70s the Chieftain would be significantly more survivable with significantly more firepower than the M60 (or if it had been set in the late 80s for that matter, when the Chieftain had newer ammunition and Stillbrew armor). But in the game's current setting I expect the main practical difference to be that it will have somewhat worse mobility.
The Leopard 1 should be the exact opposite. I still don't expect it to be any more survivable (in fact, if it was rare for the M60 to bounce a shot, the Leo 1 should never bounce a shot) or be any better at killing T-64s, but it should be a bit faster. In any case, I can hardly wait to see both the Chieftain and the Leopard 1 in action. While this might not be the most flattering time period for the Chieftain, it is still an interesting vehicle.
I'm not sure if the Marder will quite be a match for the BMP-2 (should be better than the BMP-1), but will definitely stand more of a chance than the M113. Does anyone happen to know what the British mech-infantry are riding around in from 1979-1982? I'm pretty sure the Warrior hasn't entered service yet.

I guess I'm not really expecting the Chieftain to perform phenomenally better than the M60 in the timeframe of CMCW. I believe it's still using the same L15APDS ammunition in 1979-1982 that it had in 1965 (I don't think the L23 APFSDS comes out until 1985), so despite having a bigger gun I don't think it will prove any better at killing T-64s than the M60 (I think the L15 should perform better than the M728, but not quite as well as the M735). Its Stillbrew armor package won't come out until 1986, well after the timeframe of CMCW. I have, on rare occasions, seen rounds bounce off of the needle nosed turret of the M60 (exception, not the rule). Perhaps a higher proportion of rounds will bounce off of the thicker armor and steeper angles of the Chieftain's turret, but given that it's still just homogenous steel against late 70s/ early 80s ammunition I expect the overwhelming majority of rounds will still get through. 
I expect if CMCW had been set in the late 60s/ early 70s the Chieftain would be significantly more survivable with significantly more firepower than the M60 (or if it had been set in the late 80s for that matter, when the Chieftain had newer ammunition and Stillbrew armor). But in the game's current setting I expect the main practical difference to be that it will have somewhat worse mobility.
The Leopard 1 should be the exact opposite. I still don't expect it to be any more survivable (in fact, if it was rare for the M60 to bounce a shot, the Leo 1 should never bounce a shot) or be any better at killing T-64s, but it should be a bit faster. In any case, I can hardly wait to see both the Chieftain and the Leopard 1 in action. While this might not be the most flattering time period for the Chieftain, it is still an interesting vehicle.
I'm not sure if the Marder will quite be a match for the BMP-2 (should be better than the BMP-1), but will definitely stand more of a chance than the M113. Does anyone happen to know what the British mech-infantry are riding around in from 1979-1982? I'm pretty sure the Warrior hasn't entered service yet.

It really couldn't. There is no way to enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine without going all-in on a conventional war between Russia and NATO. It would not only mean NATO aircraft shooting down Russian aircraft, but also NATO aircraft attacking Russian air-defense systems and radar.

Fair point. It might be more accurate to say that an agreement with the current Russian regime is impossible. Of course I seriously doubt that very many people mean "every individual Russian throughout time" when they go around talking about "the Russians" anyway. In any case, the Russian government really has broken enough agreements in the past that it really is impossible to negotiate with them at this point. Any agreement made with them will be broken as soon as it suits them. Perhaps that might change if the current regime is overthrown. I would certainly like to see a future where we can be on friendly terms with a reasonable Russia.

It really couldn't. There is no way to enforce a no-fly zone over Ukraine without going all-in on a conventional war between Russia and NATO. It would not only mean NATO aircraft shooting down Russian aircraft, but also NATO aircraft attacking Russian air-defense systems and radar.

Way ahead of you on that. I got out of the Army at the end of 2020, and recently started working as a Navy contractor. I feel like I'm going to have pretty good job security this decade (if things heat up in the ways I'm expecting them to).

I was thinking now is the time to get out and cash in on that tsunami of contractor money they are going to need to spend...they can keep the medals, I want the cash...sweet cash....

When people talk of "the Russians" saying "no agreement with the Russians is possible" and "the Russians are leaving the Snake island" and "the Russians are running a secret mobilisation", they are talking about Russian government, Russian state and Russian mainstream culture of nationalism and superiority and imperial mindset, not about every individual person with Russian citizenship or heritage.
Pretending it is the other way around - that people are making statement about how all people of Russian heritage carry monstrous genes or something - is common manipulation tactic that is trying to make criticism or Russia sound racist or something.
You could see it in use right in this thread, where some guy chose to interpret someone saying "Russian Federation falling apart into smaller states would likely be best scenario for both safety of Eastern Europe and people currently living in Russian Federation" as "everybody here is promoting genocide of Russians".
We all know that there is not evil gene in Russian DNA (and my friend who is a biologist focusing on evolution would tell you that the idea of "Russian DNA" is by itself nonsense). Posting "not all Russians" is only useful for Russia because it causes infighting on our side.

Wikipedia says the Brits used the Carl G 84mm until it was replaced by the LAW80 in the 80s, along with the LAW. 
I would be happy to get either the Brits* or the West Germans. Both have some interesting kit and using Marders to kill BMPs in Shock Force just isn't the same thing as a central Europe throw down. 
H
*Although going up against T64s with Chieftains is not a prospect I'm really looking forward to. I'm kinda expecting the Chieftain to be like a heavier, slower version** of the M60 series when facing the T64/T72. Pretty much anything can kill a M60 from any aspect and all the armor does is make the tank slower. 
**At least CM doesn't model engine reliability...

russians leaving Snake Island as an "act of good will" is unfortunate.
We wish they'd rather stay.
Our HIMARS crews need training.

Lack of infantry... Like in 1941 Russia is establishing combined battalions from sailors - crewmen of naval ships and vessels. Combined motor-rifle battalion of Northern fleet will depart to Ukraine from Murmansk. Probably as a part of 200th motor-rifle brigade. In its composition sailors, servicemen of coastal units, military police, reservists. This is not first case, reportedly 83rd air-assault brigade already sent similar replenishment (servicemen of brigade rear units+reservists) for one of own BTGs, moved to teh rear.  
 

Alexandr Boroday, former "prime-minister of DPR" and in present time the head of "Donbas Volunteers Union" claimed during "special military operation" DVU already lost killed more than 1000 members. DVU members, mostly citizens of Russia, fight either in DPR/LPR units (mostly regular) or in volunteer battalions, which DVU forms in Russia. Some of DVU members also fight in PMC.
  

AFAIR from the explanation, special means conducted without military fighting by special means (like spec ops operators conducting covert sabotage). They wanted to drive to Kiev and pick up surrendered UKR POW without battles. That is a special operation to degrade UKR fighting capability.
However, by the rules the special operation was over as soon as UKR started resisting and it resulted in conventional battles. The Military operation/war has begun. But RU gov did not follow the rule. 
 
No. While RU gov are just bunch of crooks they still abide by formalities. After war declaration they had to implement wartime measures. Such measures, like mobilization, would be
1) Admittance of RU initial plan failure
2) Deeply unpopular to the point of rebellion.
So, they decided to stick to Special Military Operation name hoping for the best. 
 
Propaganda. They are trying to pretend that slowness and lack of overwhelming sucess is because RU is not fighting using full force because they are trying to avoid civilian casualties. All photos and videos of civilian casualties and heavy damage are UKR fakes, crisis actors, previously died bodies or civilians executed by UKR themselves. It is all because heinous Ukrainians and heinous foreigners are trying to discredit Glorious RU Forces. 

They aren't calling it a war yet. Part of the hesitation to enact general mobilization is that it would require admitting that this is a war.

Before working on the Cold War title I worked on the CMRT Fire and Rubble module. So I got to first play with the late war Russian offensive doctrine of "We've got 4x more of everything and we're coming straight at you!" Or, as Stalin said, quantity has a quality all its own. The Seelow Heights bloodbath is often discussed but that had been preceded by the Vistula-Oder offensive where the Germans had been virtually steamrollered and Poland taken in a matter of weeks. Its interesting that the US zone of operations is in a part of West Germany least likely to be the focus of the main Soviet assault. The Fulda operation would probably be just to tie down the Americans while the main show takes place to the north. 

I think  this hits the nail on the head. I don't think it's a matter of whether Soviet doctrine works 100% like the simulations but playing to the TO&E and letting the strategy flow from there.
US
Tons of binoculars, forward observers at the platoon level. Less artillery, more air power Tanks (to me) have worse spotting at least until thermal imaging and have terrible hull down positions more organic infantry AT access APC's are useless besides transporting troops The US wants to keep you at a distance, observed while you bombard them with air support. They want to use small, flexible, independent units to make their own space and take ground.
Soviet
barely any binoculars, you get maybe one or two forward observers More artillery, less air Tanks have decent spotting, high speed, low silhouette Less organic AT access APC's can help support infantry Soviets need their entire battalion to function to make one set piece attack after gaining as much intel as possible
 
Maybe certain aspects of Soviet doctrine doesn't work but it looks pretty close to me just with TOE.
 

The Tsar was accepted by the people as legitimate for centuries, the crime boss might have a few decades (although there are counter-examples in Africa).
3rd pole as irrational:  Global power poles are a zero sum game.  So we have Russia at with a GDP less than that of Canada, and 4 times the population, and has been basically flat since 2014. (https://www.worldometers.info/gdp/gdp-by-country/, https://tradingeconomics.com/russia/gdp#:~:text=GDP in Russia averaged 972.41,195.91 USD Billion in 1999.   Dependent basically on a single, and vulnerable energy sector.  It military was a Potemkin façade, its Diplomatic power is nearing coal-miners ass level dirty, with crumbling infrastructure and massive internal corruption.   Russia is almost completely lacking in inductive soft-power and its hard power is becoming a laughing stock.  It had sharp power but decided to bash it against the brick wall that is Ukraine.
That country is not going to take on the West, nor China and is no where near able to create a regional, let alone global power pole.  In fact all Russia really has is Europe's over-reliance on its cheap gas, and nukes - no high tech, service or manufacturing industry to speak of and any it did has been clobbered by this fiasco.  It has a largely commodities based industry, which it also likely blew up.

Its trade agreements are basically local (near abroad) or a rogues gallery (Iran), and it invaded a major trading partner:
http://rtais.wto.org/UI/PublicSearchByMemberResult.aspx?MemberCode=643&lang=1&redirect=1
This thinking it can create a global power pole is like What We Do In The Shadows - "we control four houses on this street and one street over."  So unless Putin and his cronies are completely irrational, I strongly suspect they already know these numbers...and this war made them so much worse.  
"Distrust and hardens positions"...I think we are already there.  Let me be clear, this is a war between Russian and the West right now, as much as it is between Russia and Ukraine - and in a war, distrust and hardening are virtues.  We are already there - Russia is already paranoid; sh*t is blowing up in their own country, and tens of thousands of its sons are dead, and we provided the ISR and systems to make it happen - does anyone think there is a "normal" after that?  We win this by removing the paranoid actor and trying to find another one we can tolerate - because spontaneous democracy is not realistic - while containing (etc) Russia. 
I think this is the crux of the issue, and perhaps we can agree to disagree.  I am of the opinion that we are already past the point of rational negotiation of an end-state with the current Russian regime - we passed it when Russian invaded a neighbor and committed war crimes on a massive scale and the again when we directly supported, and continue to support, the killing of Russians...in large numbers.  Our unstated war goals are in line with what I wrote previously, if we are willing to admit it or not, or we even know it yet, or not.  
I cannot say how we must do what needs to be done, only that it needs to be done.  Russia must be compressed and contained, the current regime must go, the crimes of this war must be answered for, and its teeth must be dulled to the point that we can do business in some sort of regional security dynamic that works.  I get the sense that we in the West are still seeing this through some sort of odd - aggressive-discourse-until-it-is-over, a soft war like a game of sport in which we are spectators and where we can all shake hands when it is over.  No, Russia must lose this war, badly, but not too badly or we will lose.  
We will be crisis managing this until such a point as all sides negotiate with what comes next:  what can we live with, what can Russia live with, what can Ukraine live with - in the end I doubt anyone will be happy but if we stand together and are really lucky, we might get an outcome that does not revisit this mess in 25 years, or lead directly to nuclear war. 
However, do not take this as some sort of hawkish "ra-ra".  Russia cannot fall apart completely for all the reasons in my first post this morning.  We want stability and that will take a tricky balancing act.  Russia needs to hurt badly enough, be contained and compressed but needs to function - that is the middle ground.  It is going to be difficult to find, perhaps impossible...but that is the requirement; it gets much worse if we fail.