Well, I first mentioned this problem on the AB forum in August 2021, that's 5 years now.

You're the expert, if you say it can't be easily changed then so be it.

That does however seem to be inconsistent with the fact that custom maps can be made. My reference to a "global" change was meant to be ...

It's been a while now.

Since the cause of the spotting issue on the NTC map is the fact that the Cover and Concealment values for all tiles are set to 0, making it essentially a glass-like surface, surely this could be easily and quickly fixed as an interim measure pending a more comprehensive ...

"But wasn't tacops's unit representation on level higher than AB?"

Short answer, no. Same level.

Long answer:
TacOps managed individual vehicles and 2 to 4 man fire-teams.
Units of the same type could be joined into larger sized units or split into smaller ones.

If you refer to the set up ...

"the need for additional engine mechanics, such as trench clearing and their directional properties as structures. Pretty complex with the current code"

Maybe, maybe not. But you're the developer, so it's your call.

Design of models and simulations is very challenging. Some level of abstraction ...

"Could it be that this game merely simulates encounters and the defense and offense battles in a rush situation?"

Mostly. But the mission generator also includes Several levels of Defend

1. Defend
2. Defend: Dug-in
3. Defend: Fortified
4. Defend: Dug-in+Fortified
AB2 Mission Generator - Defend ...

Spotting recon/scout units at long range is too easy in the NTC map.
I first posted about this on the AB forum over three years ago, but got no reaction from the AB team. I assumed it would be fixed in AB2, but it has not been.
For example: The scout team with SOP Cover:Hold:Hold is taken under fire ...

OK. Got it. Thanks.

Pre-release videos showed 3D animations of AB battles and firefights.

Find function finds 2 references to 3D in the manual:
1. On page 4, in the Introduction: "within a new, more immersive 3D graphic landscape."
2. In Section 6 CREDITS

The manual does not include any instruction how to access the ...

CMO appears to treat EW Successes by Floating Decoys as clean misses.

Yet, is it not to be expected that an ASM that has been spoofed by such a decoy would actually impact the decoy or the sea in close proximity to it?

In my limited experience, that is exactly what happens.
In 1987, I worked on ...

"1) The Ford can absorb a huge amount of damage and remain partially functional. Most hits seem to destroy parked aircraft though."

A very complacent conclusion.

First response: destroyed aircraft means reduced capability of the CV, plus the other damage/

My experience is that few strikes destroy ...

I included Egyptian and Syrian systems and the Arab Fishing Fleet specifically to create a complex environment.
Because, real life is complex.
In this complex environment, most of which is non belligerent, the results i have seen are much less favorable to USN than what you report of the stripped ...

Oops. Don't upload much.
Here it is:

Well, the scenario doesn't tell anyone the questions I have. So, first the questions.
And the logged events do not include the terminal phase target selection process by the missiles which is what I'm questioning.

Attached is the scenario with the suffix changed to jpg to allow attaching.

And, FYI ...

12 Backfires with 2 Kinzhals each ex Engels air base on ASuW mission v CVN 78 Ford group South of Cyprus.
Ford, Normandy, Ramage, Carney, Hudner & Roosevelt.

Backfire in single aircraft flights and off-axis attack at 1000nm permitted to achieve dispersion of attack vector
or
Backfire in multi ...

I created a scenario with a group of civilian ships positioned quite closed together.
The Kinzhals each selected a different target.

What I believe is happening in strikes against USN TFs is that the software assumes the Russian missile will stupidly and invariably select the ship with the largest ...

How does CMO manage anti-ship missile terminal phase target selection from multiple potential targets in a group?

So far as I can see, it appears to simply select the ship that is closest to the missile's course and all missiles in that salvo from the same platform, following the same course ...

Wow! Someone actually ran a simulation to show the blindingly obvious?

Ireland has never had an effective air defense, ever.

IAC PC-7s have 2 hard-points for rocket or machine gun pods, but they are slower than most jets.
The Magisters they replaced had machine guns and hardpoints bu weren't any ...

I posted a scenario based on one of the battles in this book a couple of years ago.

Defense of the Bridge at Eichhoffsseidlung, just west of Bad Hersfeld.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 1#p4769371

That would require a new set of icons too, because they don't use the NATO icons. We use the NATO standard.

Not all countries are NATO or WP factions, there are neutrals too.


I disagree.
It is not necessary to use Soviet icons. Though some might like it as an option, all I'm on about is the ...

I do not agree.

The problem is not the lack of hasty emplacements, but in setting the Concealment Factor for desert tiles and desert rough tiles to zero.
Amazingly, even the rough terrain tiles I checked have zero Concealment.

Essentially, AB assumes a smooth or glassy surface where concealment is ...