I often find that, in the defense, units will withdraw on whatever trigger is specified (stance, standoff, losses) in an unpredictable direction. While they generally withdraw away from the (visible) enemy, their withdrawal axis is often away from their commander and/or peers, resulting in the ...

Hi all,

I thought I'd start a new thread to continue some of the discussions that have been going around lately on RNG and various weapon/target combinations. Some observations below:

1. It would be useful (if possible) to have a more detailed tooltip going through the elements of a result ...

Hi all,

I have encountered the same issue in Scenario 1 of the Canadian campaign. Saves are attached for 44% progress (which loads successfully) and 52% (which does not).

Hopefully this helps somewhat in diagnosing the problem.

Correct - what I meant to say is that these are mechanized/motorized units with only infantry subunits remaining (so that there is no possible situation where a vehicle icon should show up for the unit). I'm not entirely complaining though - this behavior does offer some finality when the last ...

I have noticed that units will tend to change their icon when their last subunit is destroyed (particularly common is a infantry unit with only infantry subunits remaining changing to a vehicle icon right before being killed). Is this intended to occur and, if so, what is the reason for this being ...

One additional point here in relation to the discussion of fallen out vs destroyed:

I have repeatedly encountered a situation where mechanized/motorized units (with both infantry and vehicle subunits) take losses but are then partially reconstituted in the next scenario of a campaign. The partial ...

A few questions on this campaign:

In Scenario 2, we are given several engineer units, but there is no apparent application for these units (only a few bridges exist, and those are well to the rear of the line of contact). In my playthrough, these units remained idle throughout the scenario. What is ...

I have seen several cases recently where an enemy unit is located by non-visual means (electronic emissions or counter-battery radar) and engaged by artillery, but kill markers are still populated as enemy subunits are hit despite the lack of visual contact. My understanding is that kill markers ...

After installing the latest patch (from June) and playing through several US campaign scenarios, I have noticed that US armor units perform significantly worse when engaging WP units (armor/mech in particular), but seem to take the same losses as before (or maybe even a bit more). Have there been ...

Understood - that part makes sense; what I was more concerned about was the (apparent) inability of the WP units to enter the hex or fire at the US armor until the US units began engaging (due to being placed in Screen). The lack of WP firing can be explained by not spotting the US units, but I'm ...

Very good information here - my specific situation was that a WP headquarters was located in a (West German) urban area when spotted; my decision was to launch a MLRS strike on the hex (which obliterated the entire HQ), but I then started thinking about how likely such a decision would have been ...

I have observed some unexpected behavior in the US campaign, Scenario 5 (Deathmatch) involving units that enter R&R due to readiness. In the attached screenshot, several low-strength US armor platoons were in R&R while in urban terrain; a collection of armored/mechanized WP units are approaching the ...

Two questions below on real-world planning from this period; any information is welcome.

------
In many (all?) scenarios, enemy units are regularly located in built-up or urban areas. As players, we just as regularly use artillery/rockets to target these areas. I recently had a particularly ...

In Scenario 4, we are given command of both US and FRG assets including several Kraka ATV units. The scenario begins with moderate to heavy rain and low illumination. While the TOW-equipped ATVs have a decent range (2 hexes), the Milan-equipped ATVs only show an effective range within their own hex ...

In Scenario 1 of the Big Red One campaign, the WP SPA units (SPA/Adv/1/375th TR) are ordered to Move Deliberate with the main body rather than remaining in the rear and providing fire support. As a result, the WP force loses one of its main advantages and the Gvozdikas are quickly knocked out by the ...

Currently, the user interface (in Grognard mode) will only display enemy units if they are currently spotted by one or more friendly units. However, in many cases it is useful to be able to view recently spotted units on the map when making decisions. How feasible would it be to introduce a feature ...

I came across this vignette from one of my recent scenarios and thought it would be worth sharing. These troops deserve a (posthumous) Order of Lenin if anyone ever did :D :D

Some of the suicidal unit behaviors in game are amusing (if somewhat superhuman), but this one is one of the leading ones I ...

I often observe that either my units or the enemy's will, when proceeding along a route, happily continue past strong opposing units that have significant weaponry capable of destroying the bypassing unit. This seems to be particularly noticeable with armored units bypassing enemy armor/mechanized ...

I've started looking into an interim method using the built-in functionality in QGIS. By using the polygon raster analysis tool on the elevation data raster, we can color-code each hex by the mode of the elevation in that hex (which seems to be the same methodology used to calculate hex elevation ...

I am encountering the following error when saving a scenario in the Scenario Editor. The error occurs after forces are defined for both sides and a placeholder unit is added for each force; the "Save Scenario" button is then clicked and the warning dialog indicating that the scenario is incomplete ...