Armor Question

[83Reforger]

Building a scenario centered around the Cold War in the 80's. I'm currently working on the ground situation in West/East Germany. I'm a bit surprised that there are no Chieftain's nor are there any Leopard's in terms of Armor. Is there a certain Database that I should be using to find this Armor?

It is surprising too that anyone wanting to create a scenario involving the current conflict in Ukraine would be hard pressed for any realism when the conflict involves quite a few of the Leopard type Tank. Russian Armor got a diet rich in Chieftains too in simulations of the Cold War conflict in the 80's, so much so, a Novel based on that simulated scenario was written, literally called "The Chieftains". Surprising that these were missed in Command.

[KLAB]

So the facility "Armored Plt (Chieftain Mk.9/11 MBT x 4)" UK is in the DB3K and CWDB.
So are multiple Leo's of many variants and users.

The armour is somewhat counterintuitively a "Facility".

Ground warfare is not an area where CMO has reached maturity YET and vehicles as single entities are evolving.

Any requests for something "missing" could be made via:
https://github.com/PygmalionOfCyprus/cm ... sts/issues

Regards
K

[kevinkins]

Command, in its current state, is hard pressed to simulate ground warfare in today's wars. You can try. And have a bunch of fun trying to do so. But i don't think anyone has produced a serious scenario where ground warfare is the focus in a realistic manner. But that is not the point of Command anyway. It is not Combat Mission; nor is Combat Mission Command. There are products that combine air, naval and ground. But that are not tactically based.

[tylerblakebrandon]

So the facility "Armored Plt (Chieftain Mk.9/11 MBT x 4)" UK is in the DB3K and CWDB.
So are multiple Leo's of many variants and users.

The armour is somewhat counterintuitively a "Facility".

Ground warfare is not an area where CMO has reached maturity YET and vehicles as single entities are evolving.

Any requests for something "missing" could be made via:
https://github.com/PygmalionOfCyprus/cm ... sts/issues

Regards
K

I assume the OP was looking in the new Ground Units index which is rather sparse compared to the older facilities index.

[FrangibleCover]

So the facility "Armored Plt (Chieftain Mk.9/11 MBT x 4)" UK is in the DB3K and CWDB.
So are multiple Leo's of many variants and users.

And my goodness, are they wrong. Second gen LLTV, HEAT and HE ammo, an odd conflation of two quite different variants. I'd put a DB request in if it mattered in real terms, but as you say, it doesn't.

OP, as long as you're concentrating on the air war, the details of the ground facilities really don't matter much as long as the numbers of them are about right. For Leopard 2s this is important: 4 tanks are for Heeresstruktur 4 (1980-1993), 3 tanks are for Heeresstruktur 5 (post 1993), so use the #531 Leopard 2 for your scenario and not the #2333 Leopard 2A4 even if the unit was equipped with 2A4s. Other than that they're basically just there to count how well the Soviets are doing at dropping bombs.

I would also caution, having seen your other posts, that if you're looking at F-4s at Zweibrucken, Hinds at Erfurt, Chieftains in I (BR) Corps area and Leopards outside of it you are probably biting off more than either you or Command can chew. This is what pretty much everyone does the first time they try to build a scenario, but The Entirety Of WW3 On The Central Front is going to take months to build and then run like a slideshow once you complete it. Take a look at the Community scenario "The Fighter-Bomber Aviation Regiment, 1987" (in the Community Scenario Pack, you can get it off the Workshop) for a really good, self-contained WW3 scenario that covers enough to create the flavour of operations without being too complicated.

[thewood1]

The road to CMO enjoyment is carcass-strewn the with new players' obsessions with huge and all encompassing scenarios. Start small and focus on depth first.

[kevinkins]

I agree with with that. Start small but make your scenarios require a bunch of tactical decisions from the the start. As the scenario moves along, throw in unexpected enemy reactions. But not so huge to destroy the scenario for the player.

[Kushan04]

The road to CMO enjoyment is carcass-strewn the with new players' obsessions with huge and all encompassing scenarios. Start small and focus on depth first.

Everyone on this forum could retire if we got a penny every time a new player said this.