companyteam

Thanks for that. I thought this was the case.... I've done as you outlined on a couple of occasions but hoped in this case I could do something different.

Nope - As soon as the civ lose their guns they revert to "blind". Looks like I may have to do this the hard way.

Damn - Haven't tried that. Might have to do an "arm if" mission time >0 and discard at >10 - I'll give it a go.

Yeah - Only problem with this is that they're blind, and so have no "known enemy". Similarly, because they're blind, BLUEFOR won't automatically detect them. So..... If I want to have a scenario where BLUEFOR want to avoid a route that's got protestors, it won't work because they can't see them. And if I want protestors to move into an area but ONLY if BLUEFOR isn't there, then that won't work for the same reasons (but reversed) I can script it, but there's no way to differentiate between unarmed civilians and armed groups. And if I arm the civilians (so that they can see), BLUEFOR are potentially within their rights to engage..... I've looked and looked, and I don't think there are many options. I'm looking now to (fairly painstaking) script protestor movement by conditions ("no enemy in Zone 1" etc). Events don't work, as they rely on "known" enemy, which won't happen because they're blind....... and so the circle continues.

I am trying to develop several scenarios that include unarmed civilians employed as "spotters" and as protestors. My aim is to have these personnel either report sightings and movement (in the case of the spotters), or to be "white noise" for BLUEFOR, complicating their options. To do so I am creating small groups, ensuring all ammunition is set to zero, and setting status to "normal". When I start the scenario, all civilian groups revert to "Blind". A bit of experimentation seems to show that the only way to make them normal is to arm them. I'm trying to avoid that. Am I missing something? Is there a workaround that anyone's aware of? Thanks in advance

...and one I forgot - another boat....... A light(ish) landing craft able to transport an MBT or up to two or so lighter vehicles. Can be unarmed or lightly armed (HMG only).

Two things that I'd like to see: 1. Some form of representation of radars. Suggestion, at least as a first step, would be non-functioning VISMOD of: - vehicle/ground mounted GSR. Aim is to represent something like the MSTAR or equivalent - a box with a small rotating (?) dish approx size 60cm. It may be good if this could be modeled in similar fashion to RWS, and allowed as option on a number of vehicles, or "ground mount" in similar fashion to the current ground mount RWS. - vehicle/ground mounted "billboard" radar. Aim is to represent something like the "Zoopark" or AN/TPQ-36 - an approx 2m x 3m (?) rotating billboard. Ideally able to be mounted to variety of suitable vehicles such as MT-LB as an option (?), or alternately as a static/truck mounted container based system - mast mounted radar. Aim is to represent something like the Swedish"Giraffe" or Russian "Clamshell" - a rotating dish (?) of approx 1-1.5m on an extendable mast. Like the "billboard" radars, could be mounted to a variety of suitable vehicles, or alternately as a static/truck mounted container based system. I acknowledge that introducing any form of radar opens up a whole new can of worms, particularly in regard to a requirement (?) to be able to then detect active radar systems. I'd be happy with a simple representation at first, although: - the ground mount RWS will already autonomously detect and report enemy in line of sight - this could be sufficient of the vehicle/ground mount GSR. Could that detection zone be increased and the RWS report "unknown" contacts out to a reasonable range (10km?)? - could any system intended to represent a counter battery radar be made capable of detecting and reporting artillery/mortar/rocket lines of fire? 2. Boats. I'm trying to develop littoral scenarios, but am challenged by the absence of watercraft. I'd love to see an initial representation of: - small watercraft like RHIB. May be optionally armed. Should be able to to carry up to 10 (?) infantry. - Fast armed patrol craft. Something like the Swedish CB-90, able to represent (with a degree of squint) a number of similar sized craft. Armed with HMG. May be optionally armed with light missile systems. I also acknowledge that boats now introduces issues regarding sea states and relative depths of waterways - but in the short term, let's just ignore those..........

Guys - Thanks for the help on this. I appreciate it immensely. The skins all look amazing, and will greatly add to the effectiveness of what we're trying to achive.

Ack the scrolling, but it's still an extraordinarily painful process!

#3. Ability to set default route tactics. Current menus provide ability to set default actions at waypoints, and for Infantry in buildings. Route tactics (speed, formation, spacing, mounting/dismounting, retreat back) must be set individually. This is completely workable for the individual player who can tweak/amend on the go. To provide a "realistic" AI response, individually setting these parameters for each leg of each route is a time-consuming task. Suggestion: Provide option for default route tactics to provide for the "normal" parameters such as speed, formation and spacing, but also including options such as: - Dismount (under direct fire?) - Remount (when not under fire? After a delay?) - Retreat back (if under direct fire? If can see A Veh? If strength below "X"?)

#2. Added options to the "Under Direct Fire" logic choice. At the moment there does not appear to be anyway of differentiating between small arms (<12.7), medium calibre/autocannon (to approx 30mm) or Tank/ATGM fire. Suggestion: Add additional criteria. "Direct Fire" would encompass all. "Direct Fire - Small arms" would encompass all fire to approx 12.7mm. "Direct Fire - <30mm" (?) would encompass all direct fire less Tank and ATGM. "Direct Fire - AArmd" would be limited to Tank, RCL and ATGM fire.

As someone who finds himself making big (BG+) scenarios, most recently with multiple sides/entities, and mostly (apart from Blue) being run by AI, there are a couple of things that I'd love to see: #1. A change to the control logic choices when picking units. Choice now is "Unit [this]", or alternately to cycle through all of the units to find the one I want. This sometime means cycling through over a hundred, particularly if there are Infantry dismount options. This process is exacerbated if I'm trying to select a Company to travel a route (for example). In that case, I have to separately cycle to select Company HQ and each of the platoons. Suggestion: Can the unit [this] be broken down to a series of drop downs to select a choice of company or platoon or even section? Ideally, and as an example, by selecting "A Company", all company units would be selected by default. By selecting "A Company" and "1st Platoon", only that platoon would be selected. Conversely, leaving "Company" blank, and selecting "1st Platoon" would result in the 1st Platoon of every company being selected.

Thanks for all that. Tweaking orbats, maps and themes to achieve needs and results is sometimes the bane of my existence. As a quick fix, I've been reduced at times to throwing a group of deployable bridges onto the waterline, and hoping no-one asks too many questions. And although this is asking a lot, any chance of throwing the B-11 into your mix of skins at some future point?

Thanks for the advice. Only real concern/issue I have is the range of the fitted/available ATGM, but I should be able to work around that. Have to admit that I hadn't checked it either, as it was irrelevant for the scenario(s) I'm working on. But..... can confirm, is amphibious, though slow. And you get the normal (?) issues related to exiting the water.

Thanks for the advice, and I'll be looking closely at these. It's going to be a balancing act, I suspect! Cata - I notice that you've put in the Kurganets B-17 Bumerang. Is that to represent the ZBL-09? In that case, would/could the B-11 be representative of the ZBD 05?