Panzer_Leader

I’ve bought the ASLAV-25 mug and 2x Leopard 2 mousepads (one for home and one for work) but, in terms of mugs, I’d love a Leopard AS1 as well. Some Aussie kit in scenic tactical settings would encourage me to buy some mousepad variants too. And, maybe some quality Steel Beasts key rings and bottle openers (e.g. metal and enamel) could make interesting additions around the house, like key rings for my boys for example, and who wouldn’t want to open beers for mates with a Steel Beasts bottle opener? I sure would!

Hi Mark Use of the M88 was derived from the resource below from PzBtl 911 which clearly shows M88 (Bergepanzer 1) silhouettes: Having said that, when I reviewed my own, more recently acquired, “source of truth” - Fahrzeug Profile 38, ‘Die Panzeraufklarungstruppe der Bundeswehr 1956 bis 2008’ - after your post, its own diagram of Heeresstruktur 4 on page 18 shows Bergepanzer 2 silhouettes. So, in the next version of the scenario (v2.2, pending) I’ll replace the M88 with the Wisent. Cheers

Great, thanks @TSe419E and @Nike-Ajax I’ll take a look at this over our long weekend. Cheers

I’m sure it’ll be different this time, everyone’s much more mature.

Seconded!

Have fun with this one guys. I’d love to take a look at the AAR to see how you go, if you don’t mind?

It won't stop there... I've got about 20 of them in my technical library to date.

I'm a huge fan of Tankograd's technical publications on vehicles and armoured forces of many nations represented in Steel Beasts, and consider them a key resource for scenario design, with many nuggets on vehicle subsystems and equipment, ammunition types and unit organisation. They have just published a new title 'Australian M1A1 Abrams', which people here may be interested in: https://www.tankograd.com/cms/website.php?id=/en/Australian-M1A1-Abrams.htm

Thank you TSe419E! I'll find and transfer that file tonight.

Hi Team I have bought a new gaming laptop and I'd like to copy across my Tank Range gunnery score data so I don't have to go through the Tank Range again on my new device. Unfortunately I don't know what the Tank Range gunnery score file name is or its location within the Steel Beasts file structure. Can someone please advise to expedite the process of copying my gunnery score data across to my new laptop? Thanks in advance!

My next new scenario will feature the M60A3, a tank I haven't been particularly interested in previously, but am now, so thought I'd read up in advance to understand the beast. I received them yesterday and will be tackling the following books in order: M60 Main Battle Tank 1960–91 - https://ospreypublishing.com/m60-main-battle-tank-1960-91 Cold War Warrior - M60/M60A1/A2/A3: The M60-Series of Main Battle Tanks in Cold War Exercises 1962-88 - https://www.tankograd.com/cms/website.php?id=/en/Cold-War-Warrior-M60-M60A1-A2-A3.htm M60 vs T-62: Cold War Combatants 1956-92 - https://ospreypublishing.com/m60-vs-t-62 That should get me in the mood!

Hi Team I've published the version 1.1 update to my most recent scenario, 'Combat Team Advance at Woodhill 1994', and it's available for download: Key changes in v1.1 include: - Fixed a bug which prevented 20 points for correct identification of tank type reinforcing QUINTUS within the H+60 time limit being received. - Red defensive mortar fire strengthened. - Improvements to Red reconnaissance patrol and counter-penetration force scripting. You should now receive full credit for correct identification of the tank type in QUINTUS, whereas previously you didn't, which led to lower scores than expected. Also, Red indirect fire is more aggressive, making maintenance of battle positions more challenging if observed. The Red reconnaissance patrol and counter-penetration force have a couple of extra permutations to their scripting to increase variation and potentially challenge. Successful completion of the mission is not necessarily less likely, but damage to vehicles and losses, and overall challenge, should increase. It's a company-sized Combat Team versus a platoon so it's not meant to be "fair"

Received, thanks very much Mark.

Thanks Mark, let's say it's a registered target but not FPF and time frame is late 80s to early 90s. I'd assume direct radio or wire comms between a forward FO / mortar controller and battalion / mortar CP. Not looking for sensitive info, just is my one minute assumption "good enough" or another timing "better"?

Thanks for testing @MAJ_Fubar What I'm keen to understand is how this compares to real life. Say, for example, your battalion has organic mortars 2-3 km away and an enemy arrives at a pre-plotted reference point, what's a realistic assumption for the time between the call for fire to be made and rounds to land on target? In a current scenario I'm updating, my assumption is one minute but I'm keen to test that with people who know more than I do!