[Grant1pa]

Imp and Shahadi, Thanks for the feedback.

Sorry about renaming the units. I've always done that in my scenarios to help me keep to the "script" I make during the initial design. When I design these, I do a lot of research on the TO&Es', terrain, weather, historical basis (or hypothetical basis), and then hard copy map the attack, defense positions, etc. It's exceedingly time consuming, but it helps me work around the quirks with the AI the game gives the OPFOR in advancing units, deploying dismounts early, etc.

Bad habit I guess to carry the designations over into the actual computer scenario. I can easily change that in future designs and I do understand how it can impact on game flow for someone who didn't design the battle.

I design the Russian Air support's targeting dependent upon the scenario. In the first one I presented (Bardufoss), a Spets FAC was there to target. In the last two, the FAC gets there late and targeting was to arise from the unit level. I'll work on that concept to find the balance between what's reasonable for the conditions on the ground combined with expectations on what's reasonable on the operational (prior intel) level.

The unit leaders were an error. Sorry. Working 10 hour watches and then trying to decompress with scenario building creates errors. I'll work that out better as I progress in the series, and then when I complete the 12, I'll go back on the three I've posted to date and resubmit them as the proofed scenarios.

I truly appreciate your feedback. I've been playing this game since the first month it came out with SSI. But merely designing games for yourself is a poor system at best. I'll get better. Thanks mates!

Grant1