Colonel,
Yes: "Replace one Sea Hurricane by one Fulmar to increase a little bit more the challenge," based on your results. But if I hear somebody else (not Masca) say "It's too tough, I couldn't meet this challenge, so I gave up on Turn 7," I'm blaming you!
No: "put this event (about planes) as the last event before starting the scenario" because I want the player to be thinking about those castles after the introduction and I don't want there to be too many introductory messages at once unless they are related. So this is fine as it is, except that I changed the text a bit:

- Screenshot 2.jpg (243.71 KiB) Viewed 1668 times
Yes: "We can still make one Sea Gladiator appear, yes, yes, we can!" I was juuuuusssst barely swayed by that last argument: "Coherent with the idea that they've used several old planes collected here and there... so, why any strict uniformity in there?" Else I was going to reject it as implausible that the RAF and RN would both have old Gladiators available and both would be willing to loan them to Free French volunteer pilots. But, maybe . . . yes, it could have happened that way . . .:

- Screenshot 3.jpg (361.98 KiB) Viewed 1668 times

- Screenshot 4.jpg (354.19 KiB) Viewed 1668 times

- Screenshot 5.jpg (322.8 KiB) Viewed 1668 times

- Screenshot 6.jpg (643.85 KiB) Viewed 1668 times

- Screenshot 7.jpg (350.61 KiB) Viewed 1668 times

- Screenshot 8.jpg (628.2 KiB) Viewed 1668 times
Yes: "The Vichy French DD "Le Chevalier Paul" isn't moving together with the supply ship!" I see what you mean. Allow me to don a very old hat and
mildly express my disappointment (how's that for putting it lightly?) over the failings in this game. In this editor, specifically. There are so many features that DO NOT DO what they are supposed to do but go unaddressed, year after year. Such as this:

- Screenshot 9.jpg (289.61 KiB) Viewed 1668 times
Why provide a feature to guard a unit when it doesn't work? I could start a thread of such stuff but why bother? Unless one of the guest designers notices it and is inconvenienced, it will get ignored. So yes, I fixed this, doing it another way. Although when I tested it as shown above, it did work but maybe it doesn't save well, who knows? This is why I keep everything as simple as I can. Too bad about that, though. Well, rant over. Not bad, eh? Let's put that hat back in the attic trunk.
No: "all the enemy fighters on the NE part of the map should be on their usual 'seek & destroy' AI setup." Now that we have made the torpedo planes module more challenging again, I am taking no chances with the nearby Homs fighters joining in the fray. Besides, it seems when you attack enemy fighters, they fire back.
No: "Have you put one unit of Somua S35 and one unit of Char B1?" I have seen no evidence of either tank in Syria and Lebanon. Besides, do you realize how
strong a tank the Char B1 was/is? Again, I don't want people saying "This was tough enough, then a Char B1 appeared and I had only a crappy Renault/Hotchkiss 35 and a couple of weak AT guns to deal with it, so I gave up after Turn X." You will see both the
Somua S35 and
Char B1 tanks in Tunisia (well, Char
D1's to be technical but we'll throw in a couple of B1's instead anyway).
Yes: "In any case, this scenario is . . . finished for good."