I'll be the one doing the interview, so leave any thoughts here and I'll aim to get 'em answered.
I'd like to jump on my hobby horse and bang my drum about an incredibly complex topic for at least a couple of sentences, not that what I have to say will influence them one whit nor would it be reasonable for me to expect that.
Taliban operations are financed from the growing and harvesting of opium crops. Locate and destroy these fields to cripple the opponent's resources
While this is true, it's also how the local farmers earn their living, and seems disingenuous to pretend this issue only affects the Taliban. To repurpose a pithy quote I picked up from a book on the war on cocaine in South America into a gentler point: Local farmers can earn a decent living growing opium, and resistance to switching crops to something that certainly will not pay as well, and which may require more labour, which they will then have to transport in trucks they don't have, down roads that don't exist, to markets that don't exist, to sell to customers who don't exist, is perfectly understandable. Destroying crops is going to hurt the Taliban's finances but also
relations with locals, and also, indirectly, relations with the ANP and to a lesser extent the ANA, who take bribes to do the "We didn't find any opium crops."/"We found those opium crops and burned them, honest." bit.
I do love counter-insurgency games, but they do need to remember that it's not a simple bad guys vs good guys issue. There has to be nuance, otherwise you're just back to two forces pushing each other around a conveniently empty map.
Easier questions: map sizes, combat depth and procedure, sandbox mode like V65, frequency of random events.