Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/24/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Given the limited resources of Battlefront ( look how painfully slow is the proces of remaking SF ), I don't think Fulda is even on the horizon. But in some unspecified future - why not? It would sell like crazy.
  2. 2 points
    domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Have been thinking a lot about Opfor in general (sucker for an underdog), and how to approach this with CMSF 2, particularly from a PBEM standpoint, and trying to be somewhat competitive. Doing some experimenting with CMSF 1: The heaviest option for civilians in CMSF will allow Combatants (not Fighters (Mujahideen), but the guys in camo and jeans), and possibly VBIED (but not taxis) to remain invisible until very close indeed - it seems like if these are Move-ing along city tiles, these won't be spotted until around 2 action spots away. VBIED seem to have some degree of stealth, but nothing like as much as that. Usually that doesn't matter, since they cover a huge amount of ground pretty quickly. They are not spotted directly, but the soldiers will still call out "SPOTTED AN ENEMY UNIT", etc. - so there's some contextual clues. Occasionally they might pop up with contact icons, but still nothing they'll directly fire at. Originally I thought this was a problem, but on further thought I think this might actually be okay - the manuals talk about spotting unusual behaviour in civilians, dogs etc., so this could be put down to that kind of observation. I was also originally of the opinion that this "stealth device" approach to modelling insurgents wasn't terribly great, but it does seem to match up to the tactical considerations quite well - hiding amongst civilians to get to point-blank range, etc. Combatants do not have the firepower to go into a straight fight with any Blufor squad, at least with small arms, and they're mostly equipped with small arms alone. This means that I suspect the correct approach is to force them into something other that a straight fight. E.g.: The mission is to attack a US squad, inside a police station. The plan is to use spies to discover their location, infiltrate (whilst holding fire!) to locations surrounding the building, then give them a really good reason to leave the building - ideally a VBIED, but perhaps an ATGM, mortar fire, RPG volley, whatever. The Combatants can then open up whist he US squad is fleeing the building, giving them the advantage that they need. Any technicals are ideal here as flankers - probably not engaging directly, but cutting off retreat routes. The TC 7-100 series are the recent OpFor guides for the US. 2 and 3 are of particular use: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/TC_7-100.2_-_Opposing_Force_Tactics_(December_2011).pdf https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/TC_7-100.3_-_Irregular_Opposing_Forces_(January_2014).pdf The interesting things here are how generic these are (the same basic concepts work for Syrian Mechanised infantry battalion assaults, or a fighter group ambushing a few HMMWV's). This generally splits a plan into three sections: Active Element - This is the element that will make the assault/carry out the ambush/manoeuvre onto the target. Security Element - Early warning for the approach of reinforcements, possibly delaying or preventing this. Typically this might just be an RPG team, but could include spies, IED's, mines, ATGMs, etc. Support Element - C2, Direct fires, Indirect fires and mobility. Direct fires will be MG's, RPGs and maybe an ATGM. Mobility is obviously civilian transport. The "C2" part of that is worth some thought. Irregular forces don't get much in terms of equipment, and I can't remember if there's much in the way of radios in CMSF. The Spy in Passage at Wilcox (CMSF 2 Demo) definitely has a radio, so there's that. I do wonder if it's worth using teams in taxis as messengers, sharing the spy spotting information horizontally? In any case, it's going to be important to pay attention to force (cell?) structure here, and a reasonable percentage of your force allocation should probably go on spies (or at least dedicated to spotting Combatants), since you'll need all the help you can get. This does leave the Fighters in a slightly odd position. Without the stealth of the Combatants, they're mostly useful for having better equipment (including ATGMs), usually a little better training, and higher motivation. Whilst that means that they're a good choice for the actual attack, they don't have the same ability to get close without some thought - I wonder if they're best used from concealment as the assault element, after the support element suppresses the target? That would leave Combatants in the Security and Support roles mostly, I suppose. E.g.: The mission is to attack a US squad, inside a police station. The plan is to use spies to discover their location, infiltrate RPG teams (whilst holding fire!) to locations surrounding the building, then fix them in place - unleashing a volley of RPGs and MG fire from multiple directions. The Fighters can then debus from civilian transport and storm the building directly. One idea I did read in the above manuals which I think could work well in CMSF is using taxis to form an impromptu roadblock - using them to block in either end of a street so that exits are impeded. The taxis will be destroyed, of course, but if it keeps the enemy in the kill zone longer, so much the better.
  3. 2 points
    LongLeftFlank

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Of course, guerrilla-friendly terrain is in no way restricted to cities, even in the 'arid' Middle East. Consider a few square kms patchwork of vehicle-unfriendly marshy fields, dikes, walls and irrigation ditches unchanged since Assyrian times, with LOS broken up by unkempt orchards and palm groves, walled farmsteads and dense clusters of reeds. Look closely at the second map, or go to Google Earth. This is incredibly challenging ground to secure, even with overwhelming force available. Not quite bocage, but close. And as I've preached umpteen times, terrain is the "third player" in the game; it can equalize or cripple pretty much any force.
  4. 2 points
    domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Some maps from the above sources, describing the Active, Security and Support roles in different contexts: This is more than doable with the mechanics in CMSF - obviously the crowd/riot would have to be abstracted (flavour object? burning cars?), but it would work. As a scenario it wouldn't be all that interesting, obviously, but it's nice to know. More of a formal Syrian army hunter-killer ambush, but one that would work just as well with irregular forces. Given the obstacles, this wouldn't work in CMSF, but should work fine in CMSF (ignoring the basements). "Exit" objectives will help this kind of thing with CMSF 2 The above is probably what a typical irregular scenario should look like - attack a target, and get out before the reaction force shows up. Again with the "exit" conditions making this kind of thing possible now. One thing that is notable is how small these examples are - most insurgent-only scenarios should probably be really small - Blufor getting a squad or maybe a platoon at most. That's pushing the lower limit on scale for CM, but I think it's workable. The importance of Infowar elements in the above makes me wonder if there's something clever you can do with Spotting objectives.
  5. 2 points
    I would love to see a Fulda Gap game (as well as a 1973 Yom Kippur game as well) but am fully aware that development of either would not be possible for at least the next 5 years or so. I do hope that one day it'll happen though. As always, obligatory +1 for Fulda Gap
  6. 2 points
    Would rather have a CM_Afrika Korps than Fulda Gap... But, regardless of what you wish for, remember that it was only a few years ago that some of us were asking for CMSF2 and the "common wisdom" was "no way". So, have hope and keep plugging away...
  7. 1 point
    As I recall, Steve once said Battlefront was not interested in doing a game on something that never happened. Now some of you will say CMSF never happened, but at the time it was developed the setting was still in the future , so CMSF has been, as they say, "Grandfathered in" as an exception now. Black Seas is also still a future setting. Any way I just wanted to enquire if Battlefront's position on NATO vs Warsaw Pact has not changed and is likely to never be in the cards. There is still a lot to do for the existing families and completing the Ost Front after all which is a desire for Battlefront. And can I call for a bit of restraint in posting your favorite setting wish in this thread please?
  8. 1 point
    While waiting for the final release😉, i decided to create a menu mod for Combat Mission Shock Force 2. This will work for the demo as well. The file Includes multiples UI screens and a full set of module icons. This is my first mod, so please let me know what you think! Cheers, XACTO Download page: Xacto's “Chaos” theme Menu Mod for CMSF2
  9. 1 point
    Upon reading a little closer, it appears like you are using one two-man scout team. A bit of advice.. scouting is most effective using a split squad, each alternating movement, so you always have one team stopped and listening, also if they get into trouble, a full squad can get out of it easier than a two-man team. I almost never use two-man scout teams... I'm pretty sure that I cover this on my blog. Otherwise I appreciate how thoughtful you are being with your tactics in this game, scouting, maintaining a reserve, I'm so proud [sniff]. I won't give any advice while the game is ongoing., but I am watching and reading. Bil
  10. 1 point
    LongLeftFlank

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    I think the basic building blocks haven't changed since SF1: 1. put a huge vp penalty on BLUEFOR losses to drive realistically conservative behaviours (and increase RED degrees of freedom). ... Of course this also means you can't whack BLUE right away with an unavoidable hi-cas ambush (unless you provide a vp cushion that provides for it). I generally just assume that on turn 1 the Big Bump has already happened, humvees are burning, etc. 2. Suitably constricted/compartmented terrain where BLUE can't instantly converge/call in their overwhelming fire superiority (*yawn*). Hard cover remains undermodeled, so in the absence of robust strongpoints RED has got to be able to break contact and rally.
  11. 1 point
    domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Hidden information is always difficult in a wargame - even with "double blind" information like CM, you're still very aware that you're playing a scenario, and have an idea what to expect (you'll never guess what happened in the CMSF scenario "ATGM Ambush"...) Still, a combination of a city with a lot of Preserve objectives, objectives that have to be reached, a limited mission time and the Civilian density mechanics, you should be able to cobble something together. e.g., if the intention was to be an urban ambush scenario, then giving the Red player freedom of the map and fortifications (especially wire), and giving the blue forces preserve and touch objectives and a tight time limit (so that they really have to use vehicles to get to them all), you should end up with a reasonable chance at setting up an ambush. To make it more interesting, it might not be clear what kind of route is possible to travel on. For an "assault"-type scenario, having the blue forces split up over more than one setup zone, and giving Red an Exit zone should do the trick nicely - you'd get the basic "kill A and get out before B gets here" structure. Since the irregulars have so many disadvantages, it's tough to see how they'd cope in most meeting engagements, even in urban terrain. Offensive and defensive scenarios seem a lot more plausible in general. I'm also not sure about how well these will work in Quick Battles generally - none of the Red forces really work in "fair" fights to begin with, points-based force selection doesn't make it easy to create unfair situations, and the further down the chain you go, the worse it gets.
  12. 1 point
    You are doing a fine job... it's nice to see you doing some effective scouting. How many scout teams do you have out front? Bil
  13. 1 point
    Found this treasure trove over on Axis History Forum in one of the posts and that I'd pass it on to all you CM map makers. Scales run as high as 1:250,000, down through 1:100,000 and for 1943-44, as low as 1:50,000. https://maps.nls.uk/belgium/?fbclid=IwAR0jRdrXe-Z1-IPwQukTYL-QklIJTXrt6FvpG8nSh6M4GPl8jsB_Gx4NhmQ Regards, John Kettler
  14. 1 point
    MINUTE 4 My scout team is in position actively searching for the enemy. A second squad is arriving at the edge of the woods. Its two men scout team opening the way. I am planning to merge them next turn to create two teams. The last squad is still in reserve but I will move them a little forward to be ready for supporting the others. Here is the overall situation of my troops. Contact! The enemy has been spotted by my scout team just near the end of this turn. I expect the first shots next turn.
  15. 1 point
    domfluff

    Newbie DAR/AAR: ncc1701e vs JoMc67D

    Yup, under "menus" there's a button for "conditions" - that'll give you wind direction, weather, ground state, electronic warfare, whatever is appropriate.
  16. 1 point
    Oliver_88

    Newbie DAR/AAR: ncc1701e vs JoMc67D

    I consider another benefit to the orange axis compared to the green/red to be the existence of the road. You have not stated what the initial ground conditions are but from the images does at least seem to be raining. So that road could maybe be some use for the armoured car that he is going to be reinforced with. I am thinking about the possible risk of bogging that asset down when going via the red or green axis instead. Does not appear as though you have any road routes for when you are reinforced with yours?
  17. 1 point
    MikeyD

    Best order for building entry

    That's the advantage of using MOUT infantry in CMSF2. Each infantry squad comes with four demo charges.
  18. 1 point
    domfluff

    Newbie DAR/AAR: ncc1701e vs JoMc67D

    In general, my scouts in a german formation tend to be whole teams - if you split off a scout team, you end up with an unsplittable six man squad with one or two MG's, which severely limits your options - and your number one priority is maintaining as much freedom of movement (and available options) as possible. There are exceptions, but they're generally in a final push to contact - if I'm trying to get eyes-on to a known enemy, and want to maintain as stealthy an approach as possible, then I'll split off a German scout team. Whether to rush is a common problem with meeting engagements, and is an issue with wargaming those scenarios in general - ME tend to be non-historical, and the "rush to the centre" mentality is one that's seen far more commonly in gaming than it ever was in reality. It's just one of those things. If your opponent has charged into the centre, you might have a bad time - this is partly an issue with the time limit, and partly with the objectives. I'm (again, with full expectation of being badly wrong) expecting him to have taken the other objective by now, and for this to be mostly a stand-off over open ground. That means that the decisive point will be whose armoured car gets destroyed first - which is a fight you should be equipped to win. If so, then you should be able to mop up fairly safely from outside PIAT range and win a minor victory.
  19. 1 point
    MINUTE 2 Applying what I have read on @Bil Hardenberger's blog (http://battledrill.blogspot.com/2015/03/rifle-platoon-leader-platoon-scouts.html), I am moving a scout team to contact with the rest of the squad behind. The overall situation at the end of the turn. The progression is slowly on going. I am taking my time not rushing toward the houses. Perhaps it will be a mistake, will see. So far, I have no sign of the enemy.
  20. 1 point
    stikkypixie

    Best order for building entry

    One word. "Blast" :)
  21. 1 point
    Euri

    Best order for building entry

    It better to resist the temptation of entering and clearing buildings. Better bring the building down with tank and AFV firepower.
  22. 1 point
    domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    How close they managed to get before being seen (the right-most squad is Move-ing one square forward)
  23. 1 point
    Would want more information, but allow me to blunder into an uninformed opinion. Those objectives look too widely spaced to contest with one platoon, and there's also no easy way to deny the enemy manoeuvre and therefore gain an advantage in mobility), since the map appears symmetrically split with that ridge line. Therefore my basic scheme would be to move the platoon to take the more valuable objective (** usually indicate VP), expecting a close range firefight on that objective. That will leave a few possible scenarios: - Your opponent will do the same, and you'll slug it out at close range (you should have an advantage here) - Your opponent will do the opposite, and you'll defend the more valuable objective. - Your opponent will spread out, and you'll defeat them in detail. You don't have the mobility or fires to do much that's more complex than that - advancing through the (possibly) covered approach on your right and taking that town seems as good a plan as any.
  24. 1 point
    db_zero

    BMP 1p (4c) Main Gun

    Thanks for the links and info. After years of playing CM and over 100 h2h games there is always something new to learn about. Combat Mission and Total War with mods are the 2 games I would pick if I had to choose just 2. Wouldnt want to be forced to chose just 1.
  25. 1 point
    Nefron

    BMP-3 commander: how to?

    I understand that perfectly, and I consider this game to be very heavy on micro, and I love it. I know that it's expected of me to micro units into little squares and plan each move in details, etc. It's the situations in which some of these little details matter very much, and I'm powerless to influence them that are the problem, but for some reason that should be handled by the AI, and it frequently gets handled in a completely unrealistic and immersion breaking way. I don't understand why aren't you embracing the micro all the way. Why is it OK for me to place an IFV in an exact spot, but it's not OK to tell it to use ATGMs, etc. If I have a situation where my two man Javelin team easily spots stuff on the move, but cannot fire on it because they immediately go prone and lose LOS, I consider that to be broken. I have a realistic and reasonable intent, for them to be in overwatch on that hill, that the game simply won't let me express. That is not my fault. This is a specific example that stuck in my mind from a user created mission (Myrne roadblock or something). I understand that you are resource constrained, and being a developer I know that it's never so simply as adding a button or two and calling it a day. However, I think these problems need to be addressed, and that letting the player decide is going to be the easier way. I don't think any amount of tweaking the TacAI is going to produce much better results.
×