Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/12/2018 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    DerKommissar

    Concept: Forum Operational Campaign

    The idea is to make a turn-based (WEGO) operational layer campaign here on the forums (or potentially a different platform like roll20). It will be on a square or hex-grid graph of a map -- depending on game and theatre. You will be able to make your own units (companies or platoons) and move them around once per turn. Whenever two units (or more) on the map bump into eachother, the GM will post parameters for a Quick Battle you can put into your game and play out. The player (s) then would report the results of their Quick Battle and the operational map would be updated accordingly. A turn can be a week, or bi-weekly, to allow everyone to declare their move, play their Quick battle and report their results on the forum. I had this crazy idea while messing around with my roll20 RPG campaign. Instead of making a character sheet, one could make a company/platoon sheet. Recently I saw a lot of people wanting an Operational Layer and someone even mentioned a system that they came up for themselves. It's all still very much in concept phase. At first, I was thinking the campaign should be cooperative and all enemies be managed by GM and be played by AI in-game. Though, I'm sure a lot of people would like to play OPFOR and provide an opponent for those who do not enjoy sparring with AI. I'm curious what you guys think! Interested? Not interested? Comments? Concerns? Ideas of your own?
  2. 2 points
    Sitrep @ 9:46 Wow, I am amazed by what's happening right now. The way my Marines handle the firefights is just majestic! Even though quite a lot of them are regular level troops, and many being morally depressed (cautious or scared, borderline panic). 1st Platoon entered the Obj Vasquez compound without any resistance. No contacts so far. But their AAV was attacked by an RPG guy from the Obj Phelps. The RPG gunner missed though, and was killed by AAV's quick return fire. The vehicle commander was up on the turret, unbuttoned. 2nd Platoon meets very small resistance as it moves through Obj Rick. Just a couple of guys that were dealt with surprisingly well at a disadvantageous situation for my Marines (they were out in the open, while the enemies were inside the building and fired at them at almost black range. But the Marines killed both and then cleared the house completely. Remember that compound at Obj Jones that my LAR Platoon dismounts were about to storm? The one where I created additional entry points in the walls. I am specifically forbidden to fire indiscriminately at the buildings if I'm not fired upon from them. So I was not firing at the buildings, just made some holes in the walls, nothing dangerous, let me assure you. However, the enemy might not even be aware of this. He opened up early and fired at one of my LAV-25s. It was a near hit (not direct). Small damage to LAV's wheels, but everyone's OK. LAV commander was unbuttoned when the RPG hit nearby, and he immediately closed the hatch afterwards and directed the gunner to open up on the building with 25mm. And I think we've killed the guy who fired the RPG. Also, now I can freely hose the building with lead before entering. Now unto the most action heavy part. 3rd Platoon's adventures. Remember the plans I wrote on the previous page? So far I'm sticking to it. 2nd and 3rd Squads have reached the northern end of the planned route, the one with a burning car in the yard. They've uncovered multiple enemy groups and are in the middle of a vicious firefight. They are to stay there and will cover 1st Squad's movement. 1st and Assault Squads are crossing the road, moving to the southern side of the Obj Phelps. They will blow a hole in the wall and will proceed clearing the southern side of the Obj Phelps. It might take a while, and I'm afraid that I'd need additional manpower to be sent to the southern side, but we'll see. The fighting is going very well so far. I'm proud of my little pixeltruppen. 2nd & 3rd Squads of the 3rd Platoon exchange lead with the enemy:
  3. 1 point
    Falaise

    CM:BN Screenshot Thread #2

    Bonjour, full in the gun at 550 m ! i do the same face that gunner
  4. 1 point
    domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Setting a 1,000m arc is a reasonable plan. I rarely directly target them, since relying on the turn rolling over at the right point can be a problem. I think the real point with ATGM's is to pre-plan the kill zone, the primary position, and a secondary position with covered approach route - ATGM's broadcast their position all over the place, so breaking down and changing position after a single shot seems like the best SOP, especially if that shot is successful.
  5. 1 point
    IanL

    11/11 Never forget!

    My son and I were at the ceremony today. In front of us are the RMC cadets and in front of them are the veterans as the wreaths are being layed. We are grateful.
  6. 1 point
    A great first game for CM III?
  7. 1 point
    Rodger that. +1
  8. 1 point
    Everytime when I bought a computer the last 18 years, the first and most important thing is that Combat Mission is running smoothly on it. I love to plan, see the replays and the unbelivable variation in these games. Best thing since I played wit 1/72 Airfix figures in my youth.
  9. 1 point
    I would really like to see a Fulda Gap game show up sometimes. It should present the time of the seventees, because it would be very different to WWII and not showing all the software driven gadgets we see at CM:BS and CM:SF. There would be a very variable terrain, lots of interesting equipment of many different nations and lot of opportunities for add on modules. Even if it takes some years from now, it should definitively be on the roadmap. For me a must buy. And, additionally, many German terrain items could be reused from the end of WWII module already planned. Man, I would love to initiate a counterattack using Leopard1, HS30, recon with Hotchkiss SPz Kurz or Luchs and all this other fancy equipment against hordes of Sovjet tanks.
  10. 1 point
    A couple of you asked about the map I mentioned making. I didn't ignore or forget those comments, I was swamped with some unpleasant stuff and was only able to reply to posts while at work, where I don't have CM. 😝 I never uploaded the map anywhere. I don't have a login for uploading sites; I never thought anyone would care about my maps. Here are a couple of screenshots - they don't do it justice, the topography is tricky, with gentle and steep rises and folds in the land, vegetation variation, impassable terrain, and towering over the village, a mountain, hence the map's name, "Black Mountain"
  11. 1 point
    Just came across this - a podcast with Cpt (now Lt Col.) Christopher Bronzi on the events of April 6 & 7 2004. It covers specific events then as well a bit more wide ranging topics for the stuff soldiers and small unit leaders face in combat. http://allmarineradio.com/2018/02/28/battle-study-urban-combat-in-ramadi-2004-ltcol-chris-bronzi-usmc-2/
  12. 1 point
    Whenever I played against a new (to me) player, I would usually lose the first two or three games (I'm not actually a very good chess player), but after that I would win every single game, no matter how many games we played. Once I had witnessed a player's style, I would intuitively know how to beat him. There was one young man that I nicknamed "the Butcher". He could never pass up the opportunity to capture one of my pieces. Once I figured that out, I could maneuver him into whatever position on the board I wanted just by offering him a strategic sacrifice or two. I could usually checkmate him in half a dozen moves, sometimes as few as three. Fortunately he didn't seem to mind losing too much. I began to feel a little guilty about exploiting his weakness and explained to him the error of his ways, but he never changed. Michael
  13. 1 point
    Sitrep @ 9:43 So far so good. For the most part of the mission, my Marines were able to achieve local fire superiority upon enemy contact. Almost each time. I intend to keep this trend until the end of the scenario. The pockets of resistance here and there that I encounter are quickly dealt with, all thanks to Marine TO&E and target area isolation. I can target most of the buildings from multiple sides at the same time, and most of the outer ones with heavy weaponry. So as soon as the enemy is spotted, there's little chance for it to escape. Elements of the 3rd Platoon on point: Encounter with survivals of the previous firefight: In the mean time, 1st Platoon is seconds away from storming Obj Vasquez: 2nd Platoon assembled and lined up along the Obj Rick: Fire & maneuver of the 3rd Platoon continues: LAR Platoon's LAVs create an additional entry point in preparation before storming one of the Obj Jones compounds:
  14. 1 point
    (1). Make your mind up. (2) It isn't complex for regular folks, the mechanics are as described in the manual in the same way that game play mechanics are described. If you can play the game to a reasonable standard (and I'm a pretty average player), then you are more than capable of using the editor competently. (3). I provided input to this scenario as stated below: http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-black-sea/cm-black-sea-add-ons/tactical-operations-center/ (4). You have been complimentary and constructive about released scenarios. I certainly recall some feedback discussions that we have had regarding some of my work and while we disagreed about some aspects, I accepted some of the points that you made and admitted that I could have made improvements in accordance with your suggestions. However, you repeatedly comment in threads about the absence of things that you would like to see in scenarios or what might be a great scenario idea. Sometimes you start such threads. In this case, you are bemoaning the absence of certain vehicles that are included in CMRT but are not well represented in scenarios/campaigns. In other cases your two most wanted seem to be map size and reconnaissance missions. Your comments are not feedback to individual scenarios or campaigns - they are, as you have put it 'why doncha?' This is a reaction to a circumstance which you can control. You have access to a scenario editor. You want scenarios with … (insert desire). Your solution to 'why doncha fix your own car?' I'm guessing is to take it to a garage and pay a mechanic to fix it. Likewise, the other 'doncha' stuff in your post I'm guessing requires paying specialist builders, gardeners, chefs or whatever. If I'm right then these are great solutions and, my response to the mechanic who asked me when I took my car in for repair 'so what's wrong with it then?' was 'I've no idea, you're the mechanic'. A couple of hundred quid later, the problem was solved and I have no idea to this day what the problem was. Of course if your car broke down and you couldn't afford to chuck money at the problem then your solutions would be different: Learn how to fix your car. Walk/use public transport. Move house. I'm sure there are more potential solutions but whatever they are, they will only be solutions if you have the resources. In this case though, with the exception of Battlefront releases, you don't have the option of chucking a few quid/bucks at somebody to create the missions you desire so your options go back to those in my original post. As you quite correctly point out, good scenario design does involve effort to get right. Due to the effort required, most ,if not all, scenario designers are going to design scenarios that interest them. They are unlikely to devote time and effort into the editor just because Erwin or anyone else thinks it would make a great scenario idea. The upshot is that it is pretty pointless making general comments like 'designers tend to use only a few of the available vehicles - we see the same dozen or so, and that's all'. As we have been over this ground previously I will close with 'hopefully you (finally) get the point and we don't have to go over and over and over this same old tired issue'.
  15. 1 point
    Yeah, I'd go even a step further. What makes a map truly great is the story behind it. Most places on earth, especially places of some strategic value, have a lot of history. From signs of the native population that hastily left their homes, to previous failed offensives done by your precursors, I want my battlefields to have character. Even on emptier maps, it's cool to see pathways that people used to walk in the forests or even trench systems with shelters, storage and improvised out houses. It gives context to the challenges you face and makes them that much more relevant and interesting. For this reason, I am horrible at map design -- making maps that have too many things going on but are a nuisance to the player. It's why those newfangled Fallout games are so popular... the places tell more compelling stories than the plot.
  16. 1 point
    Building off Bulletpoint, I think the aspect of having to make a less then perfect decision amplifies that satisfaction even more. The terrain of a map plays a huge role in this, because it is the one thing you have no influence over. Real life commanders never had the perfect support by fire position or covered routes into the enemies rear, they had to deal with the hand their were dealt, both on offense and defense. The terrain was as much of an enemy sometimes as the man on the pointy end of your rifle. It's why the first step of almost any military planning process is to analyze the terrain. The great captains of military history are as renowned for their ability to read the ground just as much as their ability to lead men. "Terrain walks" are a staple of any military staff ride. All this to say that when you "bake in" terrain, you are taking away a big chunk of the decision making process. When you bake in these convenient support by fire positions, the decision is no longer "where on this map should I place my support by fire position?", but instead "should I go to Position A, B or C?". On a "natural" map, maybe there is no tenable support by fire position. The player must adapt. Maybe they utilize more of their artillery up front to compensate. Or choose to utilize a smoke screen. Or one of a hundred other ways a player can utilize the terrain and their understanding of tactics to achieve their mission. Offering up a player a series of built in options is no longer a tactical game, but a "choose your own adventure". It's why I'm deeply dissatisfied with games like the new X-Com or Unity of Command - the game offers up to you a series of baked in options, of which only a few actually work. Another factor of tactical appeal is that the closer a map is to realistic terrain, the more likely you are to utilize realistic tactics. Half the fun of Combat Mission is pretending you're a WW2 commander and understanding why they made the decision they did. Check out combatintman's excellent play through of one of my scenarios here: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120527-no-plan-survives-first-contact-with-the-enemy-planning-tutorial/ He dives deep into an excellent analysis of the terrain I provided and builds a plan that I never even envisioned while designing the scenario. That's exciting! That's what real commanders had to do! Not solving a puzzle the designer offered up to you. Later in that thread I also talk about how I designed the map and more about my philosophy on scenario design. As for why sometimes *too* realistic is a bad thing, I imagine a faithful re-creation of Ardennes style woods would result in little decision making beyond putting your soldiers in a line and waiting until they step on a mine or take a bullet to the face from 15m away. Realistic terrain yes, but not very fun. Also, a personal pet peeve of mine - zig zag roads. Yes, the "real thing" has a road branching straight off at a 67.76 degree angle from the main junction, but if I try to replicate that in Combat Mission with the draw tool, it will create a mess of zig zaggy road sections. If you now try to put a hedge or forest along that road, it will inevitably create a break in LOS on what is, in real life, an arrow straight road that just happens to branch off at a weird angle. The resulting CM recreation looks odd and often plays odd.
  17. 1 point
    I don't think it has ever happened in Black Sea, but it happened once or twice in Battle for Normandy when I got ambitious and ordered some of my men to go over and close with the enemy. Turned out the Germans had pistols and were willing to use them. Michael
  18. 1 point
    Sitrep @ 9:31 So there were at least two guys in that ditch. The first one (who ran away) seems to have died on a previous turn. On this turn, his buddy tried to get another shot off, missed by a couple of meters. The AAVs cut him down with 40 mike mikes and M2s... 2nd Platoons have cleared 2/3 of Obj Morty. Here's the contested part (with like 5 dead dudes seen on the roofs) that the Marines are about to storm: In other news. Obj Drake is now fully secure! Do you feel secure? I'm sure 1st Platoon is filled with great joy by now. Somebody should tell them they gotta take the Vasquez also. And provide some overwatch for the 3rd Platoon. Speaking of 3rd Platoon. Here's a preliminary movement plan I came up with: Since there's little chance that 3rd might be able to reach Obj Jones in time, LAR Platoon, with only 4 dismounted teams, can try and grab one or two buildings there. Like these two. Should be enough to seal off the northern entrance to the village and provide some sort of control over it. Headcount tracker says I'm at 77% manpower. Which is below 80% required from me by the briefing. But this is MOUT. In MOUT, you should always expect at least 50% casualties. Overall picture:
  19. 1 point
    Sitrep @ 9:30 3rd Platoon is as lucky as the 1st it seems. The route I showed you.. There are these trenches and canals that I can't control without populating them with infantry. I had many different vehicles on overwatch in the area, but it wasn't enough.. So the good old Murphy's law works again. The route I expected to be the most secure... wasn't secure. The front line that I held was broken & infiltrated in exactly the area I used for 3rd Platoon's insertion.. The results.. a destroyed AAV, multiple casualties, and a premature deployment of the 3rd Plt, which means the Marines now have to go even further.. And it's 30 minutes till the end of the mission. I don't think I'd be able to reach Obj Jones. Maybe with LAR Platoon...? But unlikely.. 3rd Platoon's AAV takes an RPG hit: The perp, running away, being chased by 40mm grenade explosions:
  20. 1 point
    Sitrep @ 9:26 1st Platoon needs to clear one more row of buildings before declaring Obj Drake secure, but I feel like there's nobody there left. I'd be careful anyway. 2nd Platoon has cleared 1/3 of Obj Morty. 3rd Platoon is en route to Obj Phelps. LAR & Scout Sniper Platoons have nothing to report. One of the two Company HQ-assigned AAVs got stuck dead in the mud in the dried up creek @ SE corner. I ordered the crew to dismount and head to 2nd Platoon's position to treat the casualties. Wonder if I'd get the AAV as "killed" in the end during the scoring. It's mission killed and won't move anyway.. 3rd Platoon passes by 1st Platoon's AAVs that overwatch the Obj Drake: Elements of 2nd Platoon react to contact while clearing Obj Morty:
  21. 1 point
    As I wait for my partner to send the next turn, I wanted to say a few words. First, huge thanks to @akd and @GreenAsJade for their outstanding work! I'm using @akd sound mod for greatly improved sound effects and @GreenAsJade's CM Helper (via Dropbox) to facilitate smooth PBEM experience. Thank you, people! It wouldn't be as great without your work! Second, I want to talk about building clearing procedures that I use. There are two general ways I execute an entry: No enemy contact. Hunt command with reduced range (200-300 meters max) and 360 firing arc. I suspect that Hunt makes units less visible/noticeable than if they were running, and more prepared to return fire than normal Move. That presents a problem - a team on Hunt order may stop when fired upon, and the area they've stopped could be exposed and deadly to stay on (example). Known enemy position. There are two ways to approach an enemy position (a building in our case): a) Using a covered route (that does not expose your assault team), b) Using a more direct route that makes you place the assault team in front of the windows. In either case, great amount of suppressive fire is required. When coming from a covered route, you can stop outside the house/room and use delayed attack so that your assault team throws in some hand grenades. But then it'll have to run inside, preferably. If you can't approach the target building from a safe direction, you'll have to run either way. But that's the problem. Running into a room with enemies is also very dangerous. Sometimes more than giving a hunt command (unit will stop right away). What is your preferred way of moving into the buildings? Sitrep @ 9:23 Marines of the 1st Platoon win a firefight against several enemy groups while clearing the Obj Drake. Only one team was moving into a new building and made contact across the yard, so all the other teams were able to respond with fire immediately, and from multiple angles. Also, 1st Platoon may be seriously battered and understrenghted, it's still alive and kicking enemy's arse.
  22. 1 point
    Sitrep @ 9:22 1st Platoon, slowly but surely, moves forward to secure Obj Drake. Resupply is almost complete, though not without some quirks. 2nd Platoon got a new casualty the moment the first element reached the outer fence of Obj Morty compound... Nothing I can do about it. The route for 3rd Platoon's movement is still not secure enough, so I wait before committing them. LAR Platoon is on the move. I spread everyone out along the northern front, leapfrogging forward. Also ordered the LAV-25 crews to stick their heads out for a bit to check out the surroundings. The northern flank presents a dilemma. On the one hand, there's ~80% flat terrain, more suitable for mounted forces, and making dismounted recon elements very vulnerable. On the other hand, there are ditches and tree lines capable of hiding enemy infantry and AT assets. The ideal solution would be using LAVs on flat terrain while sending dismounts over ditches and tree lines, but that's not always possible due to some unique terrain features. So yeah, I kinda struggle to advance as quickly as I anticipated. Scout Snipers have reached the Point 37 near Hill 42 (SE corner of the map). I'm not 100% sure if I should send them further north to the low ground area, or keep them at Point 37 hill where they'd have better overview of the area. Enemy HQ combatant at Obj Vasquez managed to survive the Javelin strike! The fella lying next to him is supposedly the RPG-29 gunner. 2nd Platoon's being hit: LAR Platoon leapfrogs eastbound on the northern flank:
  23. 1 point
    Sitrep @ 9:19 I've got two Javelin teams placed strategically at high ground in order to be able to quickly hit High Value Targets as they appear (also for better spotting). The room that the RPG-29 gunner appeared the last time in is the same room an enemy HQ combatant have run towards/into. So I ordered an immediate attack on that room with a Javelin missile. The room has collapsed. In other news, 1st Platoon got another casualty during resupply... 2nd Platoon is still facing opposition in the first line of houses near the trenches but is ready to move into Obj Morty any minute now. Enemy HQ spotted @ Obj Vasquez: 2nd Platoon receives fire from the buildings @ Obj Morty: Javelin attack on enemy HQ & RPG-29 position: 1st Platoon is trying to resupply during combat, but can't find a better place for it. There's a large ditch on the left side of the road, and no way to drive into the alleys on the right side. So the resupply has to be done right in the middle of the street.
  24. 1 point
    Apocal

    Hammer's Flank Crossing the River

    JasonC doesn't like scenarios where the player is railroaded (especially when he is railroaded in dumb ways), where the scale goes beyond a reinforced company, where the actual relevant tactics and techniques are distorted to make a scenario more action-esqe. Given the delay involved (~20 minutes) and lack of TRPs for the attacker, it was pretty clear the intent was to use the rocket battery as the player's personal prep fire, particularly since the ammo provided is somewhere south of half it's normal load. IIRC, the briefing said as much. But given that, it is lackluster at the task; even putting the rocket barrage directly on target doesn't appreciably degrade the totality of the defenses. Even if you inflict casualties, it isn't as if the scenario designer actually degraded the German personnel numbers in each team so what is fielded still has manpower depth enough to endure and stay intact. The suppression doesn't last longer than a minute or two, so it is basically irrelevant. Odds of a player arriving just after the fifteen minute mark (longest delay possible for a fire mission) in this scenario are very low. It's been years since I played it, but I think the mortars have limited ammo as well, even though you can't use them for prep fire since they are MIA at scenario start, only coming in at (I think) the five minute mark for whatever reason. At any rate, they are incredibly difficult to employ effectively, due to the lack of map-fire ability in CMx2 and basically no good overwatch positions, which means you're exposing a unit leader (or the singular green or conscript FO) to whatever nastiness you require mortars to deal with. The first mission a monster in size terms. Some people enjoy them, some don't. I thought that was a bit annoying in the stock campaign just because I prefer real time and it is well beyond anyone's ability to manage played that way. If you're into splitting squads to maximize infantry performance, it goes straight into near-unplayable territory even for WeGo; each turn for me took something like a half-hour of tweaking, especially once I realized it was a shooting gallery for one side if I didn't carefully echo-locate each of the backfield ATGs and try to hit them with mortars before they took out my supporting armor. The careful approach doesn't work very well; you cross right in sight of the deep German backfield defenses and a few close-in machine guns in some serious chokepoints, all of which have TRPs set on them. The end result is that the Germans get a free harvest of kills wherever you cross and if you choose a single crossing point, they get a series of them with their artillery, which out-matches the player's by a fair margin. So yeah, I didn't really like the scenario that much either. Whenever I replay the campaign I just hit cease fire during the setup phase and save myself the aggravation.
×
×
  • Create New...