Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Zipuli

  • Rank
  • Birthday 09/24/1983


  • Location
  • Interests
    Armor, killing armor
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The 2 Tunguskas that appear before the American choppers arrive? Mine shot down the choppers.
  2. A feedback thread about campaigns. All played on iron and WEGO. UKR: Mission 1 Nice movement to contact mission. My Oplots did most the work and thanks to the APS systems they field, none were lost. Because of this the scenario was quite easy. I guess this was intentional. The biggest challenge came from morale shocks on my side, if anything was lost. I really like the "soft parameters" in CM, and in this title the soldiers feel "real" under fire and when taking casualties. Some may see it as "being cowards", but in my opininion it's quite spot on, with the flaws and all. Mission 2 Very good scenario, except for the cheesy spawning of Russian reinforcements. I happened to had stormed the highground building complex on the right, and made a quick and decisive long flanking move from the right to the final objective. When almost in the objective, the Russians spawned inside my attack formation. That's poor scenario design in my opinion. Otherwise very enjoyable and challenging mission, which was quite easy to tackle thanks to the available arty and chopper support. Mission 3 I love these smaller scenarios. Found this one very challenging, though doable. My plan was to create my assault routes with the BTR-4 cannons, rather than using the approaches that would have lead to enemy ambushes. The enemy plan was good, with troops disengaging and pulling back in front of the attack. Mission 4 Too big to my liking, but challenging mission. I would rather have had 2 max coy size scenarios than one battalion size. In my opinion, the bigger the scenario, the worse it suits CM because the player has to micromanage everything. And I mean everything. Doing that to all those forces just isn't fun, especially under fire ;-) Overall the Ukrainian campaign felt short, but I liked missions 1-3, especially 3. It was easier than I would have thought, mainly because of the Oplot and APS. US: Mission 1 Loved the terrain. Overall the scenario was quite challenging, I had to restart it once due to (surprise!) a bad plan on my side. It would have been more realistic, if the enemy recon element was also moving. Being static they had the upper hand against my smaller recon element, that was relying on the single Bradley. Enemy plan was believeable and the fighting turned out very tense on my left flank, where I had my tanks and Bradley platoon taking the complex. Nice use of enemy reinforcements on the flanks. This one forced me to use more brains than muscle. Mission 2 This scenario was not up to par with the rest in the campaign. Using that small force in that big urban setting felt funny at first, especially as the enemy was already in the buildings. Using mines on junctions is of course SOP for any defending infantry unit, but having the minefields on tarmac (undetectable by my AFVs) seems odd. I would have bought it if the mines were on the gravel roads etc. In the end the mission was not that difficult, but the map/task size compared to force size was IMO too big. I did not enjoy the scenario because of that. Mission 3 Poking was interesting in design. Joint fires did cause a lot of damage for the russians, but I lost all my air assets in the end. That was because of the reinforcement Tunguskas that arrived later. I found this one the most difficult mission in any of the campaigns, and as a commander would have brought up a bit more forces to counter the threat of the enemy counterattack. Now even as I had good positions when it happened, I ran out of AT weapons and that caused most of my casualties. Mission 4 I deployed the defending units so that they were not hit by the preparatory barrage, and on the left I managed to hold the line and cause the Russian attack to stop. The following mop-up with the reinforcements was easy. The Ukrainian units in this scenario were a fun little touch. I dislike these huge factory complexes in CM as the infantry is not that good in urban warfare and close quarter combat. Mission 5 Hats off. This mission was not difficult because the enemy was too strong, but because they did a very smart ambush. For the start of the mission I kept picking off single targets, but the tanks hidden inside the forests came in just at the right time to cause some real havoc and "D'oh!" -moments. The tank company (?) counterattack turned into "laser warning - smoke - reverse" duel that lasted for 30 minutes. One T-90 managed to kill 2 Abrams with 1 shot, which caused loss of hair. Good scenario, and the size was barely manageable as most of the forces were tanks and they arrived on the map in packets. With this many tanks on map, I really really miss a proper tank AI, that could manage the single tanks like real crews: taking hull down positions on their own, backing up to turret-down when fired etc. Now the tank battles feel clumsy and unrealistic, when both sides just sit there and slug it out. The american campaign was mostly good, with enough challenge in the end. I was afraid it would be more like CMSF, but the challenge was quite balanced and there was the actual chance of losing, not because of lack of forces/support, but because of smart scenario design and believeable enemy actions. RU: Mission 1 Quite easy to punch through the screening line. Nice map. Enemy was very much scattered so it was easy to pick peace-meal. The T-72B3 coy was nice thing to have, but as it was not core force and never made another appearance, their casualties did not matter much. Maybe if the same coy would have been available later, with the losses carrying over...? Mission 2 Good atmosphere, very good map. The UKR chopper attack kept me on guard, but where are the AA assets when you need them? Mission 3 Excellent mission, with beautiful map. Finally they swim! The enemy force guarding the beach was very weak, but the stiffer resistance up on the plateau, using 100mm AT -guns was harder to crack, thanks to wisely laid out fields of fire. The Oplots that were so over powerful in the UKR campaign were cannon fodder against the T-90s on the high ground. I managed the crossing and taking of the beach objectives with zero casualties, which felt good. No-one would attempt such a crossing if there was stiff resistance up ahead. The dug-in Tunguska on the Plateau proved to be the most difficult opponent. They are maybe a bit too good against ground targets, spotting everything first and always firing firts... At least it felt that way. Mission 4 The blue side plan was once again very good, along with the map. The flanking move from left is very obviously stated by the map, so did just that and moved the support platoon to back left corned high-rise buildings, from where I was able to knock out some Strykers with ATGMs. The otherwise good enemy plan lacked a good counter to this maneuvre. The BTRs felt like paper vs any weapon from 12,7 to 40mm to AT weapons, which was quite frustrating. The enemy EW was good touch, along with their quick reaction indirect fires. With the EW on, I used most of my artillery in preparation and that seemed to be the right thing to do. Too bad the force in question was not part of the core force. Mission 5 This scenario once again was quite close to my limit in size, but good thing the forces arrived in packets. The fight for the church was intense and after that planning the mechanized attack was very challenging, thanks to the Abrams and Bradleys watching all the approaches. The amount of artillery made the scenario quite easy, thanks to possibility to lay down huge smoke screens, 203mm barrages and the Havocs taking out few of the tanks. Good call on the scenario designer to hide most of the vehicles so, that chopper attacks did not manage to take them out - missiles hitting trees or buildings. Map was good once again, with sufficient size to maneuvre, but compact enough. American artillery kept on raining quickly and accurately, and it caused most of my casualties. The Russian campaign was in my opinion the best and most enjoyable. Fighting the Ukrainians felt like a pushover from time to time, but going against the Americans, with all those small touches like EW felt like a true challenge, and true modern combat. The campaign scenarios were better in my opinion than the campaigns in previous titles. Maybe when there is no historic burden, it's easier to design good scenarios, or maybe you have just gotten better over time? The scenarios also felt interesting for the most part, not repeating the same stuff over and over (like CMSF:NATO felt to me). I just hate too big urban fights with too little forces and support. On the negative side, the campaigns were small, 4, 5 and 5 missions long. If I compare this to MG allied campaign (16+ scenarios), it feels even shorter. Most of the scenarios were quite large in size (campaign description "medium" seems to understate this), with a lot of forces. The UKR mission 3 was a very welcome change of pace. More of the smaller ones, please! Another negative that comes with the campaign lenght is that the same core units don't make appearance in many scenarios, and that there is no feel of achievement / defeat from branching. The manual describes the "NATO win/lose" branches and same for Russia, so why not utilize that fully in a longer campaign? Now all campaigns ended in a sort of cliffhanger - where I would have loved to see what next. I truly hope you make some sort of "modules" or packs to this title, with the focus set on new scenarios and especially campaigns. I think it's easily the best CM yet, with the most interesting setting. The forces feel different enough and they provide different kinds of challenegs to the player. The game feels "complete" even without more forces and sides available to the fight, though more is welcome here too! With the background story I would love to see more variety in the campaigns as well. Now all campaigns were focusing on attacking. How about a UKR campaign describing the deployment to east, and then the desperate delaying action in the beginning of the conflict with ever diminishing core force and the knowledge that if you don't do well enough, the NATO will not make it in time. Or the NATO trying to turn the scales in the situation where the Russian campaign ends? Please, include smaller scenarios in the campaigns as well - or maybe a smaller scale campaign all together. Thanks for the good hours of campaigning, hope there's more to come!
  3. ...except Ukrainian campaign, which is 4 missions taking place during single day. The scenarios themselves are not bad, but it's short.
  4. Attack on Zasissya Started as a good scenario, like the 1st in the campaign. Liked the map. But there is a small issue... I started by bombing the highground to dust with Oplots and 152mm, while 120mm struck the warehouses. Under the cover of the barrages I moved in from the left with one platoon of infantry to cover the warehouse and provide base of fire for later attack. Hinds kept killing stuff further away, but they didn't report any contacts. I then isolated the highground with smokescreen and moved in with 2 Oplots and 1 platoon of infantry. The few last surviving enemies were mopped and the highground was taken. Simultaneously along the highway my tanks and APCs kept killing individual BMPs and infantry teams as they were spotted. Even a T-72. Then I took the warehouses losing one APC with all infantry inside to a RPG team. So far so good. With no contacts whatsoever, and reinforcements arriving, I decided to flank from right. I went around the forest with the reinforcing 4 Oplots and infantry platoon, with 4 other Oplots providing cover. I approached the final objective from the right, with only few individual Russians trying to resist. Good thing the APS kept RPGs from hitting and the trailing APCs bombed the spotted targets with autocannons. Now, what really annoyed me... It's 0930, and out of nowhere a 2 platoons of BMPs and 2-3 T-72s (there is no AAR tool!) spawned 10 meters from my BTRs trailing the Oplots that have just reached the objective. 3 minutes of total carnage follow, with the whole infantry platoon blowing up inside their BTRs during the first 5 seconds of action. Lost one Oplot too, otherwise the enemy that materialized from thin air was obliterated. Russians surrender and I get a total victory, but I think the platoon that was lost will be useful later in the campaign? Maybe the scenario author didn't take into account either the amount of time it takes to finish the scenario or the possibility to quickly flank from the right? The enemy reinforcements spawned right in the middle of my force, which is a real immersion killer. In this particular scenario, the map could be extended further to have the reinforcements arrive from somewhere rather than spawn. Having them start where they spawned would make them Hind food if the player, like me, uses them early on to hunt for targets in the enemy rear. Maybe it will be different after a patch? This was just a quick feedback from the Ukrainian campaign. Finished 2 mission of it so far and also a number of single scenarios. Good stuff!
  5. Nope, but I occasionally enjoy other games too and some things they do better. And my masochism treshold is not as honed as yours... You guys did read the other stuff I wrote too? Reading between the lines it says CM is currently the best there is, but why not improve on the parts that would make the best infantry model (etc.) even easier to enjoy? Oh well...
  6. Having a door helps, as well as enough space in the trunk to hold all my vodka... Clearly you don't understand what I wrote, but I had it coming. Love the commitment! Reminds me of many cool religions of the world . All reviews I have READ, and I don't waste my time on basic US/UK BS of "video game journalism", do state that the underlying model is great (the car engine for you?), but interface is far behind the modern games (your car has a square for a steering wheel, and it does not rotate) and the information feed on the status of your units outside your FOV is lacking (your car has no speedometer) and the camera controls are way more restricted than in most games (your car has no rear view mirror nor rear window). I am not calling your car slow, but _______ (hint: it has nothing to do with colour, as there is only 1 REAL and serious enough colour and if you disagree, you're a goat... (pink)). Any other idiotic comparisons?
  7. But surely you are not saying your camera controls for example are one of the best in the market? The guy made good points, like why in the world is there no "music off" or master volume controls, all that I agree with, but also can live with because I like the product otherwise. Why must "serious games" be so damn serious that everything with a hint of "user-friendly" is a horrific act of blasphemy and must be avoided at all costs? I HATE the camera controls in CM, they suck, they really do... In CMx1 paths were shown on ground, not going through the ground like in CMx2... Back in the day CMSF came out I couldn't understand why in the world I couldn't move waypoints, but had to re-plot everything if I wanted to make some adjustments. It's 100% about user-friendlines of the interface, and surely it wouldn't hurt in case of CM either, correct? I would love to be able to fully focus on the tactical side and what is happening on the ground with my pixeltruppen, but a lot of the time is lost in trying to get into the angle where I can actually see stuff happening. Add to that the fact that if something happens outside my FOV (or I don't manage to see a flickering floating icon) I get no feedback of it happening, especially in the non-rewindable real-time play. I look left and on my right there is a Tiger II killing of some Shermans and infantry... I look back right and there is no indication of this except the dead stuff. It is frustrating and takes away a lot from the otherwise excellent game experience. Yeah, I am not serious enough a gamer, and don't know how to play REAL wargames... right? Well, no... What I am trying to say is, that having bought every single CM title since CMBO and enjoying them immensely (except CMBN somehow didn't hit the spot... though I bet Market Garden will do it for me), I cannot understand the attitude here on the forums that if something negative (and easily fixable, that would in no way jeopardize the tactical part of the game, but enhance it further!) is pointed out by the reviewers, it's shot down immediately by claiming the said reviewer is incompetent when it comes to tactical "serious" wargames. Seriously? Just saying... now back to Sicily, got job to do!
  8. The new artillery sounds rock... especially when buildings are hit! Cool!
  9. CV9030 has 8 seats in the back, the TC does not dismount. In 9040 and 9035 there is something taking up 1 seat place on the right side, in the rear of the compartment, depending on the model... Don't quote me on this, but IIRC for example the Swedish 9040 has some sort of cooking place there to make food inside the vehicle.
  10. Hey! Glad to see the new Syrian stuff too! Zil and Shilka are both good additions. Especially the Shilka can be devastating in ground fire support role against soft targets, no doubt about that. Hopefully we'll encounter those in the new campaigns! Syrian air support is not bad either, especially for 3rd party scenarios (they do not fit in the main campaign as the Syrian AF was destroyed already when the attack begun?). Anyways, hoping to see the NATO module soon (even if it doesn't have France in it as it says in the info about Syrian equipment )!
  11. I've shot through the firing ports in a few vehicles, but only because I could . It's not very effective nor accurate. But in some rare occasions it comes in handy - for example if the vehicle you're in gets immobilized and you are under (small arms) fire, you can cover the dismounting by laying suppressive fire (e.g. in BMP, one side fires, other dismounts, then other covers and so on). Other situation is where NBC weapons are used, you may want to sit inside the vehicle and fire out of it while charging towards the English Channel. The firing ports in some vehicles are not that quick to use either, and the firing arcs, as Steve pointed out, are very limited.
  12. OK, finished up on the southern route, playing on elite... UK casualties: 108 KIA, 119 WIA, 7 MIA, 4 tanks, 20 PCs, 4 other vehicles KO Syria: 1468 KIA, 649 WIA, 545 MIA, 62 tanks, 105 PCs, 66 others... Major victory! Though I must admit I restarted the police station mission as well as the one where RG comes at you, though in the beginning... I must say playing all the campaigns, the british one was the best. PROs: +beautiful maps +light force forces you to think more, and play more carefully +syrians seemed a lot more competent vs. what I experienced in the other campaigns, whether 1.20 improvement or mission design, still good +not too big battles +did I mention the maps? Beautiful! +time limits forced to take risks as well... CONs: -...but some missions had too few minutes in my opinion -if enemy air force is destroyed and so on, why doesn't the briefing tell you why there is no air support on a beautiful day when the republican party attacks... If there is no air in situations where really needed, at least tell the reason why not -the missions where enemy has million tanks and you have only 1 chally and/or no ATGMs... I do support the idea of having dire situations, but the 2nd time I destroyed a battalion with a single chally I felt there could've been another way to make the mission difficult than by making my lone tank run out of ammo... -the last south mission was pure cheesy and anti-chlimax: having enemies SPAWN in the trenches... If the game doesn't model tunnels, then IT DOES NOT MODEL TUNNELS... there is no way around it So all in all, very, VERY good campaign! I felt that the enemy was actually "being smart" forcing me to get into situations I really didn't need, like the ones where the jackals are ambushed or the scimitar had driven to a minefield... Even if the challenge came from very few blue units vs. A LOT OF reds, I felt like ****, this could happen, and the fights were really tough... I felt many times I am sooo going to lose, but afterwards saw in the AAR I lost 6 KIA and 12 WIA and killed over a 100... If the trend remains, that each campaign is better than the previous, can't wait to get my hands on the NATO campaign!!! Good job guys!
  13. I saw this titled "Danish Leo 1A5 shooting" some time ago...
  • Create New...