Jump to content

Combatintman

Members
  • Posts

    5,064
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    68

Everything posted by Combatintman

  1. Well put it like this, CPT Anglen's annual performance report won't look good if the Bn CO gets wasted on his watch and in his AO.
  2. @MOS:96B2P - nice screenshots mate ... are you comfortable with your timelines though?
  3. It would have been a close range shot though - I've walked that bit of dirt and fields of fire down that road close to the viaduct are not that great.
  4. That was my first thought and is probably right - I have never seen CM get its sums wrong.
  5. Mr President, we've conducted rehearsals, developed the Intel and here is an initial draft briefing slide showing the detail requested. Looks good although I see the force ratio is near parity. Sir, one US Navy SEAL is worth 30 of those guys, it won't be a problem. Tom, that may be so but what else is out there? Sir that will follow soon.
  6. It's why I so wanted to bring this mission to CMSF. Should be heaps of downloads when its released.
  7. @MOS:96B2P the 25 armed individuals is a design decision. Basic research indicates that there were 22 or so in the compound but some were women and children. You will see that I've had to play fast and loose with facts to make this a playable mission. The important enduring criteria have always been - 'is this plausible' so in my view 25 armed (fiction/design decision) vs a mix of 22 armed and unarmed (fact) is not that much of a stretch.
  8. Freezers aren't an option in the Flavor Object menu ... so I had to compromise
  9. 'Mr President Sir, we have put this briefing packet on Osama Bin Laden together'. 'Ok Tom, give me what you've got'. 'Good work Tom, just one question, how quickly can we launch the SOF option?' 'Within a week Sir.' 'Ok Tom, I'll need to see the detail but my decision is COA 2.' 'We're on it Sir.'
  10. Well let's get the obvious gag out of the way early then ... rounds on target rather than drop shorts.
  11. What's the go here ... are you playing one turn a year or something @sburke? I'd hate to be your PBEM opponent .
  12. No - although if you don't count Steam as a 3rd Party program then there is a method you can use apparently. Somebody posted something to that effect in one of the CMX2 Game Boards (can't remember which) in the last fortnight or so.
  13. So am I to be honest - but the bones of it are insert SEAL Team next to the compound - brass up the compound - RV with CIA Agent and Agent Handler - Extract to an LZ.
  14. 'Mr President, have multi-source intel which indicates that the suspect compound in Abbottabad is Bin Laden's hideout. We've been collecting in detail on this compound for and the CIA have had operators in the area for a few months now. These indicators are the strongest we have had over the long years of searching for the AQ leader and I'm here today to request permission for the military to work up some options based on the assumption that Bin Laden is at the compound'. Sure Tom, you have my full support but we're going to need to widen the circle of knowledge, State and the Attorney General need to be in on this. I'll get on it Sir.
  15. Unfortunately it was all less cool than that .... however I do know a lot about when Afghan women listen to the radio and what programmes interest them. Never in a million years did I expect to be analysing that sort of stuff when I joined the Army over 30 years ago. Anyway starting to drift OT a bit ... I'm sure there'll be some updates soon from Pakistan.
  16. To be honest you're not going to get a definitive answer by playing forum tennis you have to test against the objectives you want to achieve by using the settings available. As I said I'm working on my coming Osama Bin Laden CMSF scenario and going through exactly the same process and trying to solve the problem. Here is my documented thought process on some testing I did this evening to give you a flavour for how you need to attack the problem (the full story is coming to a thread in the CMSF forum soon). WARNING SPOILERS FOLLOW++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Quote from my thought process begins ... As I mentioned earlier on, I want to run some tests to see how these elements react to each other and if necessary test and adjust. So with my ‘Property Defenders’ I initially went with the lowest experience value of ‘Conscript’ which would be reflective of their ability but unfortunately I pretty much had to move my Spy Group pretty much on top of them to provoke a reaction. However they did react to the SEAL team from a slightly greater (but still really close) distance. So following further testing I manipulated what I think are the two important factors in this calculus. The first one is obvious which is to increase the experience level of the ‘Property Defenders’. The second is less obvious but I touched on it in one of my earlier posts and it relates to the ‘Civilian Density’ setting within the data menu. This was originally set as ‘Sparse’ and as a result I have changed it to ‘None’. Is it reflective of the environment … no, however it has a direct impact on how UNCON units are spotted. In simple terms, the greater the civilian density the harder UNCONs are to spot so by dialling down the values I can increase the likelihood of them being spotted which is the effect I want to achieve. Additionally, unless the player reads this thread or cracks the scenario editor open, they will never know what the values are. My overall reflections on this testing is that I can’t really get the exact results I wanted to achieve which were to make it possible for ‘Property Defenders’ to be able to spot out to about 4-5 action spots. However things are what they are so rather than brood about it, I will stick with my final settings and lay out the ‘Property Defenders’. No need for details at here because I have shown you the mechanics but the art/science of laying them out requires a bit of what the military call ‘Red Teaming’ and/or Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace. If you look at either my planning thread on the CMRT board or anything that @Bil Hardingberger has done in his many AARs you get the idea. Put simply, I don’t want to put ‘Property Defenders’ all over the map, just in those places that I think will sit close to likely exfiltration routes that the player will take. Remember the effect is just to generate thought and planning in the mind of the player. However what is important is that I record the numbers of ‘Property Defenders’ that I pick and deploy in case I decide to set an ‘Enemy Casualty’ parameter as a victory condition for the Blue Player. The magic number is 15 for those that are interested. Quote ends. SPOILERS END +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ However there are other ways that you can achieve your ends using casualty parameters, weighting Victory Points and various other tricks which can simply be to say in the Mission Orders - 'German Snipers have been operating in the AO over the past week and have caused many casualties'. You need to look at the mission as a whole rather than focus on one aspect of it which is not something that you will solve discussing on the forum.
  17. We might be talking at cross purposes then. The effect I am talking about is the effect that you want the snipers to have on the Allied troops. Do you want them to pick particular targets off at hundreds of metres - do you just want them to be an annoyance to the Allied player. The permutations are numerous - what are the weather conditions, what is the ground like, how long is the mission going to be, what is the Allied Force composition. Only you can answer those questions because as the scenario designer you are trying to recreate your vision/narrative.
  18. Testing is your friend. Work out the effect you want to achieve and just play around with the hard and soft factors to get as close to that effect as you can as @womble said, the arm of service is entirely unimportant. I am currently going through this exact same process in a scenario I'm putting together in CMSF.
  19. Back to 'recon by fire' - as part of the section battle drill for the British Army ... in particular 'locating the enemy' ... use of fire is part of the drill if the enemy hasn't been found by other means. So not gamey at all.
  20. If running a Radio Station in Afghanistan counts then yes I used to work in 'entertainment' ... I'm out of that game now.
  21. Hi, thanks for the comments and yes I take the point about complexity and briefing content as I had to think long and hard about it to ensure that I could give the player the information required to play it in the required manner without setting out exactly how they should do it. The real World reason for keeping a guard at the starting location is the fact that this is your PB (Patrol Base) which contains all of your life support and your communications. The 'incentive' for the player is in the form of making it an 'occupy' objective and of course it is a specified task in the orders.
  22. I'll be honest it is not a scenario I would ordinarily choose to do but @borg had been harassing me to do a SOF type scenario and I thought I'd give it a spin out of curiosity. This type of scenario does not play to CM's strengths at all but I think I can make it work sufficiently well for it to be playable. It does mean that I have to tinker with reality though to make the scenario challenging. My intent is to run a tutorial thread explaining how I put it together which explores these concepts that I will run once the mission is released.
×
×
  • Create New...