Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by BlackMoria

  1. I finally finished the Forged Steel campaign. Hats off to George for making a interesting and engaging campaign based on what a company combat team could do in 24 hours of non-stop combat operations. The last scenario - Bridgehead at Norburg was especially intense and enjoyable for me as it allowed me to flex my defensive operations muscles (most campaigns and scenarios have blue on the offensive). Give the determination and forces of the Syrian attackers, this scenario demands that you bring your 'A' game or expect to take heavy casualties. I was up to the task and stopped the Syrian onslaught cold with minimal losses. Anyhow, this is the outcome of my campaign. Frankly, I was amazed by how well I did. Blue Total Losses: 10 KIA, 11 WIA, 2 IFVs Red Total Losses: 533 KIA, 91 WIA, 35 Tanks, 57 IFVs The results might imply the Syrians are pushovers but they most assuredly are not! The Syrians have top of the line equipment and are above average. A great campaign for those who want to experience recon and counter recon battles, hasty attacks and defensive battles in a not overly long campaign that is filled with many intense moments and surprises. I look forward to your future campaigns, George.
  2. Just to clarify. Canada does not nor ever had ownership of nuclear weapons. Any nukes on Canadian soil, such as the Bomarc missiles were US owned warheads with control and authority residing solely with the US personnel assigned to the missile batteries who worked in tandem with Canadian personnel. In other words, Canada might have owned the missile system sans warhead and Canadian personnel controlled and operated the system sans warhead but the warhead was the sole property of the US and only US military personnel could work, do testing or whatever on the warhead. And since the warhead was part and parcel of the system, Canada couldn't even fire off a Bomarc without US authority and US personnel being involved in every aspect of the act of a live launch. At least, that is what my understanding of the relationship, after talking to someone who worked in the Bomarc program many a year ago. The Cold War made for strange situations like this.
  3. Just finished up Company Attack. My base plan was to push one platoon along the second W-E highway north of the main highway and sweep into the near objective from the high ground to the north. The tank platoon and remaining infantry platoon went an a wide sweeping left hook to the north to seize the high ground and then sweep down on the far objective from the N. I advanced cautiously and encountered almost no resistance. I picked up the pace and used covered approaches. When a ATGM missed a M2, I traced the source to a ridge in the distant SE. I liberally scoured the ridgeline with mortars and 155mm arty and cautiously resumed the attack. No further fire from the ridge. Shortly, I was on the high ground overlooking both objectives. I opted to stage the assaults, taking and consolidating the near objective first, which fell without much of a fight. Armor was sighted near the back edge of the of the map and after a short and brutal firefight, 3 enemy tanks and 1 BMP were burning. I launched the left hook assault into the far objective with my armor on overwatch and a platoon of M2s and infantry as the assault force. Infantry were found near the objective but were dealt with quickly. I pressed through the objective and went for the back edge of the map. Barely a hour has elapsed and I had a platoon in defensive positions in each objective area, and my tanks on high ground overlooking both objectives and beyond. I opted to cease fire and got a Total Victory with only 4 WIA for my losses. The next scenario was the re-supply. George: Am I supposed to ceasefire through this one or is something supposed to happen? Having a blast! Great campaign so far.
  4. I play RT at Elite setting. I regularly pause the game to maintain situation awareness (George's maps are so huge) so I can look over the map from the view point of squads and vehicles. I also micromanage vehicles getting a good hull down position, which also entails me pausing the game to consider all the angles for a firing position I want the vehicle to take up. That is why I have few vehicle casualties. I am also quite cautious. I took me the full two hours to work the entire length of the map because I dismounted everyone except the tank platoon and the company commander and the dismounts worked the ground on foot. Slow, cautious and methodical. If I didn't like an approach, I would suck back a ways and work in from another route. Still, with my diligence, I overlooked a number of small pockets of Syrians outside of the NAIs (principally, because the NAI were my focus). They didn't see me, I didn't see them so I must of been quite good in inflitrating my recon people through the entire map.
  5. I just started this campaign last night. I rather enjoyed the first scenario. I am fond of large maps because I like room to maneuver and I enjoy recon / screening force battles. I also like 2 hour time limits because I usually proceed slow and cautious. Did it in one go with no reload. I was surprised by how well I did, given how others in this thread has difficulty with this one. Only one mired vehicle. My losses were 2 KIA and 4 WIA. I destroyed 3 tanks and 15 BMP and managed to get my troops into all five NAI. There were two surprises. The armor rolling down the centre of the map was unexpected (it was a George MC scenario, I should have known ). At the end of the scenario, even more unexpected was the fact I ran two recon squad through a forest (I will not say which one so as not give away spoilers but it was not a NAI) and somehow totally missed a sizeable force of Syrians in it. Don't know how the forces missed each other but they did. Given it is such a huge map, the giggles moment was when I almost literally drove over the two Syrian observers teams with my BFIST vehicle. One team was in a treeline along a field and just happened to be where I stopped my BFIST vehicle to take a peek out with the FO. The other was on a hill in a tree crestline and given size of the hill, what would be the odds of once again, stopping my BFIST vehicle almost on top of the second observer team. Great scenario. I really enjoyed this one. Loved the map. Just loaded up scenario 2 and I see I am fighting over the same ground with the company now. I hope my aggressive recce guys left some scraps for them. George, is there multiple plans for this scenario? I found two NAI completely empty of enemy, which rather surprised me. I am guessing that other plans may have troops in those or not, depending on the plan.
  6. Before we all decide to hold a wake for CMMODS, why don't we see if someone wants to step up to the plate to host the site and ask Columbusohgamer if he would okay with a 'change of command' ceremony and hand it off to someone. Unfortuately, that someone isn't me as I have enough RL issues of my own to preclude me. Still, CMMODS can be saved if someone steps up and Columbusohgamer is okay with it. Just saying....
  7. MLRS are division controlled assets, IIRC. As such, the ordinary observer will most likely never get to call on them as they are used to attack targets and force concentrations beyond the forward edge of battle (depth targets). Target planning is done in coordination with the Div S2. Typical targets are HQs, air defence batteries, artillery concentrations and reserve troop concentrations. Rarely are 'in contact' troop concentrations targetted. They also have a huge 'footprint' (600 m +) and a large safety circle as the previous poster indicated. That means unless the map is really, really huge, the MLRS strike will be 'off map' of most CMSF maps (1 km per edge or less).
  8. Warning - contains spoilers for one AI plan. You have been warned.... AAR - Counterattack at El Derjine Blue - Real Time Mode - Elite First off, this is a huge map, so I took the time to study the ground carefully and pick firing positions and fall back positions and establish my kill zones. Fortunately, there is a lot of blue setup areas so one can setup somewhat to accomodate whatever your plan is. The down side is that some of your forces, namely the forward forces can't be moved in setup because they are in non-blue setup zones. Setup: I elected to move most of my M2s and Strikers to hull down postions so I set up with that intent in mind, even though for most of my forces would have to 'run up' to my firing positions using covered ground. I prepositioned one of the AT Striker platoons on various hill features in the rear. The other AT platoon is not moveable on setup (it is designed as reserve in the scenario notes, so it is not placeable on setup) which is a pity but I gave them orders to move out to another location. I outfitted all the squads with Javelins, as I expected the counterattack to be principally mechanized forces and placed the squads in multi-story buildings or on high ground in existing ditch networks. I placed my forces to anticipate where the enemy will come in. Since a 'river' runs across my frontage, the enemy had three crossing points, so I knew which way he was coming. The downside was the two of the three crossing are in dead ground to the intial deployment which meant that I can see the enemy approaching the crossings but unless I move assets forward, I can't kill vehicles on these crossings to impede his advance. I designated the northernmost crossing 'Silver', the middle bridge as 'Gold' and and the southernmost crossing as 'Bronze'. The Battle: Right off the start, my observers and scouts are beginning to reporting clusters of contacts. The cluster of most concern to me is the one right near Silver on the north edge. Damn, I was hoping all the forces were coming from the east edge so I would have time to get forces rolling up the the hill feature in my northern AoO which were to cover Silver. It was going to be a race to get into position. Another cluster of contacts where on the road in the NE corner and the last group of contacts were on a N-S road on the eastern edge of the map. In no time, my AT vehicles were getting shot at from the force near Silver as they reversed into better hull down positions. The volume of AT fire was staggering - mostly likely a company of BMP! Fortunately, all the AT fire shot by overhead or slammed into the ground near the two AT vehicles being targetted with no hits. The two AT vehicles opened up on the northern BMPs as they moved to the crossing as a 120mm mortar mission was plotted in anticipation of mostly likely exit point out of the crossing. Soon, javelins from some of my squads rained death on the BMP group and the casualties impeded the movement of the force into the safety of the low ground at the crossing point, allowing me a longer window to engage them. The scout units in the SE and the most eastward of the my forces were ordered to hunker down and observe. Shortly, I was getting a clearer picture of the enemy forces. The NE group was BMPs and the eastern group was T72 tanks. The number of contacts implied a probable company of each. Wonderful. :eek: A motor rifle battalion. The tanks started moving towards the south, most likely to cross Bronze. I was concerned about this development since I had only a few scout detachments in the area, nothing to slow the tanks down. Fortunately, if they headed for the canyon route, I can bottle them up at the western end and prevent them from breaking out to open ground. I moved some of my reserve to the western end of the canyon to greet them. The NE BMP group as slow to move out, so my second 120mm mortar battery did a linear mission on their route. I deduced that this group most likely was going to cross Gold and full on into the teeth of my defences, so I was less concerned with this group. Silver was my concern and a platoon of M2s gained the high ground. One edged forward and was destroyed by a hail of 30mm cannon fire. @#$%&, there were alot of BMP 3s there. I sent the remaining two M2s to see if they could set up keyhole shots and bag some of the bad guys without a firestorm of return fire. One of moments that snake_eye must live for. Three BMPs appeared from the north into my rear area. I started to panic, if this was another company of BMP, I was so screwed as most of my defences were forward of the road they were coming down. My most gallant AT twosome on the hill which were trading shots with the BMP company at Silver had claimed about 6-7 BMP with the loss of only one AT vehicle. The surviving vehicle opened up on the 3 charging BMP in the rear, claiming one with the first shot. A hasty blocking force of two M2s maneuvered to stop the remaining two BMP and a host of infantry that that started to appear out of the wood near the map edge. Fortunately, the remaining BMPs from this end run were eliminated and the M2s' cannons made short work of the infantry trying to cross the open ground. About this time, the NE BMP company were charging at the bridge, their numbers 4 shorter due to a my mortars and were engaged by TOWs and Javelins. Astonishing, the T72 group which I thought were going for the canyon run changed direction and headed obliquely to the NW across my frontage, straight through the kill zone of the three AT carriers of my reserve who took up positions looking across the minefield. The tanks look like they were going for the middle but only 2 made it to cover, the rest destroyed by TOW2 fire. The middle BMP group faired just as poorly as they attacked across the bridge and into the teeth of my defences. It was a wild fight for several minutes with TOW2, javelins and handheld ATs being used to stop the enemy attack. A lone BMP and T72 stood stopped in ground which my observers could see but weapon systems could not but by this time, the tubes were run dry of ammunition. Thinking I had stopped the counterattack and now I just run the clock out, my heart fell as another two company groups of T-72 entered. At this point, I had lost 2 AT carriers and 4 M2s, the javelins were all used up and most of my remain ATs and M2s had about 3-4 TOW shots left. Not good, not good at all! I prayed for the arrival of the Apache CAS and the 155 tubes but they still had not arrived. It was going to be tight. Strangely, the northern tank reinforcements, which appeared near where the BMP attack on Silver was defeated, ran across the entire frontage of my defences, showing no interest in crossing at Silver or Gold but seem intented on heading for the canyon group. They lost about 4 tanks doing so. The eastern tank reinforcements looked like they were going for the canyon run. There was nothing I could do since only a few scouts dets were in the area and it would be death to roll the two M2s out of covering ground to face off with some 12-15 tanks. I had already lost one scout squad in the area due to them being spotted and getting hammered by a company's worth of T72s and BMPs earlier in the battle and the remaining scout squad remained hidden with eyes on the tanks. I was out of options. I elected to keep the M2s hidden and nail the trailing tanks from the rear as they entered the defile. I had one AT carrier and a few infantry squads waiting at the western end of the defile. With luck, I reasoned I could trap the tanks in the canyon and my airpower, when it arrived, would make short work of them. I never got to see how that impromtu plan would have worked as I got a Total Victory at this point before the tanks could enter the defile. Amazing, since the 155mm arty and the Apaches were a no show (which meant I got the victory in under 50 mins of the 2 hour time limit since that was when the Apaches were supposed to show up). My losses: 34 KIA / 15 WIA / 7 Armored Vehicles The Syrian losses: 348 KIA, 67 WIA, 12 Tanks, 38 Armored Vehicles Nice intense battle, snake_eye. I had two heart attack moments - when the 3 BMP and infantry showed up in my rear area. I though another company push was going to come through this area and I was not in a position to hold off an enemy force of this size since most of my forces were more forward. Fortunately, it was only a platoon attack and I dealt with it but I had to have two M2s off the main defence to counter a possible other push from the that area. The second was the arrival of the tank reinforcements. My ammo was getting critical at this point and my javelins were either all gone or very nearly so and I had about 1/3 of my TOW ammo left. It was not looking good. I think I could have stopped the tank attack if they went into the canyon since I think I could have sealed them in with casualties. But I have no idea that is where they were going since the scenario ended with a total victory for me at that point and the Apaches and 155 support hadn't arrived. Hopefully, they were not far off if the game had continued but it was starting to look grim. Pros: Huge map allowing lots of tactical possibilites and nice variety of terrain. Very aggressive enemy force and lots of them, making for a real drag down in the mud fight. You are right into it from the start and the action doesn't let up until the end. Cons: Setup options and Enemy attack choices. For setup options, part of the force can't be moved. No biggie as I understand the rational from the scenario briefing, but it would be nice to completely be able to deploy all my forces. The intial tank force went one direction (headed to the southern route) and then abruptly changed direction and moved obliquely across my frontage and got shot up as a result. The northern tank reinforcments head clear across the map across my frontage and likewise got shot up. Not sure what they were up to but it struck me as odd behavior, rather than going for the nearest crossing point. Not that I am complaining. I would rather shoot tanks as they are going across my front rather than shooting at them when they are full on charging into me. I will certainly play again to see what the other AI plans will show. Excellent scenario, snake_eye. Kudos to you.
  9. Yes, the victory conditions for Afternoon Delight are totally screwed. If the Syrians inflict any casualties (and that is any at all), they get 5000 pts. If you met all your victory conditions, you are nowhere near 5000 pts so you get a total defeat. I know because I totally wiped the Syrians to a man, occupied all objectives and has a total of 3 WIA (yes, just 3 WIA) and still got a total defeat. That is when I scutinized the victory conditions and found the Syrians got 5000 pts. As mentioned, it doesn't seem to matter for the campaign. But taking only 3 WIA and doing a total wipe of the Syrians and getting a total defeat left a bitter taste in my mouth.
  10. Well, as an forward observer for most of my military carrier and having rounds passing overhead on a frequent basis, the sound in game is for the most part accurate. Thomm hit on it - the sound of the round passing overhead is NOT audible until impact. It is only heard for a few seconds as it passes overhead then silence until impact + speed of sound to observer when you hear the detonation. The high arc of mortars and their lower relative muzzle velocity to tube artillery means you don't hear mortars passing overhead.
  11. It is more likely the case that YOU are more experienced. I've only played the Marine campaign so I can't comment on the play experience between them. Before I played the Marine campaign, I played every single scenario that came with the core game and the marine module so that gave me so face time to really learn the system and experiment. I found the Marine campaign relatively easy, even though I did the entire campaign in RT. I took the non-Pooh route and finished the campaign in fine form. I then reverted back to Decisions, Decisions and took the Pooh route. I found Pooh actually easy and I was expecting a much tougher fight and after reading much on other threads about it, I was wondering if it was the same scenario that everyone else played. I actually had a much tougher go in Afternoon Delight and Milk Run.
  12. I would say you are correct. The lone HQ member doesn't have the CO/XO designation or any rank insignia, which tells me the command level personnel are dead and the lone guy is a enlisted member of the command group. He doesn't have a radio and doesn't have any icons to state he can issue commands visually or by voice. Buck private. In fact, the lone survivor in the squad actually outranks him (note the star). Loss of command usually will result in command delays, I believe. Things will still happen but it will take longer. Also, I don't believe the HQ in your example can call for fire (either arty or cas).
  13. You not getting into the spirit of the thread. Like some of the Normandy threads, it is to make outrageous demands of the developers and then rant when said developers say it can't be done... No? I can wish for features, can't I.
  14. I would like to see an airmobile integration since it is a big part of modern military operations. It would be cool to see my pixeltruppen fast rope out of Blackhawks onto roof tops.
  15. It was absolutely a 155 crater on fuze delay because I put it there. I hammered a hill with a battery mission and could visually see all the craters being made with each impact. My FO team advanced up to the hill in an Iltis jeep (they are not large) because my M113 blew a transmission the previous day and there were no spare 113s. The ground was very sandy earth, so that may have been a factor and no doubt the crater would be not as deep if it was clay. But the Iltis fitted in the crater nicely and my OP occupied another crater near the top of the hill as an ad hoc trench to fire the next several fire missions on another ridge. Mishga: The orientation doesn't much matter when using a 155 round as IED and the depth of the IED will be a factor of depth of the hole. Most IEDs are just deep enough so they can remain undetected to visual observation. In Afghanistan, the typical IED is several mortar rounds together or a single soviet 152mm artillery round but recently, putting 2-3 artillery shells together is starting to become the norm as NATO forces field more IED resistant vehicles.
  16. It depends on who the observer is making the CAS request. Basically, when you hear the CAS reporting as on station ("in the pod"), it time to get the hell out of Dodge because it is about 30-60 secs for the "Ingress to Target" call.
  17. Absolutely! As in real life, if you intrude into a weapons free zone and you can't be clearly identified as friendly forces, you can expect a friendly fire incident in CMSF. In CMSF, just sitting immediately outside the CAS zone is no guarantee of not being hit as well, as I found out the hard way. As in real life, keep your forces at a distance from CAS doing their grim business.
  18. My preferred engagement when I was a artillery observer was to fire one gun section (3 tubes) on fuse delay and one gun section with fuse VT. The VT fuses would rain splinters down on open trench lines and firing pits. Delay fuses would penetrate into the ground and near hits will collapse even reinforced revetted trenches and penetrate overhead cover on personnel defensive enclosures. Direct hits on bunkers and hardpoints will penetrate even 6 inches of overhead cover (sandbags), particularly if the shell is 155mm or higher. As a added bonus, the delay fused rounds will also tear up wire obstacles and seriously degrade AP minefields in the immediate vicinity of the trench works. What can a 155mm round do on fuse delay. Consider this - I drove my jeep into a brand new 155 shell crater and covered it with a camo net and from 20 feet away, you couldn't there was a hole or anything because the net was flush with the ground and creative adding of nearby bushes and grasses by my driver make it nearly invisible. Short of a fortification type defensive position, any hasty type defensive position is going to take a beating, even from a moderate bombardment of 3-5rounds per gun onto the position.
  19. The demonstration wasn't meant to be scientific, it was a dog and pony show for visiting VIPs. I quite agree. Figure 11 targets don't 'harden' up like real soldiers. That said, the Soviets derive their data from similar methodologies and apply some math to the issue to come up with their 'metrics'. The British do the same as I have seen Brit 'weight of scales' charts for artillery engagements as well. The point is, the Brit and Russian tables differ. Differ methodologies, differ math. Meaning the numbers are subjective and the Russians (at least during the era before the end of the Cold War) tend to throw ammunition and weapon systems at a problem in more generous doses than western armies. So, are western army 'weight of scale' calculations too conservative and the Soviet numbers are closer to reality? Or are western numbers just right and the Soviets are 'heavy handed'? Another big consideration about those table - they are more meant for logistical planning for moving and positioning ammunition rather than a hard formula that states that enemy size A + number of tubes B = number of rounds that must be fired C to met desired outcome D. It doesn't mean that if you are a company postition, you can expect exactly 111 rounds on your position. Ammunition type, weight of fire and other factors are decided by the observer at battery level and by higher artillery headquarters for battalion/regiment or higher artillery concentrations and 'weight of scales' tables rarely come into the equation anymore.
  20. I played 'Streets of Hamas' several times and have never experienced what you are seeing. The fact you have stated that the original scenario doesn't have the 'beaming' issue implies that modifying the scenario somehow 'broke' something and we then have a start point as to what might be the problem. Have you been changing 'Red' OOBs to Blue or vice versa, because it almost seems like at some point in the game, the 'blue' M1s suddenly become 'red' M1s and the game whisks them off to the Red deployment areas, yet the TacAI still distinguishs them as 'blue' forces and fires on them. The developers do check the forums on a regular basis so you are not being snubbed or being overlooked. If you want more immediate help, contact the Battlefront helpdesk and put in a help ticket.
  21. The Soviet artillery tables are based on data from WW2. The Soviet are not innovators, they stay with what they found worked for them. Even up until the time I took early retirement out of the military in the early 90s, their doctrine still called for placing some of their artillery literally wheel to wheel, like they did typically in WW2. I was an artillery officer and FO/FAC in the Canadian military for 12 years. The results of your test is close to a fire power demonstration my battery did during RV85, a div level exercise. A typical soviet company defensive position was dug out by the engineers and figure 11 cardboard targets (3/4 human silhouette, from the knees to the top of the head) were placed in the trenches and bunkers. My battery shelled the position with 6 x 105mm guns with either 10 or 12 rounds per gun(can't remember) at FFE, representing either 60 or 72 total rounds of impact fuse HE. When we examined the site afterwards, about 1/3 of the figure 11 targets had one or more fragmentation splinters through the target's head or torso areas, representing either a serious or potentially lethal hit. So, based on my experience from that demonstration and comparing them to your result in the CMSF test, I would say the results are extremely close. As I said, the Soviet figures are derived from WW2 data and represent 'overkill'. Why the difference in data? Simple, really. After one or two complete salvos of FFE, a target 'hardens' as troops tuck themselves away in the bottom of trenches, etc. Therefore, the bulk of the casualties occur in that first couple of initial salvos and then only marginal casualties after the target 'hardens'. Therefore, 60 rounds may result in about 30% casualties and 111 rounds in 35%, so nearly twice the rounds only give you 5% more casualties, an outcome expected by continuing to fire on a hardened target. Once the target goes 'hard', you are clearly in a case of diminishing returns on casualties. Then why go 10 rounds each gun on FFE if the fire is less effective after the initial few salvos? Simple. As the rounds rain down, the combat team is rolling to the dismount line with the tanks and ICV. Get the choreography of artillery / armour / infantry right and the ramps are dropping as the last artillery rounds have just impacted, giving the infantry time to shake out and get a toehold into the enemy position before the enemy reallizes the shelling is over.
  22. Is your original version a Battlefront or a Paradox sold version? I seen other threads in which some update or patch issues arise because of who the seller of the original software is. That could be what is at play here. This from another thread: "if you have Paradox version you need install 1.10 patch before installing 1.11. Paradox 1.11 patch is only incemental patch, 1.10 is all-inclusive." I am not sure the accuracy of the above but I pass it along it the event is is helpful. Put in your issue into the Battlefront helpdesk. After all, that is what they are there for -to assist people.
  23. Because of the time frame of 2008, there is no operational deployment of such systems so it most likely will not be in the NATO module. We haven't been told the timeframe the CMSF 2 will encompass, so it is a possibility but that question is best put to the developers and I would guess that those sort of decisions haven't been made or are not for discussion at this time. They still have the British module, NATO module, a rumoured 'Red' module and CM:N on their plate so CMSF 2 is ways down the road. Edit: As it stands now, Blue has as a fist full of trump cards and the only real edge that Syrian forces have is the advance ATGMs and tons of RPGs. Assuming even a pessimistic success rate for anti AT weapons of 50%, that means Syrians have their own real advantage reduced by 50%. That means that game is more like kicking puppies at that point for Blue.
  24. It could be that the scenario had other victory conditions besides casualties that your trumphiant opponent has not met yet. He may need to completely clear you from certain objectives. Some objectives are touch (pass over them and they are met) and some objectives are occupy (you must have forces occupying the objective area). If he has moved forces out of the latter, he has failed to meet that objective until he reoccupied it. Of course, whether you tell him that is another thing altogether...
  • Create New...