Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by BlackMoria

  1. Thank god. If another armored blitz appeared out of nowhere, I would scream and yank my hair out. My outcome seems to be un-typical so far based on what I am reading. It seem the scenario design is meant for reinforcing forces to mix it up from the get go and medium to heavy casualties to occur. Then to make it so that your surviving force has to completely eliminate the enemy is really harsh and is just rubbing salt in the wounds. I understand people's frustration and don't understand why some think it is a great scenario. I look forward to this one being over.
  2. I'm in SNAFU right now. My usual caution in advancing inadvertently positioned my tanks in a good position to counter the first counterattack, which I totally didn't expect (I was oriented as I was expecting threats out of the first urban area but the hull down positions were ideally oriented to confront the first counterattack). The AAV platoon had scooted along the low ground and shield by arty smoke in open areas and were behind the fort when the wave showed up, thank god. When the first wave showed up exactly when the AAV reinforcements showed up in the exposed area, my response after the obligatory holy ****! expletive was, who the hell designed this scenario so that opposing forces reinforcements, showed up simultaneously in full view of each other. Fortune was with me. The enemy counterattack focused on my hull down tanks and not on the exposed light armor in full view on the map edge. The attacking wave was annihilated with one of my M1s being mobility killed (don't know how since it was hull down, near as I can tell) and degraded optics on two others. After dealing with an infantry attack towards the fort, I was repositioning my M1s to resume the advance and starting to get my infantry back into AAVs at the fort when my second group of armored reinforcements arrived. Absolutely paranoid after the enemy showed up at the same time reinforcement arrived last time, I popped smoke on each second vehicle of the column of reinforcements (gamist, but I really hated that first ugly surprise). Within 10 seconds, the T-90s showed up. Once again, fortune had smiled on me because the repositioning of the lead M1s to head out again had put them in semi-hull down postitions to the T-90s and the smoke screens were effective on the reinforcement column. The AAV reinforcements was in mid move to join up with the others but fortunately was in low ground out of observation of the T-90s. The first shots of the T-90s of ATGMs either missed my lead M1s or were directed at the partially smoked screened armored column and all missed. A short and violent firefight later, the T-90s went down with no losses to me. That is where I am right now. I understand Thomm's frustration totally. I have only 1 mobility killed M1 right now but if it wasn't that fortune smiled upon me twice so far, the results could have been a whole lot of blue vehicles burning. Having reinforcements for both sides appear within seconds of each other and in full view of each other is harsh and not a design choice I would consider doing for a scenario. Now I even more cautious for resuming the advance because what other nasty surprises are getting to be sprung upon me and yet I am on the clock to reach the ambushed scout platoon and clear the gorge. Fortunately, the scouts withdrew in good order without losses and are hunkered down and using the air and artillery to good effect to maintain their security while they await the main body to get to them.
  3. I just finished playing Afternoon Delight and the victory conditions at totally bogus. My losses: 3 WIA Syrian losses: 113 KIA, 62 WIA, 9 MIA, 5 Tanks, 1 Other. At the end, during the Review, there wasn't a single red unit left on map. I got a US Total Defeat. Red got 2000 pts for having my 3 guys going to the dispensary after the battle. Totally bogus.
  4. It seems a graphical driver issue. Are you using the most up to date drivers? If so, check the graphical settings in game. Something might be enabled that is causing the issues. I would suggest playing with the settings.
  5. This is a large amount of research on differences between males and females and the differences is more than difference sex organs. At the fundamental level, the male and female brain differ in metrics like logic, emotion, empathy, reasoning, aggression, etc. There is a ton of written material about so anyone can check it out. Society values make it too simplistic an answer. Expose a child to a new experience like a never before seen toy or show and male children gravitate to certain experiences and female children gravitate to different experiences. Society values is one aspect but brain differences (as I stated above) is a bigger determinor than social values. Ah, but the issue here is a computer game vs real life. Certainly, no one except the purdish are going to complain about girls in binkinis playing volleyball in real life. Now, make a computer game about it and ensure the binkinis are 'scanty' and it is not the sport of volleyball the game designer is advocating as the main design goal, is it? Otherwise, the girls would be fully dressed in more appropriate apparel for a volleyball court. And if the game as a social interaction aspect, guess how the girls are usually protrayed in the game.... you guessed it - bimbos. Hence my comments. It is a commentary about how women are portrayed in male dominated computer games.
  6. It is social somewhat. The other part is genetic differences between males and females. Boys grow up watching shows like GI Joe, Transformers, Thundercats, etc. What are these shows about.... at the core, they are about conflict resolution through violence. Girls grow up watching Care Bears, My Little Pony, Hannah Montana, etc. What are these shows about.... at the core, social interaction with the occasional conflict resolved through non-violent means. Interesting that my niece, who liked GI Joe, Transformers and Ninja Turtles gowing up also enjoys FPS games, World of Warcraft and the occasional wargame. My other nieces who grew up with My Little Pony and Barbies don't like these game but things like the Sims, etc. Which explains why I prefer CM Shock Force to a bimbo beach volleyball game. Business before pleasure....
  7. The Canadian Forces in Afghanistan use a handheld Thermal Imager called TigerEye but they are expensive and not widespread and I don't know how they are distributed out. Thermal Imagers can discern a difference to 1/10 of a degree Celcius, if I recall correctly, so they are still effective in hot weather. The chief drawback is range - with handheld units being good out to a kilometer or less. Which means they are useful if you have static position and you are wanting to see approaching hostiles. Less so if you are in the attack (handheld doesn't necessarily small and light) and even less so if you are trying to do survelliance over a large area. Afghanistan is just too big and spreadout for effective survelliance. Taliban dead have been found with current generation nightvision equipment on them, so the poppy money means they can afford to get the best, so they are likely using their night vision devices to avoid Nato troops. It is no longer the case that western forces 'own the night'.
  8. Odd that. My helos have always used missiles on vehicles except for one occasion in which the helo used guns on a BTR, which is appropiate since it is light armor. When I played Streets of Hamas, the helo missile killed two T-90s. Did you use Area or Point Target when sending the helos in?
  9. Spoken for truth. I am reminded on my time in the Canadian military when during one night deployment, the brigade recce platoon drove across the front of my gun postion four times before someone from the platoon approached my position and wanted to know where the hell they were and how to get to location X. I got them where they wanted to get to, but it was so damn funny the sheepish look on the platoon commander's face when I told him he passed by my position four times. They were driving around in a big circle around me most of the night and they had no ideas they were literally going in circles....
  10. Yes, but from a CMSF game point of view, completely irrelevant, unless the programmers have it so you have to log in and pay a small amount of money to play a scenario or your contractor pixeltruppen do nothing during that scenario. Let's not give them any ideas like that....
  11. At it core, what is the difference between a squad of soldiers and military security contractors beside the uniform and who the boss is? The weapons and vehicles perhaps... but is a special armored SUV much different than a Hummer from a game point other than visually. Are contractors armed with Steyr AUGs and wearing body armor and helmets really any different than US soldiers with M4s, aside from the visuals. From a game viewpoint, nothing really - therefore, they really don't add anything to the game per se that can't be done by creative modding or what not. But the original poster does hit on a salient point - what is the face of warfare going to be in 2018? The Future Combat Systems may be fielded in that time but how widespread will NLOS-C and NLOS-LS systems be? I expect some special brigades but I suspect that the most US military units will still be using current equipment with usual enhancement mods that the next ten years brings. The big jump in the next 10 years, outside of FCS, will be in the increased use of sensors and robotics. What affect will this have on the future battlefield, I don't know. UAVs are being used now but is it translating to more victory in the field? From a game issue, is knowing where everything is (a consequence of having UAVs) a game breaker because is makes asymetrical warfare even more lopsided in blue's favor?
  12. I don't know. In the scenario previous to the Road to Shin, Village Run, I had my full complement of 3 LAVs for my scouts. At the scenario end, I had no vehicle casualties (in fact the outcome was only 6 WIAs for that scenario). Village Run lead to Road to Shin. I start the scenario with my three scout squads but only 2 scout LAVs I am assuming the scout platoon is one of the 'core' units which progresses through the campaign. I can't explain why the scout LAV disappeared. Is mechanical breakdown a possibility? I also thought that maybe something was up with the CAAT platoon as well as only two CAAT vehicles & crews showed up for Road to Shin but in the next scenario, all CAAT vehicles & crews are accounted for, but the scout platoon is still short a LAV.
  13. Don't know if this is a bug or not. I'm playing the marine campaign. I have not lost any vehicles (amazing but true). At the start of Road to Shin, one of my scout squads didn't have a vehicle to squeeze into. It is also annoying as hell that despite having opening in other vehicles outside the scout platoon, I can't mount the scouts up in one of the AAVs. So this scout squad walked up the mountain and to the exit area, taking the whole time to do so. They did nothing but walk but I came up aces for the win on that one so do no biggie that they humped the boonies and did no fighting. On to Debouch to Disaster - the scout squad is on foot again. And the back objective is a long, long way off. Sigh... Who jacked my ride? As I stated, I have lost no vehicles earlier, including no mobility kills. Yet, it seems that the locals in the start village of Road to Shin made off with one of my LAVs, the bastards. Any ideas what is happening here? Are these scouts going to end up walking all the way to Damascas?
  14. I got CM Shockforce with Marines just before Xmas and I really love the game. Excuse me if they was already discussed but I can't find it in the forums if it was bought up. One of the wonderful things about artillery is the ability to register or record a fired target for re-engagement. If hostiles show up on the registered target area, you can call for fire without going though the adjustment procedure again. I realize that there is probably a good reason (coding or how to implement the feature) registering targets isn't in the game but, hey, one can hope right? So, any chance of registered targets in a future patch?
  15. Falconander, It is amazing how our experiences differ, despite doing the same entry. I breached on on the right flank. My first enemy contact was a T-90 facing towards the middle of town, presenting a side on aspect that was dispatched by the lead M1 with a lucky first shot. A short moment later, a BMP rounded a corner only to take two AT-4s in the face from the Marine squad staying tight on the M1. My other foot pounders manage to attain roof top positions and good corner postion to get eyes onto moving vehicles or enemy troop positions. I had good mutual support because firefights were very one sided affairs (enemy squads sort of showed up piecemeal, only to get hammered by the combined fire power of two or three marine squads and a M1, ensuring their speedy delivery to paradise). My airpower also nailed a few vehicles that I got eyes on without being engaged back. Very one sided in my favor and I had minimal casualties. It is amazing just how opposite our experiences where. Just one of the things I love about this game. Same scenario, completely different outcomes depending on luck, tactics, timing and any number of variables which determines whether one's pixeltruppen are heroes or zeroes.
  16. Sounds like it was fun (in a perverse sense). I played it as blue and got a total victory. Mind you, I set up on one flank and used the M1's cannons to breach the two walls and my force made entry at the breach points. There was no way I was going straight up the middle through the gates since it is logical to conclude that is where red has set up his kill zones.
  17. Can you revert to a game save? I think that is the only way. Doing campaigns, I game save each scenario transition so that I can go back and try different things or different tactics (for example, in the Marine campaign, scenario - Decisions, Decisions where your exit point decides which way the campaign branches). I think a earlier game save is your only hope but maybe someone else has an idea....
  18. I don't know if it is factored into the spotting in the game but in RL, machine guns have a tracer round for every 5th round unless you take pains to replace them with normal rounds. Tracers certainly help the gunner get on target but they also give your position away. Just pointing that out since it wasn't mentioned in the machine gun discussion in the last few posts.
  19. Take it slow and steady. And analyse your terrain. I can't overstate that enough. If you aren't taking 15 minutes looking closely at the terrain before you deploy your forces, you are not taking enough time to do a proper terrain analysis. The terrain is everything. It will dictate what options you have, routes and covered approaches to take, your best fire positions, obstacles to avoid or overcome, your going (how easy or hard it is to get from point A to point , where your enemy is likely to deploy and how your enemy is likely to manuever. Proper understanding and use of the terrain means more than your force composition does.... its proper appreciation and use will shield your forces during movement, allow you positional advantage when you can seize it and will allow you to focus your firepower at the decision point. Fail to study and use it and expect casualties and possible defeat.
  20. I've played this scenario and was successful on the first go around. I made several base assumptions. The squad with the smoked vehicle was observed and the rest of my force was not. I then did a terrain study prior to starting the clock on the scenario. I made some deductions on the most likely areas that enemy forces would be observing from (as hindsight after the game showed, I was 90% correct). I made a plan to try to define the enemy, which meant slowly and methodically moving scout dismounts into observation points on the intermediate high ground. My dismounts found a few enemy positions this way and hit them with arty. I would 'flash the bait' by having a dismount break cover and move quickly from one cover point to another in a short sprint. The enemy would usually strike at the lure with some fire that other dismounts could observe or see muzzle flashes or heavy weapon backblast from, giving me something to fire in the general direction of or engage with arty. I can usually wrinkle my LAVs into concealing hull down positions. If they saw something and engaged it, in short order I would pop smoke and reverse into dead ground because my experience has been the heavy AT or RPG shot is going to be coming. This scenario was a tough nut to crack but using the method above, crack it I did, with minimal losses. Slow, methodical and patience is the key. This scenario will punish the impatient player and the player who thinks they can 'hammer' their way to the objective area.
  21. That is one feature that stood out for Harpoon 3. If I recall correctly, it started with no multiplayer capability and through the dedication of the current license holder and the Harpoon community, multiplayer 1v1 was added and now it supports multiple players per side. TacOps also has a good multiplayer system, allowing for 1v1 play all the way to multiple player 'CPX' style of mutiplayer which is a favorite of quite a number in the TacOps community. TacOps looks very dated graphically but the multiplayer keeps the game being played despite this shortcoming.
  22. Point made. Adding equipment in patches (or modules) would ensure CMSF keeps its legs though. But I will concede the point at it would add more work to the developers. And patches don't pay the bills for the developers. Maybe in the hinted at CMSF 2....
  23. I think some posters are missing the point. It is not if the EFV brings anything new to the game. It is the AAV7 replacement either in 2011 or 2015 and so for some of us who like to try to stay with an accurate TO&E for scenarios, it would be nice to have in the game for simulating Marine scenarios in the 2011/15 plus time frame.
  • Create New...