Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


H1nd last won the day on January 13 2015

H1nd had the most liked content!

About H1nd

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 11/28/1987


  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. preregistered target points are also very good tool to mitigate artillery call times and from my understanding are part of eastern military doctrine in both attack and defence. If possible you should plan your attack with preplanned turn one artillery fires and also use additional pre registered targets in key terrain features along the planned axis of attack so that you can call in artillery where needed in matter of minutes. The emphasis is methodically planning your offensive action and trying to anticipate enemy counter moves and defensive strategy.
  2. Hmmh you might be right. Usually I just crop down some maps or pre existing scenarios for custom multiplayer QBs, but I think I have also used master maps and some of my own maps without AI plans in same way. I remember that I have ran into some problems before with this, but I think that was due to QB map being set as ME when I was selecting attack in QB menu and thus it did not show up as selectable map. Which is in fact one thing to remember: you need to make QB version for each battle type that you intend to use the map with: One map for assault, one for attk, one for probe etc...
  3. All tho you can naturally use your map in h2h multiplayer QB without AI plans but terrain objectives are recommended there as well :>
  4. Well somebody is a real pleasant fellow. Yes is is true that I might have missed the point a bit since yes english is indeed not my native language and also because every time there is a talk on the forum about infantry engineers breaching minefields, wich you definitely can not do in CM games, since marking is not breaching in sense of clearing a mineless lane through the damn thing, there is immediately somebody popping up with the "Its not in scope of CM something something.." like literally every freaking time. Whole discussion on whether it might be reasonable to add the ability for engineers to breach minefields is just brushed aside without any consideration if the popular perception about the issue might actually be wrong. So yeah, I might be tad bit frustrated about the whole thing. But there is still no excuse to accept such immature and completely insulting behaviour as your reply. Is this the sort of thing we want to see here on this forum? Last word on the mine issue: I am actually quite optimistic that we will eventually get at least mine clearing vehicles to both modern CM titles. And that is enough for me. -H1nd
  5. Funny how this was major part of all the training we did in FDF Combat engineers, to get through minefields, in combat, in matter of couple of minutes. But yeah.. totally not in scope of Combat Mission. And we did not even have any fancy vehicles to do that...
  6. ooo the master maps in CMFB are sooooo goood. Was the Noville one of yours? In any case they are all really fantastic. I have been thinking about finding an opponent to play some "for fun" mini campaign series of QBs in them. The Noville map for example can easily support series of 6+ medium sized quick battles I think. All in all yeah.. making big maps is a real pain in the back, especially if you are bit of OCD perfectionist like me.
  7. In CMBS especially I envision some nice scenarios involving breaching a minefield under fire with mine plows and rollers and have the mech infantry come pouring through the breach while arty and fire support hammer down on the enemy.
  8. Yeah, I have been about at this before as well. Personally i'm content if we just could get the mine clearing vehicles in the games at some point like the functional sherman crab in CMBN.
  9. Well I am a trained combat engineer and a reserve officer. When it comes to breaching minefield to keep the assault going I do have a plenty of training. But it all really comes down to the specifics of the task. One can't simply state that demining is out of scope of CM. What do you guys really mean by that? Demining, mine removal, minefield breaching.. what ever you want to call it takes time proportional to the size of the task. Just like anything else. You need to clear a path through simple hastily laid AT-minefield with no AP-mines, minefield is 50 meters deep, has probably mines in about 5 rows, each mine about 5-10m apart (if using something likeTM62 or TM 65-77). If you can locate the mines which I asume the mark mines command in CM is about, then the hard part is already done. Getting rid of the found mines is easy. Now with AP-mines in the mix the whole thing gets much much harder but that is the thing.. that is entirely different task. In general the whole idea of combat engineers versus regular engineers is that these are the people who are there, right at the tip of the offensive and It is their only job to keep the offensive going forward at all cost. I don't claim it's easy or safe, but I am claiming that with proper training and equipment, you can breach small minefields, especially ones with only AT-mines in span of minutes. Well within the scope of combat mission.
  10. I am still strongly disagreeing on this one. Finding the mines (marking them) is the most time consuming part of real life demining. Just a small block of tnt with a time fuze can take care of most at-mines once found. Any self respecting combat engineer squad should always have them on hand when supporting a advance. You can also just manually move the mines away from the way of vehicles once they are located but better use rope and hook in case they are booby trapped.
  11. yeah marked AT-mines are too hard for the vehicles to avoid, it does not seem to make them any less likely to explode.
  12. I know from experience that you can use T-72 cannon in Black Sea to clear a small patch of minefield. It's very unreliable but with some luck you might detonate all three AT-mines in a single action square with one cannon shot. Gun caliber seems to be the main deciding factor whether it can detonate AT-mines or not. Had a pretty intense mechanized assault going on that ran into some stubborn light infantry defense covered with few tactical minefields. Lined up better part of two companies of t-72's to give fire support (in other words, completely razed the village the infantry was holed up in) and had a lead t-72 fire his way through the minefield. Then I cruised in through the remains of the village while my own arty barraged the remaining enemy infantry pinning them down. Charging through your own artillery barrage with tanks seemed appropriately Russian way to roll about and it sure worked nicely.
  13. All lakes are in same map? Water can only have single elevation value per map and is always the lowest value. :/
  14. Only other published maps from me are are to CMRT (and convertable to CMBS): http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons/communal-farm-nemanitsa/ and http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons/byelorussian-rough-marshy-terrain/ But alas since I probably suffer some degree of OCD these are "quite a bit of effort" to make plus I tend to divide my attention in to too many projects and activities. Otherwise there probably would be couple more of them. There is this one fancy "D-Day in Russia" style scenario that I have been fiddling with on and off for the past year and I probably should get around to publish the map even if the scenario is not really playable nor ever will.
  • Create New...