Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


domfluff last won the day on October 24 2018

domfluff had the most liked content!

About domfluff

  • Rank
    Junior Member


  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. domfluff

    Trigger question

    Yeah, Triggers are not "if-then", it's "wait here until this condition is met, then continue with your orders". In that sense they're fundamentally similar to the inbuilt "leave after" orders, but rather than being based on the clock, they're based on units in a location. You can be a little clever about it - if the assembly/waiting point is covering one flank, and you're happy for them to hang around there for the duration, then a trigger on the other flank becomes a "if they come this way, hold fast, if they go that way, go over there", but that's very map dependent. Conditions would improve the potential for scripting significantly, but the tools that exist are still pretty powerful.
  2. domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Yeah, stealth doesn't seem to protect against air support.
  3. domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    VBIED, Combatants and Spies have civ density stealth, as per CMSF 1. The rest do no (so, technicals, taxis, fighters) Quick moves now *do* have stealth, which is a massive change. They will generate sporadic spotting contacts and shout-outs, but they can still quick move up very close with an RPG, so this is a serious threat now.
  4. domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    In fact, it seems stronger. Move commands before would hide them, but Bluefor would shout out "enemy infantry sighted", even without contact markers. Quick commands before would reveal them. With some quick testing, Move commands now prompt no shout-outs. Importantly, Quick commands do, but *do not reveal the uncons*, which means the AI can now use Civilian density. This is huge. Needs more precise testing for distances, etc, since I imagine Quick will be spotted from further range, but this is massive.
  5. domfluff

    CMSF irregular thoughts

    Civilian density seems to be working as per CMSF 1 with regards to combatants again. The patch notes only mention spies, but this seems to be functional as it was, which is really great. Testing can resume!
  6. domfluff

    How to use insurgent forces???

    Most spies can't - they're just pairs of eyes. The "Spy forward observer" can though. The issue is that (it seems) like Civilian Density isn't actually doing anything, so uncons and spies can't actually do their job - hiding amongst the civilian population. I'm hoping this was one of the outstanding issues that Steve was talking about with the CMSF 2 release, and that it will get fixed soon. It does make uncons pretty terrible otherwise.
  7. domfluff

    How to use insurgent forces???

    Spy has nothing to do with the VBIED. He comes with it so that you can have a "spotter" to tell the VBIED where to go, that's it.
  8. Term has existed since at least the original Rogue in 1980 It's a useful tool to learn what you're doing, but it's also a crutch. Use it, then try to ween yourself off it. Discipline, grasshopper.
  9. domfluff

    Update on Engine 4 patches

    That's a different mortar bug No less critical, mind you. The one above (from 2015) is the Commonwealth Carrier platoons in CMBN acquiring 2 inch mortars from universal carriers. They Acquire the mortar, and it vanishes, but they don't have it. It really breaks that unit, since that's a large part of their tactical employment.
  10. domfluff

    Update on Engine 4 patches

    Yeah, the mortar bug and the (new!) issue with Civilian Density in CMSF 2 are the most egregious ones that I've come across.
  11. Save-scumming is fine, especially when learning. Rapid iteration, etc. It's definitely something to wean yourself off though, and obviously you can't do it against humans. I think there are broadly (very broadly) two kinds of CM scenarios. Some present a puzzle-like narrative, that often are fairly linear, and may have a single best solution. The others are more sandbox-like. They tend to present you with "here is a company of strykers, here's a hill I need you to take, go". Both can be good. The former can feel more similar to tactical decision games - abstracted discussion-puzzles which may not have a "correct" solution, but usually have a ton of wrong ones. That can be really useful for creating a narrative (important if you're trying to recreate a specific battle), or exploring an unusual situation (e.g., how do you deal with an armoured attack with limited AT weaponry?). The latter tend to be more generic - you often have a force which matches the on-paper force numbers (i.e., this is a full platoon or company, with the expected force numbers, ammo and weapons), and the situation tends to be more conventional - the enemy might also represent a typical force, and the focus is on how these troops can be used most effectively. Both have a place. I think I generally prefer the latter, but it really depends on what you're after. In terms of CMBS examples - I'd put "An August Morning" in the former category, and "Into the Breach" in the latter, although the classifications are vague.
  12. domfluff

    Civilian Spies

    Yeah, I think it's not intended behaviour. They should be really tough to spot, and a vital part of uncon strategy - invisible spies are a really powerful advantage, even if they don't have radios.
  13. To use the Hull Down command you have two options, but really I suggest you only use one. - Hull Down is a movement command, so place the "Hull Down" waypoint in the direction you want to move. - Typically, I will place this just over the top of a ridge crest. - From the Hull Down waypoint, place a Target order on the spot you want to be hull down towards. - The vehicle will then rumble forward and stop when it is hull down to that specific action spot. Careful selection of this point is important - you don't want to be hull down to something, which exposes you to something else. It's a really powerful tool, and the alternatives only really work as well if you're lucky with topography (doing it manually) or can see the enemy (hunt). If you place a Hull Down command without a Target order, the vehicle will move until it is hull down to the hull down waypoint. This is much harder to control. Do this: As pointed out, the risk to the exact example above is that if your hull down point isn't visible, the vehicle will crest the hill and move to the other side. You could make this move safer by moving the Hull Down waypoint to your side of the ridge, but the risk there is that you may not have LOS to the target. Personally, I take the risk, and it seems to work out fine. "Assault" is the other automated command, and is much more restrictive. I use it in specific circumstances, but it's not as powerful or universally useful as Hull Down. Other things: Smaller scenarios allow you to iterate faster. You're more likely to lose the whole game in a single bad turn, but it will be faster to pick up again. I definitely feel that smaller scenarios are useful for learning. Elite or Iron. I much prefer Iron, most people I play seem to like Elite. They're mostly the same.
  14. CMSF 2 demo has a single tutorial mission (Stryker platoon attacking a village). I know the actual CMSF 2 manual (as with all of them) has a fully stepped-out tutorial, but I don't think the demo manual does. I don't think the CMSF 2 manual is available for download anywhere.
  15. domfluff

    How to use insurgent forces???

    Armour missions were in CMSF 1, but not later games. For 155's at least, there aren't any actual-armour piercing rounds, so they'll still be using the same HE stuff. There's a debate elsewhere in the forum about this. CMSF 1 manual has: General - generic setting Armor - weights towards anti-armor rounds Personnel - weights in favor of airburst antipersonnel rounds Which for the 155's, if there is a difference, can only be differences in fuses, whether they explode above the target, or on it.