Jump to content

kinophile

Members
  • Content Count

    1,592
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from CMFDR in Your one golden Tactical Rule   
    I'm bored blind on set today so... 
    Interested in your 1 Golden Rule for combat within CMBS. 
    Now, I don't mean your various macro/micro tactics for the different units,  but 1 simple,  hard and fast tactical,  in-battle rule you try to live and die by. 
    (nor do I mean your OOB selections etc) 
    Eg. 
    1. Always have a flanking attack as part of my main attack. 
    I call it my Perpendicular Rule - whatever attack is launching also have a secondary attack perpendicular to the main axis. I find every single time I ignore that rule it costs me far too much to succeed. 
    I apply this at the map wide scale all the way down to Squad/vehicle level. 
    I'm sure this is blindingly obvious to anyone with military training,  but it's still no harm to articulate it :-)
  2. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from Artkin in KinoMAP - "Fighting Blind" [WIP] HvH   
    Yah I learnt that the hard way on my first maps  Starting from scratch this. 
    Here's the current build. 
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/mhb2znc9gtywvy0/Fighting Blind.btt?dl=0
     
     
  3. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to BTR in Operating your IFV/APC under the threat of Javelin   
    Your scouting vehicles should be your UAVs, this is a 21st century battlefield dammit 😄! 
  4. Upvote
    kinophile got a reaction from sburke in THIS GAME......IS AMAZING   
    And that's just v AI (I assume). 
    Wait till you try H2H and get the moment of OHNOYOUDONTOH****YOUDID
  5. Upvote
    kinophile got a reaction from rocketman in THIS GAME......IS AMAZING   
    And that's just v AI (I assume). 
    Wait till you try H2H and get the moment of OHNOYOUDONTOH****YOUDID
  6. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to IICptMillerII in Operating your IFV/APC under the threat of Javelin   
    I actually disagree with this. Yes, the javelin is a very effective anti-tank weapon. However, so was the Pak 40 in WWII, or an Abrams in hull down in the modern titles. I don't think your approach to operating in a javelin environment is much different than any other anti-tank weapons environment. The same principles apply. Cover and concealment are still your best bet, regardless of what you're up against. 
    People tend to think that modern warfare requires a whole new set of tactics in order to be successful. This generally isn't the case. Weapon systems in the modern age tend to be more lethal due to their first shot accuracy, and spotting ability across the board has increased as well. The same basic rules still apply however. If the enemy javelins cannot see you, then they cannot kill you. Suppressing fire is just as effective against a modern javelin as it is against a WWII anti-tank gun. Its just now the javelin is harder to spot, and once it's fired you're likely out of luck. 
    Others have touched on it, but I'll repeat because I think its worth stating again. A good fires plan goes a long way to mitigating all sorts of anti-tank threats, be it javelins, AT-14s, or guys with RPGs. As an example, I know a lot of people expressed frustrations with the "Passage to Wilcox" scenario in the SF2 demo, but from the American side. There is a battery of AT-14s that can cause some real havoc if you aren't careful. However, the briefing warns you of this threat, and even tells you roughly where they are on the map. So, as part of my overall fires plan, I made sure to dedicate a section (2 tubes) of 120mm mortars to put the suspected AT-14 position under a constant rain of fire during my initial movement phase. I did that by setting the fire mission to a long mission, but a light rate of fire. That way only 4-6 or so shells were landing a minute, thus preserving the mortar ammunition, but this was still more than enough to suppress the AT-14s and even knocked at least one of them out. The rest I was able to destroy with direct fires from my tanks and Bradleys, which didn't take any fire from the AT-14s as the gunners were too busy hugging the dirt from the mortars. 
    For Red Forces, be it Russian or Syrian, a detailed and accurate fires plan is extremely important. You can suppress, destroy, or at the very least deny enemy javelin teams from setting up in advantageous positions. That can buy you time to maneuver into an advantageous position for your own forces, where you can start to bring direct fires to bear on suspected and known anti-tank positions. Easier said than done of course, but it is certainly doable. 
    One last note I think is worth mentioning, using infantry as recon is very useful when facing javelins. Their handheld optics might not be as good as the ones mounted in vehicles, but they are also much easier to maneuver and conceal than vehicles are, and javelins will generally not engage them unless ordered to. Worst case scenario, you lose a recon team to a javelin, but now that's one less javelin missile you have to worry about. Best case, you are able to spot enemy anti-tank teams with your infantry and neutralize them without losing your armor. Again, easier said than done, but its quite possible. 
  7. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from CMFDR in New Manual   
    @Oleksandr's thread on tactics got me thinking...
    I've always hated the current CM manual style. I'm heavily trained & experienced in visual design so I thought, well, why not? 
    So I'm now redesigning and formatting the manual in a tongue-in-cheek FM-001 style, in InDesign.
    COVER SHEET:

    Obviously that's my own CM:BS logo. I was a bit lazy and don't have the correct, official one handy.
    Still, this gives you an idea....
  8. Upvote
    kinophile got a reaction from HerrTom in Scenario "Brutal" is exactly that - Brutal...   
    Ive found a combo of street fighting with an exterior flanking force (usually through the little village at left, then across the river and up over the slope in front) is good. But that force must NOT break out too soon. 
    Also, Peter has some nasty AI plans in there, so keeping that flanking force as a mobile, last ditch reserve is very useful. I once had to return the entire force (1.5 pltns plus 2 atgm teams) to deal with a very bad MBT charge up the main street. 
    Brilliant scenario, one I very consciously emulate and keep in mind when designing.
    Its cray-cray v. humans
  9. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from gnarly in How do you counter tanks with ERA?   
    UKR can be depressing. I recently fired 3 ATGM in quick succession against a T72. Just got soaked up by the ERA. 
    Made the next few turns very exciting, which is why I play UKR in the first place. :) 
    The lesson is that with RUS ATGM you're not guaranteed a kill, buts probable. 
    With UKR ATGM you really better have a back-up plan and assume 50/50 failure. 
    With US its fire n forget, brah. Press the trigger and refresh Facebook. 

  10. Upvote
    kinophile got a reaction from Artkin in How do you counter tanks with ERA?   
    UKR can be depressing. I recently fired 3 ATGM in quick succession against a T72. Just got soaked up by the ERA. 
    Made the next few turns very exciting, which is why I play UKR in the first place. :) 
    The lesson is that with RUS ATGM you're not guaranteed a kill, buts probable. 
    With UKR ATGM you really better have a back-up plan and assume 50/50 failure. 
    With US its fire n forget, brah. Press the trigger and refresh Facebook. 

  11. Upvote
    kinophile got a reaction from HerrTom in How do you counter tanks with ERA?   
    UKR can be depressing. I recently fired 3 ATGM in quick succession against a T72. Just got soaked up by the ERA. 
    Made the next few turns very exciting, which is why I play UKR in the first place. :) 
    The lesson is that with RUS ATGM you're not guaranteed a kill, buts probable. 
    With UKR ATGM you really better have a back-up plan and assume 50/50 failure. 
    With US its fire n forget, brah. Press the trigger and refresh Facebook. 

  12. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from Sgt.Squarehead in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Very well put.
    Also good for Last Stand type fights. I've a Urban map in my head for Human v fanatical AI. Only possible with that ballast. 
    @Sgt.SquareheadI haven't had the pleasure of your Mosul map but I assume you're using this approach to maximise the AIs "tenacity". 
  13. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to tpr in Reshade 4.0.2 Primer   
    Spinning can be stopped by simply setting "input processing" to "pass on all input". Yes everything what you do is also done in game but still makes things less nauseous and way easier so check your effect results.
    Also when ending up in menu with enabled reshade and getting the flower power visuals simply deactivate it now with your hotkey and locate any ingame Combat Mission menu button with your cursor and click it. Your screen will become normal again, no biggie.
  14. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to LongLeftFlank in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Hmm. Instant resort to ad hominem attack, plus entirely fanciful assertion that I have spent significant time commenting on your posts seems... faintly familiar.
    Mr. Tittles, is that you?
  15. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to Heirloom_Tomato in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Creating scenarios is a challenge and most of the ones I start to make are played be me once or twice and then another idea comes up I would like to try so the original one ends up being left for another day. I like the special forces type of scenarios @slysniper @Sgt.Squarehead and @Combatintman were talking about and took the time to make one I felt was good enough to be released to the community. Here it is:  http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-black-sea/cm-black-sea-add-ons/vega-force/ Give it a whirl and provide some feedback. 
    I have read through this whole thread and this comment really gets me. I am curious @SimpleSimon, which scenarios have you made and released to the community? I am interested in trying out one you have made to see how it compares to other community or Battlefront made scenarios. 
     
  16. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from Josey Wales in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Calm down.
    This forum doesn't need this kind of acidic negativity. 
    It's the the interwebs, lad. Nothing is real, nothing matters. Give the emotional outrage a rest.
  17. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to umlaut in Black Friday or Cyber Monday Sale?!?!?!   
    But why not, if it turns out to be the best game you´ve ever purchased?

    I have bought scores of games during the last couple of decades - and CMBN was surely the most expensive single purchase. But most of the cheap games I´ve bought were probably cheap because nobody wanted to pay full price for them. So in some cases I have paid 10 $ for a game I have scrapped after two hours. 10 $ might be cheap for a game - but is 5 $ an hour cheap?

    The 60 $ I paid  for CMBN has given me thousands of hours worth of enjoyable gameplay for the past seven years. So in terms of cent pr. hour it is the cheapest game I ever bought.
     
  18. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to slysniper in Black Friday or Cyber Monday Sale?!?!?!   
    It sure is funny how most of the people who complain about price and why is the games not on sale for bargain prices are people who have a handful of comments on the site and are recent new members.
    In other wards I see them as typical gamers expecting the same thing they see with most of the rest of the industry. Expecting to get something for almost nothing after a short life span of the product , with a newer version out and selling again for that company.
    They have never played any game for any extended period of time and are just waiting for the next thing on the market that they can consume.
    The concept of a game with depth and years of endless playability is not a possibility in their thought process. Let alone a fact that the company is not capable of putting out new versions in a year or two with staffs in the hundreds to do such things. A product with only a handful of guys working on and making adjustments to and no ability to try and push the graphic limits of the present home computer each and every year.
    They see it as a unknown logic in the world that they live in and cannot accept it.
    I find it funny. BF is two guys that came from that world and hated it, created their own way to run and manage their game and have done what they wanted and made the life they wanted for themselves and provided us with games no one in the all powerful industry want to do.
    So Bf keep selling and doing business how you want. I appreciate the games too much to care about sales and how they do business.
  19. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to ASL Veteran in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    There actually is another time factor that some may consider.  For players who prefer to play head to head games most players seem to prefer playing scenarios with shorter time lengths to scenarios with longer time lengths.  I assume that's because of how long it takes to complete a game head to head and so the longer the scenario length is the fewer people will tend to play it head to head.  Other players who play against the AI may also prefer shorter length scenarios because they simply don't have the time available to play something for two hours or more.  So the designer may think that four hours is the perfect amount of time for the scenario that they are designing, but when players see that four hour time limit they immediately think 'nope, too long' and skip it because the length of time given is a factor in whether or not players choose to play something.  Number of units is another factor of course, and many of the longer scenarios are also some of the larger ones in terms of forces involved, but that isn't always the case.  In most cases the map size should probably dictate the game length and if a WW2 infantry soldier can't walk to every objective area with a few minutes for fighting tossed in then the scenario length is too short.  Modern scenarios can have shorter time lengths than the WW2 ones since everyone is typically vehicle mounted and vehicles shrink map sizes for access purposes.  
    Now some players who choose the shorter time length scenario may wish that they had more time when they are in the middle of playing said scenario, but at the same time those same players may have been using that shorter time as a basis for choosing that scenario in the first place.  That's why I have only exceeded two hours one time for any scenario I've ever created.  Longer times will scare players off from even looking at something in many cases simply because of the perceived investment of time the player thinks he has to make in order to play the scenario even though a longer length scenario doesn't necessarily need to 'go the distance' in order for a winner to be decided.
  20. Like
    kinophile got a reaction from benpark in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Calm down.
    This forum doesn't need this kind of acidic negativity. 
    It's the the interwebs, lad. Nothing is real, nothing matters. Give the emotional outrage a rest.
  21. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to DerKommissar in More drama in Ukraine--Sea of Azov   
    Yeah, even more reason it's strange that USMC, Ukranian Marines and VMF don't appear in Black SEA.
  22. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to Erwin in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    This temptation is understandable.  But, my experience is that one learns more and faster by overcoming one's shock, readjusting one's plans and keeping on going with what forces one still has - like one would have to do in RL.  
    Generally I save every 5 turns and restart the previous save when the game system does something really dumb/unrealistic and one loses something cos of "design/system error" rather that one's own mistakes - eg when a doorway turns out to not work and the unit runs out to the street to be massacred instead...
     
  23. Upvote
    kinophile got a reaction from General Jack Ripper in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Calm down.
    This forum doesn't need this kind of acidic negativity. 
    It's the the interwebs, lad. Nothing is real, nothing matters. Give the emotional outrage a rest.
  24. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to domfluff in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    Broadly, I think there are two types of CM scenarios (with a lot of overlap).

    You have scenarios that are trying to create a narrative, and you have scenarios that are more "sandbox" in nature.

    The latter tend to be of the form: "You have a by-the-book US Rifle company, and you have to take that position how you see fit, go", and tend to be sandbox games.

    The former tend to look like Tactical Decision Games "You have a US rifle company, and you have to take that position, BUT x and y condition", or even "You have a rifle company, you take those positions, oh lawd there's a panzer platoon coming"


    I do think there's room for both, but since CM doesn't have the strongest tools for creating narrative (scripting, etc.), the sandbox scenarios are frequently stronger.

    This means that the limitations on those need to be a little more lax. For a Tactical Decision Game, you can ask questions like "how would you defend this village from an armoured attack, with only handheld anti-tank weaponry?", and this can be an engaging puzzle, but the Sandbox style should be more like "How would you defend this village from an armoured attack with a rifle platoon?".

    Limited timings can be an important tool for both of these. There are endless scenarios where the balance isn't quite right - scenario design and testing is hard - but to ignore time is pretty much the same thing as ignoring any other limitations ("I don't have enough AT guns", "I don't have enough troops", etc.). For the TDG-style scenario, this can be part of the point - you might have to work out how to achieve an objective under severe time pressure, and that's as authentic a situation as anything. For a sandbox-style, I would suggest that the timings should be a little more lax, since you're allowing room for creativity.
  25. Upvote
    kinophile reacted to Ithikial_AU in How I view most scenarios and the designers...   
    For purposes of my argument below I'm defining the following terms as:
    Tools - Units given the player to fight the engagement.
    Parameters - Map size, time limits, objectives etc, the variables that can be adjusted by the designer to promote a certain type of play.
    Purely my opinion but the best scenarios in CM are the ones where the designers give the player a clear objective (and secondaries if applicable), a set of tools to use and then let them loose to solve the problem in any way they see fit. When designers start reducing parameters like time allocation and map sizes/design in certain ways they are promoting a certain type of play. This usually means designers are restricting the player to follow a linear path to completing the objectives. Inappropiate map sizes for the forces provided to both sides and restrictive time limits are the usual things I've noticed that designers turn to increase difficulty or try to push the player to follow a historical pathway. Even with some of the stock scenarios I've played, I've come away thinking did they just reduce 30mins from the time allocation to up the difficulty?
    That's not to say time shouldn't be a factor for scenarios and racing the clock is certainly viable in some situations, however design and narratively speaking it has to make sense. If you are assualting an entrenched enemy position and you as the player are told you are commanding the main effort, your superior officer is not going to care if it takes you an extra 30 minutes to take that final position. This is where my victory points allocated by time taken comes into play and frees up designers to be more flexible when setting a scenarios parameters. If you take that final objective but you required those extra 30 minutes you won't get the additional victory points that would of made it a total victory... but please keep fighting the battle until you complete it.
    Oh and if you are designing a campaign and force me to rush a large map within an hour and then expect the same force to do it all over again with no replacements...  

    @George MC is still the master of getting the balance between tools and parameters right in my opinion. If you haven't played this one yet, you've been missing out...
    http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons-scenarios/der-ring-der-5-panzer-division/
    My thoughts above also do not mean all battles need to be battalion(+) affairs to give the player variety, however the time allocation and map size should be adjusted based on amount of and the type of forces involved in the battle.
×
×
  • Create New...