NeoOhm

I got them!
I flanked from the back/side after knocking out a Panther. They got a Russian BBQ.

 
CM Red Thunder 2022-08-02 14-48-04-50.bmp

Interesting - never noticed that b4.

yep about 1 round every 10 seconds in direct fire mode for a mounted German 81mm mortar

There are a couple of issues with the way mounted mortars work currently:
The mortar fires very slowly while it is inside the vehicle.
  The mortar vehicle cannot be ordered to move to a location and immediately open fire from there, like any other unit can, by selecting the final move point and making a target order from there. Instead, you need to move to the location first and then the following turn you can issue the fire order to the mortar unit inside the halftrack. However, you cannot be sure that the mortar will have LOF from that location, so you sometimes need to spend several turns moving it around one turn, checking fire next turn, etc.
  Mortar halftracks cannot fire the last 24 shells for some reason. You need to unmount the mortar unit to fire those.
  I still hope some of these issues will be fixed.

Does depend on how you fire them.
Direct LOS fire is more accurate and for that mounted IMO is as good as dismounted but has advantage mortar team protected better from incoming fire and can quickly displace if needs be i.e. drive the SPW off and away.
Indirect fire not noticed any difference but then idirect fire via a spotted does depend on experience etc of the person calling in the fire so might take longer to get rounds on target accurately if spotter bit rubbish.
Obvious advantage of SPW mounted mortar is it quickly can come into action where needed(no set-up time etc); its lightly armoured so gives some protection against incoming small arms fire/shell splinters .

I have not tested mounted/unmounted mortars so dont really know but it cant be that big of a difference. What I do know is that on map mortars are more accurate than off map mortars. 

The Battle for Highway E97
Size: Small
400m x 1000m
https://www.mediafire.com/file/at4xaiw54kjqeqs/Battle_for_E97_v1.zip/file
THIS MAP WAS MADE WITH CMBS ALL IN ONE MOD ASSETS 
Hello All,
A few days ago I saw a video of a Russian element, perhaps platoon sized, ambushing two UA BRDM-2s and dismounts. The video can be found here if youre interested. I had thought that the are looked interesting, the Ukrainian commander was confronted by an exception circumstance, and it appeared a sharp firefight resulted from the contact. To me these all seem like the ingredients for an interesting CM map, so thats what I made. In testing though I found that there isn't actually much to it. The firefight is intense, but short. Either the RA crushes the convoy before the BRDMs return fire, or they get suppressed and picked apart. The scenario exists as an interesting 'test' of the TACAI in a real world inspired situation, but ultimately it was my conclusion that TACAI on both sides often overperformed what the video suggests that actual results were. Looking at what I was making I think the map and the tactical situation lends itself to an interesting CM fight if I was willing to deviate a bit from the footage I was referencing. Therefore in the .zip file you will find 3 scenarios, two serious and one for fun, all based on this real world engagement. 
Scen 1- As it Happened (AIH): This scenario is based on the video footage as seen, as well as some normal mapmaking tools like Google Earth. It is possible to play either the RA or UA side, both are recommended. I find it is easiest to replicate the simulated engagement with the RA side. My suggestion is to wait until the BRDMs move into the kill zone and then push your forward to the crest of the berm. DO NOT SET TARGET ARCS OR MANUAL TARGETS. Either gives your forces a big advantage, especially against the BRDMs. In most of my testing what happens next conforms, more or less, to what happened in the video. For the UA, if you wish the pursue the historical plan, Set up a path of 'FAST' movement orders through the arcing portion of the highway. On the first action square of the 'straightaway' set your BRDMs to either 'quick' or 'move' (I prefer quick). Once the Russians start hammering you, dismount and engage. I find that from the UA perspective, results tend to skew towards either extreme. Either you get wiped out in a turn, or your BRDMs turn around and open fire, pinning the Russians. Really I find this scenario to be an interesting test of TACAI against a real world scenario. Its a case study of just one, so its results dont really mean anything, but I found that both the Russians and the Ukrainians tend to be more lethal, shoot more accurately, than what we saw in the video. This is doubly true if the player interacts even a little bit with their forces, as the Russians its not hard to wipe out the BRDMs if you want to do that. 
A couple notes regarding scenario design: First, there is no right or wrong way to play it, but there is an intended way. The intention is to give you an encounter like is seen in the video. You can try multiple approaches if you'd like, but if you diverge too much from the premise you can quite easily break the AI and produce unusual results. Second, the force composition may look a bit....odd... for both sides. For the RA, I wanted scout teams that had no RPGs. None appear in the video and obviously at the ranges were talking about RPGs would be murderous. But I would have to drop the ammo levels to 'severe' to do it and found that had a negative impact on the Russian's ability to ambush the BRDMs. But I realized that if I swapped scout squads for 1 FO and 1LMG squad each, I maintained the same weight of fire without either bringing RPGs. For the UA the problem is a bit different and relates to the BRDM's modeled carrying capacity. BRDMs are modeled with a crew of 2 and a carry capacity of 4 dismounts. I have no idea where this info comes from, but I generally think BFG's modeling is pretty reliable. The video claims a UA strength of 14+ which, to me, just seems way to high. Unless they were also riding Desant, but I dont think the video establishes that. The issue for the UA force in the scenario is that it doesn't all fit onto the BRDMs. The TOE force would be a six man recon squad plus a two man HQ. But the recon squad splits into three and three, meaning it doesnt fit into the BRDM with the HQ team. So either I deleted the HQ to fit in the squad, or I developed a different option. Ultimately I made a decision to make the scenario a bit more interesting, but a little less like the video. I kept the HQ platoon mounted in the BRDM and added an attached LMG squad, increasingly slightly the firepower for the recon squad. The leftover three man team I put into a building marked 'Survivors!' The objective ultimately is to extract the survivor team. The survivor team CAN interfere with the if put on the 2nd level or roof. If you want to keep them out of the action, put them on the 1st floor, restricted target arc, and on hide. 
Scen 2- Enhanced (E):  The second included Scenario is called 'Enhanced' and tries to make a traditional CM mission out of what footage we saw. The objectives are the same, though point values have been rebalanced. Scout the convoy route and extract survivors for the UA, destroy follow on forces for the RA. But the forces have been increased to roughly Platoon vs. Coy (-). The Russians have received two more scout platoons, complete with RPGs, as well as some light armored vehicle support. The UA received the support of a 'Quick Reaction Force' made up of the leftover squad from the 2nd recon platoon as well as the entirety of the 1st recon platoon. These are mounted mostly in BTR-70s, though one BTR-4E has also been included for heavy lifting. The QRF also comes with an MT-LB for the player to use extracting the survivors, which have also increased in number. Both sides get mortar support. Ultimately the UA has an advantage here in mobility and vehicle support, but the RA has infantry numbers and the stronger position. This scenario is best played either HTH or Blue vs AI. It has both Red and Blue AI plans, but I spent way more time working on the Red AI than the Blue. TBH I just dont think any blue AI would be capable of doing what I want them to do, the survivors would be sitting ducks in an extraction to any human with half a brain. I do think though that this scenario would be really interesting for HTH play, it could be worth a try. So I did make sure every scenario contained an equivalent red briefing. 
The VPs have also been rebalanced here to reflect the new forces. Mostly the UA is working to deny the RA VPs. They gain points by touching the recon objectives and by hitting the listed casualty threshold. The RA gains points by killing UA soldiers via unit objectives. Survivor squads are worth the most, then squads in the BRDM platoon, then the lowest value is the QRF force. As the UA player, you want to risk your QRF troops while your Survivors the least. OTOH the RA is going to want to squeeze the survivor's position BEFORE the QRF can relieve them. 
Scen 3-UA is OP plz Nerf (UAOP): This is a joke scenario but I thought some might like a little catharsis. If you just want to blow the hell out of some Russians this is for you. It uses Scen 2 as a base but further modifies the UA force. The QRF has been reinforced to two platoons mounted in BTR-4Es. Two tanks from the commanders reserve have also been included as immobile bunkers. They have excellent FOV and can smash everything the Russians throw up. Oh and the Mortars have been upgraded to 122mm arty. And a little surprise from the UAF. 
If you keep the .zip around, you can just drop the single scenario you want to play into your scenario folder. No mess, no clutter!
I will follow this thread up with a thread of screenshots, stay tuned! 

Here is my take on the first scenario. 

The map is a interesting one tho, maybe expand the scenario a bit and make the road and bridge a HOLD object.
thank you for the link MOS!

In case you didn't see the below post from the Ukrainian topic.  A scenario in the same area was already made. 
 
 

I've got something cooking. Probably will be up tomorrow, I just have to write a scenario briefing. 

I rarely use 'Target' for area fire for just this reason, 'Target Briefly - 60 seconds' gets you the same result, but it saves you ammo & work too! 

Yes, that would be very useful for sound or verified contacts.  It's often hard to remember.

Yes.

You need both. The main folder of WARSAW mods is at the CMMODS. Then in my goodybox are my scenarios and a small set of mods I made for the overall project.

It's just a % probability assessed by the game system.  Nothing one can do.

As womble said, if you fire on-map indirect it isn't that precise anymore. The fall pattern is different IIRC, the oval oriented differently or something.
In CMCW you get 120mm mortars for direct fire. They mosh.
The fact that they can fire that quickly in direct fire is probably not realistic.

Little like a shotgun close you have a pattern over a distance it spreads. 

Bogged vehicles have a dice roll whether they become operational or go to immobilized, which is permanent.
I assume bogged vehicles make it to the next battle but I never encountered it.

First you need to discuss which game you talk about. A rookie FO in RT with a battery of Katyushas is different than an Elite FO in SF2 with a battery of mobile 155mm's. I play those two as follows by following tips. The FO in RT blast away for obscuration mostly in the beginning of a scenario. The Elite FO is different following my tip he selects the 155mm on Harass  for a long duration. During a battle he picks priority targets and targets of opportunity. I understand an FO uses a map grid for references, landmarks or his own position. Here is a link for you to watch. 
 

No, not really. Indirect fire is indirect. "Sniping" the MG nests and keyholed ATGs that you find "the hard way" is best done, usually, with mortars in "direct lay", with their own LOS to target. They can usually find some good concealment at a long enough range that they won't be spotted until after the bombs have started landing. You can use anything from 81mm down in this role, to good effect.

Pretty much the same as womble. For WW2 titles I usually drop it on key terrain that looks like it would contain enemies, usually a suspicious looking hill or treeline or something. On map artillery is for sniping machine gun nests or AT guns. For modern titles the call in times are usually so short I'll wait until I positively identify the enemy and just drop really short intense bursts right on top of them or walk the artillery around the map using the readjust fire option.

I tend to use called arty more for speculative "that looks like it might have some enemy in it" or "that looks like it'd be danged inconvenient if it had enemy in it" targets because using it "reactively", once you've positively identified something that needs removing is generally going to crimp my tempo. Positively identified targets are what on-map mortars tasked to support whatever maneuver elements are out front finding where the enemy really are (if they're not, as they usually aren't, underneath a pre-called barrage) are for.
I've no experience calling arty from off-map in the modern titles, this is with the level of delay inherent to the WW2 titles.

If your oppo is careless enuff to leave a lot of inf in the open long enuff for a barrage, that will cause casualties.  But, in CM arty fire is generally ineffective vs anything in buildings, and I find that arty kills very little compared to direct fire.
We used to mostly talk tactics when the games first came out.  But in recent years most discussion has become the equivalent of rivet counting - ie: arguing about whether a particular weapons system is accurately modeled etc.  rather than about anyone actually playing the game.
You need to chat with players.  I suggest you find one of the (few) forums that are discussing a specific scenario or campaign and see what other players are doing in their DAR's and AAR's and ask questions re "why did you do that" sort of thing.  Players will be happy to discuss tactics there.  

Guys
This thread will be used for me to advise you of updates and latest uploads to the aforementioned areas.
Its an ongoing process that Im working through but a quick update for this first post is....
The Scenario Depot III : Ive totally redesigned this and am working on fixing thumbnails so that the grid format looks good.  When uploading scenarios be sure to use a square image (any size) for your featured image.

The CM Mod Warehouse : A huge task that Im still plodding away at. Im tidying up all the downloads from the previous site and have also got a HDD full of mods from the mists of time that will eventually all get uploaded also.
The Proving Grounds II : This site is dead but I am going to work on it to turn TPGII into something new... possibly a challenge site or something along those lines... still to be decided.
Any updates I carry out or content uploaded you will be notified about in this thread.  
Thats all for now.
Thanks
Bootie