Tactics forum

[rocketman]

BFC, is it possible to start a seperate strategy and tactics forum, like for CMSF, upon release of the game? It would be of great help, especially for us poor sods who has to make the transition to the modern era from WWII.

[MikeyD]

At least a sticky to keep the discussions at the top would be nice. There's going to have to be a lot of unlearning of 'bad habits' when transitioning from WWII to modern war. Of course 70 years ago they weren't considered to be 'bad habits' 

 

...hmmm, those extra- cute emoticons will take some getting used to.

[Jargotn]

Yeah. A place to duscuss and find tactics would be great. And with the new and shiny forum it would look even better!

[LC-]

Lord knows I need the help.  Why can the computer sneak up an entire company right up to my men in foxholes and remain undetected and know where I am, while my men even on hunt orders get spotted across the map while in heavy woods?

 

Sorry off topic but definitely a thumbs up from me for the tactics forum.

[womble]

Why can the computer sneak up an entire company right up to my men in foxholes and remain undetected and know where I am, while my men even on hunt orders get spotted across the map while in heavy woods?

 

 

For the first, I'd suspect the overuse of "Hide" orders. For the second, "Hunt" provides no concealment advantage and it's very likely indeed that you're misinterpreting the terrain your men are Hunting in, and somewhat likely that you are, in addition, expecting too much concealment of too little vegetation depth.

 

To expand: if you're using Hide in foxholes, your troops will be face down in the dirt and even the ones occasionally "Spotting" may well not peek over the rim of their scrapes. They will spot very ineffectively. The enemy could have spotted your troops with an asset other  than those that are advancing on you, on a well-concealed elevation out of effective weapon range (if it was within effective range it'd be firing on you and you'd know about it).

 

As to the "Heavy Woods" thing, you first have to grok that "lots of trees" does not equal "good concealment for the troops among them". Then you have to refine your understanding by recognising that the terrain under the trees is the important thing; it can vary from bare dirt to heavy woods. Heavy woods is rare; most terrain under trees is "Light woods" which gives some concealment, or lesser levels of vegetation which might give almost none to standing/moving soldiers. You can identify the heavy woods action squares if you have vehicles by selecting a vehicle, choosing a movement order and hovering the mouse over wooded Action Spots: Heavy Woods ASs will change the mouse cursor to "impassable". The third element of the terrain troika is the depth of the terrain. What matters is not what terrain your troops are standing in, but how much concealment-providing terrain is between your most visible troops and the observer. If your team is in an edge AS of a light woods patch, there's probably only a couple of metres of concelament between your most exposed pTruppe and any watching eyes. Being one row back in the woods will make that more like 10m. The average goes from 4m to 12m.

 

This is not your normal wargame where puting an element in a "woods hex" gives your harrassers a "-2". It's orders of magnitude more nuanced than that.

[agusto]

I would like to have a tactics subforum too. It is not a bad thing to have all tactics related threads in one place. When i was new to CMSF (my first CM game) many of the threads in the CMSF tactics sub forum  provided me with great help and i certainly wouldnt have learned the game as fast as i did without the tactics forum. When i look at CMBN, on the other hand, you ll have to look through lots and lots of forum page to get to the tactic-relevant threads - something not everybody does.

So, given that it is litterally just 5 clicks for the admins to make a tactics subforum, i would say the gain from having such a forum significantly outweights the effort of making one.

Edited December 21, 2014 by agusto

[nik mond]

Maybe combo it up. As a "Tactics and AAR" sub forum just to keep it dynamic.

[pnzrldr]

Thermal sights in CMBS will give everyone fits.  INF can be seen through fairly heavy trees, and what can be seen can be killed.  I'm sure we'll hear holy cain about it, but I think it is a fairly good model of reality.  You need LOTS of trees, or better yet, buildings in the way.  But I digress...  

 

Perhaps Bil will dust off his tactics blog - it is pretty good, and you can link to it at the bottom of his signature last I looked.

[leakyD]

Thermal sights in CMBS will give everyone fits.  INF can be seen through fairly heavy trees, and what can be seen can be killed.

 

This, plus APS, I think, will be most challenging. Completely different approach with reacting to new tech, even if coming from CMSF.

 

I remember fuzzy blobs with the M2 thermals in '91. From Youtube videos I've seen, the new stuff is ridiculously more accurate and detailed!

[MikeyD]

Older equipment dies a lot in this game. Play older equipment like its WWII. Keep them unbuttoned as much as you dare or else their situational awareness drops like a stone. I've had buttoned-up BDRMs on a map, no enemy in sight. Unbuttoned them and immediately its "Oh look! Four enemy vehicles!"

[Buzz]

"...what can be seen can be killed....."

 

Drones may reveal the battlefield as never before... then what was unseen... unknowingly becomes a doornail waiting for the unseen hammer

[Ketz]

Maybe combo it up. As a "Tactics and AAR" sub forum just to keep it dynamic.

Delurking just to say I really like this idea, since AAR's are a great way to learn.

[antaress73]

drones will die quickly against modern air defenses... from what I read

[MikeyD]

And they do in the game.    I understand (real world) Ukraine has grounded its own small drone fleet due to persistent Russian ECM jamming

[John Kettler]

Ketz,

 

Welcome aboard!

 

pnzrldr,

 

There's a simple, very effective and nasty trick that can be used to defeat thermals and visual detection if back in a wood line. I learned it from my dad, who honchoed the technical side at Hughes EDSG (Electro-Optical and Data Systems Group) of the DTV for the Abrams and the TWS for individual and heavy weapons. The approach goes like this. Build a wooden frame wider and taller than the tank. Cover it with aluminized Mylar. Erect in front of tank. Visual observers will see trees. Thermal devices won't see the tank, but will instead see the thermal background of trees and soil. Wait until the enemy gets close enough (spotters), then drop the screens. Holy deadly surprise engagement, Batman! This has been tested in the field and worked great.

 

MikeyD,

 

You wouldn't be drawing any conclusions from the veritable annihilation of pnzrldr's Ukrainian BMP-2s, would you? It's like watching a master class in massacre! As for Ukraine's drones, if they're COTs, then they're effectively wide open to jamming, with crashes being the likely outcome. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler