Jump to content
Battlefront.com

Soft launch... CMBS Battle Pack 1

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, kraze said:

Hey guys I've completed mission 4 (US Total Victory) with touching OBJ Charlie Mike (was its name I think?) and briefing said it will cause my forces to attack an EW site

But the next mission was me pushing through phase lines to attrit enemy forces. Is that OK? Maybe I misunderstood something?

(as a side note this mission's briefing image mentions 3 objectives that you need to occupy but they are from the mission 4 and are not present)

The opportunity to take out the EW site itself isnt a playable mission. Ishould have been more clear. But selecting that means the Russians will not have EW capabilities in future missions at the cost of less resupply for your forces.

 

I'll look at the graphics.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you check the CP 222 objecticve in "The Rockets Red Glare" mission? I had units on it but it was not reflected in the AAR.

I too was confused by the EW site description.

Really enjoying the campaign! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was wondering whether or not the new CMBS Battle Pack finally is out on the steppe proper, allowing long range gunnery and missile fires, not to mention giving the Russians and Ukrainians the ability to use their mobile BSRs and such as they were designed to be used, capabilities severely constrained by short LOS distances in the core game? Right now, considering I've been in no shape to play CMBS for months, it seems like a bad idea to buy it, so I'm hoping someone who has will kindly answer my question. 

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2017 at 6:43 AM, John Kettler said:

Was wondering whether or not the new CMBS Battle Pack finally is out on the steppe proper, allowing long range gunnery and missile fires, not to mention giving the Russians and Ukrainians the ability to use their mobile BSRs and such as they were designed to be used, capabilities severely constrained by short LOS distances in the core game? Right now, considering I've been in no shape to play CMBS for months, it seems like a bad idea to buy it, so I'm hoping someone who has will kindly answer my question. 

Regards,

John Kettler

I don't think the Battle Pack includes any Steppe scenarios. But I agree scenarios set in Southern Ukraine on the steppes would certainly be good. Many of these would I think be relatively small ( company or so f tanks with supporting infantry and helicopters tank battle on large maps allowing maneuver and long range engagement.

Another possibility might be a modernized version of a small part of II SS Panzer Korps battle in the Rive Mius (ate July/early August as described in Nipe's Decision n Ukraine with the Germans replaced by US and Ukrainian forces. \This scenario will take pace towards the end of August as the war draws towards a close assuming here the US victory branch. The Russians will be well dug in with fairly extensive minefields As with the historical WW2 battles temperatures would be very high 

https://opentopomap.org/#map=6/50.057/32.607

Anyway there s this very useful mapping app that you may be aware of which will be very useful. The only drawback is that the Ukrainian place names seem to be Cyrillic. I am not entirely certain either in regard o whether the 1943 battle to which I refer was fought in what is now modern Ukraine or, as I suspect may be the case, some miles into Russia. Assuming the latter to be the case, and I suspect this my well be the case there is the risk that Russia would go nuclear. However this is a game and we could explain it away by saying there are negotiations in progress while this fighting is on-going. The Russians are blustering and making threats about nuclear weapons and there is some form of nuclear standoff prior to the political solution that ends the war. Arguably this Cuban Missile like crisis does much to scare both sides into agreeing a settlement. The US agrees to withdraw their forces from any Russian territory in exchange for any parts of Ukraine Russia occupies. No march on Moscow here. just very limited advances into Russia for largely political reasons

Edited by LUCASWILLEN05

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FIX LIST on new US Campaign

 

I am currently playing the US campaign - currently on Mission 6. The battles are very challenging. There are however some things to be fixed here and there:

On the right side of tactical map where the there is the list of assets and reinforcements, in some cases the information stated there is confusing.

In mission 1 (or was it 2?) the support battery comes after a very very long delay compared to its stated arrival time

In other missions, the tactical briefing screen lists a battery and one line below it mentions the same type battery with an assigned arrival time: One would expect to have two batteries available but this is not the case - only one battery is available which is the one in reinforcement. 

The tactical briefing in mission 5 mentions objectives which are remnants from mission 4 (there are no such objectives on the map)

SPOILERS..........

.

.

.

.

.

MISSION 6: At least one AI plan in mission 6 makes the mission unplayable  as the Russians advance with tanks and BMP-3s to overwatch positions close to and with direct LOS to the zone where the two platoons in reinforcement arrive.  

 

  

Edited by Euri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, first of all, thank you very much for trying the Battle Pack and I hope you are having fun with the battles. I've tried to make them challenging!

I will be doing an update soon based on the feedback posted here and that will be pushed out to you guys as soon as it's ready. No ETA yet but it's in progress.

One thing I wanted to ask is if anyone has played the separate battles in a head to head manner?  All of the seperate battles are tailored for head to head play instead of being optimized for play against the AI. If so, I would greatly appreciate feedback on those experiences.

Thanks again, I'll try to get the update out as soon as possible!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am v glad that BF is producing Battle Packs - with professionally done campaigns especially.  Campaigns are what make the CM2 system shine. But, user-made campaigns are very hard to come by vs scenarios due to work effort required so are well worth $.  (Imo it's worth paying up to $25 for a pack with more than 2 campaigns.)

There is a clamor for H2H scenarios.  But, do not most players play vs the AI?  Designing those should be easier as one needs to be less concerned about balance.  Winning an unbalanced game can usually be balanced by how the designer awards points for casualties.  eg: Some of the most challenging and rewarding scenarios and campaigns require very few friendly casualties.

PS:  Enjoying the new Russian campaign.  But, I find the high casualties so depressing (have burned out on mission 4 I think) and am now playing Grigsby's WITPAE for R&R(!)  This isn't a criticism of the campaign missions, just that I guess am not good enough at Russian SOP to make it work as it should.  :(   

I come away from playing CMBS with a sense of foreboding as to how lethal a modern war would be.  If CM2 is accurate it seems that the frontline troops and weapons systems would get massacred quickly.  What then will protect vs a threat from another nation?  ie:  We lose lots of good stuff vs the Russians leaving the west relatively weak vs the Chinese (or vice versa).  

I visualize the world in a situation similar to that prior to WW1 with very little prep for a horror that could happen very quickly.

Edited by Erwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Erwin said:

I visualize the world in a situation similar to that prior to WW1 with very little prep for a horror that could happen very quickly.

This was the situation from about 1948 until about 1985. The assumption was that if the ball went up in Europe, the only way to stop the Warsaw Pact would be to immediately go nuclear. There was no serious confidence that NATO ground forces would offer much more than token resistance. There wasn't even enough conventional ammunition stockpiled in the theater to last more than a few days. I wonder how well the planners slept.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually do not fear nuclear.  Biochem attack (possibly from a non state actor) is more probable.  But, believe that the next war will be fought primarily vs civilian pop via cyberwar.  Power grids, food and water supplies disrupted.  Widespread panic and massive civilian deaths - esp in places like LA where you have huge population and very few ingress and egress transportation infrastructure - v little chance of escape unless you have a chopper or boat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Erwin said:

...in places like LA where you have huge population and very few ingress and egress transportation infrastructure - v little chance of escape unless you have a chopper or boat.

Huh? When I lived in LA there were hundreds of routes by which you could drive out of the basin. As long as you had a functioning car and a tank of gas, you were good to go. Where I live now, on the Olympic Peninsula, would be much more vulnerable to isolation. In order to move anything in or out, you either have to take a ferry or cross a host of bridges across rivers. A few well-placed bombs and we'd be trapped without food and most every other thing that you buy in stores.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are forgetting the density of population.  18.68 million in LA area!

The freeways and main arteries in LA are already the most jammed up in the world.  Add panic and you can forget about driving anywhere.  Sure... some may know backroads thru the mountains with a 4x4.  But that won't help much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Erwin said:

You are forgetting the density of population.  18.68 million in LA area!

The freeways and main arteries in LA are already the most jammed up in the world.  Add panic and you can forget about driving anywhere.  Sure... some may know backroads thru the mountains with a 4x4.  But that won't help much.

Oh god 101 and 405 kill me every day.  And probably literally to others...  I feel like one has to spend a few days in LA to truly grasp how bad the traffic is.  Depending on the time of day, certain areas of the city are completely inaccessible due to car accidents and traffic.

Combine all of that with panic and more car accidents and congestion and it's going to be a bad day - even if no real attack takes place I could easily see thousands of casualties from the panic alone on the roadways.

Not to mention that LA has no resources to speak of to actually keep its citizens alive if the vast infrastructure bringing basic needs in from outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Erwin said:

You are forgetting the density of population.  18.68 million in LA area!

You have me there. When I moved there in 1963, the announced population of LA County was just a little over 3 million. The last time I visited was in 1974, and although I don't have any numbers for that date, it probably hadn't more than doubled in that time. So yes, LA was more civilized when I met it and only starting to change when I left it. Pity as it was a pretty nice place once upon a time.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I visited over twenty years ago and was staggered at the volume of traffic back then.  :o

The ochre smudge of pollution hanging over the LA skyline was something I'd not seen before.....We have that here now.  :(

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 3:16 AM, Euri said:

FIX LIST on new US Campaign

 

I am currently playing the US campaign - currently on Mission 6. The battles are very challenging. There are however some things to be fixed here and there:

On the right side of tactical map where the there is the list of assets and reinforcements, in some cases the information stated there is confusing.

In mission 1 (or was it 2?) the support battery comes after a very very long delay compared to its stated arrival time

In other missions, the tactical briefing screen lists a battery and one line below it mentions the same type battery with an assigned arrival time: One would expect to have two batteries available but this is not the case - only one battery is available which is the one in reinforcement. 

The tactical briefing in mission 5 mentions objectives which are remnants from mission 4 (there are no such objectives on the map)

SPOILERS..........

.

.

.

.

.

MISSION 6: At least one AI plan in mission 6 makes the mission unplayable  as the Russians advance with tanks and BMP-3s to overwatch positions close to and with direct LOS to the zone where the two platoons in reinforcement arrive.  

 

  

Thanks for the feedback, I will look into these and get an update out soon. FYI, all of the times on both sides have a random factor applied to reflect the reality that things do not always go according to plan. It sounds like you suffered from the worst possible case for that artillery support. That happens.

That one particularly aggressive Russian AI plan was supposed to surprise the reinforcements, that was my intent but they might be too close as you say. I will look at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2017 at 9:02 PM, Imperial Grunt said:

That one particularly aggressive Russian AI plan was supposed to surprise the reinforcements, that was my intent but they might be too close as you say. I will look at that.

It was a great idea. They just advance a few meters  too deep :-) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7th mission of the US campaing (the Cav is coming ... or something like that) is a gem.   BUT...it needs additional time. At least 15 mins more. Variable time wont do the trick because ... it is variable. For me it lasted +1 min and got a minor defeat in a totally won situation

Edited by Euri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you manage in mission 6(?) Rocket's Red Glare?

Where you start with but a recon platoon and a pair of ATGM Strykers but in just 2 minutes right after the start russians launch a massive attack throwing a good dozen of BMP3s and tanks at you - and there's like nothing I can do, maybe take 3 or 4 of them out before they mow down everyone - there's no time to launch precision strikes with arty even to at least kill some tank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, kraze said:

How do you manage in mission 6(?) Rocket's Red Glare?

Where you start with but a recon platoon and a pair of ATGM Strykers but in just 2 minutes right after the start russians launch a massive attack throwing a good dozen of BMP3s and tanks at you - and there's like nothing I can do, maybe take 3 or 4 of them out before they mow down everyone - there's no time to launch precision strikes with arty even to at least kill some tank.

 

 

Spoilers:

First, let me say I play in real time, which makes it easier to deal with the Russian probe. I got the sniper into the church in the center and he survived just long enough to call in an artillery strike on the Russian anti-air assets. This is critical to be able to call in the Apaches or they are quickly lost. Other units made it to the large building on the right where they played hide and seek until reinforcements arrived. (The javelin was able to take out two tanks.) It is also important to blunt the Russian armor somewhat or they will be sitting on top of your reinforcements when they arrive. The Strykers are very difficult to utilize in this situation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, tried that, tried many different variants but there are just way too much enemy armor and they overwhelm me in seconds even if I manage to take out 2 tanks and 3 BMPs near the large building to the right using ambush. There are just way too many of them and I have only a single Javelin team which at best manages to fire off one shot before enemies come too close - since I have only 90 seconds before the probe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SPOILERS

If you manage to isert quickly two fireteams carrying 2-3 AT tubes each in the big building on your right and, once you hear tanks and BMPs approaching, you withdraw them to the "back" rooms where they are not exposed to enemy fire (except if the enemy comes around the buidling) you have over 50% chance to hold the position and inflict heavy casualties to the advancing Russians. Just remember to withdraw your Strykers in to safety

Edited by Euri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...