Jump to content

Recommended Posts

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmW_vcwM_qxukdDjpfUEerpICUzTrTKek

The full playlist for the Combat Mission: Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures project is linked above, including:

  • Combat Mission Normandy Tactics - by Jeffrey Paulding
  • Combat Mission Tips - by his1ojd
  • Combat Stress, Combat Shock & Morale - by Josey Wales
  • Combat Mission: Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures - by Chris Maillet (Me)

New, completed videos will be posted into this thread. Feel free to ask questions, make observations, or criticize anything you see.

This project would be worth nothing without your feedback.

 

Using excerpts from: FM 3-21.8 The Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad this video gives a brief explanation of how to utilize an infantry rifle squad in Combat Mission.

 

Using excerpts from: FM 3-21.8 The Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad and Bil Hardenberger's Blog: Battle Drill this video gives a brief explanation of how to utilize an infantry platoon in Combat Mission.

 

Using excerpts from: FM 3-21.10 The Infantry Rifle Company and Bil Hardenberger's Blog: Battle Drill this video gives a brief explanation of how to utilize an infantry company in Combat Mission.

The old thread in the CMBN forum is deprecated, and I will no longer be following it.

Edited by SLIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SLIM I think I caught a small error in your infantry squad video. At around 13:10, you say mortars are effective against entrenched enemies and wooden bunkers. I believe only the very biggest mortars can knock out wooden bunkers, and generally against entrenched infantry in foxholes and trenches, mortars are much less effective than direct fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

and generally against entrenched infantry in foxholes and trenches, mortars are much less effective than direct fire.

???

Literally the entire point of foxholes and trenches is that it protects infantry from direct fire, and fires in general, to include shrapnel from falling artillery. The best way to defeat these types of fortifications (aside from clearing them with your own infantry) is by using high angle of attack weapons, such as mortars. The whole reason modern armies such as Russia and the US are investing so much in airburst ammunition is for this reason. It gives direct fire weapons the same effect on target as high angle of attack weapons. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
56 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

and generally against entrenched infantry in foxholes and trenches, mortars are much less effective than direct fire.

???

Literally the entire point of foxholes and trenches is that it protects infantry from direct fire, and fires in general, to include shrapnel from falling artillery. The best way to defeat these types of fortifications (aside from clearing them with your own infantry) is by using high angle of attack weapons, such as mortars. The whole reason modern armies such as Russia and the US are investing so much in airburst ammunition is for this reason. It gives direct fire weapons the same effect on target as high angle of attack weapons. 

The point of foxholes and trenches is primarily to protect against artillery and mortars. In the game, the best way to clear foxholes and trenches is by tank fire, followed by small arms and machineguns from less than 300 metres. (if you have 4.0 installed, a few mortar rounds will make the troops leave their foxholes, but that's another discussion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

The point of foxholes and trenches is primarily to protect against artillery and mortars.

Wrong.

1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

In the game, the best way to clear foxholes and trenches is by tank fire, followed by small arms and machineguns from less than 300 metres.

Also wrong.

Deaf ears and all that, so I'll leave it to SLIM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IICptMillerII said:
3 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

The point of foxholes and trenches is primarily to protect against artillery and mortars.

Wrong.

3 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

In the game, the best way to clear foxholes and trenches is by tank fire, followed by small arms and machineguns from less than 300 metres.

Also wrong.

Deaf ears and all that, so I'll leave it to SLIM. 

Since you're a captain and I have no military background, I'm actually all ears to how I'm wrong here. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

@SLIM I think I caught a small error in your infantry squad video.

Well where were you a year ago when I posted the video? I'm not changing it now...

 

Quote

At around 13:10, you say mortars are effective against entrenched enemies and wooden bunkers. I believe only the very biggest mortars can knock out wooden bunkers, and generally against entrenched infantry in foxholes and trenches, mortars are much less effective than direct fire.

81mm Mortars will cause casualties in wooden bunkers either through direct hits, fragments entering the vision slit, or fragments entering the back door.
The problem with using them, is getting the required number of direct hits to achieve anything. At ranges above 500 meters, you'll be lucky to get a few direct hits, even with over 100 rounds fired. (Yes, I just spent an hour testing this...)
Obviously, if you have 75mm Pack Howitzers (or your local equivalent) available, use them, but by far the most common supporting weapon available to a single squad would be the Platoon (60mm) or Company (81mm) mortar section.

Remember, the video is about the SQUAD, not the Battalion.
If a single squad comes across a bunker, the LAST thing you want to do is sit there plinking away with your rifles.

Mortars easily shred infantry in trenches either with direct hits, or fragmentation, unless they're hiding.
Infantry set to 'HIDE' in trenches or bunkers are difficult to destroy by any means, but the problem is while they're hiding, they're not shooting at you.

 

57 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:

Literally the entire point of foxholes and trenches is that it protects infantry from direct fire, and fires in general, to include shrapnel from falling artillery. The best way to defeat these types of fortifications (aside from clearing them with your own infantry) is by using high angle of attack weapons, such as mortars.

This is 100% correct.

In fact, I just spent the last hour shooting at infantry in trenches with mortars, just to try to figure out what the deal is.

The casualty counts alone were decisive.

Bulletpoint, if you're resorting to direct fire high explosive and massed small arms fire to deal with entrenched positions, you're certainly wasting a lot of time and ammunition.
Just call in a Heavy/Maximum Linear Barrage, and simply march around the position, and move on towards your objective. They won't bother you again.

"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of mankind." ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to Thanks guys you may have just broken my string of victories against @Bulletpoint  :D  Kidding

But seriously not sure where you got that info on trenches, but just think for a minute.. an open topped trench is going help against mortars.. how?  Overhead cover from bunkers? Sure, but don't let the art work fool you.  Wooden bunkers in CM are meant to represent rudimentary structures.  An 81 mm round will defeat them.  Maybe not necessarily the first hit, but it will eventually.  60 mm not quite so effective, that's when you resort to Bazookas etc.

Edited by sburke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sburke said:

to Thanks guys you may have just broken my string of victories against @Bulletpoint  :D  Kidding

As I said at the opening of the thread, questions, criticism, or observation of any kind is perfectly welcome.

Beating these issues to death is one way to make sure everything gets sufficiently clarified. If we can do so without being abrasive, all the better.

Anyway, I may as well make the announcement here, there is a four-part video coming soon.

Appendix A - Street Fighting, is an unscripted ramble featuring my own observations on fighting down a street, and a few niggles about 4.0 infantry behavior.

My dedicated team of "a few dudes I wrangled into a message thread" are checking things out now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SLIM said:

As I said at the opening of the thread, questions, criticism, or observation of any kind is perfectly welcome.

Beating these issues to death is one way to make sure everything gets sufficiently clarified. If we can do so without being abrasive, all the better.

Anyway, I may as well make the announcement here, there is a four-part video coming soon.

Appendix A - Street Fighting, is an unscripted ramble featuring my own observations on fighting down a street, and a few niggles about 4.0 infantry behavior.

My dedicated team of "a few dudes I wrangled into a message thread" are checking things out now.

 

I think you mis understood.  I sarcastically meant to imply that Bulletpoint's misperception of the effectiveness of mortars had been used by me to best him.  No such battles ever took place.  Once again my attempt to make a joke fell flat.  Guess I should give up on that career goal of being the next Seinfeld...

At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed. Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

Instructive and  interesting video series, Maybe a few more videos covering aspects of modern warfare covering the differences between this and WW2 eg ATGMs drones, APS etc 

Those are plans for the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, weapon2010 said:

Is  there a random uncontrollability coded into the engine for realism purposes?

I'm fairly certain it's because of the new "Peek around corners" mechanic.
I'll be clipping out some video for a more formal report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very useful series of videos esp for newbies.  Comments: 

1) Shoulda given the first 3 man team a facing order to the right (away from the street) - IIRC that would prevent the one guy going out into the street and getting KIA.

2) Smoke grenades do not land at the "end of the line" - as was later proved in the video.  You can throw in a direction - altho' even that can be vague.  Also, inf smoke takes effect within a minute, not several minutes, so ya gotta be ready to move.

3) You can put your own unit waypoints inside any building in order to see what an inf unit sees from that building (and any desired floor).  It is not obvious.  In the above example it is quite possible that the view from the (possibly enemy occupied) side building is actually obstructed. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 14/10/2017 at 8:06 PM, SLIM said:

81mm Mortars will cause casualties in wooden bunkers either through direct hits, fragments entering the vision slit, or fragments entering the back door.
The problem with using them, is getting the required number of direct hits to achieve anything. At ranges above 500 meters, you'll be lucky to get a few direct hits, even with over 100 rounds fired. (Yes, I just spent an hour testing this...)
Obviously, if you have 75mm Pack Howitzers (or your local equivalent) available, use them, but by far the most common supporting weapon available to a single squad would be the Platoon (60mm) or Company (81mm) mortar section.

Hmm.. maybe I'm just plain wrong (definitely possible) or maybe they adjusted the game since I began playing some years ago, but I remember those wooden bunkers to be invulnerable to small/medium sized mortars and 75mm howitzers. I remember one of the scenarios from the Road to Montebourg (Hell in the Hedgerows) where there's a hedgerow with several wooden bunkers. Back then I could not hurt them with my howitzers, even though I counted several direct hits.

 

On 14/10/2017 at 8:06 PM, SLIM said:

Mortars easily shred infantry in trenches either with direct hits, or fragmentation, unless they're hiding.

Or unless they cover, which they will do automatically. The point is that trenches and foxholes protect quite well against indirect fire (in version 3.12 at least). That doesn't mean troops are invulnerable in trenches, it just means they will survive longer.

But in the game, troops automatically pop up again after hiding, so rifle fire is effective in a "whack-a-mole" fashion. You need to get your own guys into some kind of cover as well though, and depending on what exact game you're playing it might be hard to come by. I play only CMBN, and there's usually some bocage to hide behind while shooting the inhabitants of the trenches.

 

On 14/10/2017 at 8:06 PM, SLIM said:

Bulletpoint, if you're resorting to direct fire high explosive and massed small arms fire to deal with entrenched positions, you're certainly wasting a lot of time and ammunition.
Just call in a Heavy/Maximum Linear Barrage, and simply march around the position, and move on towards your objective. They won't bother you again.

It depends also on the version of the game. In 4.0, troops will leave their trenches when under mortar fire, and get cut down in the open. And of course if you have lots of artillery, it will definitely do its job, also against trenches and foxholes. But in that case you're spending a lot of shells, and even if you have it, it takes a long time to call in the fire mission and deliver enough ammunition as well.

 

Edited by Bulletpoint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Hmm.. maybe I'm just plain wrong (definitely possible) or maybe they adjusted the game since I began playing some years ago, but I remember those wooden bunkers to be invulnerable to small/medium sized mortars and 75mm howitzers. I remember one of the scenarios from the Road to Montebourg (Hell in the Hedgerows) where there's a hedgerow with several wooden bunkers. Back then I could not hurt them with my howitzers, even though I counted several direct hits.

Depends how long ago you were playing. Wooden Bunkers were adjusted at least once in patches.
On my test map, a 75mm Pack Howitzer KO's a wooden bunker with an average of 3 hits, firing over open sights at 900 meters.

 

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Or unless they cover, which they will do automatically. The point is that trenches and foxholes protect quite well against indirect fire (in version 3.12 at least). That doesn't mean troops are invulnerable in trenches, it just means they will survive longer.

But in the game, troops automatically pop up again after hiding, so rifle fire is effective in a "whack-a-mole" fashion. You need to get your own guys into some kind of cover as well though, and depending on what exact game you're playing it might be hard to come by. I play only CMBN, and there's usually some bocage to hide behind while shooting the inhabitants of the trenches.

Yes, you are better off in a trench than sitting in open ground, however you are more vulnerable to mortars or high-trajectory artillery than anything else.
When I spoke of hiding, I wasn't talking about 'Cowering' I was talking about using the 'Hide' command. It's important to be specific.
If you are in a trench, and under mortar fire, order your troops to hide, and they will have a MUCH better chance of survival.

Yes, if you can suppress the inhabitants of a trench to such an extent they are unable to return fire at you, you can walk right up to them and shoot them in relative safety. My point was, why bother taking the time and effort to do so if you have mortars available?

 

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

It depends also on the version of the game. In 4.0, troops will leave their trenches when under mortar fire, and get cut down in the open. And of course if you have lots of artillery, it will definitely do its job, also against trenches and foxholes. But in that case you're spending a lot of shells, and even if you have it, it takes a long time to call in the fire mission and deliver enough ammunition as well.

Not true. I didn't have a single case where troops abandoned their trenches while under on-map mortar and howitzer fire.
Your typical 4-tube 81mm mortar battery has around 200 shells, which is more than enough to clear a trench formation of around 120-150 meters. If you combine over-watching machineguns with a mortar barrage, you will have that trench cleared with little danger or effort.
You can call it in with a regular FO or Officer in between 4 to 7 minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SLIM said:
7 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Hmm.. maybe I'm just plain wrong (definitely possible) or maybe they adjusted the game since I began playing some years ago, but I remember those wooden bunkers to be invulnerable to small/medium sized mortars and 75mm howitzers. I remember one of the scenarios from the Road to Montebourg (Hell in the Hedgerows) where there's a hedgerow with several wooden bunkers. Back then I could not hurt them with my howitzers, even though I counted several direct hits.

Depends how long ago you were playing. Wooden Bunkers were adjusted at least once in patches.
On my test map, a 75mm Pack Howitzer KO's a wooden bunker with an average of 3 hits, firing over open sights at 900 meters.

I was talking about indirect fire. Definitely direct fire is effective, that's the point I was trying to make. Direct fire good, indirect fire bad - against wooden bunkers.

 

2 hours ago, SLIM said:
7 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

It depends also on the version of the game. In 4.0, troops will leave their trenches when under mortar fire, and get cut down in the open. And of course if you have lots of artillery, it will definitely do its job, also against trenches and foxholes. But in that case you're spending a lot of shells, and even if you have it, it takes a long time to call in the fire mission and deliver enough ammunition as well.

Not true. I didn't have a single case where troops abandoned their trenches while under on-map mortar and howitzer fire.

I think the keyword here is "on map" indirect fire. CptMiller did a good video presentation of the issue.

 

Quote

Yes, if you can suppress the inhabitants of a trench to such an extent they are unable to return fire at you, you can walk right up to them and shoot them in relative safety. My point was, why bother taking the time and effort to do so if you have mortars available?

Because you don't need to suppress them and get close. If you can get a good base of fire at about 200m range you can just shoot the guys in their trenches when they pop up to shoot. (assuming you have fire superiority and that it's a game against the computer - a human opponent might make his guys hide in the trench).

 

Edited by Bulletpoint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I was talking about indirect fire. Definitely direct fire is effective, that's the point I was trying to make. Direct fire good, indirect fire bad - against wooden bunkers.

I've already addressed this, indirect fire works fine, so long as you can score good hits. Whether the weapon system is on the map, or off the map, doesn't matter.

 

10 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think the keyword here is "on map" indirect fire. CptMiller did a good video presentation of the issue.

I am aware of ||CptMiller||'s presentation on the issue. Regardless, the troops in my test scenario made ZERO attempt to evacuate their trenches when under indirect fire.
Once again, whether the weapon system is on the map, or off the map, makes no difference. A Heavy/Maximum Linear Barrage called in with an F.O. is indirect artillery fire.

 

11 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Because you don't need to suppress them and get close. If you can get a good base of fire at about 200m range you can just shoot the guys in their trenches when they pop up to shoot. (assuming you have fire superiority and that it's a game against the computer - a human opponent might make his guys hide in the trench).

If the enemy is popping up to shoot at you, they're NOT suppressed. If you outnumber and out-firepower the enemy to such an extent, why are the presence of trenches even an issue? If you have the luxury of lining up riflemen to play "whack-a-mole" then go ahead and do it, just don't expect me to believe that THAT is the most efficient solution, because it's not.

I think you are rapidly wandering off point. Please stick to a salient point.

  1. Mortars and Howitzers are capable of killing or attriting wooden bunkers, either by knocking them out, or by causing casualties.
  2. Trenches are not proof against high-trajectory explosive rounds, and aside from deliberately hiding in them, mortars cause casualties at frightening rates.
  3. Lining up riflemen to plink away at entrenched infantry is NOT the most effective, or the most efficient way to kill them.
  4. The 4.0 Infantry Behaviors are an aberration, and will be patched at the earliest opportunity.

Is there anything else you want to bring up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SLIM said:

I am aware of ||CptMiller||'s presentation on the issue. Regardless, the troops in my test scenario made ZERO attempt to evacuate their trenches when under indirect fire.
Once again, whether the weapon system is on the map, or off the map, makes no difference. A Heavy/Maximum Linear Barrage called in with an F.O. is indirect artillery fire.

I believe what Bulletpoint is referring to here is what triggers the bug. On map mortars and off map mortars are both indirect fire. However, on map mortar fire does not cause infantry to flee their trenches, whereas off map mortar fire does. In your video, are the mortars on or off map? I'm assuming they are on map based on the fact that the targeted infantry did not break and flee from the barrage. If they were off map, can you please send me the file of the mission you used for making the video? I'm curious to see for myself if the infantry flee from the fortifications. In my testing, regardless of veterancy/morale, or the type of off map artillery, the TacAI always chooses to flee. 

Edited by IICptMillerII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×