CMSF irregular thoughts

[domfluff]

The way I see it - the uncon advantages in Quick Battles will be as follows:

- Cheap, highly motivated troops.
- ATGM's with the Fighters, including some AT-14.
- Cheap, fast vehicles with lots of firepower, including cheap anti-air. Should be decent drone killers at least.
- IEDs and VBIEDs are devastating disruptive technology, and don't have easy counters 
- Civilian density provides some stealth cover for Combatant positions and Movement
- Small arms that excel in short ranged combat, especially the RPG-7, which is superb in complex terrain


Disadvantages include (but are not limited to!):

- Poor training
- Poor equipment (e.g., no body armour, night vision, secondary weapons)
- Limited supplies
- Limits of stealth will be hard to judge, so unreliable
- No armoured vehicles
- Terrible C2 (few to zero radios)
- Artillery limited to mortars, no air support


To me this all points to what's probably fairly obvious - that the ideal scenario for a competitive uncon player is a defence in depth over complex terrain (ideally a city, but the same thing would work in the right kind of rough terrain) - multiple independent positions that can work by themselves, and support each other with fires, particularly with ATGMs, but also mortars and MG teams.

Independent positions make the most of the limited C2 options, since each position can be held by a "platooon" under voice/sight comms from their HQ unit - they probably won't be giving out spotting info to the other positions, but they will at least keep C2 within themselves.

[MOS:96B2P]

2 hours ago, domfluff said:

Disadvantages include (but are not limited to!):

- Poor training
- Poor equipment (e.g., no body armour, night vision, secondary weapons)
- Limited supplies
- Limits of stealth will be hard to judge, so unreliable
- No armoured vehicles
- Terrible C2 (few to zero radios)
- Artillery limited to mortars, no air support

To me this all points to what's probably fairly obvious - that the ideal scenario for a competitive uncon player is a defence in depth over complex terrain 

I think the lack of night vision is significant in both RL and in the game.  However scenarios set during the day would help even things out as far as vision.  Also the uncon Forward Observer spies can be very useful for intelligence and calling in indirect fires.   

Why do you say limited supplies?  Possibly you mean they would have been limited in real life.  If so this is probably often the case.  I was just thinking from an editor perspective where the designer can set supplies at full, provide ammo dumps, ammo trucks etc.   

I hope we figure out the mechanics of how stealth (civilian density) works once we get our hands on the CMSF2 editor.  Then we can make the civilian density setting a little more predictable. 

The lack of C2 is a problem but I suppose a realistic one.  However it occurs  to me that we have cell phone IED dudes available in the editor.  To bad we couldn't assign them throughout the uncon TOE with the ability to maintain C2 (via cell phones) among the uncon units.  But as it is now almost every time they dial a number something explodes    

At least in theory uncon forces fight only when they think they have the advantage.  If scenarios are designed with this theory in mind a lot can be done to make the battle very tactically challenging for the conventional player (more balanced).   So, in theory, the mission would seldom if ever be a uncon company vs a conventional company.  However it might be two uncon companies against one conventional platoon (equipped with Humvees) escorting supply trucks through a city.  The supply trucks take a wrong turn ...............and the QRF is 30 minutes out .........and ROE no air power ...........and etc.  I'm sure you have already thought of this I'm just keeping the interesting conversation going . 

Edited November 12, 2018 by MOS:96B2P

[domfluff]

You're quite right about the supply settings, but Typical settings are lower in CMSF 1 (and presumably 2).

The Uncons will also not have the benefit of BMPs or Humvees full of ammo to stock up on, and may or may not get ammo dumps in CMSF 2 (will have to see). There's obviously nothing technologically advanced about an ammo dump, but it'll depend on whether they have the dismountable trucks etc. to do it.

 

[transporter]

Concerning the 120 mm mortars.  My experience with mortars is limited to my time in Nam back in the 60's so forgive me if I seem a bit critical.  In playing the training scenario in the  CMSF 2 demo I have come to the conclusion that they cannot hit the broadside of a barn.  The targeting shots are a long ways from where you want them to go and the fire for effect is not much better.  You seem to spend a great portion of your meager supply of rounds just trying to get close to where you want them.  I would think that veteran crews with a good line of sight by the FO would yield good results.  We know exactly where the mortars are and we have good coordinates of where we want them to go so you would think with all the fancy electronic hardware we have they could better.  For anyone of you who have served in with the 120 are they really that inaccurate? 

Edited November 12, 2018 by transporter

[domfluff]

In the training mission, are you calling them in using the drone for spotting? I suspect that's going to be worse than doing it by eye, for a couple of reasons - anything that lands outside of the drone's spotting disc is obviously going to be invisible, but I suspect (haven't tested) that it's a little worse in general anyway.

The tutorial mission also has a lot of buildings hiding things you might want to hit - it's worth getting a eye level view from the FO and seeing what they can see, since any spotting round that lands behind a building is going to be useless to you.

[transporter]

I have the drone but am using the FO on a direct line of sight on a building or to lay a smoke screen in front of the buildings.  The FO is on the roof of the observation building.

Edited November 12, 2018 by transporter

[domfluff]

Interesting. I wonder if the fact the FO is actually a JTAC has anything to do with it? Also what the experience level is for the mortars - it's not really possible to test this without the full game though.

I wouldn't expect it to be any different than CMBS really, but I do know that the Typical settings for US FO's in CMBS are usually Crack or Elite.

[transporter]

It doesn't give the experience level of the mortar personnel, just that the JTAC team is veteran.  I guess we will just have to wait for the full game.

Edited November 12, 2018 by transporter

[A Canadian Cat]

38 minutes ago, transporter said:

 I would think that veteran crews with a good line of sight by the FO would yield good results.

It should. I had no trouble dropping 120 rounds on a very specific target in the training mission. I did not try a smoke mission though. Sometimes artillery missions get off track and never get on track but usually it is due to poor visibility for the caller not seeing the spotting rounds. Can you try something similar or nearly the same a couple more times and see if you get the same result?

[MOS:96B2P]

It is interesting that a JTAC team is used for the demo instead of an FO team.  A JTAC I thought was generally for air strikes.  

In March 2017 using CMBS I did some experiments with FO teams and JTAC teams.  I was surprised at how long it took a JTAC (Joint Terminal Attack Controller) team to get artillery FFE on a target.  This included both precision and conventional artillery strikes.  In the test a Veteran FO took 3 minutes to call for 105mm fire.  A Veteran JTAC took 8 minutes.  I notice in the CMSF2 demo the platoon leader takes 2 minutes for the 120mm mortar and the JTAC takes 4 minutes for the same mortar team.  This of course is time not accuracy.  Always something to test....................  

[Erwin]

Also, recall that using the Elite JTAC and Elite drone, the FFE on a Point Target was very disappointing - arriving all over the place in a large diameter like a wide area target.  Precision Strikes using the Elite JTAC/Drone combo were better, but it often took two Precision missions to get close enuff to kill.

[MOS:96B2P]

14 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Also, recall that using the Elite JTAC and Elite drone, the FFE on a Point Target was very disappointing - arriving all over the place in a large diameter like a wide area target.  Precision Strikes using the Elite JTAC/Drone combo were better, but it often took two Precision missions to get close enuff to kill.

Hmm, that's true.  I used JTACs in TOC because they were dedicated UAV operators assigned to the UAV Operations Center inside the FOB.  Maybe a Fire Support team, renamed UAV Operations Team, would have been better at spotting and hitting targets................ off to test.  

Sure Erwin, NOW you think of that .  

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Just occurred to me, but do the Russians have any ECM in TOC? 

Could that be a factor in the drone's difficulties?

Edited November 13, 2018 by Sgt.Squarehead

[MOS:96B2P]

8 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Just occurred to me, but do the Russians have any ECM in TOC? 

In the early beta versions the Russians had some EMC.  But I removed it early on for various reasons.  (I think one reason was the disappointing UAV performance).  So no ECM at all in TOC.  

@domfluff I apologize for the thread derail.  Back to the very interesting subject of irregulars!!  

[Sublime]

I usually use a HI/LO mix for my atgms and the ratio depends on the terrain.

Preferably I can have kornets and saxhorns for my hi lo. In more open terrain say 3 kornet teams and 2 saxhorn teams, more urban id flip it to 3 saxhorn for 2 kornets.  I try to use really close engagement ranges for my atgms if theyre saxhorns as well - theyre very useful because they can be fired from the shoulder position and only have a 7 second delay to shoot in a building thst way unless you deploy them.

Generally the saxhorns usually kill bradleys flat out and at least immobilize abrams. Often will kill them. Kornets usually kill the abrams too, but remember this has to be done right. Some points -

I often have several groups or areas that ambush. I try as often as i can to have my defense open up all at once. This also makes it harder for the enemy to smash on unit to pieces at a time, if youre a near peer ambusher it depends on the firefigbt but if youre not then its only a question of are your defenders dying in place or are you going to try to fall some men back to new positions? Because you.ll always get wasted trying to stand and fight. So if your oppo is playing correctly and moving inf with his armor it should work well that your squads open up on enemy troops and the atgms open up on the armor same time. As much violence and noise packed into a really small amount of time and in an area youve isolated the enemy target from the main force even if only by sheets of smoke from burning vehicles, or a corner that was turned.

I never try front on ambushes with my atgms unless its absolutely forced. Sometimes it is, many a saxhorn squad Ive had were forced to shoot and blow up a bradley and be wasted by a hail of return fire because the brad just disgourged a team thats gonna run into that building -

That said ideally you have your atgms firing flank or rear shots at tue enemy to their left or right, and hopefully theyre in turn covered by another team or two to either lateral direction.

I usually tie my atgms into a net, where my kornets usually can see one or two of eachother at least. The saxhorns not so much but of course if they can -

If you have any armor this is where crappy RedFor armor, whether T72B3s with regular or green crews in BS or T72s SF, this is where you can hopefully actually kill US armor with those tanks. You position the tanks as you would a WW2 TD, in ambush. You want to be able to try to pull it out when its immediate visible threats are gone if it lives.  Basically your tank or tanks will have the premo lines of sight and since they almost are always definite spots they are best used to kick off ambushes. Especially with timing problems in WeGo,  a huge arc so the T72 opens up on anything it sees (but it cant seemuch bc its keyholed) so if the enemy rushes faster than you can set up the ambush properly the T72 at least opens up and yiur inf wont and still be unspotted. In this scenario worst case your T72is still ambushing the Blufor so whatever happens with that happens, and when your orders phase comes up you can unleash your troops, especially if your tank just opened up and the firefight exchange hasnt really begun or you.ll just take off the close cover arcs to begin the ambush. ( i let my men target for themselces except area fire and on map mortars.)

I also never make 1m covered arcs thats insane. I may make them small but never that small thats asking for your men to get gunned down while you rage at the computer. Make sure you remember to give your men a little breathing room to defend themselces and also holding shift while making a covered arc makes it 360 degrees. Very important.

[MikeyD]

The advantage of uncons in QB is they're FUN!
I just did a QB playing 'combatants' attacking against AI Syrian infantry. What a pack of disorganized doofuses! It really did feel like "neighborhood guys with guns" as Steve once called. them. Achieving anything at all with these misfits feels like you've won a major victory. 'Combatants' are very different from 'fighters' who have the training, discipline and equipment (and suicidal impulses) that 'combatants' lack. No suicide car bombs for 'combatants'. Also no split teams, higher chain of command or artillery support.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Don't forget that fighter teams have the lethal RPG-29 as a rule (average or better equipment for a Fighter Command) in CM:SF, TBH I'm hoping this might be toned down a bit in CM:SF2, IMHO they should only become available when equipment is set to excellent.

[Vet 0369]

+1 for @Sublime. Very good explanation of how to initiate an ambush. We always initiated an ambush, IRL, with either a Claymore mine, or an M-60 machine gun. No one fired until the mine or M-60 opened up. We generally used an "L" shaped ambush with the mine or M-60, or both, at the base of the "L" so they could hit the column head on, and so Marines weren't opposite each other and killing the Marines across from each other. The "classic L" ambush had a rear cutoff man to take out "Tail man Charlie" the main ambush, and a front cutoff man to take out the "Point man." It's amazing how close one can be to the opposition before they see you. In one training exercise, I was a Front Cutoff man, and was laying on my belly in some low scrub. The Point man came abreast of me about 6 feet away when the main ambush opened up. He turned toward the main party, I rolled to a knee, and fired three or four blanks at the ground with my M-14 with a blank firing adapter. He went straight up, scared s***less, and said "Where the #%^* did you come from?" I told him I'd been in his field of view the whole time and that he'd better start paying attention if he wanted to live when "in country." And this was before the Marine Corps went to Camos, and we still wore the green cotton utilities!

I wish we were able to set a specific unit to initiate the ambush in CM. I usually do it by selecting the entire ambush party, and giving it a "Target" command. Not nearly as good as having a "group trigger" command though. IIRC, CMx1 had an "Ambush" command..

GIGrunt designed an excellent campaign that has a scenario in CMBS that requires setting up an ambush.

Edited November 25, 2018 by Vet 0369

[Sgt.Squarehead]

On ‎11‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 2:44 PM, MOS:96B2P said:

I think the lack of night vision is significant in both RL and in the game.  However scenarios set during the day would help even things out as far as vision.  Also the uncon Forward Observer spies can be very useful for intelligence and calling in indirect fires.   

Missed this on the first pass through the thread.....I've found there's a interesting dynamic at play between NVG and Uncons.  My testing of Mosul scenarios suggests that Uncons appear to be better than regular units at seeing other Uncons in heavily populated environments** (High or Medium setting in most of my tests), unless it is (getting) dark, at which point NVG equipped units (Syrian SF in my experiments) gain the advantage. 

Please note the emphasis given to 'suggests' & 'appear to be'.....This was not by any means the main focus of my testing. 

** This works both ways as I discovered when my Spy triggered a passing VBIED! 

PS - Note also the slightly brighter skies in the latest iterations of Al Hutumah. 

Edited November 27, 2018 by Sgt.Squarehead

[domfluff]

Ooh, that warrants some further testing, and should be reasonably easy to show - setting up a straight line like the above, with Red vs Red or just combining units together through switching sides.
 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Modified my post to cover all my observations.....The Spy/VBIED thing really surprised me, I had to completely re-plan the story for Al Hutumah as a result. 

[MOS:96B2P]

6 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

My testing of Mosul scenarios suggests that Uncons appear to be better than regular units at seeing other Uncons in heavily populated environments**

** This works both ways as I discovered when my Spy triggered a passing VBIED!    

 

6 hours ago, domfluff said:

Ooh, that warrants some further testing, 

I'm just waiting to get into the CMSF2 editor to do some testing.  I'm hesitant to run anymore tests in CMSF1 in case there is some minor tweaking (intended or not)  in behavior between CMSF1 and CMSF2.  I've got several ideas that I think will work in scenarios.  I just need the game editor to verify / modify.  

[Sgt.Squarehead]

3 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:

I just need the game editor to verify / modify.  

I feel much the same, I'm still ignoring the demo, just itching for the full editor. 

PS - Unless/until the dismounted ammo dump thing is resolved I feel CM:SF1 will still have some novelty value, just for the unusual TOEs you can create with crew-swapping.....Doubt I'll write anything for it though, it's a pain to balance the VPs and the new game will just be better.

However the fact remains CM:SF2 won't actually meet it's promise of running all CM:SF1 scenarios OOTB until they do sort the dismounted ammo dump issue! 

Edited November 27, 2018 by Sgt.Squarehead

[domfluff]

Time to start testing in earnest.

First point - Civilian Density is not a setting like Electronic Warfare (chosen at setup and costing you points), instead it's a feature of the map. A random city map I poked had a "very high" density, so I imagine it varies.

[Sublime]

On 11/25/2018 at 2:25 PM, Vet 0369 said:

+1 for @Sublime. Very good explanation of how to initiate an ambush. We always initiated an ambush, IRL, with either a Claymore mine, or an M-60 machine gun. No one fired until the mine or M-60 opened up. We generally used an "L" shaped ambush with the mine or M-60, or both, at the base of the "L" so they could hit the column head on, and so Marines weren't opposite each other and killing the Marines across from each other. The "classic L" ambush had a rear cutoff man to take out "Tail man Charlie" the main ambush, and a front cutoff man to take out the "Point man." It's amazing how close one can be to the opposition before they see you. In one training exercise, I was a Front Cutoff man, and was laying on my belly in some low scrub. The Point man came abreast of me about 6 feet away when the main ambush opened up. He turned toward the main party, I rolled to a knee, and fired three or four blanks at the ground with my M-14 with a blank firing adapter. He went straight up, scared s***less, and said "Where the #%^* did you come from?" I told him I'd been in his field of view the whole time and that he'd better start paying attention if he wanted to live when "in country." And this was before the Marine Corps went to Camos, and we still wore the green cotton utilities!

I wish we were able to set a specific unit to initiate the ambush in CM. I usually do it by selecting the entire ambush party, and giving it a "Target" command. Not nearly as good as having a "group trigger" command though. IIRC, CMx1 had an "Ambush" command..

GIGrunt designed an excellent campaign that has a scenario in CMBS that requires setting up an ambush.

Thanks and thanks for the awesome story. Jeez man you had already been in country and back and the m14 was still standard?

Much respect