The Syrians

[Liveload]

Just got this game, and it's a lot of fun. I've noticed, however, the Syrians seem comically inept ... like Imperial Stormtrooper/Hollywood levels of ineptitude. I've rammed a T-62 into a gun-damaged Abrams, and the T-62 still couldn't see the Abrams. I've had US soldiers jogging down the street, come under fire from entrenched Syrian MG's and the US Soldier, without stopping, kills the MG and keeps jogging. Just comically impossible stuff like that keeps happening to the Syrians. Doesn't deter me from playing them, it just takes away from the experience.

I also noticed after a little browsing that the Syrians are missing a lot of equipment that would add a lot to the game. Link to Wikipedia list of Equipment of the Syrian Army

Lots of stuff there to pick from, rockets, missiles, tanks, etc.

Bottom line, I would like to see the Syrians receive some love.

As a side note, a huge jumble of Abrams tanks idling makes wonderful white noise to relax to, just make sure you don't have some random belligerent arriving a few hours into it....

Thank you.

[Zveroboy1]

You will encounter odd situations concerning spotting from time to time. But this isn't a problem with Syrians per se. There is almost nothing that separates a US soldier from a Syrian soldier. The game doesn't have the various nationalities behave differently except in some rares cases like split squads. It is all about equipment, materiel and experience level : binoculars, night vision and optics for vehicles. Often for old Syrian tanks you're better off having the tank commander with the hatch open.

[domfluff]

Playing the Syrians is hard. You've an army which is at least twenty years behind the US (more or less), nothing like the quality of optics and comms, and on top of that has worse soft factors on Typical settings. It's also far from impossible.

First of all, one soldier = one soldier in Combat Mission. Regular troops are identical across the board. On top of that, they'll have organisational and equipment differences (radios, optics, body armour, etc.) that will add up to a larger difference over time.

Pretty much no Syrian armour can penetrate an Abrams from the front. All of them can take out one from the side. This means that there's a good argument to either use the best possible armour (T-90/T-72 TURMS-T) with enhanced spotting, or use the worst possible armour available (and mostly fight unbuttoned)

It also means that you need to distribute your fires. Two tank platoons in the same location can be faced frontally by an Abrams. Two platoons in different locations can't, and with good co-ordination can get flanking shots and kills. Exactly the same thinking applies to ATGMs - trading off decreased C2 for gaining an advantage through positioning.

Syrian/Soviet doctrine is all about specialisation. Imagine going up against a Bradley platoon - this will have superiors optics, better armour than your IFV's, TOW missiles, dismounted Javelins, etc. The Bradley overmatches pretty much everything in the Syrian arsenal, so to get past that requires some careful thought.

Your basic Soviet attack is extensive, active recon, followed by preliminary bombardment, followed by an attack in line with armour (in the open anyway), followed by an attack in line with mechanised infantry. The entire structure is built around overwhelming force and numbers at the sharp end - the organisation encourages you to use larger forces than you with Blufor.

In the context of the Bradley Platoon then, each part of your force needs to deal with an element of theirs - your mortars need to suppress or kill their dismounted ATGMs, your armour needs to kill their Bradleys, and your infantry need to mop up. Getting this all to work together is hard, much more difficult than playing the US.

 

Poor quality troops can be expected to do precisely one thing in the battle. This means that you need to plan such that the troops can have their moment, and if they survive afterwards, that's a bonus.

IFV doctrine is to use the BMP as part of the squad firepower. If you don't, you're intentionally crippling yourself, with an undermanned and undergunned unit. BMPs also explode when you look at them funny, which means that you need to use hull-down positions, and great recon before you leap into contact.

Soviet thinking around reconnaissance put more emphasis on recon by force than the West. The Motor rifle recon platoon are two BMPs, with an AT-4, an HQ and two scout units. The correct way to use this in a CM perspective is to be bold and aggressive - construct attacks on forward suspected positions, and try to maintain cover with a support element (either the second BMP, or the BMPs covering the dismounted units. This is far more likely to risk losing the recon platoon, but it will also reveal far more about the enemy, faster, which is what you need to achieve.

 

Basically... it's hard, yes. It's supposed to be, since CMSF is about modern asymmetrical warfare. 

Ideal scenario design can balance this with Preserve objectives, or harsh penalties for losing blue forces, but it's tough.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Either that or let the infidels come into your town and then do this:

Edited June 2, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead

[Sulomon]

17 hours ago, Liveload said:

Just got this game, and it's a lot of fun. I've noticed, however, the Syrians seem comically inept ... like Imperial Stormtrooper/Hollywood levels of ineptitude...

That's just realism.

[Chudacabra]

I think in comparison to how the Iraqi armed forces fared against the Coalition of the Willing, the Syrians actually do pretty well in this game. I feel that if you're defending as the Syrians, then you need to just focus on the NATO infantry and lighter AFV's. I'm currently playing as the Syrians defending against the Dutch and it is very tough, but I've managed to kill many Fenneks and APC's while also inflicting quite a few casualties. I really should have purchased more AT-14's though. 

[Liveload]

I'm very well aware of the modern Syrian Arab Army's capabilities. It almost seems like they were an afterthought in a blue on blue simulator with some IED's thrown in. Not only is the TO&E a complete mess, a lot of their best units are simply not in the game. Their real capabilities are just not there.

Here's a little taste of reality:

Hope you enjoy.

 

Edited June 7, 2019 by Liveload

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, Liveload said:

Their real capabilities are just not there.

Here's a little taste of reality:

LOL Ahhh what is that supposed to show? The beginning of the video is amateur hour. Poorly equipped and clearly untrained men move down a road with one tank and one truck with auto cannons on it. Then there is a series of air strike videos destroying buildings and some drone footage showing various unidentified vehicles and small groups of people moving. Then the last segment is pure Syrian Government Propaganda spewing BS and showing supposedly captured equipment.

I see nothing in this video that establishes any of your claims. Please enlighten us as to what time points in the video show any of the following:

1. Strong capabilities of the Syrian army
2. How this shows that the TO&E are inaccurate (to the setting of the game)
3. What units are missing.

 

[Liveload]

Real T-90s in Syria:

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

So does the Syrian T-90 come with a time machine?  Because it would need one to get back to 2008.

I'm not saying I don't agree with some of your points, but you are falling into the usual trap (we've all done it) of comparing Syria in 2014-19 with the game's attempt to model the Syrian TOE of a decade earlier.

Edited June 7, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead

[domfluff]

There are T-90's in Shock Force...

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Not the right type.....Syria actually has a very few T-90 & T-90A, the game only offers the T-90SA (which Syria doesn't have, but which Iraq (kind of) does). 

The tank in the video is a T-90, which makes it pretty old and possibly actually less capable than the current Iraqi T-90S:

Edited June 7, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead

[domfluff]

Ah, true, but they're pretty close.

From memory, there were reports around the time (2008) of a tiny number of T-90 (presumably export versions of some kind) going to Syria for testing.

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

They were older T-90s as seen in that video:

& also some T-90As

The CM:BS T-90A would be about right for the latter, if BF were to decide to update the game.

Edited June 7, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead

[TOG]

I don't know if it was already posted here but there are some interesting syrian tank modifications. Slat cage extravaganza!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BOqiliXt4w

 

[Liveload]

Also, the game needs Churches added along with ancient ruins. Syria is a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious society that spans eons. When one of the Churches in Aleppo was destroyed by takfiris, it was the Muslims that got together to help rebuild it and protect their Christian brethren.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

No arguments with your comments other than you are once again confusing the real fighting in Syria with the fictional 2008 NATO invasion of Syria that the game models.

[sburke]

1 hour ago, Liveload said:

Also, the game needs Churches added along with ancient ruins. Syria is a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, multi-religious society that spans eons. When one of the Churches in Aleppo was destroyed by takfiris, it was the Muslims that got together to help rebuild it and protect their Christian brethren.

The Middle East is far more complicated than most of us realize.  Reading the US army review of the Iraq war is really an eye opener. There is a tremendous amount of detail about the insurgency which at the time was not well understood. Fascinating read for anyone interested. I am only about 30% of the way through volume 2. 

As to CMSF2. We won’t be getting anything additional. It is done (except for some of the campaigns that are still being reworked). Personally I’d love BF to do more on it, but realize it isn’t going to happen. So many things I’d love to see incorporated. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

1 hour ago, sburke said:

We won’t be getting anything additional. It is done

There was a time when it wasn't going to be done.....But then it was. 

I remain optimistic.....In the absence of a CM:A reboot this is by far the best of the modern titles. 

If the demand's there, why not cater to it? 

[Mord]

When playing the Syrians expect to lose. You can only go up from there. Do what I do and set a few personal goals: Kill that Abrams, wipe out twenty guys, knock out a Stryker, etc. You don't have to win to have fun with weaker units in CM, you just have to adjust your thinking. Combatants are great for that. You can play the politics game and strategery-gize about how every infidel casualty you inflict is going to look in the western media. A little role-playing can go a long way in easing the sting of defeat.

 

Mord.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

1 hour ago, Mord said:

You don't have to win to have fun with weaker units in CM, you just have to adjust your thinking. Combatants are great for that. You can play the politics game and strategery-gize about how every infidel casualty you inflict is going to look in the western media. A little role-playing can go a long way in easing the sting of defeat.

IMHO in that sort of scenario the designer should have his VPs cater for this.....Huge points on 'Blue' units, every man lost is a calamity.  

It's easy enough in principle, but balancing it is harder than a more conventional battle.....My usual rule of thumb is 'Asymmetrical Warfare Requires Asymmetrical VPs', with many, many more available to Red, simply because their chances of actually getting them are so ridiculously low. 

[Mord]

The original scenarios did tend to take US casualties into account. I recall one or two at least that penalized you severely for losing dudes.

 

Mord.

[sburke]

11 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

There was a time when it wasn't going to be done.....But then it was. 

I remain optimistic.....In the absence of a CM:A reboot this is by far the best of the modern titles. 

If the demand's there, why not cater to it? 

Well I won’t piss in your cornflakes. If your optimism is rewarded I’ll be a very happy gamer. 

[Bozowans]

On 6/1/2019 at 6:20 PM, Liveload said:

I've rammed a T-62 into a gun-damaged Abrams, and the T-62 still couldn't see the Abrams.

Weird stuff like this happens in all the CM games to be honest. It seems to happen most often when units are very close to each other. When I was playing Black Sea one time, one of my Russian BMPs failed to spot an enemy Ukrainian BMP even though it was right out in the open, right in front of it at point blank range (like 50-60m away). The vehicles just sat there for quite a long time doing nothing until I eventually had to bring up an infantry squad in the next turn to blast the enemy BMP with a rocket. The infantry spotted it almost instantly. I remember taking a bunch of screenshots of the whole incident because I was like WTF. 

Then there will be other times where something will spot an enemy under seemingly impossible circumstances and then blow it up with a crazy trick shot from miles away through a huge forest and out the other side or whatever. These games can be unpredictable like that. I think the devs like it that way.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I had a weird game with the Brits in CM:SF1.....My infantry were utterly unable to see a platoon BMP-2s,  however as soon as the enemy infantry debussed from the BMPs my lads saw them and opened fire. 

At which point all three BMPs saw my lads and they opened fire too.....Didn't end well at all.