George MC

This is one of the scenarios contained in the recently released demo.
http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/uncategorized/cmbs-rolling-thunder/
About the scenario
This scenario recreates a US company team attack against a Russian Forward Security Element or FSE. A Russian FSE is a usually a reinforced company sent forward of the regimental axis when the threat is weak but more commonly sent ahead of a first echelon battalion or battalion operating away from the main body. Motorized rifle companies are often used in this role, even in tank units.
Both sides have a fairly ‘typical’ OOB (organisation, units and vehicles) plus supporting arms (air assets, anti-aircraft assets and artillery) for the missions they have been tasked with. As such this scenario serves as a useful introduction to commanding a modern combined arms unit at the company level.
This scenario was originally designed to be played first and foremost from the perspective of the US side against the Russian AI. It is playable head to head (H2H) but has not been playtested for balance in this regard. It is playable as Russian vs US AI, although in the attack the AI can't dismount and remount infantry, so that can hamper it a wee bit. Still the US AI plans should give you a tactical workout.
There are three distinct Russian AI plans and two distinct US AI plans – thus allowing some level of re-playability.
How difficult is the scenario?
As stated this scenario is really designed to be played as US attacking Russian AI (or possible H2H). The designers intent is that a ‘good’ player i.e. a player used to the Combat Mission game engine and practiced in using modern core combined arms tactics would find this fun but not over the top challenging. A new player i.e. unpractised in either modern or Combat Mission should be able to play this (TOP TIP – make liberal use of the ‘save game’ option – so you can rewind if things go horribly wrong) – and most likely at least pull a draw. So bottom line is experienced players will most likely find it fun but straightforward, less experienced might find it challenging initially but soon becoming easier. Once the US side make it over the reverse slope position they have a very good chance of winning as the fire-power of a US mech company team is pretty immense!

Live from the front
 

This is one of the scenarios contained in the recently released demo.
http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/uncategorized/cmbs-rolling-thunder/
About the scenario
This scenario recreates a US company team attack against a Russian Forward Security Element or FSE. A Russian FSE is a usually a reinforced company sent forward of the regimental axis when the threat is weak but more commonly sent ahead of a first echelon battalion or battalion operating away from the main body. Motorized rifle companies are often used in this role, even in tank units.
Both sides have a fairly ‘typical’ OOB (organisation, units and vehicles) plus supporting arms (air assets, anti-aircraft assets and artillery) for the missions they have been tasked with. As such this scenario serves as a useful introduction to commanding a modern combined arms unit at the company level.
This scenario was originally designed to be played first and foremost from the perspective of the US side against the Russian AI. It is playable head to head (H2H) but has not been playtested for balance in this regard. It is playable as Russian vs US AI, although in the attack the AI can't dismount and remount infantry, so that can hamper it a wee bit. Still the US AI plans should give you a tactical workout.
There are three distinct Russian AI plans and two distinct US AI plans – thus allowing some level of re-playability.
How difficult is the scenario?
As stated this scenario is really designed to be played as US attacking Russian AI (or possible H2H). The designers intent is that a ‘good’ player i.e. a player used to the Combat Mission game engine and practiced in using modern core combined arms tactics would find this fun but not over the top challenging. A new player i.e. unpractised in either modern or Combat Mission should be able to play this (TOP TIP – make liberal use of the ‘save game’ option – so you can rewind if things go horribly wrong) – and most likely at least pull a draw. So bottom line is experienced players will most likely find it fun but straightforward, less experienced might find it challenging initially but soon becoming easier. Once the US side make it over the reverse slope position they have a very good chance of winning as the fire-power of a US mech company team is pretty immense!

I've just uploaded it this morning, so as soon as it's signed off it should appear. In the meantime you can grab it HERE
 
Just realised that the version that will be uploaded to the repository will only work with the new 1.02 patch (I'd updated my game with a beta version of the forthcoming patch). The version at the dropbox link above should be playable in 1.01 (I went back and used my original version of the game (luckily I kept some older back copies).
 
Apologies for the slight foobar. Hopefully you can play the version at this dropbox link (although you will still have to have patched your game to 1.01).
 
I've created a separate thread for discussion, feedback etc regrdaing Rolling Thunder at the following LINK

Thanks for sharing.

FRAPS is used by a lot of players (including myself) to record video and take screenshots.
 
http://www.fraps.com/

Yeah, this was good mission, and teach me how RPG7s are inaccurate when +150m of range.

After being away (again) I finally finished the mission.
With a draw.
 
I lost one APC and my non-qrf infantry got beaten up pretty badly (Note to Myrelf: Your air support can't see russians under the trees. Your Air support will see your own infantry hiding inside buildings). The points were pretty equal.
 
I would probably have won the mission if one of my trucks hadn't decided to get immobilized while crossing the river on "slow". Those ~300 points really hurt. Bad luck I guess.

I played Ukrainian and also ran out of time. 
 
GREAT SCENARIO THOUGH!
 
SLR
 
P.S.  Can we have more scenarios of this sort of size please?

The Ukrainian Hind destroyed a truck that had gotten through with my AGS blocking thr exit out of ammo . thanks guys ! Lol.. Probably a double agent

spoilers
Lovely map, setting and mission, it really looks and feels believable. So many details and on a map small enough to not ruin my frame rate completely with all the objects.
The sniper team at the far left end of the map was really a pain for me, I wasted so much time and ammo on their location just for him to poke out again and again to kill the poor guy who is now supposed to do the buddy aiding to the medic before him. That bastard took atleast 5 of my men out of the fight for good and wounded several - while still being alive at the end of the game, in the same spot. I'm not sure why my BMP-2s and BTR-70s could not convince him to leave his little position - in my experience the volume of lead going his way and exploding around him would've pressed every non fanatic into crawl back a few tiles.
The air support wasn't helping at all and actually counter productive - killed more Ukrs than Russians and I even had to cancel them in the end because they started shooting ATGMs at my convoy, luckily a tree ate it.
I had more luck with the river, one got stuck for a moment. I lost just a single BTR-70 during the mission - he took an RPG to the front after he got out of the water and close to the road where he was supposed to provide overwatch for my Inf clearing the building. Although I had a lot of overwatch covering the BTR they failed to spot the squad inside the building (had Infantry just across the road from the building and they got not a single vague sound marker or anything that could've warned me - blind and deaf idiots ), they repaid the deed greatly though.
Best scenario I've played in any of the CM titles. 

Yeah I played this last week. Lovely mission!
 
I didn't have much luck with Hinds either. I had to cancel one mission because the Hind was obviously shooting missiles at my BTRs....and missing.
 
Also without spoiling much, I have to say, this mission had me use the UAZ driver in creative and slightly sadistic ways   Even after his ride was kaput, he continued to be very useful for my effort. Best UAZ driver ever!

Hands down this is the best Cmx2 scenario ever !

Realistic setting
Beautiful Map
Perfect size
Friendy fire from Hind's
RPG's from everywhere
Trucks getting stuck in the ford
30mm HEI rounds hammering suspected enemy positions
Enemy AGS-30 positions i could not locate till the very end

WOW !

Arent all campaign maps available as QB maps in some way or another? They should be if not.

Will wait for patch and new version and give it a spin. Thanks for all your great work for CM-games

Keep in mind that in the next patch US Excalibur rounds will have their precision slightly downgraded.

SPOILERS***************************
 
 
Just finished this one, and even on elite is was way too easy. And that was my first major tank battle in a modern era CM-game so I expected to fall flat on my face. Maybe I got lucky. The first UAV spot was an SPAA that was taken out by precision arty. That let my UAVs and Apaches roam free. And it was really simple to pick off target after target with precision arty (too much of it?). And they remained stationary all the same. The tanks that made it to face me, quickly got shot to pieces or their "lasing" made my tanks retreat to safety. The few shots on target were repelled by APS. All in all I lost two Bradleys and two Abrams to immobilization (despite dry ground conditions). That's about it. Then I started getting large reinforcements so I expected a major counter attack, but then all of a sudden I got a total victory with 33 minutes left.
 
So, in all, the scenario was a bit of a disappointment for lack of challenge. The only really troublesome event was (something I really liked) when the AI tried to flank me already after 10 minutes. The map is great, and with some alterations to the difficulty, it would warrant a replay.

Maybe this is something for the scenario designers to consider in the future...
 
I have had simular experience with other missions...maybe not to such a degree bit still...
 
- Waiting for precision arty to hit...HIT !, waiting for precision arty to hit...HIT !
 
 
As scenario designers we might have to think about how many STATIC targets we have in a scenario and what weapons the player has at his disposal.
 
When the player has precision arty avaliable maybe fewer veichles should be completally STATIC (AI-Groups allowing)...They only need to move a short distance every now and again to ruin some of the precision strikes.
 
One would think that in RL if one side suspects that the enemy might have this kind of ammunition avaliable....They would not stay STATIC for very long....

That reflects my experience with the scenario.  Started with defining the battlefield and fixing the enemy.  Worked what contacts I had over with precision rounds and Apaches. Defeated several minor armor thrusts.
 
Noted more armor building up further back in the map.  Snaked my forces into positions to observe.  Apaches worked over area where possible tank contacts were noted.  Engaged in long range battle (2000 to 3000 metres) with Russian armor. 
 
Blunted attack.  My reinforcements came in.  Slowly moved forward and engaged enemy as they appeared, taking the major middle objective.  Game ends with Total Victory for me.  Map at ends showed 90% of Russian armored vehicles were destroyed.
 
Okay, it wasn't the Battle of Kursk with both sides madly rushing at each other but the battle unfolded as I wanted it to.  At no time did I feel that I didn't have a grip on the situation and I controlled the tempo of the battle the entire game.  
 
Yeah, it was slow unfolding battle but I have seen longer ones watching US forces in Iraq in real life (like the one in which an US mech infantry company took 3 hours to move and secure three buildings that were 1200 metres distance.  Most of that time was waiting for air support and artillery to be allocated and work the area over.

So I just finished playing the scenario First Clash as the Americans vs the AI and I'd like to share some thoughts. The mission is to lead a tank heavy force a Russian spearhead. The map quite big and open with subtle undulations. I begin by slowly and cautiously moving the force forward and things go quite by the books at first. My dismounted infantry spots one or two enemy units, UAV + precision artillery or Javelin kills it off.
 
Things get pretty crazy fast though, suddenly it seems the whole Russian armoured forces have been amassed against advance. So I decide to sit tight and wait for reinforcements, while at the same time trying to kill off as many tanks as I can using air and artillery support.
 
Normally I expect, given the numbers of both friendly and enemy tanks on the map, this scenario to be one big tank duel-fest. However, the Apaches and precision artillery are so good that I never really got to use my huge tank force. The Apaches both expended their 16(?) hell-fire missiles, my UAV fired 2 more and I expended all precision artillery rounds on static targets. This means that most of the action happened on the other way of the map, about 3km from my position without my main force taking active part in the fight. Most of the scenario consisted of waiting for air or artillery support to arrive.
 
Things only got hairy twice when two platoons of enemy tanks rushed down my right flank. I finished the scenario with a very "passive" feel. I wonder what your experiences were on this?

I get a 'Fatal error - we should have had a valid file ID' page when I click on your link.

Thanks George.

This scenario was originally released as part of the CMBS game. Whilst the intent pre-release was to create an intro to modern armoured warfare it appears many players post release considered it too easy – mainly due to the strength of the US forces arty and air support. Whilst doctrinally correct it did make the scenario a bit easy for the US to win. In addition all US AFVs had APS. The preponderance of APS equipped armour did mean the M1s were pretty unstoppable.
 
 
This version tones down this. Overall the changes aim to make the scenario a more challenging proposition.
 
This scenario recreates a US company team attack against a Russian Forward Detachment of an armoured tactical group – the first contact between both sides ‘heavy’ forces. The map is a large one - around 4km x 4km although the OOB on each side is kept manageable at around reinforce company level.
 
Both sides have a fairly ‘typical’ OOB (organisation, units and vehicles) plus supporting arms (air assets, anti-aircraft assets and artillery) for the missions they have been tasked with. As such this scenario serves as a useful introduction to commanding a modern combined arms unit at the company level.
 
This scenario was originally designed to be played first and foremost from the perspective of the US side against the Russian AI. There is also a Blue AI Plan and potentially it is playable head to head (H2H) but has NOT been playtested for balance in this regard.
 
There are two distinct Russian AI plans and one US AI plan – thus allowing some level of re-playability.
 
You can grab the new version at the following HERE
 
There was an earlier thread discussing the stock version that was packaged with the game HERE. I'd appreciate any comments regarding the redux version are posted here - just to keep em separate please?

Oops my bad. It's working now. Cheers for the heads up guys

helloheywhatsnew, according to several polls we had over the past couple of years, the average age of the community is approximately 40 years. Also this:
 
 
is by far the most agressive and disrespectful comment anyone in this thread has made yet. It is disrespectful because it generally devalueates the opinions of all people older than you as crap and it incorrectly makes the generalized assumption that people older than you are incapable of keeping pace with technological developments. Furthermore you seem to confuse your own personal taste with knowledge, disproportionally even calling it "education" to tell people what you think they should like. I am genuinely sorry that you have MS, but trying to invoke pity in order to discourage people from stateing opinions that disagree with yours is quite a dishonourable and weak rethorical tactic.
 
 
 
Basically that is why i dont think it would be interesting (or, with other words, not worth the effort it would take to implement the feature). You can just take a look at the AI plans in the editor if you want to how it works and reacts. But watching a scripted AI fight itself is really just like c3k said it: two blind men with bulldozers fighting eachother.