LongLeftFlank
-
Posts
5,589 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Posts posted by LongLeftFlank
-
-
I don't own 2.0 yet, but was just wondering whether the "New And Improved" 2.01 MG behaviour has had the side effect of letting MGs rapidly attrite non-moving dug in infantry using their now intensified ROFs.
Has anybody checked out the effects of HMG offensive fire against troops in foxholes or bunkers?
Agreed. The problem with abstracted microcover is that if it reduces chance to hit of an otherwise accurate bullet or fragment by half, you can defeat that by pumping in 2 rounds.The "pinned" troops then sticking their heads and shoulders up to spot for extended periods compounds this problem. Thus, Troops in cover rapidly melt away under intense fire no matter what your or their intent may be unless you can enforce a Hide order behind a suitable stretch of bullet-defeating cover like a crestline.
Which is why simply upping the firepower of MGs with no other changes is going to make things much worse, not better, for infantry. Even if it "solves" the pooltable problem.
-
Still on CM sabbatical, but couldn't resist peeking in here a moment. MacIsle, your devotion to photorealism truly warms my heart!
One thought though, looking at your screenies: be sure to study the 1947 imagery with care, because I strongly suspect a lot of the roadsides where you have wire fences were actually hedgerows back in 1944. So much of the bocage has been removed since then to support mechanized farming and widened roads.
-
As I've noted elsewhere, I don't have 2.0 and have had to put a hiatus on all gaming for the moment. I just happened to check back briefly and saw this.
In 1.0 ISTR moving the vehicles across that little bridge was always a little tricky -- you had to be sure both the waypoints on both sides weren't placed too close to the abutment and that the pathline crossed directly across the centerline of the bridge. I wonder if that particular bridge being only 5 squares from the map edge is creating a problem? -- just a blind guess though, really.
In the meantime, you might consider deleting all the bridges in the Editor and replacing them with "culverts" by raising the terrain height to the road height.
-
This thread has discussion around this semihistorical scenario. I hope you enjoy playing this complex and lethal map. Feel free to repurpose it and publish your own scenarios using some or all of it if you wish.
-
Guys, I went ahead and published the CMSF Baba Amr scenario on the Repository.... it usually goes up there the next day once the BFC guys confirm it isn't naughty pictures. The scenario is playable using the base game alone (no modules required). GaJ's site is out of action for the moment, but I'll put it there too once it's back up.
Regretfully, I didn't have time to finish my playtest with SBurke as I'm having to go gaming free for job reasons until further notice. Caveat emptor.
Some folks had asked me about the status, and so I figured there was no point in holding onto it. I hope it provides some good play value even though it is definitely unbalanced..... the map should negate a lot of the regime firepower advantage.
-
Oh great, Kettler's invaded this thread as well. Good thing I've quite CM for the time being and don't care any more. Spam away JK.
-
Per my reply to another query.
I am visiting the forum for the first time in 2013 having quit gaming cold turkey for job reasons, for the time being. Anybody who wants to try to update the IJA and Pacific mods for 2.0 (which I don't own) is free to do so and publish the results on the Repo. Most of these mods originate with others in any case -- CoonDog, et al. -
I am visiting the forum for the first time in 2013 having quit gaming cold turkey for job reasons, for the time being. Anybody who wants to try to update the IJA and Pacific mods for 2.0 (which I don't own) is free to do so and publish the results on the Repo. Most of these mods originate with others in any case -- CoonDog, et al.
-
Classic "tactics" used by a demoralized force with too many vehicles and not enough infantry. With no RoE to speak of, they conduct indiscriminate "recon by fire" instead of sending out foot patrols.
-
Are you sure about that? Does the ammo level stay the same when the bearer is placed at a distance? One number doesn't change but the one that matters does.... at least that's the case for German infantry guns.
-
There's a link next to the frame. Good old Action, the "Sevenpenny Nightmare", filled cover-to-cover with antiheroes and good old ultraviolence. My parents were scandalized I tell you. I miss the 1970s -- going to hell in a handbasket just ain't what it used to be.
-
-
If a player side is awarded early intel, at start you see a number of ? icons showing (approximate) enemy locations even before you Spot them -- the number of these depends on the % the designer sets.
However, AFAIK these locations need to be within LOS of at least one of your troops.
If you want to get even more granular, you might create Objective labels with stuff like "DShK?" and make those visible only to the player.
-
The platoon subforts and company CP area each would get a dugout, a deeper fortification with overhead cover in which to shelter from artillery fire. Depth of a cellar or more, wood ladders to get out of them, tunnel rat living. Usually only one per platoon subposition.
Then radiating from that, short communication trenches to firing trench positions (fire step, embankment with sandbags, that sort of thing), which let the riflemen and LMGs cover one of the approach routes to the strongpoint itself. Their main mission was direct defense of the strongpoint proper against enemy infantry assault.
Each subfort might also have associated heavy weapons (HMGs at a minimum) that had a role in the strongpoint to strongpoint, open areas fire scheme. These heavy weapons could also help defend that part of the strongpoint from direct attack, but that was not their main mission. Interdicting the obstacle barriers and unmanned open ground to the next strongpoint over on their side, was.
A typical configuration of one of these platoon subforts would be a semi circle of firing trench looking over say the east face of the overall strongpoint, one log bunker HMG to the left and 20-30 yards behind that semi circle, communication trenches of all of those to a central dugout, which could also hold a local reserve squad to "repel boarders" by remanning a threatened point or "grenading up the trenches".
The perimeter of the platoon subfort itself might be covered by wire obstacles at 50 yards or so - meant to be far enough away to prevent approach within grenade-throw of the fighting trenches, without crossing the wire. But otherwise close enough that small arms from those trenches would be murderous to anyone trying to make such a movement. The layout of the individual subfort would however confirm to the nature of the ground, sighting opportunities, etc.
A quick footnote to Jason's remarks, with bolding -- Mickey Mouse stuff to many here, but perhaps not to some, and it's seldom that I find a "prepared battlefield" scenario where the designer has followed these rules well.
It may seem tempting to site your strongest bunkers and entrenched HMG nests on hilltops or upper slope locations that maximize their fields of fire, so that you can focus withering crossfires on the enemy the moment he stands up, but that is an elementary mistake. Such positions are readily observable by the enemy, who registers them for early destruction by artillery concentrations or ranged direct fire weapons/AFVs. The only exceptions might be Maginot/Westwall style armoured cupolas and pillboxes (which aren't provided in CM -- the in game bunkers are fairly weak though 2.0 strengthened them a bit I gather).
Therefore, as Jason notes, MGs are sited so that they're obscured from enemy positions opposite but can pour enfilading fire on their flanks into attackers struggling in the obstacle belts, or to shoot lengthwise (defilade) along gullies or trenches that the enemy might use to approach in cover.
So at range, each position ideally:
- First covers the obstacle belts in front of its neighbours
- Second covers covered approach routes to itself
- Third can deliver intense FPF and grenades into a killzone across its own immediate front, and hopefully can summon reserves before that situation arises.
-
Stop.... Mord.... I'm.... Afraid..... Will You.... Stop..... Mord.....
-
I'd kill to see a 'Free French' fifth column like CMSF has Syrian civilian militia 'fighters'.
Yeah, a little partisan action might be interesting; once designed these forces are easily ported to Bagration and Italy modules too as an added inducement to buy, not to mention what-if "Werwolf" stuff in the Bulge game family....
-
I like the jail next to the nunnery.
-
What about mods like Makin Atoll and the IJA?
Faces and voices and terrain probably OK by the sound of it, but uniforms will probably be British/German again. I've been traveling for work so other than mouthing off on the forums I haven't had any CM time, or Upgraded. I'll sort PTO out promptly once I do.
-
No problem, just wondering. For DBP I can mashup CMBO voices plus a smartering of German (Legion), Arabic (Tirailleurs) and Vietnamese (source tbd).
-
Agreed. The problem with abstracted microcover is that if it reduces chance to hit of an otherwise accurate bullet or fragment by half, you can defeat that by pumping in 2 rounds.
The "pinned" troops then sticking their heads and shoulders up to spot for extended periods compounds this problem. Thus, Troops in cover rapidly melt away under intense fire no matter what your or their intent may be unless you can enforce a Hide order behind a suitable stretch of bullet-defeating cover like a crestline.
Which is why simply upping the firepower of MGs with no orher changes is going to make things much worse, not better, for infantry. Even if it "solves" the pooltable problem.
-
Well most of the reason for that "fragility" is that infantry makes improper use of cover. So it takes inordinate casualties, with commensurate morale impact. Also, it can presently be shot out of its emplacements at range.
-
Have you already redone the voice files? I was planning to do it as part of my DienBienPhu project, but any work that can be saved would be cool!
-
While I'm certainly not expecting them for MG, is there any chance of getting the US-equipped French Army in the final CMBN "funnies" module? A couple of my most memorable CMBO games back in the day were French forces, and they certainly operated in the CMBN timeframe... La Liberation, Anvil-Dragoon, etc.
And just this once can we pass on the snide Homer Simpson comments from "le Gallerie d'Arichide Americain"? Heard it; in general, the French fought bravely and well in 1944-45.
-
These incidents are rare of course, but a similar incident occurred at Dien Bien Phu with 105s at point blank: 'Debouchez a zero!'. I am hoping they'll make the 75mm pack howitzer available in the OMG or "funnies" module but not optimistic unless someone can cite its use in the CMBN timeframe and AO.
My own workaround for now is to mod an immobilized M7 Priest; the hull can represent the emplacement, sunk into the earth. Not perfect but fit for use.
cmsf and cm Afghanistan
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Depends on the backstory. If you expect Fulda Gap to be relocated east 1500 miles (i.e. armoured brigades going head to head in WWIII) then yeah, nukes will probably fly.
But battalion scale meeting engagements between mechanized foreign-armed ethnic militias and external "peacekeepers" in the strife-torn Ukraine -- i.e. a Yugoslavia style intervention gone badly wrong -- are entirely plausible, and appropriate to the CM2 scale. IMHO.