Jump to content

Fat Dave

Members
  • Posts

    362
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fat Dave

  1. ...seeing how powerfully armed and hard to kill these Devil Dogs are...you HAVE to give the Syrians these sort of set-ups to avoid a complete walk-over. After having played all weekend as Red, once the Dogs bark up, any Syrian position is usually shot to pieces in very short time. The LAW, the M32 GL and the ripping SAW's really put a lot of hurt down range very quickly and very accurately. I found unless I upped the experience and leadership to Crack level, the Syrians would: 1. Find it seemingly harder to hit their targets in the first place 2. Pin easily by the very reactive return fire 3. Subsequently and systematically get shredded by accurate bursts and rifle grenades. Seriously, the Syrians need numbers on their side, keyholed positions and Crack experience to stand any sort of chance
  2. Hi George, That makes sense However, I *thought* I have seen AFV's fire their weapons with optics damage before...and the BMP-3 has 3 weapon systems to chose from. Is there an option to fire over iron sights in these things should things go horribly wrong? Will send file in any case. Cheers
  3. Hi guys, I have just witnessed the same thing in 1.10. BMP-3 get's hit by a lot of fire, crew decide to bail even though the vehicle is not actually destroyed. I check the damage report- optics are damaged - weapons systems are intact. I cancel the dismount way-point of the crew (strangely enough this time I only see 1 of the 2 crew members, one is yellow wounded status) and send them back into the BMP. Next turn, they are back in and 'in-command' of the vehicle. Already the gunner's status is set to 'firing'. I give it a fire order and as expected, nothing happens... the BMP does accept and carry out move orders yet will not fire anything. This time I have save files available. Who do I send them to and how? Cheers David
  4. Hi Sivodski, I can't wait to play PBEM against a human opponent, but only until all the little bugs have been fixed WEGO Ammo oddities, current dodgy vehicle pathing and weapon scrounging 'problems' need to be resolved before then. Look forward to 1.11 Cheers
  5. Hi guys, Well after Steve's explanation re: inexperience and AK's on full auto not helping with accuracy I fired up Al Huqf one more time to see if I could make a game of it against the fearless and seemingly bullet proof 1.10 Blue team Instead of starting with poorly led Syrian regulars who really couldn't hit anything even when presented with 'gifts' for targets - targets which I doubt a human player would ever give me - I upped their experience to veteran, gave them high motivation and a +1 commander. Using the same positions, I set the Red cover arcs and waited for the AI to send them targets. Well, the Blue team duly rolled in and rolled over my supposedly combat experienced, motivated men who still did very very badly with their Klashinikovs. With disbelief I watched the same scenario unfold - Blue present bunched up targets, Syrians open up - lines of yellow streak through, over, under but not into the now alerted Blue soldiers, who let rip - from exposed positions - to take out my guys with frightening accuracy who are in buildings. Some might call me a bad loser/tactician, but something just doesn't feel right at all. I have the positions plus the experienced men behind the triggers, yet time and time again I get hosed all over. This did not happen in 1.08. I really feel there is something not quite right with this as it stands. Not a major issue if you are the Blue player However, I like a challenge so Red suits me - but I need to be sure that what I am seeing is 'fair' and how it 'should be'...and nothing else. All thoughts appreciated
  6. Thanks for the reply Steve, glad to hear you guys are on the case. Looking forward to 1.11
  7. Hi guys, Just wanted to mention a few more things that I thought were a little odd while playing Al Huqf on veteran level WEGO. Firstly, what determines whether an important squad weapon (like the RPG-7) is picked up or not? I have had several cases where my hapless Red squad has not picked up the launcher after the gunner has fallen. Buddy aid is administered yet the launcher has not been picked up. The remaining squad of 8 guys has the RPG rockets in their inventory but no-one has deemed it important enough to pick up the launcher. They have remained in their position (a house) and are simply waiting for the next Blue attack. Surely, this should happen all the time? In 1.08 I saw this behaviour often and was very happy with it. In a two man dedicated RPG anti-tank unit this should happen right? Gunner goes down, assistant gives buddy aid, then picks up launcher? Again, I didn't see this happen in Al Huqf. After buddy aid the gunner's body and launcher dissapeared leaving the remaining AT team member with his AK. Secondly, in 1.08 I was pretty sure that when 8-9 AK's opened fire at a suicidal Blue squad running in the open I was sure to knock most of them down quite quickly. Since 1.10 I am not so sure anymore. I read that accuracy had been toned down, and I am aware that troop quality/experience, and suppression all play a part in how accurate outgoing fire is, but since the new patch, I watch in disbelief as loads of out-going fire seems to miss seemingly 'sitting duck' targets at relative close ranges (20-40 metres) The Blue troops will stop amongst the sickeningly hail of fire (in most cases in this scenario in the middle of a road), turn to face their newly acquired targets and rip off long bursts - killing/pinning etc my boys in good cover who literally had the jump on them. My Red fire just doesn't seem to hit them like it used too. Am I seeing things/missing something here? The Blue boys are vets/cracks and regs in the Al Huqf scenario and my boys are all poorly led and easily freaked out regulars, but AK's fired 'en masse' into open and bunched up targets at close range would surely do more than just give your postion away. I am not convinced that what I am seeing can be explained away by some extremely complicated abstraction...but would gladly like to hear otherwise...if it is indeed the case. Cheers
  8. Hi Steve, Great to hear you are looking into the vehicle pathing issues. While playing Al Huqf in veteran WEGO (my testing ground for urban combat) I noticed more strange vehicle behaviour. In one case I needed the BMP to change position in order to get a different firing angle due to the blocking of LOS/LOF due to one of the many low walls seperating the houses. I gave it a short (10 metre or so) reverse order and then a short hunt order towards it's new location. I watched as it reversed, then drove forward back to it's original start point, turned side on, moved across to the where the end hunt destination was, turned again (showing it's ass which prompting a rifle grenade in it's direction - it missed) then drove straight down the road about 40 metres (into a house) and stopped. Next turn I gave it a new hunt order back to where it came from and this was done without any trouble. All of this was done in a T-junction of intersecting roads surrounded by low walls and houses. At no time did I have a space issue, the BMP had plenty of room for manouvre. Hope this can be nailed down.
  9. Not sure if this is a bug per-se...but as was pointed out earlier, vehicle pathing (BMP-1 in this scenario) seems to have changed? What I saw was a BMP driving erratically along a seemingly straight stretch of road in between some buildings. Despite ending up at the end way-point it seemed to jink from left to right when there was no visual need for it i.e it's path was unobstructed. I have played this scenario many many times so it caught my attention straight away. Curious.
  10. Guessing by the silence, this has not been reproducable? To be clear, this happened exactly as I stated Once 1.10 comes out, I will play the scenario again to see if this can be replicated. I am positive it can be.
  11. Thanks for the replies guys! I understand now Setting up the Red's points' levels based on 'destroy' the Blue infantry unit -as one objective- mixed with a terrain objective would certainly be the way to go for this UNCON defense scenario. Bring on the Marines and 1.10!
  12. If I understand correctly Cpl Steiner, I need to set every Blue infantry platoon/squad -for example- as a unit objective for Red to destroy? If so, is there a limit of how many unit objectives I can use? I am thinking of the limit there is for AI plans F1-F9 style for example.
  13. Hi Ken, I too have seen this. The Al Huqf map is where I tried this. 3 to 4 houses in a nice line, with the doors covered by enemy fire. They could blast into and out of the first house, but then it all went a little wrong. No subsequent blast used for the next house, opting for the door instead. Not sure what was happening there. I only tried this once, putting it down to to some 'fuzzy' logic or some sort of TAC AI response to enemy fire somewhere... Can you consistently reproduce this?
  14. I hear you Stikkiepixie, I noticed this months ago as I was testing a night trench assault battle. As the Red player I was able to knock out a few Blue vehicles, but it was the Jason Bourne type of uber crew members that were then advancing and clearing my fully packed trenches...2 guys...probably with smoke still coming off their overalls wasting my Reds. I wasn't convinced bailed crew members would be in any sort of state to go over on the offensive. Anyway, let's see if this has been toned down in any way.
  15. Hi PT, This is exactly the type of info I was looking for:) Appreciate it a lot. I tried to figure out all the possible scenarios regarding losses and objectives to see what was required for a win/draw or a loss but wasn't sure what sort of damage percentages were realistic as well as fun and balanced. No-one would want to take on the UNCON side knowing that from the first turn, you'd be pissing into the wind for the rest of the game Your breakdown is very helpful. Thanks again.
  16. Hi guys, In preparation of 1.10 (which I am hoping will transform infantry combat to something less frustrating, and help me sell this game to my friends) I am trying to make a UNCON vs Blue MOUT battle which could be played as PBEM. I am trying to get it balanced so neither player would feel they are fighting a losing battle from the get-go, regardless of what side they chose. I want to create a battle in which the Blue attacker needs to capture (occupy) a building in the middle of an UNCON held small town (think Al Huqf) and kill as many enemy as possible while preserving their fighting force. As the Red player, they need to hold the building, and kill and destroy as many of Blues' attacking force as possible. They are all fantatics and preservation is not an issue. Now, I can think of a nice mix of units that could battle it out, but I am not sure how to balance it out via points. Would anyone be able to give me a rough formula which would balance out each sides objectives, both terrain and unit wise. I am thinking along these lines for the Blue player: 1. Occupy the building before the end of the alloted time = 100 points 2. Destroy more that 70 % of the enemy force = 100 points 3. Keep own losses to under 30 % = 100 points For the Red forces: 1. For each IFV destroyed 50 points. 3 x Bradleys or Strykers@ 50 points each= 150 points 2. Occupy building before the end of the alloted time = 100 points 3. Destroy at least 30% of attacking force = 50 points Now, I am a complete beginner at this balancing act, and I am not sure if anyone would see this as a fair set of win/draw or loss criteria. All help/suggestions appreciated. Cheers
  17. Hi JP, OK, I misread your first post about re-arming the vehicles themselves Bardosy hit the nail on the head re:MOUT tactics...go slow and cautiously, supress any likely building which might contain enemy units with your cannons and keep the Brad as far back as you can. Use your troops to find the enemy then manouvre to within LOS to engage them. Plans have a bad habit of falling apart when making unexpected contact, and unless you are hit with a well aimed RPG-29, the Brad's armour is usually good enough to let you re-evaluate what the next move will be after that 'where the hell did that come from' moment
  18. Hi JP, I would beg to differ on the vulnerability of the Bradley in SF They are well armoured and can absorb more firepower than a Stryker in my opinion. In my last game, in a MOUT setting, I watched in horror (I was playing as Red) as it took 5 (!) different type of RPG hits and kept on firing. It survived 2 hits from a tandem warhead RPG and shook off the rest. Even a shower of grenades wasn't enough to knock it out. After the game had ended I saw that after all that apparent punishment it had suffered one crew casualty and damaged tracks... If you are taking them up against Red MBT's on the other hand, well, the results you are seeing are probably pretty much right on the money I'm afraid the re-arming of the Bradley/Stryker after it has fired off it's ammo is out of scope for the type of battles CM:SF is simulating.
  19. As long as a QB is balanced in terms of opposing forces, then it is up to player to do the best they can with the hand dealt to them. Of course, playing against another human is where the real tactical challenge lies, and currently, an almost gentleman's agreement needs to be struck about what forces to play with to ensure this balancing act. CM1 covered this very well in my opinion. What about the idea to provide the player with various pre-selected balanced QB 'packages' of units to battle it out with? Imagine being able to select a Red QB uncon unit 'package' which could consist of either a small, medium or large uncon QB force - coming with fighters, AT assets, IED's and the like, to battle it out against a Blue force package of similar size/fighting power and experience.
  20. thewood, No weapons damage, in fact, no damage at all. The first thing I checked actually, and according to my my little tool wrench incon - systems were all go. All green.
  21. Hi Mark, Thanks for taking a look. No save file unfortunately. It will be a tricky one to replicate as usually the BMP is toast once the Bushmaster starts hammering away, and I haven't seen a crew bail out of a vehicle before it has been destroyed before... The BMP was stationary, in ambush with a covered arc, it then took hits - didn't pop smoke, or reverse - and the crew decided it was time to bail. I reckon - and this is of course pure speculation - that had I let them complete their 'bail' order and let them reach the safety of the house i.e the end point, then ordered them back into the vehicle - then I wouldn't have had the first issue of the BMP 'seeing' them as any normal passengers instead of recognising them as the crew. When I did this 'properly' i.e dismounted them, let them complete their moves and then order them back they became the crew again. Why the BMP then refused to fire any form of weapon (despite the 'firing' status) after they re-crewed is something for those in the know to figure out
  22. Hi guys, In case this hasn't been reported already (and probably already squashed in 1.10) this is a bug I saw last night. Using 1.08 I played the Al Huqf meeting engagement scenario in WEGO mode as the hapless Red side. My BMP-2 was providing overwatch before the Bradley finally rolled out of it's starting blocks and tore up the town. The Bradley quickly put some Bushmaster love into the BMP (at least 5 shots hitting) before moving itself out of LOS and began engaging other targets. To my surprise, the BMP suffered no damage, but both crew members (regs) decided to exit the vehicle and head for the nearest building. The turn then ended. Seeing that the BMP was fine, I cancelled the move which the crew had plotted towards the inside of the building and gave them a fresh order to get back into the BMP. As the new action phase unfolded I saw the crew head for the BMP and climb in - excellent I thought - the BMP is operational once more. However, as the turn ended, I noticed that although the crew were inside, they were not in control of the BMP, instead, the 'floating crew icon' indicated they were merely passengers. In short I had a BMP whose status was something like 'dismounted' and 2 crew sitting inside doing nothing. In order to try and solve this, I gave them the 'dismount' order for the following turn and watched. They dismounted fine and sat close to the BMP. As the turn ended, I then gave them a 'quick' back into the BMP. As the action phase unfolded, they ran towards the BMP and got in...this time, they were merged into the vehicle - and the BMP was 'officially' back in action. Next turn I gave the undamaged and fully armed BMP a 'target light' order at a building, only to see the status of the gunner go to firing...but with the BMP just sitting there. It simply would not fire. For the following turn I gave a 'target' order at a closer building, full LOS, nice blue line, but again, it did nothing...despite the gunner's status still displayed as firing. Although refusing to fire, the BMP could move - so I gave it fast move orders towards some likely enemy locations. It moved into position - took some fire - and duly sat there (still with the gunner's status as firing) until it was hit by multiple M203 rifle grenades and was 'destroyed'. The crew bailed again and were subsequently mown down not far from the vehicle. A bug surely? Anyway, I am hoping this has been noted and fixed for 1.10. Cheers
  23. Hi Derfel, Good work. I think you have highlighted some issues which need to be addressed. The more this is tested and brought to BFC's attention the quicker this will be solved. Agree completely about the non-save aspect, a crash during live play means you have nothing but frustration as a result. Again, fingers crossed for 1.10
×
×
  • Create New...