[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

Well personally I see a WORLD of difference between weapons then and now. Sure there are similarities but that is about it IMO. The setting also affects things (e.g. Normandy v desert and open, barren terrain). There is a lot to get concerned about threat wise on a WWII battlefield but chalk and cheese compared to this.

In any event, personally I prefer WWII, it's weapons and the Western theatre and no manner of comparisons will affect that I'm afraid.

Off to the CM:BN board Nice talking.

[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

Interesting, thanks. I suspect, using as an example the German mission no. 1 in the campaign, deployment of foot based Milans would be an appropriate option, equally, like you say, you have to go with what you get and this case there are none, just the Marder Milans and given Leo fragility I will not be putting one of those in a firing position!!! With respect to the first part of the response, in game terms that's the point I am getting at really. If shelling the blazes out of everywhere would not be considered viable and commanders in this case would need to come up with a 'Somme fee' alternative I would normally rather try that alternative than 'gamier' options.

I'm happy with the game/sim balance overall but will be happier when Normandy arrives as it's weapon lethality that causes many problems for this setting IMO, and the complete push over for forces without them. So, where the right assest is not available, and other tactics do not seem best placed, the "recon by arty" may be the best, if somewhat gamey, approach

[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

Yes there is. There are of course ways to tackle this mission but that's not really the subject of this thread. But, since you raised it smoking is what I did Point is not ALL missions will have favourable terrain and some, maybe, not the assets you would wish for. What then?

I'm sure interested in how forces would ID and deal with weapons such as the AT14 in RL. In the game the liberal use of arty/air seems to be a popular method but, given the cost of materiel would such a tactic, collateral damage aside, be used in RL?

I am interested in military history, strategy and tactics but my interest is mainly around classical, medieval, napoleonic and comes to an abrupt halt at 1946. Of course many considerations will carry over from era to era but I do find that there is a distinct difference between real life doctrine and game doctrine, the better games managing to reduce the gap. A knowledge of tactics etc is certainly a help but they will not always be applicable in game terms, hence I am somewhat choosy over the various strategy/tactics 'guides' that spring up.

But again it's digressing. AT14s are definitely ones to watch for in CMSF and, where Leopards are concerned, particularly so. Doubtless I will draw them out with liberal arty use game wise, and shield with smoke if I am unable to do so. Much more may not be possible and that may reflect RL really well, I just find it strange that expending vast quantities of arty fire would be an acceptable tactic and if so, would rather limit use of it in that way, at least for this type of purpose.

[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

Ah perhaps I misunderstood then when you said:

"Even then the Leos will crest ridges 2 or even 4 at a time!!!"

To me "crest" there is a verb meaning to "go over the top of"?

If by "crest" you meant "adopt a hull down position behind" then I stand corrected.

Interpretation can be problematic. To me there are numerous uses of 'crest' such as "to reach a high point" and "lie at the top of", neither of which need to amount to the whole vehicle going over the top.

Debate over dictionary/personal interpretations aside (internet discussions have a habit of side-tracking down all sorts of tortuous routes that I prefer not to bother with ), as DaveDash suggested I find the Leos much too vulnerable as assets to look for ATGMs in this way. On occasions the vehicles have had to push more over (or even crest ) ridges than I'd like as too low a profile didn't encourage a response. Using them to bait the less sophisticated ATGMs I find to be little problem, the AT14s are just not in that class!!!

Also, there are some maps (first in the German campaign in NATO for instance) where skirting round ridges is not so easy to do. In this mission all German forces are arrayed behind a ridge but need to go over it at some point and cross terrain overseen by enemy forces. Some of these points are slightly more risky than others but there is little alternative.

[Welcome to our newest Forum]

Brilliant news!!! My new home page!!!

[I Love NATO!]

Good points again Dave. I certainly plan to use rooftops a lot less now, until I have total superiority. The 90% angle for support teams is a good idea and I have actually done this many times but as much by accident than planning I do like to use them early on for JTACs, FOs and HQs for spotting purposes but WAY back early on. I also posted about the improvements I found when I put I put jeep mounted FOs (well JTACs at least) in the 2ic or coy cdr Marder (or I suspect any Marder they will be allowed in) which results in missions coming in 1 minute quicker (I play on Elite to better reflect reality) so prefer to do that when I can and again, where threats to the IFVs have been taken out.

[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

But why are you going over the crest?

Stick to the low ground and go around them.

You should only be near the top of a crest if:

1. Turret down doing a recce (that is standing on the turret roof using your binos, with the entire rest of the vehicle concealed), or

2. Hull down supporting the move of the vehicles that are using the low ground to move to the next position. If you are doing that you need to “jockey” (fire one round, reverse come back up 100m+ away from your last location and start over) between rounds. and when you move to the next feature you reverse into dead ground and move around the feature to the next position supported by the other vehicles in the Tp / Pl.

See Post #5 above for a link to videos describing “Jockeying” and “bounds”.

1 and 2 are the precise reasons.

[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

I agree 100% with your Leo conclusions as a result of countless reloads of the 'live' mission 1 in the German campaign (I don't normally do reloads but on the first mission do it LOADS to practice tactical options and get to grips with the system). My Leo's stay hidden until I am 80-90% certain there are no AT14s left or they are well suppressed by arty fire. Even then the Leos will crest ridges 2 or even 4 at a time!!!

[No YTC campaign in CMSF???]

Thanks anyway. Better solution for me than an uninstall and re-install of everything including patch 'x' (x being the patch with YTC campaign).

Merry Xmas to all at BF. Great game, at least until Normandy comes along

[No YTC campaign in CMSF???]

Sorted now. Didn't realise it was at the repository.

[CM:SF - Slight patch confusion.]

Ah..brilliant, thanks. Was going to ask if it could be mailed or whatever rather than going through the process of a full uninstall. It's also not clear what patch I would have needed. Did a search on Paradox/YTC etc but drew a blank, Google too. This will be the easier option by far.

[CM:SF - Slight patch confusion.]

In another thread it seems I may need another patch in this sequence to get the YTC campaign?? Moon said it was 1.1 (have queried on the original thread) but to my mind 1.1 is the same as 1.10?? In any event I can't see a 1.1 anywhere and nothing giving a hint to which patch I need to get the YTC campaign from Paradox???

I have successfully (checked the version number each time) installed CMSF, patches 1.10 and 1.21, then NATO then 1.31. No YTC campaign though

Only flagging it here in case something needs amending in any patch guidance on the website for those who may just buy CMSF and NATO.

[No YTC campaign in CMSF???]

OK thanks. That is Paradox patch 1.1 and not 1.10 (which IIRC would be the same). An earlier would surely be 1.01?? Presumably I'd need to uninstall everything, re install CMSF, then DL and install the Paradox 1.1, then 1.10, 1.21, NATO and 1.31 as I suspect installing 1.1 will downgrade or corrupt the current installation?

Have just checked but can't find 1.1 on the download/patch page?? I have 1.10 and that definitely went in as I checked the version number after each install? I checked their site to and cant see a 1.1 (but 1.10 says it contains ALL previous patches). Bit stumped how to get round this???

[No YTC campaign in CMSF???]

I only recently got CM:SF (Paradox) and the NATO module and after installing CM:SF went straight to a process of installing the 1.10, 1.21 (retail) patches, NATO, then 1.31.

It's only on reading the CM:SF manual I found out about the YTC training campaign. When I booted up CMSF today I noticed there is no YTC campaign there??? There are 4 campaigns in all, the 3 NATO ones and the TF one? Is the campaign not included with the Paradox version or has it gone AWOL courtesy of something else???

I also notice, although not a critical issue, then when I select the three NATO missions a small green 'light' comes on over the NATO module icon yet when I select the TF one I get no such light over the CMSF icon? Is that normal???

[I Love NATO!]

Following more play today I find that infantry are mainly useful for losing me points Tending to try to keep 100% alive I find not using them in combat the most effective option and especially NOT from rooftops. Spotting from outside small arms and MG range with armour threats out the game OR sat in their Marders seems to be the safest two places.

This I suspect is entirely reasonable with the armour/IFVs needing to be used for probably 95% of a lot of tasks. I found putting infantry into suppressed buildings very dodgy also if there were infantry in a building opposite. I now tend to use them for going into buildings which tend to be level with my armour/IFV front line, just to make 100% sure there is no-one in them, not to clear them by combat.

[Interesting ATGM observations vs BLUEFOR tanks]

Glad it's not just me Dave!!! I really find the Leos go down quick against these and spotting/drawing fire with the Leos is WAAAAAY to risky unless they immediately reverse from a forward move which JUST has them probe into AT14 LOS and with a gazillion infantry spotters on the ground to see where the shot came from!!

I dare not use any armour at all unless these are cleared, which in many ways is realistic, but maybe to biased in the AT14s favour in some cases.

[I Love NATO!]

Interesting points, I'll definitely bear in mind the air strike info. Infantry I find to be effective at ATGM spotting only when they are positioned in overwatch positions and then AFVs are used to 'shoot n scoot' to draw ATGM fire. I don't find the infantry that effective at finding them on their own as such, especially in urban settings, where the infantry are just as likely to be ambushed by an MG, or even a squad in ambush, as much as they are likely to find and KO an RPG team. Care also needs to be taken with pushing the Marders up to provide support in such situations as they will also die quickly if the first thing they discover, as they nudge into LOS of one or more objective/target buildings, is an RPG. Had a couple die when trialling this!! I dare say this is where the tanks would be more useful in the urban setting as the RPG is less lethal frontally than a Kornet I suspect.

I do find that my Leos really cannot be risked as ATGM (long range) magnets at all in the initial stages and find that the Kornets are the main problem. Several times, even with 'shoot and scoot', a Leo has been knocked out or immobilised on the first shot. So far I have HAD to put out loads of eyes on the battlefield, well back right at the start of a mission, to have a hope of spotting ATGMs when they fire and even then have to have the tanks only JUST crest a ridge with an immediate reverse. I definitely need to use recon by arty/air more to help disclose enemy positions. I tend to find the tanks are more survivable once the ATGM positions have been suppressed with a minute or so of arty, until then I have found them highly vulnerable, even directly front on, and 99% of the time unable to ID what fired at them. Most times I have had tanks at least immobilised, and often KOd, when placing in overwatch too early, when going too far with their 'shoot and scoot' or pausing too long once forward. I also notice that when i have had a seemingly poor ATGM firing at my Leo(s), the rounds hitting the dirt quite a way in front, the targeting systems on the tanks have degraded very quickly (checking the 'damage' tab) so even missed ATGM shots are doing more damage than it's worth risking the MBT for. A blind tank is useless. Maybe Abrams and Challengers are more survivable?

Often with shoot and scoot, especially when the target is enemy tanks etc., I use 'Hunt, Pause, Reverse' to allow time to spot as they roll forward, acquire and kill. With ATGMs I think maybe 'Quick or Fast, Pause (5-10 secs max, if indeed any pause at all) and Reverse' may be better figuring that the 'Hunt' forward is useless for ATGM spotting as, unlike a tank target, there is nothing to see as they creep forward and that 'crawl' gives an ATGM gunner a longer time to aim.

I suspect with RPGs the Leos may be more survivable and I might need to start pushing 2 of the 4 forward (up until now I have kept all tanks right at the rear in overwatch but along with the coy cdr and 2 ic in Marders there comes a point where they fail to spot/shoot at much) to support infantry assaults on some urban objectives to help prevent the Marders getting killed by RPGs, thus allowing them to then nudge forward more safely to support an infantry assault with suppression where the infantry would otherwise be dying if they assaulted without them in most cases.

I do find that the enemy tend to be HIGHLY accurate with a lot of their AT weapons, even against a jeep going full tilt down a road!!

On a completely different note, one thing I have found that if a JTAC air observer is provided (thus far I have had them only in jeeps) they are MUCH better able to perform that role if they are placed in the coy cdr or 2ic Marder (presumably because of access to the vehicle comms) than they do on foot with binos. The jeep only has a radio. This way I found the JTAC call times reduce by 1 minute plus across all assets.

Again, on a different note, the Marders are armed with Milans but I have yet to see one fire at anything, much less kill anything with one!! I am (largely) keeping them unbuttoned as the manual says to allow the cdr to use them but they are dormant. Early days yet I suppose as it's only the first mission but, in the demo, I had more kills (MG nests on towers) with foot Milan crews than I did with those that were Marder based.

The lethality of modern weapons for me make CMSF a less interesting tactical game than CMBO in all honesty, or the eagerly awaited Normandy. As Erwin says it does seem to be a very similar recipe for each mission. I suppose the recipe was the same for the Normandy/WWII setting but the reduced lethality seems to allow you to use a greater range of ingredients. There is an awful lot of 'watch and wait' which I actually don't mind for a change but I'm not sure it would keep the interest long term as much as CMBO did. I do miss CM games though (and CMBO is a bit dated now compared to CMX2) and NATO appealed, at least as a stop gap. It also helps to get me fully familiar with CMX2 commands. I definitely look forward to returning to the WWII setting though, especially with the current game engine.

[Optical Drive on way out or another problem?]

Well I have a feeling the drive may be on the way out. If it was a system/driver issue I can't see why it would recognise some CDs and not others? Whenever there is a CD in there the drive shows up on 'My Computer' or 'W/Explorer'. It's just that in some cases the CD shows in the drive (the instances where it has detected it and 'spun up') and in others it just shows as empty (e.g. when CMSF or indeed NATO, which I DLd and burned to CD on a Mac Book, is in there). I tried the Dell Diagnostics/Driver CD that came with the machine after this and it spun up fine. Both the CMSF and NATO CDs showed up fine using a USB external CD drive too.

It strikes me that the drive is getting really fickle about what it reads and the only explanation I can think of is that it's on the way out. I could look at a cleaning CD I suppose but wonder if there's any point given that it read the diagnostics CD fine.

So, two options, buy install another R/W CD Drive (but which I wonder - I am UK based and the machine is a Dell XPS 600) or bring forward the replacement of the machine from Spring. If I do that it will NOT have an LG DVD optical R/W drive and almost certainly will NOT be a Dell!!!! With 2GB of RAM and a GeForce 7800 graphics card it's getting on I suppose. IIRC it's about 5 years old now.

[I Love NATO!]

I'm just kicking off with the NATO German campaign and it is interesting to say the least. Taking me a long time to get to grips with ATGM hunting!! I will NEVER bother about panzerfausts in CM Normandy this much I'm sure.

Having some mixed views on mission execution. I tend to split the force into a platoon per objective leapfrogging the Marders in two's with tanks providing overwatch to the whole battlefield once main ATGM threats have been harried enough. I am tempted to pump 2 or even three platoons to one objective, swamp it and move on on the basis that 4 Marders in overwatch is better than 2!! Not always going to be possible.

ATGMs are a real headache though. Where I can I tend to get as many infantry eyes on the battlefield with teams, leaders, spotters, even drivers, before doing very short shoot/scoot with the tanks in the hope of drawing fire and seeing where it/they come from so I can then call in arty. I don't like to waste too much arty on 'guess' missions.

In closer urban areas it's slightly harder. I prefer to have the German 6 man squads well supported by Marders, they die really easy on their own. BUT the Marders need to be safe from ATGM threats and assaulting the buildings they may be in with infantry is dodgy without Marder support. All makes for interesting play!!! Great module though. It will do until CM:Normandy comes out that's for sure. I have yet to play the Canadian, Dutch or even Stryker campaigns so plenty to get along with. Figure if I can hack it with Germans and their 6 man squads I should find the others more forgiving. Playing on Elite at moment.

[Brit Sound Mod?]

That's great, thanks. Your mod had a good read me so was little problem, even less so had I seen the chapter in the manual. The ZB files it seems then 'take precedence' while they are in the data folder (anywhere) but unlike with CMBO there is no replacing on a permanent basis and reverting to stock sounds is as simple as just removing the relevant brz/mod. For ease of keeping an eye on what I have I think I'll just have a 'Z' folder and put your brz files in a folder just called 'AKD Sound Mod' in there. It was mainly getting my head round whether mods in the z folder would work if they were in sub folders and if they could be called anything you like, or if they needed to be prefixed with Z etc. Brill mod.

Just one question now, as I finish getting my head round how the sounds are modelled by the game. Your module that does the small arms 'far', does that actually re-model ALL small arms fire in the game so they all sound far or does the game itself have close/far or whatever and this just alters the far ones? Same with the explosions, is there just one set of sounds in the game for explosions and therefore the mod mods them all or again, are there 'far' and others and the far ones just does the far?

[No 'Desktop' display option?]

Many thanks. I will bear in mind the wide-screen settings do as the new PC will have this (allowing me to take a sledge-hammer to the Dell - never again!!!).

[Brit Sound Mod?]

Thanks for the info. In all honesty I totally missed the Mod section in the manual partly because with the CMBO/BB/AK games IIRC there was no modding section in the manuals and because the section is bundled closely with scenario design/editor stuff which is something I don't dabble in so a quick (too quick in this case) skim read of the section led me to pass the info by.

As you say, a sticky entitled "How to Mod CM:SF - Instructions" with the text merely referring people to read pp 150 -153 of the manual would be a good idea. Some may think this shouldn't be needed but in all honesty I was very surprised to see anything on modding. In fact IIRC I even saw the chapter header and, as it was bundled with editor/design stuff, thought it must relate to something else.

Like you say though, much easier to manage than CM:BO bmp and wav files!!! MUCH!!

[New Scenario - Canadian Square Combat Team]

Only just got NATO. Will play this through after the stock campaigns. Thanks.

[Full colour silouttes v1.30a including NATO released]

It sure is!! That said, it does seem like it might be easier to manage what you have/don't have if you can/should create folders pertaining to each mod within the Z Folder (e.g. NATO Icons, AKD Sound and Scipio etc etc). I doubt I'll mod this as much as CMBO mind!! I also plan to keep copies, in fact with CMBO I had a Mod folder containing three folders (Installed, Not Installed and For Trial) but I did have loads for that!!

Modding that became a hobby in itself!! I was on 'dial up' then mind, those were days LOL!!! Not so many mods about for this also but the ones I plan to use seem very good and popular. Be interesting to see what happens mod wise when CM:Normandy surfaces - can't wait!!!

[New file at the Repository: NATO Icons (2010-10-26)]

Thanks for the help. At the moment I only have two mods, 'AKD Sound' and 'NATO Icons'. Latter has no 'Read Me', former has but it doesn't mention the need to actually create a 'Z' folder, just about deleting one called 'Z_AKD Sound Mod' of you have it already. It DOES however say that this folder could be in the Z folder if you have one.

I doubt I will use SO many mods on this as I did with CMBO but it's good that it seems you can keep them organised. I will try keeping folders of mods inside the Z folder I think (e.g. NATO Icons, Scipio Icons etc etc). In the AKD Read Me it talks about deleting this folder called "Z_AKD Sound Mod" that you might find in the Z folder if you have it already and what I'm not quite clear on is whether, to keep things neat, I can/need to put AKDs mod in a folder just called 'AKD Sound' OR if I actually should/need to create one called 'Z_AKD Sound Mod' (e.g. a Z folder within the Z folder). I'll give it a try.