Peter Panzer
-
Posts
591 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Peter Panzer
-
-
Damn it people, I just spent the last twenty minutes looking for the corresponding 'Screamers' thread only to come in here and see folks carping about people carping about a video game.
Speaking of which, v1.2 by the weekend, right? Good then.
Just to make this post vaguely relevant, here is an image of some UK Infantry trying not to get blown up...
..and here is some UK Infantry that can blow me up...
-
Nice work Wengart, Pandur and Mark.
Any chance the fix for this can be slipped into v1.20 given that it hasn't been rolled out yet or is it far too late for that sort of thing?
-
The M707 can use its artillery FO abilities to get range and check LOS.
Thanks MikeyD. I suppose one could use that technique as a rough workaround.
It would be great if at some point the M707 had the "Target" and "Cover Arc" buttons in the UI activated. It has always struck me as an oversight that the player cannot check LOS and assign sectors with a recon vehicle. Especially given that the "Target" button is active in the editor and the '707's REDFOR counterpart (UNCON Spy) does have access to the Target/LOS tool in-game.
-
Well, it turned out the demo I downloaded from the Worthplaying US Mirror was mistakenly the v1.11 Marines Demo and I will not have access to a broadband connection again for several days. So, if some kind soul could chime in on any potential improvements to the M707 in v1.2 it would be great...
- Can it now use the "Target/LOS" tool in game? (Dietrich's question above)
- Can it employ "Cover Arcs" to scan assigned sectors?
Bonus question...
- Has the short-barrelled "Para" SAW been added to the US Army and Marines inventory?
Thanks for any information.
- Can it now use the "Target/LOS" tool in game? (Dietrich's question above)
-
As one of the folks who have been banging on about various issues within the game post v1.11 I wanted to say thank you to all of the BFC boys and the Beta Testers who have put what certainly appears to be a tremendous deal of effort and responsiveness into v1.20.
The bulk of the points I have raised over the last several months appear to have been addressed...
- Infantry on rooftops are easier to spot.
- Mine marking works properly.
- US M240 gunner does not ignore facing orders when using the bipod.
- Fixed a bug that could cause a quick burst of unrealistically high rate of fire from a weapon mounted on a moving vehicle.
- Vehicle crew "up top" as gunners or in open hatches have a more natural pose.
- These vehicles no longer automatically button up even when under heavy fire: MTVR trucks, Humvees, and pickup trucks. (THANK YOU!)
- IED Mines are more likely to explode.
- Small model fix for M16 with mounted M203.
- Syrian Unconventional forces add a Forward Observer Spy.
I really can't wait to try the demo over the weekend as it seems like v1.20 may finally be the point at which CMSF turns the corner for me. Again, my thanks to all for listening and implementing these changes - you very likely just picked up another customer for the UK Module!
- Infantry on rooftops are easier to spot.
-
Where's the changelog for 1.20 again?
Yes, can this please be posted either on the forum or perhaps the Demo page?
Also, does installing the demo create any conflicts if you already have the full game installed?
-
Marco:
I don't know how in the hell I missed these the first time around, but thank you - this is simply fantastic work!
Here's hoping we see plenty more samples of your craftsmanship in the future.
-
Paper Tiger:
They soon ran into some trouble and I forgot about the IED and moved my Bulldog off to support the troops. The next unit to cross the bridge triggered the IED. Oops...Now that is very cool! I have said again and again it is the "little" things that really invigorate the game or vice versa. Thanks to you and MikeyD for the quick replies!
...I think the Brit module really shines when you play missions with UK Light Infantry units with artillery, air support, Jackals, WMIKs and the little light armoured vehicles in support.Broadly speaking, I agree that small unit actions revolving around light armor and cavalry/recce are tremendous fun. Indeed, the bulk of my scenarios center around this OOB and I am glad a Beta Tester shares this perspective!
That said, lavishly crafted models and detailed TO&E's are a fantastic start, but the engine has to get the details right in order for those new elements to come to life.
As someone who has not had the luxury of play-testing the newest build, I will place significantly more weight on the items in the v1.20 change log than all of the present "word-of-mouth," videos and web pages for CMSF:UK when determining if I invest more in this incarnation of CM.
For example...
Will WMIK/LMTV crews button up at the first crack of small arms fire like M1114 gunners in v1.11?
Can I conserve those precious 30mm Rarden or 25mm M242 rounds and rely upon the AI to emphasize the coaxial guns via "Target Light?"
Will unarmed Recce vehicles and the M707 finally be able to scan sectors using Cover Arcs?
Will OPFOR infantry on rooftops remain invisible to your Light Dragoons and Jarheads even at ranges inside fifty meters while pitching grenades?
I remain very cautiously optimistic about this patch/module and look forward to learning more in the coming days.
-
A few questions...
In reference to the operation of the 30mm Rarden cannon, NormalDude noted...
The thing also has to reload every six shots and has a very limited main gun ammo load out compared to a Bradley. You actually have to carefully consider whether you want to use the main gun or the MG, because there is not a lot of ammo to play with.Has the manner in which the AI selects which weapon to emphasize in relation to "Target Light" or "Target Heavy" been modified in v 1.20?
Recall the requests for a more precise manner for the player to prioritize AFV weapon use over the last several months - conserving limited ordnance was one of the big reasons why.
Also, the online manual notes that in reality, FV510 employs electronic countermeasures for IEDs. Is this reflected in the game?
If so, is it safe to conclude it is only effective versus microwave/cell detonated explosives (i.e. a jammer)? Does this only provide a radius of protection that moves with the AFV or does it actually "fry" the circuitry of the detonator rendering the IED harmless to follow-on forces?
-
...IIRC there was some sort of bug in v1.11 and earlier that muted the full value of LRAS3. We fixed that for v1.20...
Steve:
That's great news. It's nice to hear the recon assets are getting some attention.
Speaking of the LRAS3, will we finally have access to in-game LOS and Target Arc functions for the M707 (Recon Humvee) in v1.2? Given that their equally unarmed REDFOR counterparts (UNCON spies) have them the omission seems rather odd, not to mention limiting in terms of the '707's effective use. Even stranger, you can use the LOS function for the M707 in the setup phase but not when the engagement begins.
LT Mike isn't the only one around these parts that enjoys a solid recon mission. Can you help us out?
-
Paper Tiger:
I have to confess that I'm not really qualified to comment on Humvee's behaviour under fire as I've hardly played a mission as the US side for over a year and a half (and on those very rare occassions when I do, I play missions with the heavier hitters).Not a problem. Frankly, I have suspected this of quite a few folks - I welcome your candor and desire to get things right. I prefer Cavalry units, so inaccuracies surrounding light armor and recon vehicles (no in-game LOS tool for the M707) tend to get my attention. As MikeyD and I discussed briefly, with the introduction of UK teams and eventually WWII era crews using similar configurations this issue is not going away.
Unfortunately, this behaviour can't be reported as a BUG though as it's 'working as designed'.I agree. My outsider theory is that new self preservation behavior was added for AFV crews without taking into consideration the ramifications for M1114/MTVR gunners. Buttoning up under fire makes very good sense for a TC, but it is exactly the opposite of what '1114/MTVR gunners are expected to and must do to ensure the survival of their team.
The vehicle crew's motivation will also affect things.A logical presupposition. It is also incorrect when applied to v1.11. A highly motivated veteran will behave the same as the greenest boot. As noted previously, range does not play a role either, nor should it in reality. The US military trains its combat personnel to acheive fire superiority when in close contact so as to fight through an ambush and manuever for advantage. All we get in v.1.11 are virtual doggies and jarheads filling their pants consistently under practically any and all conditions. This is disasterous in WEGO.
So it might (remembering the opening sentence of my post) be more the scenario designer's 'fault' than the game engine.Negative. See my last point.
This requires a more careful argument to get it changed so I'll run a couple of tests and raise the issue on the Beta forum.As I have said in similar circumstances in the past - fair enough. Thank you for devoting the time!
Actually, if you could point me to a scenario or two where I'll see this behaviour, I'd be grateful.Unfortunately, I exclusively "roll my own." In other words, the first thing I do upon installation of a new module or the like is delete all of the scenarios and campaigns and create my own "Hotseat" engagements.
If need be, I do have a very simple, small "test" map I use to observe these issues for myself. I could set it up with a USMC "Escort Platoon" and a squad of REDFOR infantry and e.mail it to you. Of course, it would be nothing that you could not replicate in five minutes time on your own to be honest.
Please let me know how you wish to proceed as I do not want to create unneccessary work for you. Then again, with all of those campaigns you have authored you may be a bigger glutton for punishment than I am.
-
MikeyD:
How long a gunner should risk his life topside is "personal opinion" that BFC may or may not agree with.Well, yes and no.
Would it be acceptable for a roof gunner to be suppressed in a similar manner to his unmounted counterparts? Possibly. Unfortunately, that is not what happens in v.1.11. Even a few near misses, regardless of range, will cause them to button up. Again, that is just not what happens in reality. V1.10 had their behavior simulated quite well. Presently, we have to deal with an extreme, which makes M1114's, CAAT Teams and MTVR's rather compromised in their offensive/defensive capabilities.
But with the Brit module there's going to be a LOT more exposed mg gunner on wheeled vehicles.Absolutely - and for all of you guys pining for the French countryside during the summer of '44, guess what your SPW and M2 gunners are going to do the first time a virtual round whips past under the current model?
Its not that there's no distinction between weapons, just that the details are out of our control. So 'oversimplified' might be the wrong phrase. Perhaps 'over-automated'?Truth be told, I know there is no chance that a "Target Light/Medium/Heavy" option will be introduced in v1.2, however I thought I would tack it onto the list as it is something I and others have commented on several times in the past. For that reason I won't get into it again here.
Paper Tiger:
With regards to the Humvees buttoning up, perhaps you might want to consider keeping them a tad further back from the action than having them too close to small arms fire. I know that this is not always possible especially in MOUT operations but it doesn't seem to be too unrealistic behaviour to me.Range doesn't matter man, try it out yourself. Gunners button up as far out as 500 and 600 meters after two or three small arms rounds in the vicinity. That simply does not reflect reality. Furthermore, abandoning the primary weapon station when your team is under close contact is exactly what you do not want to do. I have cited numerous, real life examples of gunners facing a hell of a lot more than a controlled pair manning their stations and fighting.
I am not calling for impervious robots, but v1.11 is far too extreme and restricts an entire class of vehicles.
I was able to replicate this bug myslf very easily so I've filed a bug report for you Peter.Thanks! That was very kind of you - I appreciate it!
Kyle:
And Peter Panzer, wow, those are some MAJOR headaches you've listed here.I have been at this for quite a while - some are arguably more major than others.
CMSF has been an odd gaming experience for me, it isn't solid enough to keep me immersed, but it doesn't suck enough to make me say to hell with it. I am holding out for v1.2.
As Paper Tiger noted, you (we) have a more probable chance of seeing corrections to existing elements of the game rather than the introduction of new vehicles and such. I would love to see REDFOR MANPADS teams and ZSU's, but I digress!
Kosta:
The possibily to let [leave] "acquired" equipment in the vehicle, if you don't need it.Yes. I have mentioned the desire for an "Unacquire" option as well.
-
Well Kyle, I have been putting forth the issues below long enough to know that the only individual who considers them to be "must address" is myself. Good to see I am not the only one who thinks the M1114's/MTVR's are hosed though.
Machinegunners do not orient properly
Unlike the other members of their team, machinegunners do not orient properly when assigned a face command in v.1.11. Likewise, if ordered to "Target" in one direction during a turn and then ordered to cease fire and "Face" another direction in a subsequent turn they will not do so until issued a new "Target" order.
Infantry on rooftops remain impossibly invisible
Roof-mounted weapon station gunners undermodeled (M1114, MTVR)
M707 recon HUMVEE lacks an in-game LOS tool and "Target Arc" capability
REDFOR AFV crews lack their unique unit portrait (infantry is substituted)
AFV weapon use oversimplified (Target Light, Target Heavy)
If these issues, some of which have existed for a very long time, were remedied in v1.2 I would be thrilled.
-
Quicker solution: adjust the roof-mounted station gunners' behavior to reflect that which was present in v.1.10 given that it was far more realistic than what we have now. Personally, Seabee, I love your suggestion, but don't hold your breath.
Humvees in v1.11 are scarcely worth more than REDFOR target practice, transports for a box or two of virtual 5.56 and a means to claim the game has accurate TO&E's. CMSF CAAT teams and Army gunners do not reflect their real-life potential in-game.
Below are some examples from Evan Wright's account of '1114 gunners in the 1st Recon Battlion (USMC) during the initial march to Baghdad in 2003. If you are going to brand your product as a "Tactical Ground Combat Simulation" I would think there would be a desire to get this stuff right, correct?
Through much of this advance, First Recon, mounted in a combination of seventy lightly armored and open-top Humvees and trucks, will race ahead of RCT 1, uncovering enemy positions and ambush points by literally driving right into them.That's right folks, they drove into some very close range firefights. In reality, these teams do not have the luxury of "outranging" OPFOR systems. You fight your way out of a killzone - assuming the fetal postion makes you useless and gets your team killed.
The other team member in the vehicle is Cpl. Gabriel Garza, a twenty-one-year-old from Sebastian, Texas. He stands half out of the vehicle, his body extending from the waist up through a turret hatch. He mans the Mark-19 automatic grenade gun, the vehicle's most powerful weapon, mounted on top of the Humvee. His job is perhaps the team's most dangerous and demanding. Sometimes on his feet for as long as twenty hours at a time, he has to constantly scan the horizon for threats.Out of the hatch, all of the time...
Colbert delivers instructions to Garza, who is keeping watch on the Mark-19...The gun is "up."
Colbert orders Hasser onto the Mark-19 grenade launcher, and with the ZPU still firing, the team methodically directs fire at it.Inbound, automatic 23 mike mike - the gunner is out of the hatch and returning fire. You will not see this in v.1.11 of CMSF.
Al Hayy...
From an ambush standpoint, we drive through the worst terrain imaginable. The road sinks down and snakes between tree-lined hamlets, whose walls extend right up to the edge of the Humvees. Some of Recon's transport trucks take fire. One has two of its tires shot out, but it rides on its rims. A Humvee in Charlie Company comes under heavy machine-gun fire. Marines ahead of us pelt the building where the hostile fire is coming from with about thirty Mark-19 grenades, blowing off large chunks of its facade and suppressing the enemy fire.
They are under fire. Guess what platform those Mk19's are mounted on? M1114's, go figure.
Muwaffaqiyah...
...the pipe and the ruined truck in front were deliberately placed to channel the vehicle into what is known in military terms as a "kill zone." We are sitting in the middle of an ambush box.
As soon as Colbert opens up, the enemy sprays the kill zone with rifle and machine-gun fire. They also launch at least one RPG that flies across the hood of our Humvee.
They cannot fire indiscriminately with their Humvees so close together. Each carefully picks his targets. Robert Bryan, team medic, in a Humvee behind Colbert's, takes out two men with head shots. When the .50-caliber machine gun opens up overhead, the concussive blasting is so intense that Bryan's nose starts gushing blood.
Close range ambush, no chance to "outrange" here. That .50cal. returning fire in order to break the ambush, yeah, it's mounted on...the roof of a Humvee. Replicate this behavior in the "Tactical Ground Combat Simulation."
Outside of Ba'qubah...
Iraqi Republican Guard troops have dug into trenches along both sides of the road. The enemy fighters are armed with every conceivable type of portable weapon — from machine guns to mortars to rocket-propelled grenades.
"I have no targets! I have no targets!" Colbert repeats over the gunfire, but Cpl. Walt Hasser, the gunner in the turret who operates the Mark-19 grenade launcher, begins lobbing rounds toward a nearby village.
Mortars are exploding so close you feel the overpressure punching down on the Humvee.
At this point in CMSF your virtual gunners are filling their pants while the rest of the platoon gets aired out.
Come on guys, this should be an easy one. Honestly, I just do not understand the type of pleading that seemingly has to take place to get these types of obvious things noticed and addressed.
-
The problem is terrain and structures usually conspire to bring the fight VERY close.
With all due respect Mikey, the problem is precisely as AKD and myself have outlined. Self preservation behavior, which is perfectly logical when it comes to protecting AFV commanders is utterly antithetical to what M1114/MTVR gunners do in reality and should do in-game.
Gunners do not button up, the safety of their team dictates they do exactly the opposite. The engagement range argument falls flat, man. I have gunners button up in-game after a few AK rounds hit the hull of their '1114's at 200 and 300 meters.
Given that SLIM referenced Evan Wright's account of 1st Recon Battalion's exploits, I would suggest reading up on their gunner's behavior in close range ambushes to see how the crews actually react in real life operations. Again, respectfully, it is nothing like what you are advocating should be the case in CMSF.
We need you to carry the torch on this one - get this fix into v1.2, please. Don't forget the M707's LOS tool - we have been supplied with a recon vehicle with no eyes for Christ sake.
M1114 Humvee
M1114 gunners button up after a few incoming rounds impacting on the vehicle - even rounds that are in close vicinity will sometimes trigger the behavior. Gunners remain in this posture until the fire slacks off. I believe we are seeing an AI routine intended to aid the survivability of AFV commanders adversely effecting the realistic portrayal of '1114 gunners.
The primary weapon station on the '1114 must remain "up," the team's survival quite often depends on it. Gunners do not drop down at the hint of danger, in fact, it is precisely the opposite that is the case. Here are a few examples from .mil (bold font is mine)...
"Humvee Gunners Set Sights on New Shield" Erik Slavin, Stars and Stripes (Oct. 2005)
Given a choice between protecting themselves by sitting or leaving the task of spotting a suicide car bomber to someone else, nearly all gunners interviewed said they would stand.
“I understand what my job is,” said Spc. Joshua Forman, 21, of Sammamish, Wash. “I understand that I could die. Once you get past that, it’s not really an issue. You come to peace with that, you can do more for your team. I’d gladly give my life to save the life of any other soldier I work with.”
"U.S., Afghan Soldiers Fight Their Way Out of an Ambush" Micah E. Clare, Army News (July 2007)
The silence was broken by the muffled sound of a dull thud in the distance, which didn't register with Sgt. Heinicke at first, because of the thick armor practically soundproofing his vehicle.
"Did you hear something up there?" Sgt. Heinicke called up to Spc. Stone in the turret.
"Um....yeah, maybe," Spc. Stone replied, leaning out of his turret so he could hear. "It might have been an explosion. I couldn't tell."
Spc. Stone quickly scanned for targets with his Mark-19 automatic grenade launcher. All he could see was a billowing column of black smoke.
...The job went to Spc. Stone, who fired off several 40mm grenade rounds onto the hilltop at a vanishing enemy....
...The enemy weapons fire had largely died down; especially after the Humvee gunners pointed their weapons towards the enemy and began firing. The rapid bursts of concussive shells hitting the insurgent's fighting positions pulverized rocks and felled trees.
M707 Recon Humvee
M707's cannot use the "Target" LOS tool in-game like their unarmed UNCON "Spy" counterparts. This greatly reduces their utility, can this please be corrected in v.1.12?
-
Slim:
It ain't happening in v.1.11, baby. The latest patch hosed the behavior of crews manning roof-mounted weapon stations like those on the M1114 and MTVR. What's more, troops cannot fire from the windows. The later I can live with, but the former is a big step backward for those of us who attempt to use light vehicles as something other than cannon fodder.
I first mentioned this here.
Also, there is no in-game LOS tool for the M707 for some reason. Unarmed UNCON spies have them, but their mechanized US counterparts get shorted. I brought this up again here.
V1.2 is likely weeks away, it would be great if these types of issues were addressed.
-
Something of a quick aside here...
Scipio:
Do you have plans to update your Unit Icon and Small Arms Icon mods to reflect the new hardware in the UK Module?
I certainly hope so. The current versions really bring the interface to life and are quite skillfully executed. Thanks for sharing your work!
BFC:
Speaking of icons, don't forget to add a unique portrait icon for REDFOR AFV crews in v.1.2. It seems it was accidentally left out of the Marines Module when the BLUFOR received their AFV crew portraits.
-
Just joking. I appreciate attention to detail as much as the next guy.
No sweat, man.
Yes Mark, that image illustrates the model discrepancy nicely. Moving on.
-
Mark Ezra:
I have posted your pic to beta testers for their determination...Thanks for bringing it to my attention....Thanks, that's really all I ask. The M16A4 had the same issue prior to v1.11, it looks like the fix in the last patch didn't get applied to the M203 variant. I hope this helps.
Mehman:
That's nitpicky. In a game like this I think that's negligible.Not when viewed in the context of the many fixes BFC has applied to models and graphics over the course of the game's refinement. These "small" issues do capture the developer's attention and on some level, matter to them.
Clavicula Nox:
OMG You mean to tell me..that I paid for my Marines module and there are such errors as this!? OMFG BATTLEFRONT AARRGGG! BETA TESTING? HAVE YOU HEARD OF IT!?Given the ambiguity of the medium, I am not sure if you were joking or if you are just a dick.
There was no hyperbolic or derogatory tones in my post. It was simply a "hey guys look at this" message. Mark was cognizant enough to take notice and follow through - end of story.
These types of observations are typical on this forum, by-in-large we are a detail oriented bunch, as are our hosts at BFC.
Here are just a few examples:
This guy has some notes about the M240
This fellow wanted to mod the barrel of the M249 so it reflected the current issue more accurately.
Here are a few "OMFG" items from the latest patch (v.1.11):
V1.11 PATCH FEATURE LIST
- Updates to models: BRDM-2, BRDM-2 (AT5), BMP-3, AAV-7, AAVC-7, M1A1 Abrams USMC, and M16 rifle.
- M4A1 rifle renamed to M4.
- Light from moonrise appears more gradually.
- When walls of different types abut, the sides render correctly.
Thomm:
I, for one, thank Peter Panzer for his attention to detail and the time he took to properly document his findings! I am sure that this kind of details matter to people who handle(d) the actual weapon.Thanks for the perspective. It is the attention to the "small" things that really sets BFC apart in my mind.
- Updates to models: BRDM-2, BRDM-2 (AT5), BMP-3, AAV-7, AAVC-7, M1A1 Abrams USMC, and M16 rifle.
-
Can the incorrect model for the M16A4/M203 please be corrected in v.1.2.
The handguard/RAS should extend to the rear edge of the front sight base. See below...
Incorrect (as it appears in v.1.11):
Correct:
-
If the holdup for the British Module is primarily one of TO&E/scenario issues, might we see the v1.2 patch released in advance of the module?
It certainly would make the wait easier for the anxious among us and would help others who are on the fence about the Brits gauge whether things have come along far enough to spend additional dollars on CMSF.
-
Apocal
Thanks for the list. I have already read several of those titles, however it was some time ago. I will be picking up a copy of We Were One tonight. If the roster you presented is a reflection of your preferences, you will want to check out House to House by SSG David Bellavia (USMC).
I have a better sense of where you seem to be coming from, but from what I recall, the use of heavy fire against structures with unknown inhabitants was, by far, a post initial contact event. Although not exclusively, this was an effort to either break contact or achieve fire superiority after an ambush had already been initiated. Again, it's been awhile since I have read the accounts you mentioned so there may well be some very legit examples of preemptive fire in the materials above.
What always makes me start looking at the screen askew is the apparent lack of ability to observe contacts in structures or on rooftops no matter how obvious they are until they open fire (see the link in my previous posts for an example). That just does not square up with me. I think we need to be careful about rationalizing away a shortcoming in a key aspect of MOUT that could use some adjustment.There really aren't a whole lot of other options, to be honest.
This is my understanding as well. The problem, as I see it, is that in CMSF it is 100% of the time. Nothing the player can do, short of redecorating the block, can effect the chance to prevent in ambush in MOUT conditions.IRL insurgents initiate contact around 80% of the time in built-up areas.
Well, you know how I feel about the tweaking part. I think we both agree that absolutes or extremes are a no-go. That's what we have right now with v.1.11 regarding spotting in MOUT - an absolute. That's where the BFC boys have to walk the line in terms of modeling, I just happen to think they are a bit tipsy at the moment.MOUT spotting could stand to be tweaked, but prior to this, holding onto buildings in the face of firepower was harder than it should be because of X-ray vision possessed by some units.Thanks for the discussion, I appreciate it.
Rogue
I hope you found some good tips and all of the spotting back-and-forth isn't too tangential.
-
Prior to contact with enemy units? When you have a moment, could you please point me in the direction of those accounts? I must admit, I have yet to come across an AAR citing US forces conducting actions in the way you describe.You'd be very hard-pressed to find an account of the takedown of Baghdad that didn't include description(s) of some mounted element racing down congested streets, blazing away at every window and door they saw or preemptively applying hot steel to suspect areas.The point trying to be made here is that the only tactic available to the player to have a chance at preventing an ambush in MOUT is to lay fire on every suspect structure in the hope of getting lucky and drawing a response. Recon-by-fire should be one option not the only option.
If folks want to roll into every virtual town and light up block after block as a SOP, that's great, play the game as you wish. Those who prefer a methodology aligned closer with more common practices shouldn't be shoehorned into that tactic because the spotting in MOUT is presently off base.
Seriously, how does someone look at the images I posted in the link below and conclude that MOUT spotting is good to go?
-
Rogue187
Take heart, not all of the circumstances arrayed against you are realistic.
As you have discovered, v.1.11 of CMSF guarantees an ambushing force 100% concealment and initiative if the are located within a structure. You cannot avoid an ambush in MOUT regardless of the amount of overwatch you deploy or time allocated to observation by AFV's or recon assets.
Here is an example I posted during the first week of January highlighting just how off kilter the current model of spotting in urban terrain is:
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=85444&page=7
Employing direct fires against the facade of every suspect building is "gamey" as hell, a waste of virtual ordnance, tactically rigid, boring in terms of gameplay and will assure you of a loss if the scenario calls for a minimum of collateral damage.
Seabee and others are right, recon-by-fire is a valid tactic under some circumstances, but it should not be the only tool available to the player in order to have a chance at preventing an ambush - that is unrealistic, period.
Please let the spotting in MOUT for version 1.2 be tweaked. Locating OPFOR contacts in structures should be difficult, perhaps very difficult, but not impossible all of the time.
So Rogue, while your joining Flanker and I in the please-adjust-MOUT-spotting waiting room, here are a few very general tips you can try to use in the meantime:
- Be patient and drop the ramp on your IFV's/AAV's. Infantry leads the way. Split your teams for maximum overwatch and tactical flexibility. Bring along extra AT-4's/RPG's as HE will be required to reduce hardened positions.
- Locate and seize the dominant terrain. Note, this is not always "the tallest building." It may very well be the single story blockhouse that provides LOS/LOF up a key channel.
- If at all possible, envelope key OPFOR positions or assault paralell channels simultaneously. Do not allow the OPFOR to safely fall back and kill you later. Even harrasing fire is better than permitting a clean exfiltration.
- Deploy your units with 360 degree security in mind. A skilled opponent will stick it up your virtual ass.
- Smoke, use it.
- Deploy your AFV's in a support role. MBT's and MGS's are particularly desirable as they can be on the scene quickly, lay down heavy fire and do not suffer from request delays like arty or CAS. Do not let them idle in place for minutes on end - ID the target, fire a round and resume cover. You already know where a decent opponent will jam your armor if you are not mindful of their limits in MOUT.
- Be patient and drop the ramp on your IFV's/AAV's. Infantry leads the way. Split your teams for maximum overwatch and tactical flexibility. Bring along extra AT-4's/RPG's as HE will be required to reduce hardened positions.
Brits modul is released!
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Scipio:
Will we be seeing an updated version of your color 'Weapons Icons" mod for the UK module sometime soon?
I thought the present version for US and Syrian forces was superbly done and really brought the UI to life.