Erwin

Someone made the point that in CM games it usually seems like "why aren't all troops equipped with smg's?" since LOS ranges are generally low due to map size. However, in RL most engagements were at longer ranges 400m+ so in RL rifles were more valuable in most cases.

Very useful. Thank you...

Ideally one wants the breach team to not enter. However, in case one gets the timing wrong, after a breach command I usually give a FAST move back the way they came. That way they have less chance of being ambushed in the area they just breached.

I appreciate the response. Yes, my question was what to actually do with the HQ units in the game to at least try and use em as realistically as possible in the game. Do you leave em out of the battle altogether, or should one bring the Co or BN HQ's or their XO's/2IC's up to direct the combat from the front? I think what you are saying is bring the Co HQ's to the front while the XO's/2IC's can be left in the rear - (or use em as medics). Thank you...

IIRC the games are bodged when it comes to long range combat like you describe. Ahistorical inaccuracy of the 88mm in CM is just one example. Have you tried making the 88mm Crack or Elite? Maybe they will perform better. I tried designing a CMAK scenario with an 8Km x 4Km map just so that one could try "historical" desert combat with 2K+ LOS. Got discouraged due to the work effort but also cos I started hearing issues like what you have described. But let us know how Elite and Crack 88's do.

No HQ's or XO's killed so far. I just wondered how best/most realistically to use em. In the game Co CO's supposedly can take command of a unit that has had its Platoon CO killed. Yes, we all use XO's as medics. But, generally, will the Co CO go with the troops to better command them while the XO stays safe behind, or vice versa? Basically, am never sure what to do with all the Co CO's and their XO's, 2IC's and "Operations Officers". ******* SPOILERS ******* 1H 20 MINS TO GO: Advancing through the village and reached halfway point. No further casualties(!) since last briefing. The RHS hill force is now level with the 2nd village and about to take out another enemy trench. It doesn't seem worth using airpower to hit the enemy dug into the LHS hills, since with the right flank now secure, the troops can go around the buildings on their right side safely without worrying about enemy fire from the RHS hills.

Question re RL SOP's: When a force has a Co or Bn CO and XO's/2IC's, is it normal to send the Co or Bn CO forward and keep the XO/2IC in the rear in relative safety in case the CO gets killed? Or... does one keep the Co/Bn CO safely in the rear and send the XO/2IC to the front to be used in some way?

SMG's used to fire at longer rage but players complained that they were wasting ammo and didn't want the SMG's to fire out of effective range. So, BF changed that.

The US are called "Airborne", but the HQ's say "Mech Inf". 30 MINUTES INTO MISSION #2 (WEGO - ELITE): The trickiest part was getting a foothold in the relatively protected buildings of first village without taking serious losses. US and ANA troops have now captured the first 4 or 5 rows of houses, maybe about 20%-25% of the first village. Am focusing on limiting friendly casualties, so the going is very careful and slow. This would be MUCH easier in RT. However, casualties are low so far - maybe 5-6 from the village force and 3-4 from the flanking force. Ammo conservation may be the biggest challenge. One ANA squad has half a bar left and will have to be pulled from the line soon. Other units are still ok. However, one encounters enemy units that no matter how much firepower is directed at them, they don't die and Allied units can waste a lot of ammo firing at them in one WEGO turn. And of course in CMSF one doesn't know how much ammo a unit has until it gets low (its ammo bar starts dropping). ********* SPOILERS ********** The village is protected by snipers and MG's on the hills on each side. These enemy units harass the Allied force from both flanks. A couple ANA hit by sniper fire. A recoilless rifle on the deep far area of the RHS hills has taken out about 3 ANA as they advanced up to the first village. Helicopter and fixed wing strikes have killed the recoilless rifle and an MG in the RHS hills. Other strikes are degrading the MG's and snipers in the unreachable LHS hills. Since we have to limit damage to the village buildings, all heavy aircraft ordinance is being used on the enemy units in the hills on either side of the villages. Once the aircraft only have MG's, they can be used on the villages. The LHS hills are impossible to reach due to terrain. But the RHS hills have easy access. A hillside "Task Force" comprising the recon platoon, a US inf platoon plus a sniper and an FO (with an engineer squad in reserve) has overrun several trenches - a couple were enemy occupied and a couple unoccupied. Progress has been good - better than in the village. The plan is to eliminate the flanking fire from the RHS hills and then turn the force and enter one of the villages from its side - thus enabling a 2nd assault on the villages instead of having to fight all the way thru in a linear fashion. One inf platoon and an engineer squad and HQ's are all in reserve in their set-up positions. So far, so good...

Cars and pickups have been available in CMSF from the start, Michael. (Before your time?) They have been much modded in addition.

US Mech inf + ANA with some US engineers and air support. I also enjoy the mix of units in this campaign. Nice to see NATO, BRITS and US in one campaign.

Yes, I use a version of that for my CMRT game.

It makes me nervous that there is no ammo resupply. I would like to do a lot of recon by fire, but since in CMSF we don't know how much ammo everyone carries, one can't budget bullets effectively. Suggest that if you load up troops with extra ammo, you mention that in the briefing. Otherwise, one has to assume regular (approx. 200 rounds/man for rifles?) and be very economical in its use. 18 charges does not feel like enuff for so many buildings, esp since the Brits had 24 charges in Mission 1 and I may have only used about 7.

Re sneaky. All my vehicles made it around the right flank with no casualties. I just happened to be reversing one back to pick up someone and thru laziness of waypoint plotting he reversed a few meters too far. Otherwise I would never have found the minefield lol. It really is in an out of the way place that no one needed to drive there. Loved the scenario concept, but PO'd at my losses. At least 5 guys and a vehicle from mines. Another 3 from Taliban popping up under their feet. About 19 casualties total out of about an 80-man force. Anything more than 10% (around 8) should result in a loss imo. Starting on Mission 2: ****** SPOILERS ******* My std SOP is that Recon units and long range weapons should not be used for assaults. The snipers and recon have no business in the villages as clearly there will be restricted LOS. From the RHS hills however, they can shoot into the villages from those hills. So, will send the recon platoon plus the two snipers with at least one FO plus a mech platoon for back-up over the RHS hills. (Maybe plus one engineer squad?) Since dragonwynn is such a cunning SOB, I suspect there will be enemy defenses there. With any luck, this force can swing left at some point and enter the center of the villages instead of fighting their way thru from the end. The assault into the town will be conducted by the engineers, the ANA platoon, and one mech platoon. The third mech platoon will be in reserve to go into the town or into the RHS hills. (What the hell does the one man "Operations" unit do btw??) Already being shot at by multiple snipers situated in the LHS hills. Since there is no arty (why is that?) have to call for air support to sort the sniper nests out.

Completed Mission 1 with a Taliban surrender. Got a Tactical Victory. The Brits were literally a couple meters away from the 2nd road objective, and didn't get anywhere close to the trench complex objective. One issue: Even tho' the Brits occupied the Mosque, we didn't get any points for it. The "green area" remained even tho' it was a "Touch" objective. I think I recall the same thing from the first time I playtested this scenario. What's up with that? (Jeez I hope I don't have an earlier buggy version of this campaign!!) However, lost another vehicle to an RPG - that was plain careless. 18 guys KIA or WIA, or about 20% of my force. That seems like it should be a loss, not any kind of Brit win. My preference is to be penalized more heavily for friendly losses, but give the player a chance to win with minor losses. In this Mission I seem to have "discovered" every minefield. At least my guys didn't stumble into the 2 IED's.

HEART OF DARKNESS ****** POSSIBLE SPOILERS ****** 34 MINS TO GO: Things moving faster thank goodness. Taken the Mosque objective. About to take the 2nd village objective. Also using choppers to degrade the uncons on the other ground objectives. My only beef is that I had a recon vehicle out in the depression in the middle of nowhere and it hot a minefield! Lost the vehicle and one survivor. One expects mines around locations like roads, bridges, chokepoints etc. But, in the middle of nowhere where it's incredible "luck" that anyone would ever find it?? Lots of charges and ammo left. I wonder if I should be using more ammo on "recon by fire?"...

dragonwynn: Will play your Heart of Darkness campaign until you decide when to do the Zitadelle update. Will make comments re "Heart" in CMSF forums.

HEART OF DARKNESS ********* POSSIBLE SPOILERS ********* 55 MINUTES TO GO: Still cautiously clearing the buildings around the first/closest objective (on the left). I could have popped smoke and ran a guy into the "green" and out and got the Touch Objective. But, I think that would be "gamey" and it's in the spirit of the mission that the buildings around the market be all cleared b4 we can declare the objective cleared. I have committed the entire engineer platoon to the left flank plus a 2IC, so there is a reserve in case of more IED's, mines or ambushes. Hopefully have flushed out the defenders of the market place. Also a grenade thrower vehicle plus a 7.62mm vehicle are working their way down the left map edge and have flushed out an enemy HQ and uncons situated between the objective village and the Mosque objective. I recall that Brits don't do much recon by fire to save ammo. So am not firing at anything unless there is a target or a known enemy contact. Someone plz correct me if I am doing this wrong. On the right flank, have committed a couple of vehicles (one 50 cal and one 7.72mm) plus an FO, a 2IC and the Recon HQ to recon the approaches to the RHS village objective and also to clear the depression area, securing that flank. Killed about 8 Taliban with arty in the trench. Not sure if one should be using the 2IC, an FO or an HQ in this role. (Plz let me know.) But this force seems to be rich with HQ's, 2IC's and FO's and short on infantry. All other HQ's and vehicles are in or around the small centrally located group of buildings. I may run out of time. But, this pace seems right for this operation since friendly casualties are to be avoided. Still 6 KIA and 6 WIA b4 even getting the first objective represents about 15% of my starting force(!). So, in RL, one wonders if the operation would have been called off at this point. Losing 3 to the mines irritates. And it was strange to have Taliban pop up literally under the feet of my HQ and rear units causing me another 3 casualties. But, I can understand that more.

Love the "large" maps and Bn level missions as well.

wow... thank you...

Thanks dragonwynn. If I wasn't enjoying the challenges of your campaigns I wouldn't be so concerned about "getting it right". Are you planning to redo the mortar C2 issue? If so, I would stop my game now (as I am only 20 minutes in), and restart with your desired set-up. Once I complete a campaign mission and go on to the next mission(s) I do not want to restart a campaign. As good as your campaigns are, life is short, and most of the fun in playing are the surprises when one plays something for the first time, (hence my intense dislike of having to replay a mission or scenario). It may be that the mortar support is not so important for the first trench line. But, perhaps they are important for the next objectives? ******* POSSIBLE SPOILERS ******** Re the trench line, I could have used my MG's etc to suppress the entire trench line b4 the inf assaulted. That may have reduced casualties and enabled a more economical capture. So, I would not mind restarting this first mission to experiment with using the MG support. However... The reason I did not use the MG's for recon by fire/suppression is that I thought that that would make the firing MG's visible to the enemy bunkers and possible enemy FO's - and that would cause friendly MG casualties from the bunker fire as well as enemy arty. Even though there is quite long range LOS in the rain, visibility is such that one can sneak troops right up to the enemy trench line before the enemy notices and fires back. Can't decide if one needs to use the flamers more liberally at that point or what... One can't see the enemy until he fires, and one doesn't want to waste flamers on trench areas that may be unoccupied. Either way, so far my flamers and engineers with charges have been useless. It may be that it's best to keep the flamers and teams with charges in reserve until the trenches are cleared and only use em to destroy the bunkers. Question: When you guys played, what sort of friendly casualties had you suffered when you captured the first trench line?? Am assuming that no one used offboard arty since by the time one sees a trench or an enemy, one's units are way too close to safely use arty.

One cannot (in a scenario timescale) detect mines or IED's without em blowing up first. Exception: If you engineers/pioneers sit undisturbed beside unknown mines for a period they will detect them (and then "mark" them). But, you have to be very lucky to leave pioneers at the right spot to so long, and it is such a long process that it's unrealistic to attempt "mine detection" in this way in the timeframe of a CM2 scenario. Mines and IED's are of course realistically nasty. The problem with using em "unmarked" in a game is that one can lose so many men that the mission or campaign can become unplayable and not fun. For purposes of making a scenario that features IED's or unmarked minefields playable, winnable and fun, designers could ensure there is an additional number of men in the set-up so that a player can lose a certain number of men to IED's or mines without materially affecting the player's chance of successfully completing the mission and "winning". Re minefields: Unless the scenario designer has built in a "reserve" of casualties that one can suffer without materially affecting the outcome of the scenario, it would be good to indicate a minefield with "posts" in the way dragonwynn has done in the first mission of his Zitadelle Campaign, or a fence or barbed wire (do minefield signs exist that can be seen by both sides BEFORE a mine detonates?). Helpful thread on how IED's work:

"There is fair evidence (in terms of how the word was spelled in middle english) that both "lef" and "lieu" pronunciations have coexisted for some time. The French word "lieu" (place) on which the word is based, is occasionally seen spelt in old French as "luef"."

"I try and find a balance between realism and keeping the missions exciting and challenging so I have no easy answers on how to keep from taking casualties." This is not a request or complaint to you, Dragonwynn. Your designs are xnt. And I am amazed at your productivity. I think you have single-handedly produced most of the new campaigns available to all CM2 titles in the last few months!! I am bemoaning my own lack of skill even after playing CM2 since CMSF came out 10 years ago! Perhaps the issue is that I got to be good at CMSF and that meant getting used to suffering very few casualties. That was critical since most of the older CMSF Missions in a campaign penalized a player for taking excessive casualties to the point where one would have to go back a few missions and replay them all just so one had enuff men and equipment to progress in the campaign. That was miserable, but it really taught one to not take unnecessary casualties - every life, vehicle and ammo reload was precious. The WW2 titles were a shock to me as it seems one usually has to be prepared to take 15%-30%+ casualties per mission. In addition, in most recent campaigns there has been little emphasis on force and ammo conservation. Most new campaigns have missions that seem to be almost disconnected from one another - ie you can take massive casualties in a mission, and next mission you have a full complement again. If I was happy taking 15%-30% casualties, I would probably have a much better play experience. But, am always struggling to keep casualties in a mission to below 10%. That's a major reason for my burn-out issues.

That's a relief. I was getting concerned I had done something really dumb, or my CMBS install was corrupted... Strange that no other player of this Mission seemed to notice or comment on this!