Erwin

Are you familiar with the term "beating a dead horse"?

This horrible stuff has been going on for decades.  None of the previous Presidents accomplished anything re NK, and instead they were selling out the west to China - basically acting like the captain of the Titanic - trying to keep everyone calm while the ship was sinking. 
Am happy to wait and see if Trumpy's unorthodox approaches to everything works.  At least the US economy seems to be booming - and that was after everyone predicted economic collapse if he was elected.  So, pinch of salt re all the negativity and naysayers...  

A huge problem re C2/communication delays given the tight time limits of the vast majority of scenarios.  I don't think one can play this way normally.
However, I definitely play like there are real human lives at stake and am always asking myself what would I do in a given situation, or what can one reasonably expect from the "guys".  So, no suicide missions... eg recon till you get shot "just to see what's out there" etc.
One of the many aspects of MOS's TOC that is hugely enjoyable is the 4 hour time limit - gives one plenty of time to play as realistically as one wants.  It's currently at Beta 9, so you can be sure it's being tested thoroughly. 

Yes, MOS has already (cleverly) demonstrated that one can have multiple dumps in his TOC scenario.  The other clever idea is to have reduced ammo in each dump so that units can acquire smaller amounts of ammo - like when you want to give a sniper unit 200 rounds but the minimum is 1,000.   
The only thing to be careful about as a designer is to make sure you provide many such reduced ammo dumps so that the total amount of ammo available in all the dumps is sufficient.  
Question:  What happens when a unit is within ACQUIRE range of more than one dump and tries to ACQUIRE ammo?  

It would be great to toggle grid lines. I hate seeing them all the time as it spoils the look of the game. But, sometimes they would be valuable.

IIRC there was an issue with long range firing in the CM1 games - like over 1000m became very inaccurate for the 88mm.  Making the 88mm Elite might have helped.  I just don't remember...
What I enjoyed about CMAK was that you could create 8kmx4Km maps and enjoy a near operational level experience with a lot of mobile warfare and long range duels.  
What puzzles me right now is why folks are so excited about CMSF2 but not about a DAK game.  I have read comments that the terrain is boring etc.  But guys... they are both set in essentially the same terrain.  Deserts can have amazing terrain - it's not all flat and featureless as CMSF demonstrated.   

A major aspect of MOS' TOC scenario that am enjoying is having enuff time in 4 hours to decide what one's overall strategy and "standard operating procedures" are for dealing with the insurgents.  Of course one's plans have to be continually updated depending on what surprises may blindside you.  The Russians and Separatists have complex plans of their own and it feels like am playing vs a cunning human oppo.  
In addition, a player has to examine intelligence reports from IIRC 5(!) sources (S2, SCIF, SIGINT, UAV's, HUMINT...) as well receive requests from Ukrainian Liaison officers and consider logistics, ammo conservation as well as transport of supply to troops and also of Defectors to evacuation sites... Your Forward Operating Base even has a "functioning" helicopter landing pad where you receive men and supplies and also evacuates Defectors.  There is even a motor pool shop which cleverly simulates repaired vehicles being returned to service... and much more... 
TOC has features that have never been seen in any CM2 game and is a truly revolutionary re-imagining of what a CM2 title can accomplish in terms of providing exciting challenges for experienced and also less experienced players.  As we know, most CM2 games are very unforgiving of mistakes.  But, in TOC, one can make errors and still recover the initiative. 
TOC provides enuff reinforcements and assets that one can make blunders and still recover the initiative and play to the end without restarting a savedgame (unless you are Sgt Slaughter of course - sorry SS, couldn't resist hehe).       (Am about halfway thru testing Beta 8, so I may still eat those words however.)   
 
 
 

Yah... 12 people.  Obviously a huge majority of all customers of BF.  Clearly we doubters have all been wrong about this and BF should immediately sign up to Steam.  How could we be so stupid as to think otherwise.

A major aspect of MOS' TOC scenario that am enjoying is having enuff time in 4 hours to decide what one's overall strategy and "standard operating procedures" are for dealing with the insurgents.  Of course one's plans have to be continually updated depending on what surprises may blindside you.  The Russians and Separatists have complex plans of their own and it feels like am playing vs a cunning human oppo.  
In addition, a player has to examine intelligence reports from IIRC 5(!) sources (S2, SCIF, SIGINT, UAV's, HUMINT...) as well receive requests from Ukrainian Liaison officers and consider logistics, ammo conservation as well as transport of supply to troops and also of Defectors to evacuation sites... Your Forward Operating Base even has a "functioning" helicopter landing pad where you receive men and supplies and also evacuates Defectors.  There is even a motor pool shop which cleverly simulates repaired vehicles being returned to service... and much more... 
TOC has features that have never been seen in any CM2 game and is a truly revolutionary re-imagining of what a CM2 title can accomplish in terms of providing exciting challenges for experienced and also less experienced players.  As we know, most CM2 games are very unforgiving of mistakes.  But, in TOC, one can make errors and still recover the initiative. 
TOC provides enuff reinforcements and assets that one can make blunders and still recover the initiative and play to the end without restarting a savedgame (unless you are Sgt Slaughter of course - sorry SS, couldn't resist hehe).       (Am about halfway thru testing Beta 8, so I may still eat those words however.)   
 
 
 

"You only get one chance to make a good first impression."   BF has a very smart policy of not releasing anything till it's completely ready and it applies here as well. 
People are looking for, and eager to jump all over, flaws in a new scenario.  This system of MOS is so good I hope it inspires many other designers to stretch the envelope.  But, it's a very sophisticated concept scenario and it has to be as perfect as it can be to really showcase its features.  Due to its length, it's doubtful many will want to play an updated version if there is a problem with what is released.  
 

IIRC there was an issue with long range firing in the CM1 games - like over 1000m became very inaccurate for the 88mm.  Making the 88mm Elite might have helped.  I just don't remember...
What I enjoyed about CMAK was that you could create 8kmx4Km maps and enjoy a near operational level experience with a lot of mobile warfare and long range duels.  
What puzzles me right now is why folks are so excited about CMSF2 but not about a DAK game.  I have read comments that the terrain is boring etc.  But guys... they are both set in essentially the same terrain.  Deserts can have amazing terrain - it's not all flat and featureless as CMSF demonstrated.   

Still can't understand why some folks care so much to keep pushing Steam on and on... and on... when it's so clearly not wanted by BF or most players on these forums - just the same 3 or 4 people.   Is there an agenda here?

And imagine if all those STEAM users then started asking for CM to be more like a FPS etc - more like Call of Duty, or one of the real time games, or StarWars franchise...  
The fact is that this a tiny tiny niche within a niche.  Look at the huge success (not) of board wargames marketwise compared to "family games"? 
STEAM appeals to a completely different market and demographic and if BF ever decided to pander to that market am confident the new CM game system that would evolve due to market pressure would no longer appeal to the very people who are here on this board.

It's a scenario called Tactical Ops Center that MOS has designed and is in final testing (and it's had a lot of testing) for CMBS.   This is a genuinely quite brilliant "re-imagining" of what a CM2 game can accomplish with all the new options that a designer has in the CM2 toolbox.
I won't say too much or spoil any of the many, many surprises you will find in this scenario.  However, it's safe to say that MOS's scenario simulates low intensity operations in a sector of the Ukraine front vs Russia and Russian Separatists.  The player is in charge of a Forward Operating Base (FOB) and one has troops (US and Ukrainian) that one needs to allocate to many different roles - (eg: roadblock clearing, resupply, rescue beleaguered garrisons, locate Russian Separatist bases etc etc.) just like in RL. 
MOS has cleverly adapted and redesigned a large 2.5Kmx3Km map so that one gets near-operational feel to the CM2 game (that we have not been able to experience since CM1 which features maps as large as 8Kmx4Km).
The really brilliant aspect is the way MOS has used all the bells and whistles of the CM2 system to offer all sort of in-game information sources, eg:- Intel, SIGINT, S2, SCIF, UAV's as well as info from Detainees and Defectors(!) to provide actionable reports. 
The player needs to use all this info in order to gain an overall picture of what the Separatists/Russians are up to.  The player has to decide what his forces are capable of, and therefore what info his forces are capable of acting on.  The player's decisions and the actions of his troops will affect what happens in the game later - just like in RL.  
Over the last almost 20 years of playing CM1 and then the CM2 family of games, it seemed like all scenarios were stating to feel the same or at least so similar as to be becoming boring.  So, this creation of MOS is a breath of fresh air and am eager to keep testing the latest Beta.  The experience constantly amazes and surprises me and feels almost like a brand new game system - like a CM3...
You guys will love it...
 

"You only get one chance to make a good first impression."   BF has a very smart policy of not releasing anything till it's completely ready and it applies here as well. 
People are looking for, and eager to jump all over, flaws in a new scenario.  This system of MOS is so good I hope it inspires many other designers to stretch the envelope.  But, it's a very sophisticated concept scenario and it has to be as perfect as it can be to really showcase its features.  Due to its length, it's doubtful many will want to play an updated version if there is a problem with what is released.  
 

It's a scenario called Tactical Ops Center that MOS has designed and is in final testing (and it's had a lot of testing) for CMBS.   This is a genuinely quite brilliant "re-imagining" of what a CM2 game can accomplish with all the new options that a designer has in the CM2 toolbox.
I won't say too much or spoil any of the many, many surprises you will find in this scenario.  However, it's safe to say that MOS's scenario simulates low intensity operations in a sector of the Ukraine front vs Russia and Russian Separatists.  The player is in charge of a Forward Operating Base (FOB) and one has troops (US and Ukrainian) that one needs to allocate to many different roles - (eg: roadblock clearing, resupply, rescue beleaguered garrisons, locate Russian Separatist bases etc etc.) just like in RL. 
MOS has cleverly adapted and redesigned a large 2.5Kmx3Km map so that one gets near-operational feel to the CM2 game (that we have not been able to experience since CM1 which features maps as large as 8Kmx4Km).
The really brilliant aspect is the way MOS has used all the bells and whistles of the CM2 system to offer all sort of in-game information sources, eg:- Intel, SIGINT, S2, SCIF, UAV's as well as info from Detainees and Defectors(!) to provide actionable reports. 
The player needs to use all this info in order to gain an overall picture of what the Separatists/Russians are up to.  The player has to decide what his forces are capable of, and therefore what info his forces are capable of acting on.  The player's decisions and the actions of his troops will affect what happens in the game later - just like in RL.  
Over the last almost 20 years of playing CM1 and then the CM2 family of games, it seemed like all scenarios were stating to feel the same or at least so similar as to be becoming boring.  So, this creation of MOS is a breath of fresh air and am eager to keep testing the latest Beta.  The experience constantly amazes and surprises me and feels almost like a brand new game system - like a CM3...
You guys will love it...
 

It all depends on size of scenario.  When CM1 came out I was convinced that RT was the only way to play for the reasons you stated.
But, as I became more experienced (and aged) and started to play much larger scenarios, I became a religiously fervent WEGO convert.  Apart from playability, it's so much fun to replay sequences all over the battlefield to see all the small pixeltruppen stories get told.

It all depends on size of scenario.  When CM1 came out I was convinced that RT was the only way to play for the reasons you stated.
But, as I became more experienced (and aged) and started to play much larger scenarios, I became a religiously fervent WEGO convert.  Apart from playability, it's so much fun to replay sequences all over the battlefield to see all the small pixeltruppen stories get told.

KABOOM...!   That put me in my place.   

It all depends on size of scenario.  When CM1 came out I was convinced that RT was the only way to play for the reasons you stated.
But, as I became more experienced (and aged) and started to play much larger scenarios, I became a religiously fervent WEGO convert.  Apart from playability, it's so much fun to replay sequences all over the battlefield to see all the small pixeltruppen stories get told.

I had the privilege of meeting the man decades ago when he was on a book tour in LA.  Got him to sign  a copy of "The Right Stuff" which is still around here someplace.  
I assumed he was dead by now.  But he's going strong at 95!

MOS' innovative system in his CMBS TOC scenario would be perfect for rear area counter-partisan/guerilla scenarios.  Perhaps we could accomplish Partisans with a mod (changing one of the minor countries) if BF cannot get em in.

The wonderful thing about CMSF2 (and CMRT as well) is that it will be very amenable for designing scenarios using MOS' very innovative concepts (involving many types of INTEL) that he is pioneering in his TOC scenario - (conducting COIN (Counterinsurgency) and low-intensity ops. 
Maybe even partisan ops in Yugoslavia if suitable mods are created for CMFI.

Nice review.

Found this interesting 2016 movie on Netflix.  Set in the Congo in early 60's it's about an Irish UN company doing a "Rourke's Drift" defense vs hordes of African and French ex Legionaire mercs.
It's interesting to see weapons of that era - Vickers, Brens, Lee-Enfields and what I think are FN's plus some SMG's I couldn't ID.
Re the sniping capability of the Bren, a scene depicts the Irish talented sniper exchanging his scoped Enfield for an iron-sighted Bren to take a particularly long range shot.  Apart from the first 15 minutes of set-up once the battle starts it's pretty continuous. 
It also depicts the less than courageous decisions of Conor Cruise O'Brien and the ill-fated Dag Hammarskjold, (then SecGen of the UN).   Recommended.
 
More images