sburke

That sucks, it is a regular broadcast channel here. the ebook is available on Amazon for $12, but the Nat'l Geo program is really well done. They have taken a few liberties with the story, but so far the feel of the situation is very accurate both for the troops involved and their families back home. Many of those families were involved in the production.

For anyone watching this series (and I highly recommend it) I have been doing some searching for additional material to understand the engagement The Series http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/the-long-road-home/videos/in-the-valley-of-death/ Other material - There is some of the usual like Wikipedia, but am not getting much new from that. This one has a good map showing the routes as discussed in the show, locations of various actions etc. It is written from the perspective of C troop 2nd Bn 37th Armored so presents something that is discussed in the show, but so far not represented. http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/AIWFC/COIN/repository/Sadr_City-Armor-Moore(Nov-Dec04).pdf

odds are it is a heavy forest terrain tile. The animation doesn't change for terrain but visualize this as heavy undergrowth with fallen trees etc and you'll at least appreciate why they are moving slow. For your sanity's sake maybe change them to hunt or if you do not expect contact to simply move.

It is just a news article and it could simply be the guys want some political cover from being accused of being a part of ISIS. Mind elaborating on what your experience is?

probably embarrassed they didn't think of it first.

Pretty interesting and funny article about a team of Iraqis taking on ISIS by disrupting their communications channels https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/they-planted-porn-in-isis-propaganda-just-for-starters-then-sowed-chaos-and-confusion-in-the-caliphate/ar-BBFpDrb?ocid=spartanntp

no need to hope, they have openly commented that it is being looked at.

heh yeah that one I am unsure of if it will be affected by the other. It is very possible the logic on how to react is affected. Will have to wait and see,

freakin hysterical

I know of no tweak to keep the AI from running into Arty. I am a little unsure of your first sentence in that it seems like what you are saying is if your infantry has a movement command and arty starts falling they will continue that movement command - but I'll assume for the moment it is. It is unfortunately on you to watch for spotting rounds and provide the necessary direction that every 60 seconds you can. Beyond that the AI is gonna try to do what you told them to until their morale tells them their commander has apparently not been paying attention. If I am incorrect and what you meant to say was the AI would run out into arty in a sort of stupid panic as it seems to be what you are referring to in the last sentence, yes that is the issue that the pitchforks have been raised over and BF is having a look at. It was an unintended consequences of an attempt to get the TAC AI to not just sit there while getting stonked by a mortar. It was felt it was too easy to fight the AI as it would just sit there till the last guy bought the farm.

That wasn't specifically meant for you, just an observation. What you are running into is the balancing act. Time can be critical and to be brutally honest I do find myself on the short end of the clock late game more often than I'd like. I will use synchronized movement with pauses etc but typically only when I am pretty sure I am in no danger of significant contact. Bounding movement and using the timed pauses definitely has a place. If I am borderline sure about the enemy I may have the initial move after the pause be hunt just to give my unit a chance to cancel. I have learned (well I am learning cause I still make this mistake way too often) to be aware of what positions I know are clear and what aren't, to try and provoke the enemy to break cover by a target brief on a position I am not sure is clear before I venture to move. There is no "right" answer. The one I really struggle with is when I want to smoke a street I think is covered by the enemy. Smoke is short lived so waiting too long means you lose the cover but trying to guess when a team will actually toss grenades and how long it will take to form a screen and how long it will last (and if it will last long enough to cover my retreat f I need it)... let's just say it can be pretty tense.

Just a high level view with editing to make it appear to be a drone camera. Nice but only partially in game. There is no "drone view". Sorry

LOL me too I have slowly been building a storehouse of ideas mostly based on small unit actions and likely set in a campaign so I only have to worry about AI plans for one side. Some of those ideas are for a spetsnaz campaign in Ukraine using CMBS. I keep going back to advice from JonS and others about not over designing, not forcing the player to have to stick to "the plan" etc I have the basic ideas, but trying to convert them into something that someone will like and has replay value is an art I have not yet acquired. With CMSF2 in the works I have started thinking more along the lines of a campaign whose focus is just to bring your men home while you deal with the grind of managing with the developing insurgency. Blame LLF for that as his couple he has done on Ramadi have been a catalyst along with Chris's "the snitch" scenario from TF Panther. Sgt Squarehead's use of IEDs and flavor items really got me thinking that there would be a way to incorporate them as something you could actually look for. 10 years later and still really fresh ideas coming out about how to design for the game and it is getting a face lift. When it gets released I am popping open the best bottle of wine I have.

This is sburke's wife. He ran screaming from the room with some bizarre high pitched scream I have never heard from him before and is now whimpering in the closet. BUT were he a real male with a few drops of testosterone that I keep telling him to get from his email spam, he'd say c3k... is..... hmm how do I say this, I think I saw something similar recently about just saying it real fast Iagreewithc3k. There. Damn that was difficult. There are two aspects to wego that are somewhat flip sides of the same coin. One is the loss of control once you have issued commands. For me that loss of control is the bit of realism about the limits of command. I can tell a unit what I want it to do, but what happens after the big red button is hit is out of my hands for a minute. I like that. On the other hand there are certain situations that RT is more realistic in that as c3k noted, if I want team B to head out and join team A when they reach cover across the field I can do that. In wego I have to guess and if I decide I'd rather not guess I have to wait the 60 second cycle. What I have learned is to be patient. Well that is what Steve has learned. What I have learned is he is a pathetic coward afraid of action, but we can discuss that another time. I think he is about to emerge from his hiding spot. Use the whole dang 60 seconds. Slowing down the game is usually a good thing for a player. The time compression we invoke based on our god's eye view of the battlefield frequently causes us to make really bad decisions. Waiting allows your team to have more situational awareness. They spot better and you may find they identify enemy units better especially if team A receives a couple rounds of incoming fire. You now have a more informed position to make a decision on the next turn. I have this perception from posts that players are still trying to perform this complex synchronized ballet of movement. That isn't combat. That is god's eye gaming. Slow down. Observe. Move from cover to cover with over watch and if you have to cross terrain that you are not sure is clear of enemy, for god's sake use smoke.

@borg IEDs in CMSF were meant to replicate their usage as known - roadside devices to hit targets with little risk to the insurgents. They aren't "booby traps" per se. That we can utilize them as such is just another example of creativity in the community. Yeah I know we all know that, just resetting the reference point. As to why, try Sgt Squarehead's scenario if you haven't. He's certainly created the feel of booby trapped buildings. Been tinkering around with the idea of some scenarios based around patrolling for IEDs. The big weakness has always been the inability to ID them or do anything about them or knowing you have done anything about them. The idea is to place them on unknown touch objectives. The objective carries no points just notification you found an IED. If you haven't been blown up odds are you've managed to deal with the triggerman, if you haven't you at least know the spot to avoid (it is assumed you call it in and ask for a demolition team). The IED would also be placed with some kind of flavor object so just as in RL you have some thing to look for as potential locations - hats off to @Sgt.Squarehead for that idea. So the game scenario might be something like patrol the MSR on the Ramadi map and clear any IEDs. You take your unit and go looking whilst also dealing with any snipers or other insurgent attacks. It wouldn't be your typical CM battle and maybe a bit boring for some folks but definitely a different experience. Small unit action on a large map potentially mixed in a campaign where the mission to patrol for IEDs is what you always start with and the day becomes whatever the day becomes. Wondering if at some point we'll have suicide vest uncons. Doubt it but that would really alter things.

false flag attacks are nothing new. here is one by Nazi Germany in preparation for the invasion of Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident Definitely a viable option for a back story for any CM modern conflict. You could even create a scenario of the actual false flag attack as the beginning of a campaign. Have the entire campaign be the initial steps to war. Has some advantages as the forces involved should be small with out all the additional support elements that are typically there for a regular conflict campaign. If you want to make sure that all the possible units including US are involved have it occur as a training campaign is being undertaken with NATO forces so as to explain the unusually rapid response by units with limited support. Could be really fun.

I opened his masterpiece of a death trap Mosul scenario and all IEDs are outside. Some are close, but none inside buildings.

It isn't an argument per se. Olek. It is simply a disagreement about what the differences between the titles are. WW2 action is significantly different than modern, typically less lethal (though you'd never know that from most CM play). However aside from that the various WW2 titles are radically different. Everything from terrain and buildings to weaponry, tactics you can use based on ToE organization etc. As a small example in CMBN JonS created a what if of a late WW2 airdrop planned prior to Market Garden (part of the battlepack). He repeated the same scenario utilizing different formations so you as a player can experience what the differences in capability are given the same battle. It is a pretty fascinating experience. I was fortunate to play test it and the difference between UK airborne versus US airborne was far more than I expected (and made me a big fan of using UK airborne forces in CMBN). If someone is going to suggest titles for you to spend your hard earned dollars on they owe to you to provide a balanced view that is a fair picture of the differences in titles. From my view it would be like saying all units in CMBS are the same other than uniforms and vehicles. I think you'd agree Russian infantry versus US infantry offer completely different capabilities with trade offs for both. The same holds true across the entire spectrum of CM games. I personally felt you were being rendered a disservice. Apparently my noting this is a recurring statement that I was in disagreement with was offensive.

Gee I am sorry I was so dictatorial to note that Erwin makes these statements about the "feel" of certain games that belies the significant differences between titles and he is so butt hurt by my commenting that he has brought this up several times lately pushing a particular view he holds that many others disagree with. Far be it from me to point out that this view ignores the many differences in titles that might make someone more interested in them instead of just assuming they are all WW2 therefore it is just vehicles and uniforms that differentiate a US rifle squad from a VG unit from a Bersaglieri or from a Russian SMG unit. I wouldn't want to make it look like Erwin is just spouting utter tosh. My mistake.

Jeez ........ you could stop pushing the same line and let Olek or someone else make up their own mind without pushing this "it's all the same in WW2 stuff".

Absolutely disagree. Anyone who thinks CMRT feels just like CMBN, CMFI or CMFB is looking only the most simplistic aspects and generalizations. The only reason CMSF has that casualty factor is because people design scenarios that way with modern expectations. There is no rule against doing so in any other title. So really all you are saying is public standards about casualties differed between WW2 and current western views. That is not a CM issue. As someone who like doing maps, CMFI is one of my favorite titles. It is unique and rightly so and shows BFs attention to all the details including the uniquely difficult challenges of managing Italian troops. For folks who like WW2 armor engagements CMRT is usually the preferred title. CMBN and CMFB are at least the same theater but still feel significantly different for me anyway don’t even get me started on soviet smg units this seems to be a recurring statement by you Erwin and I can appreciate they may start to feel that way for you, but that is your perception and not one I’d agree with.

The manual is pretty clear and there is nothing there to support any difference between wia and kia. Wia are in fact included as casualties. Lightly wounded (yellow base) are not. That is not opinion. If anyone wants to argue different (and against the data presented by the OP) feel free, but you’ll need more than a feeling of recollection.

If anyone recalls the original AAR for CMBN release was Bois de Baugin. In it the allied player was trying to move a truck load of troops forward and was unaware of a German scout team hiding along their route. Needless to say the perils of assuming it is safe to travel in a soft vehicle is likely to end up with lots of red crosses

Honestly I never recommend folks getting physical media anymore. Just forces you to worry about patches anyway. Once you buy the game you can always just download the full installer and save it. They release a patch or engine upgrade, just download the full installer again. Makes re installing a snap and your are always current if for some reason you really want physical material you could try having it shipped to your hotel, but your schedule looks kind of tight for that.

Did a quick search in the manual. It actually makes no mention of a difference in value for wia and kia. I searched under casualties and buddy aid. Honestly I thought it made a difference too, but if it did and it was changed, I don’t know when.