Roter Stern

Because there is no such thing as too many options.. I for one, almost exclusively use the Upper-Corners control ... must be a CMAK habit. I find the Right-Mouse-Button-Hold is only good for very precise control, such as for staging a screenshot or something.

Pandur, I don’t think that giving your units a “hide” command in the 3D deployment view in the editor does anything. Although I’m not even really sure why you’d need to hide and ambush at the same time? Doesn’t the ambush command already tell the units to hide until enemy is with-in a certain range? Also keep in mind that out in the open the ambushing troops will get spotted pretty quick regardless whether or not they’re hiding, but that’s normal… there is only so much cover a few blades of grass to provide to an entire platoon The way I did it in my scenario above is dead simple and seems to work just fine for a static defence. All you really need to do is assign the deployment positions and give an ambush order - all under the “Setup” order. And as long as you don’t assign any additional orders, the AI troops should stay in their deployed locations hidden, waiting for the enemy to get in range. I didn’t even bother changing the Exit settings, since I’m pretty sure with only a single Setup order given those don’t come into play at all. So leaving both on 00.00 should work just fine. Also here’s the bit from the Manual that does a good job of explaining the Exit function The “Exit Before” option causes the Group to try very hard to get to the next Order before the specified time is reached. This does not mean the Group will do it, just that it will try. If it has taken excessive casualties, is immobilized or heavily engaged it may blow the set “Exit Before” time. The “Exit After” option does the opposite by telling the Group to stay at the current Map Zone until the specified time is reached. With this setting a Group never moves on to the next Order before the “Exit After” time is reached. So no, you do not have to set these to the length of the battle, if you want your current order to be carried out for the rest of the battle. The last order given is carried out for the rest of battle by default. [ August 09, 2007, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

Cunning - yes. Original - hardly

Woah, easy there Invader, or your “beloved” scenario designer might suffer from a severe case of a swollen ego As for making 2 scenarios a day, I’d be happy to, as soon as there is a PayPal fund up and running to allow me to quit my day job Also a very nice write-up, cheers! Although I must admit that I was afraid of people doing that with the arty… for all the brutality of the Russian army command, they would not level entire villages just because they suspected mild resistance. Proven resistance, yes, would in fact get pounded back to stone age – but walking a wall of shrapnel in front of each and every Company on patrol is pretty absurd … even for the crazy Russians At the same time adding a “preserve” objective onto those two clusters of buildings is nonsense as well, since if they get levelled while taking out an enemy squad no one would even flinch about it. The only way that I can think of solving this is to add a couple of additional AI plans where those buildings would be left empty. Or perhaps also adding more buildings, so that the two mortars will never be able to take them all out with a pre-emptive area-fire. Can we please keep these kinds of comments to the “this is not the real Combat Mission and will never be on my hard-drive” threads? For one, I think infantry is perfectly fine. As for using the BTRs as “droppers”, I’m assuming you mean using them to ferry troops from the starting location into covered positions? A valid tactic indeed, but not when the enemy has as many RPGs teams as you have BTRs … and when those BTRs bog down every 50m [ August 09, 2007, 08:29 AM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

How is that different than having a BMP full of troops get vaporized by a Javelin? /shrug But back on topic … EFPs would actually be an excellent addition to the game, especially since currently any IED that has the power to do any real damage to vehicles will also level half of a city block.

Also, when you're expanding the map, don't have it zoomed out all the way - there is a noticeable difference.

I’ve actually encountered this as well. Just did about two dozen scenario reloads applying different types of damage to the admin building in the scenario to try to narrow down what exactly is going on. One thing for sure – small arms fire contributes very little, if at all, to the “damage” effect. Even after having four BTR-60s unload their 14.2mm auto-cannons for 5min into the building I received full “preservation” points. Same thing after scoring 8 RPG-7 hits. So far so good… Where it stopped making much sense is when I started using the 120mm Mortars. After a few tests it became pretty obvious that either there is a bug with the way arty adds on damage to the building for the “preservation objective” purposes, or there is some major inconsistencies. Test #1 – 4 rounds directly targeted at the admin building – 2 roof hits, 2 ground bursts ~5m away from the building – full preservation points given for both the building and the tower. Test #2 – 4 rounds at the 2-story building 30m away from the admin building – closest hit to admin building at ~10m, closest to tower ~90m – zero preservation points given for the building and the tower. Test #3 – this was where it really got weird – 20 rounds at that same 2-story – again closest hit to admin building at ~10m, closest to tower ~90m, 2-story gets leveled down – points awarded – half for admin bldg, zero for tower … here’s the screen shot for from it: Does this make any sense to anyone?

How about Syrian SpecOps firing off a pair of javelins?

sorry dont get that. registered today and this is my first post </font>

Interesting write up and observations! I wouldn’t mind checking it out as well. Try http://www.mediafire.com/ - seems like a pretty straight forward file sharing service – no registration is needed to upload or download. Although if you register you can create and share “folders”. I found that to be a bit of a problem as well. So in cases where units moving around a building might cause them being exposed to a new threat I issue a gigantic 180-degree fire arc to keep them focused in a specific area … seems to work pretty well.

Well first of all, if you’re not interested in realism and are only looking for a “fun” game then what exactly are you doing playing Combat Mission? There are a lot of games which are incredibly fun and can be learned with-in 20-30min on-the-fly. And secondly, there is a pretty well defined difference between people who enjoy a realistic simulation, with-in the confines of what home-PC software can do, and those plain insane thinking of themselves as Michael Schumacher. If anyone watches Top Gear, they actually had a segment about that, where Jeremy learned a particular race track on a particular car playing on a Playstation. He then proceeded to race that same track on that very same car in real life to see if his Playstation experience was of any help. Needless to say he didn’t even come close to his original in-game lap time. Moral of that story? No matter how well made and designed, no matter how much detail is put into it, a simulation will always be just that – a simulation. Or a better way to put it – anything even remotely capable of being 100% realistic will not run on a home computer. So yes, in fact you are absolutely correct, “realism” is a marketing gimmick. However, does that prevent Combat Mission from being pretty much the most realistic squad-level warfare game currently available? No of course not. Which of course brings me back to… What is Combat Mission anyway? If that is what Combat Mission is to you, than I can name at least a dozen of amazing games capable of PBEM multiplayer. You don’t need Combat Mission for that. Ever try Space Empires 5? That’s an amazing game. How about Laser Squad Nemesis? Last time I checked that has PBEM and is made by the guys who brought us such classic as X-Com. And don’t think for a second that those two I just named are simplistic games made for the A.D.D.-generation – not by a long shot. Besides, what’s preventing you from playing WeGo PBEM in CMSF anyways? Didn’t we sacrifice TCP/IP WeGo (which is what I wanted) for it? I’m sure BFC won’t say it like that, but that’s basically what it came down to. So you better play PBEM and you better like it, or I want my TCP/IP fixed or somefink. On the other hand, for me Combat Mission is … being able to control troops at squad level in a detailed combined arms tactical environment and being able to apply real-life tactics for real-life results. That is what CMAK/CMBB were for me. Now let’s have a look at CMSF… does it do all of the above? Yes, of course. Does it do these things better? With out a doubt. So is CMSF still a Combat Mission game or not? Of course it is, to say otherwise is just nonsense. Whoa… where did that come from? I miss the old QB just as much, so don’t get me started on it. However, to think even for a second that the only thing that made CMBB/CMAK great was the QB system is, yet again, just nonsense.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised if your friend is also heavily biased about the capabilities of Abrames … much like the Germans were convinced that Tigers were invincible, yet some how they still managed to lose a few divisions worth. Judging purely from in-game experience, Abrams is indeed very hard to take out head-on. Almost to the point of silliness – I had 4 Kornet ATGMs empty their entire ammo load (16-20 missiles total) onto the front of an Abrams and yet it didn’t even suffer any damage to the main gun or the optics. Effectiveness of Soviet tanks varies widely, especially with range, and seems to rely more on getting a lucky side-shot than anything else. If they do manage a side-shot however, a kill is quite possible – I’ve seen static T-55 take out the Abrams with a side shot at just over a km.

Well, it's pretty clear which side of the fence you're on As for you saying that RT is not realistic... well I can't argue with that, but at the same time I think it's a thousand-fold more realistic than being able to spend several hours perfecting each and every 60-second stretch. What is the old CM anyway? Is it being able to control troops down to squad level i a detailed combined arms tactical envoriment or is it being able to play the exact theatre you wanted? Think about that one. I wish there was an option to reply to a post without bumping it up to the top

Thanks for the comments everyone, really appreciate it! Actually that's already in, it's worth just as much as actually capturing the building. Even the briefing makes a mention of it. After all, an Administration building is worthless if all the precious logistical paperwork is just a smouldering crater To be honest I don't think Russians put all that much value on soldier's lives during the First Chechen War ... heck, I'm not sure they do now. It's enough to read about the first assault on Grozny (an urban Chechen capital), where 9 out of 10 of all BMPs and Tanks were taken out, many with troops still inside and refusing to get out :eek: ...yet strategically it was still considered a victory. That’s actually the scenario I’d love to eventually tackle – should make for an intense multiplayer game.

I personally feel that to open a thread after thread about the same few repeating issues not only pollutes the forum, but also shows a complete and utter lack of trust in the developers. It hasnt even been two weeks since release yet, so the only things that should be getting reported at this point are BSOD's and CTD's. Perhaps what BFC should've done is posted their to-do and wish lists. At least that would clearly communicate the difference between features that require tweaking, did not make the release because of time constraints, or were taken out as a conscious design decision.

While the points are valid, I honestly don't understand the need to go into a total panic-mode. Especially calling it needed improvements and demanding attention from the devs Let BFC do their thing and patch the game up, geez. And personally, when I see "troops getting shot at, and continuing to run", I think discipline, not a game bug

A very valid point, but I don't think we can change things like that... can we? At the same time you can also argue that Federal troops should have BTR-80s instead of the 60s. As well as sporting some proper armor, such as the titanium "sphere" helmet, instead of the Syrian tin-helmets And actually this was the whole point of this scenario, to make a “proof of concept” sort of a thing. Just to see how believable the Chechen theater can be recreated with Syrian forces… so far so good, I think. [ August 07, 2007, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

My thoughts exactly, something about taking out an entire armored Coy with a platoon worth of Javelins that I don’t find gratifying… Good point with the ammo as well – they do run out a little too quick. Although the limited supply was supposed to represent Rebels as if they just got off a long trek though the mountains and also being far behind the Federal lines. I’ll try it out again in TCP tonight with full supply, and we’ll see how it goes. [ August 07, 2007, 05:36 AM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

Just played it in RT vs the AI... quite interesting, even though I hate starting a scenario "hot". Turn from bad to worst quite quickly and I only managed to squeeze a Minor Defeat after losing 2 Strykers full of troops My only comments are about the Red platoon advancing though the orchard... that seemed a little wasteful in light of three 50cals and a 40mm going off over their heads. And also the terrain objectives turned out to be quite random... the two building complexes did not stand out as logical "hidden" objectives, i.e. they were not dominating tactical positions on the map, so their value seems rather doubtful. All in all, an interesting scenario and excellent terrain!

Uhh yes, thank you... forgot to mention... while designed for multiplayer, there is a Blue AI, which does a reasonable job of defending the village. However when I tried making an AI for the Red to attack the village, the best it could do was “get completely and utterly slaughtered”… so I didn’t even bother keeping it. Hence the scenario is Multiplayer or Red

The scenario was created in an attempt to give some context for my mates and I to play multiplayer Red-vs-Red. While I tried to keep the scenario as plausible as I could to the best of my humble knowledge of the conflict at hand, it is not supposed to depict anything historically accurate. Although I always welcome constructive criticism, so feel free to fire away. The scenario takes place on 8 May 1995 in the Northern flatlands of Chechnya, several months after the frontline Russian units have captured the area and moved on further South, leaving a rear-echelon unit to garrison the area. The Company-sized engagement depicts a raid by a Chechen Rebel unit (Blue), presumably part of Basayev’s Guerrillas, on a Regional Administration center of Polyanskoe (the name is pretty much made-up), and the ensuing Russian Federal Forces (Red) counter-attack. Sneak-peek... I’ve never tried this form of file-sharing before, so bare with me... MetaFire Shared Folder Now also availible though CMMods I plan on creating a series of these to keep myself away from those obscene Strykers and Javelins, and if I don’t get flamed back into the stone age I’ll gladly keep posting them on the forum (seeing how none of the Scenario sites have geared themselves for CMSF). [ February 15, 2008, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: The Louch ]

Problem is not even that people don't realize how much work CMBO took to polish out, but instead that they try to compare CMSF to CMAK, which has another 3 years of polish *on top* of CMBO.

How very true... personally I was very contempt with the way casualties were handled in CMx1 ...i.e. not at all. To add any more detail would simply mean more micromanagement, which is exactly the opposite of what BFC is trying to accomplish.

Nah, Beta-testing is fun - there is nothing more satisfying than seeing a product develop and being able to say that you were part of it.

Combat Mission: Med Evac? Yeah, aint going to happen But speaking of casualties... did you know that troops can give firstaid to casualties from other squads? The selected squad was moved into that building about a minute after the first batch got wiped out. That's pretty cool, didn't realize first-aid was modeled in quite this much detail. Perhaps CM:Med Evac is still a possibility after all