Paper Tiger

Hirr Leto I have taken some time to consider your earlier post. This is not a matter of me conveying my contempt towards someone who does not share my views. This is a matter of you posting your long-winded and intellectually pretentious farts on these boards with the intention of pissing off the folks who do enjoy playing it and then scurrying back off to wherever it is that you skulk to congratulate yourself on a job well done. That some wargamers are capable of enjoying this game while you can't offends your world view and not mine so stop trying to portray me as the unreasonable one. It is very sad that you are unable to desist from taking these shots two years+ after the game was released and that really should alert you to the fact that there is something irrational about your nature. Not only do you take a perverse pleasure in finding ways to belittle CMSF fans on these boards while making yourself appear superior to us in the process, you actually care enough about CMSF to crusade to keep it off the wargame communities that you frequent. These are not the actions of someone who is interested in participating in discussions about a game on the designer's boards but rather those of someone who takes that game far too seriously. In conclusion, I consider you to be an unbalanced individual who may be even be potentially dangerous to continue interacting with. Since you are clearly too obsessed with CMSF to move on I have taken the step of ignoring you so that I don't have to interact with you further and you are not coming off that list. cheers!

Talk about missing the point. I'm the one saying it's a game, you want to make it personal. How old are you? What a shame that I thought you were a bit more mature than your posts here suggest. Intelligent? Yes I'll definitely give you that. Mature? Obviously not.

Wow! Some great links there. Very inspiring from a scenario design point of view. Just out of curiousity, CMSF is the only game that features the Jackal, isn't it? Probably the only one that has Brit forces as well I guess. The models for the module are exquisitely detailed and combined with the way the game models dust hanging in the air and shots falling short kicking up dust, I feel like I've already seen this 'in-game'.

I think you mean the 'I am an inbound fighter approaching from the <screech>' If it is that, then it was intentional. If they'd left in 'East' then just perhaps some folks might have expected the attack to come in from the east. Just a guess...

Are you a cop or something? I only feel compelled to speak out when it's used in conjunction with a grass mod

I should state for the record that I play this game exclusively against the AI* and the AI never takes a poke at a smoke cloud. I confess this tactic would be a total bust against a human player. I try to put the smoke on the target as it does cause casualties. I remember being unpleasantly surprised a LONG time ago to find that vehicle smoke inflicts casualties on friendly troops in close proximity to the vehicle. * This being the reason why so many of the missions I design are tough to beat. They are designed solely to present ME with a tough challenge when playing against an AI controlled opponent.

...it does seem a bit gamely to smoke a position, walk right through the enemy 5 feet away, and then shoot them all when the smoke lifts (especially in buildings). Wow! I've never tried that. I use it for moving in on positions or for approaching very dangerous units like T-72s. They have a very nasty tendency to spot your javelin team hunting to get LOS to their positions. SMOKE their approach and they're sitting there nicely when the screen lifts and BLAM!

I confess that I use it a LOT when I'm playing missions and so I pay attention to wind direction and strength when I'm reading the briefings. Quite often, my battlefields have great plumes of smoke drifting across it as I'm making my assault. I don't use vehicle generated smoke to create smoke screens but I do use artillery deployed and infantry smoke very liberally. And there's uually plenty of this to go around in any given mission. The reason I ask this is because I use it extensively when I'm playtesting my own missions. To be honest, I imagine some of my missions would be extremely difficult to win if you didn't use it copiously because moving units in the open in LOS of enemy units in CMSF is death for two (obvious) reasons, first, their ability to spot enemy units is degraded, the faster the move, the greater the degradation. and second, because it is much easier for stationary units to spot moving units. I use SMOKE to move a unit into a position so that when the screen lifts, they are already in position and stationary. Given that your average US unit has better equipment than all but the best Syrian units, this gives them a better chance to 'spot' first, especially when they have already been 'informed' that there is an enemy unit in front of them by C2 links (which I also frequently take advantage of when playing as BLUE). So do most of you guys USE it as well or is this a tool that is largely ignored from mission to mission?

Wow, snake eye, that is very, very detailed feedback. I guess I owe you a hint then... SPOILERS++++++ It sounds like you're not getting much benefit from the Recon phase. By the time the first infantry platoons arrive, I've pretty much taken out all the vehicles covering the south crossing using the helo, the artillery and the ATGM LAVs. I make my main effort there and usually get a couple of platoons and the engineers across before the first hour with no casualties. A LOT of what follows next depends on the AI plan and where the counterattack goes. The usual plan is to swing north from the south crossing to assault the North crossing from both sides simultaneously. I wait and prep the place thoroughly with heavy artillery first. If there's NO counterattack then this is usually easily done within 40-60 minutes with very few casualties. However, most of the time, the counterattack will throw your plan and there are casualties here but nothing that should lose the game for you if you're careful. Personally, I think the counterattack is a gift to the player as it allows him to eliminate a very powerful force as it moves in the open. I always have the eastern ridge well covered by stationary ATGM assets so most of the vehicles get taken out. Getting the infantry inside their BMPs is a double bonus as it slows the entire group down too. If they go into the town and hunker down there then you're in for a very tough fight. I've never beaten AI Plan 5 but I can usually get a DRAW. The farmhouse is an easy taret as long as you approach it carefully and then after that, I take down the Governement Buildings with heavy airstrikes and any artillery I have left. Stuff the PRESERVE points as you usually take more points in casualties than you'll get from preserving it. I never hit the Mosque or Civilian Buildings though so that's 100 points in the bag for nothing. I have to fight hard to capture the Government buildings and the Mosque and then the AI surrenders. I never assault the town frontally from the south crossing although it would be the best way to do it with Plan 5. I always hit the north crossing from both sides at the same time. The north crossing is where I used to take game losing casualties in the early days of playtesting. (Witness the Syrian Bruce Willis photo). It's hard to get LOS to some of those defending vehicles without coming at the position from the south. Once you've spotted them, their life expectancy is very short. You must ALWAYS wait to get the best asset in to do the job. I once held up the assault on the north crossing for nearly 20 minutes to get a javelin team into place to get a couple of T-72s. Use SMOKE to cover their approach and the hunker down to wait for the smoke to clear and then wham... I found myself using what are possibly quite realistic tactics to get wins in this mission. It makes for some rather boring moments from time to time as you wait for the best assets to get into place or the artillery to prep the area but you also get to set up some pretty spectacular moments later in the game as well. My assault on the town is aurally awesome The wife knows when it's happening in the front room.

Afraid not. It will stay in its last order zone so that's not a good idea. The AI doesn't display any awareness of VP zones whether they be 'occupy', 'touch' or 'destroy'.

Well, think about it like this. The Temperate environment with water, weather and fire are pretty substantial additions to the CMx2 engine, not to mention the new QB ssytem. However, once they've been successfully coded in and everything's looking lovely, what else is needed for CMSFx2? Apart from some new Europen modern era building textures and some new kit for all the concerned parties, it'll only be creating and playtesting the scenarios and campaigns that come with the new title. (That admittedly does take quite a bit of time) I don't have any problems envisaging a late 2010 release date.

CM:SF 2 will be started in a few months I genuinely could care less about WW2*. THIS is what I want! *I am prepared to eat my shorts when WW2 is released as I'll probably love it too

And Now that I am playing again, I think at least some of my dislike is with the setting. I never cared at all for cmak desert maps I don't like Desert settings very much either although there are some really spectacular Desert maps in the Brit campaign. I was sufficiently impressed to comment on their look while playtesting them. Some scenario designers like to create more temperate looking maps and this is not unrealistic as the northern area of Syria (around Aleppo etc) is very fertile.

50% BLUE casualties! It's been a LONG time since I saw that happen. I suppose what follows could be construed as a SPOILER.............. I have to ask, how slowly are you approaching this mission? Sounds like you're moving quite quickly. S-L-O-W is the way to go especially in the first hour. I got into the habit of setting aside the first 2 hours of the mission for the battle to capture the crossings. I take it very, very slowly and wait for air/artillery assets to get those tanks/BMPs that are too tricky for a javelin team to get to. I rarely ever lose any vehicles playing this mission anymore. Since you lose a LOT more vps for vehicular casualties retaining the vehicles means you can afford to take a few more infantry casualties and still get a Minor BLUE Victory. I've come very close a few times to retaining the 10% FFP bonus but I usually lose it due to carelessness in the final assault on the town. The AI usually surrenders before time expires and so I get the VPs for all the VP locations regardless of any die hards remaining in the vicinity of the crossings. And I honestly can't remember the last time I earned the PRESERVE VPs for the Government Buildings. Unless you're very, very good, it's just NOT worth it.

Hi snakeye Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad that it proved difficult on your first go as I was seriously worried that the first few players would come back and say 'nice map, good fun but too easy'. BLUE has so many support assets to play with and the time to use them in this one that it took a lot of time to get it balanced. The Orontes crossings: Red gets points for controlling either of them. They are separate objectives for RED. For BLUE they are combined into one objective. This was done to prevent BLUE from capturing one and ignoring the other. I did this quite a lot while playtesting and trust me, it guides the player in the right direction. It's way, WAY too early for me to give any spoilers on this mission but I'll say that I usually get across the river without taking any casualties. The real fun begins when attacking the north crossing. However, it usually falls before the 2 hour mark and that leaves me one hour+ to move on the town and the farmhouse. The farmhouse is very easy to take while the town is the real tough nut. The AI usually surrenders before I move a unit into the Textile factory. Usual result in a Minor US victory although I increased BLUE's Friendly Force Preservation bonus from 5% to 10% and from 50 points to 200 points to allow players to get a tactical/Major/Total victory. I have a tendency to design missions that require the player to play them a few times before he gets a solid win. There are five AI plans and I design them to keep even the experienced player guessing until around the half way mark. There's one I plan that's very tough to beat. I won't say which one but you have a 1 in 5 chance of getting it every time you play. From reading your AAR, I suspect you got that one.

SNAP two three...

Removed... hmmm. Perhaps you meant to say 'not yet implemented'? The CMx2 engine is a completely new engine, coded from scratch to allow a far more detailed representation of Modern Era (and soon WW2) combat. Any feature that the CMx2 series has that CMx1 had is a result of that particular feature being included because it was feasible to do, not removed or deactivated. There's probably not a scrap of the CMx1 code in the CMx2 code. CMx1 is basically a computer board/miniatures wargame with very sophisticated tables for determining the outcome of any given fire. Essentially being a board game, the level of abstraction in the CMx1 series of games was so high that this was an easy feature to include. When you were told that you had a 43% chance of a hit, that was likely the actual percentage the computer was using to determine if your shot hit or not. Once the shot was fired, the 'dice' were rolled to see if that shot was successful and if it was, a second roll made to determine what effect it had. It should be obvious by now that this is not how CMSF works. I prefer to think of it as a 3D Interactive Combat Environment. You are given an idea of how good your shot is from the colour of the target line when you draw your shot. That's probably about as much information as you could expect a real life soldier to get when calling his shots. So much can change after the shot is fired as well. It takes time for that projectile to travel from its launcher to its intended target. If you shoot back at an ATGM team, they can lose their nerve (or die) and cause a 100% guaranteed hit to plunge into the ground. Having said that, who knows what you'll see when you get the WW2 title. Perhaps displaying this kind of information will be too important a feature to a WW2 wargamer for BFC to omit it. For Modern Era with its far more sophisticated weapons systems, it's probably not practical.

IMO this is one of the most important improvements to the game. It has made scripting and debugging AI plans a much simpler thing to do. Before, I used to deploy Spies all over the place to observe the AI perform its plan (a PITA to do) and even then they would miss a LOT. And then you had to remember to remove them all before finalising the mission. I was fortunate enough to have this tool when I was working on 'USMC Second Storm' and I could see that the AI was having problems moving its vehicles around in the town. So I 'knocked down' a few walls and put in an extra waypoint or two and the AI was able to move its vehicles around without too many snags. I was able to sit back with a cup of tea and watch the AI repeat this several times to make sure that it wasn't a fluke either. Wihout this, I'd probably have just added a couple of minutes to the order to allow the AI more time to get to its next objective. You are also able to gauge how well the AI units are positioned for spotting enemy units when you give them 'Ambush XYZm' orders. When you select them during the game you'll see their large yellow covered arc. You can then watch as your units move into the arc and see when the AI spots them as the arc disappears immediately. You can follow their actions in the little text box in the bottom left of the screen so you can see that soldier X is aiming etc. This will allow us to determine more effectively the effects of experience, morale and equipment quality has on a unit's ability to perform its orders in the game as well as the different levels of concealment certain terrain offers to moving units. Wheatfields seem to be particularly good at concealing moving infantry units from enemy eyes. I must also say that used in conjuction with ability to Disable AI Plan 1 scenario designers can actually select which plan they want to test without having to worry that they'd get AI Plan 1 even when it was set to 'Use Rarely'. It happened enough to me for it to be an issue.

The AI setup information seems to explain everything except this... Had the AI not setup when the OP checked? After he was done with his deployment had the AI not deployed? The AI controlled side doesn't choose it's AI plan until you hit the button to start the game. If you play a mission in Scenario Author Mode, you'll see that the AI units start in the positions they were given in the Editor by the Scenario Designer. Then, when you hit START, you will see AI instantly teleport its units to the positons at the beginning of the first turn. In Abu Susah, there is only one AI plan and it's not a 'Author-Set up' plan. Almost every single mission I've ever designed has at least two AI plans, and one of them is the 'Paper Tiger Set up'. And if the AI had deployed why would it re-deploy from a saved game? If you save the game during the Set Up phase the AI won't have chosen its plan yet so you'll see it 'redeploy'.

MOVE isn't completely useless IMO. Walking instead of running reduces your troops chances of being observed by enemy units at long distances. At much shorter ranges it's a waste of time. FAST is great for crossing roads and getting into cover or getting from one building to another especially when combined with SMOKE deployment. BTW, have any of you noticed that your troops tire much more rapidly when they're moving through long grass and wheat in v1.21? Sometimes MOVE is better when moving through large patches of terrain like this.

Abu Susah has "Mixed" setup zones that are painted-in. That's the cause of the randomness. Actually, just to clarify MikeyD's comment, it won't make much difference if you select 'Lower Floors', 'Upper Floors' or 'Rooftops' for the AI group set up zone. If the AI group set up area includes a building and other terrain the AI will often set up in the terrain, but not always. That's what we're seeing in this mission. I just set it up a couple of times in Scenario Author Design Mode and watched the AI do its magic. I am very glad you brought this up because I ran some tests on AI set ups this morning and found that if the AI will choose a building when the AI set up area is one square and that square includes a part of the building regardless of the Floors option. In the past it would always deploy outside of the building. This has been fixed. I think it would be a good idea for the Beta team to have a look at some of the missions that come with the original game as some of them have definitely been 'porked' by the massive improvements to the game engine (especially AI dynamic use of artillery in V1.10, AI Infantry 'butting out' behaviour in V1.11, and RED Commanders abilty to call in artillery in v1.21). Especially those where the RED side is on the defence. 'Abu Susah' is one that has suffered over time whereas 'Al Amarah' still seems to work just fine. Since folks that buy the original game now are getting a few 'porked' missions with the game, it wouldn't be a terrible waste of anybody's time to fix them up for v1.22 or V1.30. It's surprising how few missions actually came with the original game, especially when compared to the Brit module.

I CAN'T wait to try out the newly implemented "selectable-and-moveable-waypoint" system that was promised to us so long ago! I don't think this feature would be too difficult to implement for Infantry waypoints but I can see how it would be for vehicles. I have spent a bit of time watching vehicles moving between their waypoints to time my AI plans and it seems that they really get up to speed at the start of the move order and then slow down as they approach their waypoint. No doubt it took a while for Charles to code this in so that it looks and behaves in a realistic manner. There's no chance whatsoever that a patch will give everybody everything that they want. Some folks will be disappointed while others will appreciate what they get. You're turn will come though and when moveable/adjustable waypoints finally get in, no doubt somebody will complain about it taking precedence over their 'pet' feature. FWIW, the Scenario Author Test and the ability to switch off AI Plan 1 for testing AI plans are very important additions (and IMO should have been in a long time ago so I know how you feel). I have no doubt that we'll see an overall improvement in the quality of scenarios from this point on. And just wait until you play a mission in low light conditions... the dust/sparks effect is not just for fairies. As MikeyD pointed out, it gives the player yet another tool for gathering intel on enemy positions as yet undiscovered. You're going to need that for some of the things I've got planned in the future.

Late last night a short, but violent, electrical storm prevented US aircraft from flying in support of USMC units operating to the south of Hama. The brief respite it offered provided sufficient cover for units of the 1st Syrian Airborne Mechanized Battalion, based at the airfield to the north, to take up defensive positions to oppose USMC forces advancing from the north west towards the M1 highway in an attempt to cut the city off from reinforcement from the south. Supported by a couple of platoons of T-72 M1Vs from B Company of the 471 Tank Battalion, at least two platoons of Syrian Airborne Infantry have dug in to defend the Orontes crossings a little over a kilometer west of the north western outskirts of Al Qusayr. Intelligence suggests that the T-72s facing you have probably been upgraded and fitted with NVG gear. The Airborne units are equipped with the BMP-3 which is also fitted with NVGs. While Airborne units are usually equipped with the lethal AT-14, no ATGM assets have been observed in the area. Intelligence believes that whatever ATGM assets they do possess will be deployed further to the south where the terrain is more open. The outskirts of the town itself are being defended by a company of Infantry from the 181 Reserve Infantry Battalion. They are mostly Green troops with poor equipment and have little motivaton to fight. Last night's storm may have been a fortuitous occurrence for the Syrians but there's a second storm coming at them from the north west and this time, it's their turn to get their heads down. This is a 3 HOUR long mission. You need the USMC Module and the game patched to v1.21. The map is very large, 2288m x 1248m but the forces for both sides are reasonably small. There are 5 AI plans for the RED side. It was designed to be played as BLUE vs RED AI. It may also be playable H2H although it has not been playtested this way. There are seperate briefings and maps for both sides but there are NO BLUE AI plans so it is not playable as RED Human vs BLUE AI. The reason for this being that I have not yet figured out a way to script the AI to overcome the challenges the BLUE player faces in this mission. USMC Second Storm is my first mission featuring US Marines and the Syrian Airborne Mech Infantry and, if time permits, it won't be my last. I had a LOT of fun designing and playtesting it and I think it's finally good enough to share with you guys. I have given the BLUE side a lot of firepower in the form of artillery, both mortars and heavy artillery, and air support, both helicopters and aircraft. So much so that a victory in this mission seems almost assured. However it won't be that easy as you will be heavily penalised for taking excessive friendly casualties. You cannot afford to take more than 15% casualties while accomplishing your mission. Suffer more and a DRAW will be the best result you can expect. This means that if you want to win, you will be forced to play at a slower pace than you may be accustomed to and this style of play may not be to your taste. For some of you, the Recon phase may prove to be as about exciting as watching paint dry so if you like to jump straight into the thick of the action when you fire up a mission, this is definitely not one for you. The Recon phase lasts for 15 minutes and it is a very important part of the scenario. Employed carefully and effectively, the limited, but powerful, Recon assets you have available in this phase can smooth the path for the main body later. I will be very interested to read your impressions of this mission as I am currently creating more missions in this vein for a future campaign. In those missions I want to give BLUE all the firepower he can reasonably expect to have but not to prevent him from employing it effectively by 'painting' all the important defensive terrain with costly PRESERVE terrain objectives. I have tried to use PRESERVE objectives in such a way as to present the player with another level of decision making in the course of carrying out his orders. Hopefully the PRESERVE bonus has been pitched at such a level that it is really worth fighting for but also that the mission can be won without it.

'When the men were REAL men and the women were REAL women and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were REAL small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri' The man was a comic genius. He is sorely missed.

Even though several tanks spotted them there were no attempts to pursue Neither CMx1 or CMx2's AI could react to sighting an enemy unit in this manner. You would need a trigger based AI to allow units to react in this way and even then it might not 'pursue' but start moving towards its next objective which may coincide with the direction of flight of the triggering units. CMx2 may very well have trigger based AI at some point in the future so we'll get a chance to see what we can do with it. Regarding AI Defensive battles, there is actually quite a lot a scenario designer can do without moving units around. Just because you don't see anybody moving doesn't mean there's no AI plan. There are no movement orders in 'UK It Ain't Half Hot Mum' but it took me a long time to get the three RED AI plans right.