hcrof
-
Posts
1,106 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by hcrof
-
-
I do chuckle when I see the occassional "uber" comments. They're usually next to the thread about having to restart 'scenario X' 3 times before getting it right, and the complaint about how lethal MOUT battles are.
Marine and Brit modules have something like 80(?) new standalone and campaign scenarios between them. And the scenario designers had considerable practice since the original release. Haven't iphone apps improved since the original 'Hello Universe' app was first released?
See my comments on being annoyed at ridiculous battles where no sane BLUFOR commander would continue advancing without support. I prefer a strait fight and the US Army is too good at them
Each to their own though - some people like the 'puzzle'.I agree about scenarios improving though. The Marines and Brit modules have some excellent ones. 'Edge of darkness' for example was both balenced in terms of force numbers and challenging for the Blue player, lots of fun! (More ammo would be nice though!)
-
i dont know when you joined the CMSF "club" but version 1.01 and 1.02...thats where blue was "über"! you could do TF thunder mission 1 without ever disembarking anyone from the strykers.
thats much harder now...i think i is quiet fine.
I think I started with 1.08 because of reading all the bad reviews. I kind of wanted to mess around with modern systems to see what they could do. If the US army was stronger than that they must have been pretty über! (Thanks for letting me copy/paste the ü
) To be fair I havn't really played with them since Marines came out so I can't really form a good opinion on them recently. Still a javelin is a javelin and they massively unbalence H2H play.
I'll stick with the other, less javelin heavy armies thanks!
-
Well the game has been pretty solid from v1.10 IMO and has only improved since. There are still minor niggles like excactly how long it takes to set up an ATGM
but the bugs are pretty much ironed out to a degree that would satisfy any big name title.The expansions themselves are worth getting. The US Army is a bit too uber for my taste, play with the Marines or better still with the Brits and you have a proper fight on your hands! My preference is still Red v Red though, an old school RvR fight feels a bit like CMBB and a more modern one like in my AAR is a balenced, bloody fight!
Or, as Steve would say - Play the Demo!
-
What you see is what you get really - brush, trees and long grass block LOS whereas walls etc are better at providing actual cover.
Remember though that unlike CMx1, a 'tree tile' might not have any underbrush which makes your guys pretty visible.
-
Great, another AAR - and this one couldn't be more different to mine!
I will be following this closely, I may pick up some tips for my game against Mike Churchmoor
A question. Will you be putting in suppressive fires on the village as you start to assault or are you going to try and sneak in quietly and only fire if the enemy opens fire on you?
-
With a roar of engines, my BMPs lurch forward, racing to their positions. The long columns of carriers would make for an easy target so in the south they turn off the road into an area of dead ground. The vehicles disgorge troops who head for a field boundary and set up their positions.
Although I am setting up a reverse slope defence, spotters head for the hill tops, ready to call down mortar fire on approaching troops. Some carry RPG's.
One of my keen eyed Sagger operators at BIGFARM spots an enemy BMP, hiding in some trees 2km away. It has an extra aerial on it – the battalion commander!
He fires but enemy mortar rounds hitting BIGFARM, while ineffectual, throw his aim off and the missile swings wide.
Airburst crashes down near my positions but the men just huddle in their carriers, nervous but safe.
My biggest worry is now over, Mike is using all 3 mortar modules on useless targets. If he had hit HILLFARM on a 5 minute timer he could have really put the hurt on my ATGM teams there!
Unless this barrage stops quickly, Mike will have wasted a valuable asset. Unfortunately I may have done the same. I didn't realise it takes 8 minutes now to call in a fire mission – my men will have to order a strike on the forward slope of the south hill as soon as they arrive and hope that Mike takes his time to get there.
The only other thing to mention is the Keystone cops routine that is happening at the bridge – at least most of the stuff got through eventually!
-
This looks like a fun map, a lot of room to maneuver!
Aren't you worried Mike will read this?
It'd be great if you could both post DARs on here and agree not to read each others'
.What are "textbook Soviet tactics"?
GSX has pretty much got it - I might not even dismount my infantry if I can get away with it! The tanks will lead - hopefully they can take any hits from defenders that arn't suppressed by artillery or direct fire.
If Mike reads this I will lose the game, but its only a game right?
-
Thanks guys - I hope I can keep this going untill the end of the battle! If Mike reads it then it will be a short game but he has given his word
hey this is sweet! nice force selection...say what quality level are the troops, green/regular?you got the AK74 or the AKM as main armament for the troops?
All the troops are regular with a mix of both types of rifle.
I forgot to add BRIDGE is worth 500 points and the farms are 300 each. Total force value is 1000 points each and we take a proportion of that as we estroy each others units.
-
My Plan
I have to prevent Mike from capturing 2 farms (Objective HILLFARM in the north and objective BIGFARM in the south) and capture the bridge in the west (Objective BRIDGE surprisingly
).If I lose BIGFARM I will accept the loss, if I lose HILLFARM I will counterattack and retake it before moving on to BRIDGE.
Prior to this battle I made myself a single player scenario where I tested out some 'textbook' Soviet offensive tactics. These are extremely simple, aggressive and worked very successfully. I hope to replicate these in this battle (As long as I hold my nerve!). Unfortunately, Mike tried out these tactics too in the same battle – I hope he hasn't learned what I have!
My overall plan is risky but hopefully will catch Mike by surprise, I will defend the farms with the minimum force possible, advancing quickly early on so I can fall back and delay his forces later. As soon as I get my artillery support I will launch a Soviet style 'Okhrat', dumping all my artillery on the bridge area and assaulting objective BRIDGE as fast as possible with half of my infantry and all of my tanks in an aggressive left hook. Hope fully the shock and speed of my manoeuvre will take him by surprise and vastly overmatch his defence. The bridge should be mine before the farms fall. When I hold all three objectives I will then call for his surrender and if he doesn't, my tanks will attack him from the rear.
The HQ position with my 'strike force' lined up in the backround
View of Objective BRIDGE
The keys to my defence are two things. First of all, I will set up my ATGM's near both farms. These will then have clear fields of fire across the valley and should hit advancing tanks on the flanks. I will also have a manoeuvre group of BMP's to the south ready to deal with any additional threats. Secondly, my infantry will rush forward into reverse slope positions on both sides. They will call down airburst mortar fire in front of them to discourage dismounted attacks and will retreat under cover of smoke when pressed, buying time with space and keeping casualties low. The river is a problem in the south. The crossing is not easily defended and it will restrict my movement. I have set up a machine gun section to cover the retreat. The defence in sector that I am attempting requires a great deal of skill and coordination but I feel that I have enough experience by now to be able to pull it off against a cautious opponent like Mike. (I have another opponent who would chew this defence up and spit it out, because of his incredibly aggressive opening moves so I am taking a bit of an educated gamble here).
There are 2 weaknesses to my plan:
1.If Mike is aggressive there is a good chance that I will not be able to stop him with my defending troops. My reserve will then be used plugging holes in the line rather than outflanking him.
2.The majority of my troops are concentrated in the north. There is no way to shift to the south without coming under fire. If his northern flank appears heavily defended I may have to punch through the centre in unfavourable tank country. Smoke will me crucial here to protect me from ATGM's.
An interesting point about the map is that there does not appear to be any good 'Hull down' positions. I might be mistaken at this point but if this is true Mike might be reluctant to use his tanks without them. It seems that most maps in CMSF have a huge number of natural hull down positions which tend to lead to players seeking them out more than in the real world.
I expect Mike to be less aggressive then myself. He will consolidate his defence before putting infantry feelers forward to scout out my positions. Hopefully, my mortars on airburst will discourage this sort of behaviour!
I expect his heaviest attack in the north, because the large hill is both vital to the map (I believe it his 'decisive point') and is difficult to defend. I will keep harassing mortar fire on it for as long as possible to stop a dismounted advance and hopefully my anti tank groups at BIGFARM will discourage armoured attack. I don't expect to destroy that many of his troops as he attacks. He is very thorough and will use combined arms and overwatch to maximum effect, minimizing losses while he advances slowly.
I think Mike will keep his armour in reserve and release individual platoons as needed. While I am confident I can defend against his tank attacks for long enough, I hope my attack doesn't bump into a platoon of T-62s! I may have to delay my attack until I know where all his tanks are.
My decisive point?
When my artillery arrives! -
I read an DAR over on the CMBB boards and found it pretty entertaining so here is my attempt. I may slow down in the future due to 'real life' but here goes for now
I have been battling Mike for a while now and he is one of my most entertaining opponents. In light of this, I have decided to write up an AAR for the forum. Hopefully I can get some feedback on my playing style and I might be able to add some of this to the community strategy guide (If everything goes according to plan
).The Battlefield
The map is my own creation based on a quick battle map. The QB map only takes a tiny proportion of the 2x2km map but it informed my visual style of the area.
The terrain is European farmland with rolling hills and a developed road network, the ground is wet and the sky hazy.
To the north is a large hill that dominates the area, it is lightly forested which restricts the views from the top but on the eastern slope, a farm (Objective HILLFARM) allows views across the river valley in the centre of the map.
The view from HILLFARM
Splitting the map in two is a river that winds its way from the west to the north. It is forested along its length and has 5 crossings – two of which are bridges. Due to the wet ground, the other three have a good chance of bogging vehicles that cross.
In the centre of the map there is a dense forest. This will severely restrict vehicular movement but might allow infantry to infiltrate close to the enemy.
Finally, in the north there is a village overlooked by a hill to the east. These two features dominate the terrain on that side of the river and will probably be key to any fights on that side of the map.
The Players
Mike Churchmoor is an experienced CMSF player who I win against as much as I lose. He, like me is quite cautious and tends to use an infantry screen in front of his armour in methodical attacks that keep his losses low. Given enough time and ammunition he will slowly work his way though all his objectives and there is very little that can be done to stop him. Our last battle unfortunately descended into stalemate and a draw so I hope this one will be a bit more decisive!
I regard myself as a competent player who is good at very small knife fights and can get the most out of artillery. My weakness is a reliance on 'textbook' manoeuvre which can make me careless in larger battles like this one. I also feel that my caution does not always pay off. I might not commit enough assets to a task for fear of losing them all at once only to find that I lose them piecemeal instead. In this battle I will attempt to be more aggressive as I feel this will catch Mike by surprise and neutralise his carefully placed overwatch.
Forces
We both command a mirrored force in a meeting engagement. A mechanised infantry battalion (- 1 company) and two platoons of T-62M tanks. At some point in the first half hour we will both also receive support from a battery of 122mm self propelled Howitzers. Given the map size it is not quite enough to cover all the bases with a force this size but that should hopefully result in some interesting manoeuvre warfare. The BMP-1 vehicles are baseline models with a Sagger-3B and the infantry ATGMs are also Sagger-Bs so the battle could date some time in the early '70s.
-
John - I am aware of the capabilities of Soviet artillery, they certainly put a lot of emphasis on it and all of it is genuinely scary. I didn't know that the MLRS was fielded that late though! It does seem like a massive gap in capability that could be cheaply filled with an inferior system while they developed the MLRS. Maybe NATO relied on airpower to do a similar job instead? (a massive mistake if that is the case IMO)
I just don't 'get' NATO's thinking on a ground war in europe. It is almost as if they didn't take it seriously!
c3k - I believe the 'grid square removal service' refers to cluster munitions specifically. However, even using HE you probably wouldn't need to be that accurate against softer targets like artillery batteries and HQ elements behind the front lines.
In v1.21, artillery certainly works when you get a direct hit. I just lost a T-55 to (very) lucky 122mm round. The problem is that vehicles don't take any damage from near misses and airburst as described in the OP.
-
in the vid, The Scousers Visit London, when they head back to the bus and meet the pimp and the 2 other bullies...are the pimp and the bullies speaking london accent? this is what i meant in the beginning, its nearly prounounced as you pronounce german. short and hard, i like that accent a lot.
Yep, thats an east london accent. Watch Guy Ritchie films like Snatch, Lock Stock, Revolver, RocknRolla etc and you'll get a lot of it
Isn't it about time you guys had another civil war? I mean, the last one was what, 350 years ago? No wonder your society has become so sluggish. You need to get in there and mix it up, shed some blood, blow up a few things.Michael
If its north v south we would blow up the Midlands - I can deal with that
-
whats this? i watched the vid on youtube and had trouble understanding it throughout...it seems they are somehow making the 3rd guy down becouse he was in england for a match and they seem to be scotts or so...? is this video playing around with the differences between the english, welsh, scottish and so on?
i understand the worst rednecks on US movies better then this guys, i need to watch more of this to get used to it.
Heh, We all have trouble understanding scousers! Scousers are from Liverpool so are english but there is a bit of a North/south divide in england (Northerners are Monkeys/Southerners are Fairys). We all grow up down south with plenty of jokes about northerners and they do the same about us
The thing about the UK is that some accents are completely incomprehensible - it is depressing not being able to understand a guy who is speaking english and lives less than 50 miles away! (The Cornish or the Welsh for me). In fact, I used to work with some scottish guys who where perfectly capable of not being understood if they wanted to.
In terms of films, Hot Fuzz is awesome, RocknRolla is worth watching and who could fail to mention James Bond!
-
I have an opponent right now who is deliberately airbursting himself to stop me sneaking up on him!
Does anyone know what calibre artillery are required to destroy a tank? Can you use 81/60mm mortars for example?
John Kettler - Thanks for the link, a suprising number of knockouts due to HE. Certainly more than I remember from my CMBB days!
It would be nice to get cluster munitions too but I can understand Steve when he says that a 'Grid square removal service' may unbalence the game
-
Well I've signed up, looking forward to my first command!
-
One of the best things about CMSF is that it has encouraged me to do my own research on modern military matters and some of the things I have found have been fascinating.
Who Says Dumb Artillery Rounds Can’t Kill Armor?
http://sill-www.army.mil/FAMAG/2002/NOV_DEC_2002/NOV_DEC_2002_PAGES_8_11.pdf
The above link confirms something about artillery that was bugging me but I just hadn't noticed fully before. In the game, a more or less direct hit is required to destroy an armoured vehicle. While this might seem like realistic results, a near miss or an airburst munition causes no damage at all, not even damage to optics, radios etc!
The above article states that artillery is in fact more effective against armour than it is in the game. Apparently, a 155mm round can potentially destroy a tank from up to 30m away and shell fragments are effective at destroying weapons, tracks, sights, radios and other components of a vehicle even if the crew are unharmed.
I would be interested to hear what other people think. Should CM players be forced to move their vehicles out of artillery fire immediately, even if it is 'just' airburst because of the worry that they will become combat ineffective or destroyed? Or is the artillery in CMSF correctly modelled as is, with no changes needed
One problem that occurs to me is the AI. Currently, a tank will not move if under artillery fire, meaning precise targeting is easy. This compensates for the lack of effectiveness of the artillery. Apparently some campaign missions can only be won because of this and so by increasing the effectiveness of artillery against armour, single player games would become much easier.
On the other hand, by making the TacAI act more realistically, you could 'break' the campaign.
Any thoughts?
-
I notice there are some eastern european countries in the coalition. Is it possible to join as one of them for some Red v Red action?
The whole OpNem project looks very well done so far!
-
But what about triggering a blue ambush by splitting your red squad and sending the fodder ahead? Who cares if they die because they will reveal the ambush.
Now I will agree that this is a true to life tactic but not for these red troops. (Syria).
Also, if you split off a 2 man squad to cover an approach then, again, who cares if they die because the very fact that they died told you blue is comming that way.
You may have honor and say you would never do gamey things but I can tell you others will.
Firstly, how often does blue do ambushes? Anyway, a well concealed marksman or fireteam would be able to pin down or destroy the 2 man team without revealing its position.
Secondly, in defense red should deploy pickets to watch approaches, as long as they are close to the rest of the platoon. They arn't stupid and won't just ignore an approach just because some imagined and arbitrary 'Doctrine' tells them to.
-
Heres a novel Idea - Make syrian squads occupy 3 action spots instead of 2! The 3rd action spot could be 2-3 riflemen who when split off from the main squad would be almost entirely useless from a combat point of view but could act as MOUT spotters/ammo bearers if needed. As they have no binoculars they would not be great at spotting things anyway at the ranges on the modern battlefield (Outside of a city). Obviously if they had a bad morale hit when out of LOS from the Squad leader it would make sense - If they come under fire they would cower or disapear. Im sure that is realistic - send some conscripts to get ammo in a tight spot and you can never be too sure if they will come back!
The other advantage of 3 action spots is that they will not bunch up so much in defense, Win-Win!
-
I personally dislike difficult missions - perhaps because I like a degree of realism or believability in a battle. If I am with a depleated platoon against a mechanised infantry battalion I just think WHY? Why should anyone in their right mind even attempt this suicide mission in the first place? I will play a mission once and won't restart so I get frustrated when I start doing badly an hour in and quite often Ragequit (Withdraw and wait for support
) battles that I feel a real commander would not attempt to fight. Also I enjoy PvP too much, unbalenced missions are terrible for competative play. I am a bit of a surrender monkey there too actually - if I don't like how a mission is going I will do what an honerable commander would do and not fight to the last man!
So I suppose I like realism and playablity overall
Edit - lately I have made a number of Novelty 'roleplay' type missions for myself to test out genuine (read: very simple) Soviet small unit tactics. I have enjoyed them immensely but None of my unfortunate playtesters seem to agree
-
It might work, although if you set for example - infantry vs infantry. Red v Red (as I have done in the past) you will get a mirrored game. I don't know whether that works for every setup but the QB's do seem to have some standard formations. I have only ever played 2-3 full QB's before though so I don't want to sound like an expert!
-
The problem with that suggestion is that the 'same' forces are often very different in capabilities. For example, a US Mech infantry company not only has an equipment and experience advantage over a BMP company, it also significantly outnumbers it as well!
The only way to get balenced battles is to agree on a setup beforehand and to use the editor IMO, QB's are broken in CMSF.
I find the best way to get QB's are to choose an interesting looking map and to make it Red v Red. I also mirror the forces to make sure the battle is about skill, not setup.
-
tyrspawn - I think to best use your suggestion, the squad should only replenish ammo when it leaves the vehicle. That way, vehicle crews and depleted squads who are sheltering from arty fire don't take ammo when you won't ever use them again that battle.
-
Hi, Welcome to the forums
1. You can only reskin units - BFC keeps a tight reign on modders. They have their reasons but I won't try to explain them as I don't know enough about the technicalities.
2. Elevation in the scenario editor is actually very simple when you get used to it. What you are doing is creating 'contour lines' on the map. It allows for some very precise modelling of terrain even if it isn't as visually accessable as other editors. If you want to create a hill, just draw a series of concentric rings, each one higher than the last as you move towards the centre. As you get used to it you will quickly be able to create concave/convex hills, ridges, gullies etc.
If you need extra help, try opening another scenario designers work and see how they do it - everyone has their own style!
Each to their own though - some people like the 'puzzle'.
During Action Report - hcrof vs Mike Churchmoor!
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Suddenly the radio bursts into life – enemy coming through the village! BMP's advancing in the centre! As the picture emerges, it appears that the enemy is sending platoon columns forward, feeling their way through the centre and south.
Enemy BMP's moving along a road
The recon platoon sends an urgent message – an enemy BMP is less than 200m away from the southern defenders. They are still running to their positions on the other side of the hill!
Without warning, a carrier in the 'dead ground' explodes. No one is hurt but only the gunner gets out, the drivers leg is trapped and he panics, unable to move.
This is not good. No doubt Mike can see that I have 2 platoons of BMP's just behind the southern hill and can plan his attack knowing my positions. On top of that, I have just realised that my old fashioned BMP's cannot pop smoke. Without a smokescreen from their engines I might lose another one before they reverse further down the slope! I watched the BMP get hit on replay – it was a sagger that came from the southern edge of the map. BMP or ATGM? Who knows?
As well as this, elements of his force are already quite far forward, having ignored the obvious defensive potential of the village. It is probably just a probe – I can't form conclusions at this stage so my plan will not change.
My spotters seem very good. I have spotted both the Btn HQ and a tank 2km away and both of them are partially obscured by trees! Whether I can destroy them is another matter. I have already wasted 2 sagger rounds on the Btn HQ so I will order my team to hold fire until those mortars stop – apparently loud bangs and the threat of death can throw your aim a bit. Who would have thought?