tyrspawn
-
Posts
380 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by tyrspawn
-
-
part 3 (final) of mission 3:
Great series so far and I loved your Shock Force videos as well.
I have one tip for you though, if you don't want your guys firing at anything too far away give them a short target arc.
Good point, I forget about this!
-
-
****. My JTAC got hit by a FAB-500 or whatever russian monstrosity is dropped by their fixed wing. This is going to be a very tough battle going forward... uploading the next 2 hours of this mission probably tomorrow.
Also I ran out of hard-drive space while recording and I think about 20 minutes of the battle are missing! I was essentially talking to myself for 20 minutes
-
is SPAA efficiency/effect tied to where the area of effect for the CAS mission has been allocated?
e.g. if I do a UAV observe mission on the corner of the map 3000 meters away from a tunguska.. is it the same threat as having it observe on top of the tunguskas?
-
Krause. Just started the vid, and thanks for the kudos, but hoping I disappoint you as far as predicatability. There really wasn't much to the AI plan. If you want me to go full on Russian AGMB some time, I'll build one. Good website, btw.
You sure did set up to burn through a lot of your indirect ammo in preparatory fires. Remember, that is your PRIMARY killing agent in this game! You do get another section of Paladins, but be conservative and leave something for later. Remember, no reason your UAS cannot do some of the observing on the NAIs for you. You don't necessarily have to get physical eyes on. And do make sure you take out the overwhelming majority of the IADS before committing your CAS or ATK.
Oh, and I was NOT in the Gulf War (whipper-snapper must think I'm OLD!) - was at Armor Officer Basic when it went down, with my name on the "I volunteer, please send me now..." list. Obviously over by the time I got done. All my interesting time has been in IZ and AFG.
"Hardcore 6, this is Power 6, identify enemy main body serials and pass to X-ray for targeting, break."
"Keep your scouts alive, carefully manage your anti-armor ordnance, and don't shoot dirt with my artillery! Good luck, out."
I figured if you were a LTC you were probably a junior officer in the early 90s.
I am aware that I blew through indirect suppressing suspected SPAA positions vicinity the construction company - but it's a priority for me to suppress any, even on a whim, so that the fixed/rotary wing can roll in hot.
I am expecting to be attacked by platoon+ sized armored CRPs at my OPs and possibly a company sized FSE before the main body arrives. So i'm expecting unpredictability!
Also I am wary about using the UAS without SEAD completion. I'm planning on playing through the rest of the mission tonight so we'll see how it goes.
-
the area of effect for an MLRS fire mission is 1 grid square (1000 x 1000 meters). It's an operational-level asset (brigades/divisions fighting eachother) rather than tactical (battalions/companies etc).
-
Part 1 of mission 3:
-
pretty busy this week, I should be able to get the next mission done by tuesday hopefully.
-
the s-300/s400 is a STRATEGIC-LEVEL SAM, not tactical. The brigades rolling around in CMBS would have SA-8s and SA-11s/17s for their top echelon defense and the SA-19s, SA-13s and MANPADS for battalion/regiment level.
There are clearly circumstances in which a long range SAM like an s-300 would deny medium or high altitude flying in an AO, but that would just mean that the aircraft would pop up still miles outside the engagement range to attack the targets and use AGM-65 or other standoff weapons rather than GBUs/JDAMs.
-
CMBS has a very poor simulation of air defenses and SEAD.
In reality the platforms in CMBS would not pose a threat to fixed wing aviators in most circumstances. The tunguska's max engagement altitude is about 11k feet. Typically speaking fixed wing aircraft consider anything below 10k to be suicide and try to stay above 15k. The cruising altitude of most fighters is 20-30k. The standoff range of laser guided bombs, AGM-65 and JDAMs far surpass the max range of the SPAAs in CMBS. They do/would pose a huge threat to helicopters however. In reality there would be a lot of remote lazing with COLT/JTAC teams for the choppers to pop up. SA-8s and SA-11s/17s would have posed a different story.
Fixed wing aviation also rolls with SEAD in any major operation in the form of air launched anti-radiation missiles. The standard missile for this role at this time is the AGM-88, which can reliably target something like an SA-19 (tunguska) or SA-13 from 20+ miles away. A fixed wing aircraft can easily stay outside the engagement envelope of the SPAAs in CMBS.. and only in circumstances when forced to go low altitude would result in dangers. Obviously fixed wing aviators try to avoid this at all cost, and do not operate at combat altitudes below the max engagement envelopes involved in CMBS.
-
part 2 of mission 2:
-
Chris, watched your latest today, and I noticed you were concerned about the engineers not using their blasting charges to ascend floors of a building. It's probably because it's been so long since you played Shock Force, but I noticed that you used the Quick movement command (Yellow) and apparently expected the unit to automatically use their charges. However, a special Blast command is needed, and it can be found in the Movement orders panel toward the bottom.
Also, I'm not sure what happened when some vehicles you were attempting to move directly through a tree line instead made a circuitous route to the other side. It certainly didn't look like the tree line should have prevented direct passage, but if you are at all unsure you can test any patch by selecting a movement order and moving the cursor around over the entirety of the path through the treeline. The cursor will change and indicate any action square that contains impassable terrain for the selected vehicle.
One other thing. When the RPG hit your Bradley on the right flank and the troops inside panicked and fled the vehicle, I didn't notice, but it's possible they were Green troops and not Veterans. That could help explain their actions, which admittedly were stupid to the point of being fatal.
These comments are intended constructively. I really appreciate your videos and always enjoy them.
1. Nope - I was more confused by the "breach kits" on the regular infantry squads. Im going to look that up in the manual right now. I was trying to use a "Breaching kit" to "breach" the room and it was turning to a quick move instead of a red line. The engineers were blasting through the walls as intended.
2. Yeah figured that out after it happened! It's just an inconsistency with map design because in the first mission you can drive your tanks through dozens of trees in a super steep terrain - in the 2nd a little thicket of bushes can stop your movement.
3. IF you think about what happened logically, it's absurd. Imagine if you are in a bradley. You hear an explosion outside. YOur vehicle is not penetrated or in anyway damaged. You then bail out of the vehicle into a road as the front most vehicle along the entire FLOT and get shot down. Several viewers noted that the troops were green.. and that's curious. Why would the US send it's ****tiest troops as the front echelon of an armored taskforce to fight the Russians? especially considering the year most of the troops would be combat veterans of iraq and afghanistan.
-
The military term for acceptable casualties is "Acceptable loss". The standard in any offensive operation is 15% - but everything the military does has an acceptable loss rate, even going to a firing range for rifle training. The rates are probably classified.
Generally speaking if your formation can still function as a unit after the action, it's acceptable. You're essentially attacking 2 platoons with 3 platoons - which is unacceptable odds in a conventional engagement without combat multipliers (3:1 for attacks and 10:1 for urban attacks). You'd need another 3 platoons to make the odds "fair" - otherwise you can compensate using force multipliers (artillery, aircraft, tanks etc). Without compensation you can expect higher casualty rates (add 10 or 15%)
-
Those Bradleys that got killed at 2:25:00. The cause was a minefield. You can even see the "mines" sing popping up on the left side of the first Bradley for a couple of seconds.
****.. yeah.. I saw it in the end of mission screen but didn't see it during the battle because i was so flustered. Not much I could have done to anticipate that other than sweep the entire path with the engineers, which would have exposed them to fire.
-
Watch my videos (in signature).
As others have said, real life tactics work very well in CMBS. The only "wildcard" will be the tactical AI and their lack of responsiveness. Generally speaking though you should:
1. perform a OCOKA before the mission: http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/survival/ocoka.shtml
2. create an operations order - that is a list of orders/plans to take advantage of your OCOKA analysis and to achieve your objectives given METT-TC (Mission, Enemy, Terrain and Weather, Troops and Support Available, Time Available, Civil Considerations) limitations
A lot of new players or even long time wargamers neglect the 1st step. On most CMBS/CMSF missions you should spend at least 15-20 minutes flying around the map analyizing the terrain vs most probable course of enemy action. And how you will counter those actions, paralyze the enemy and destroy him. My first video in my new Combat Mission Black Sea series has an OCOKA performed on video and my stream of consciousness as I do it.
In addition to this there's particular tactical considerations for victory. Rifle Platoon and Squad is the essential guide:
http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/DR_pubs/dr_a/pdf/fm3_21x8.pdf
-
One thing I found in the new black sea is that the US army troops in particular seem to be extremely prone to being pinned and cowering. One or two shots from an AK will send an entire rifle squad into laying down and being shot one by one, even when surrounded by AFVs and having good command lines etc.
It's extremely unrealistic. US soldiers and marines would only devolve to such behavior under the most extreme conditions (continuous artillery suppression or continuous supression by a MG etc). It seems like the us army guys are pajamas to the worst extent in black sea.
From a game design perspective:
1. Group suppression needs to be replaced with individual suppression. This is made obvious when in "assault" during bounding overwatch. If the manuever elements gets suppressed the base of fire ellement will immediately start cowering. The whole job of the base of fire is to protect the manuever element and NOT lay down and give up. The guys manuevering are relying on the base.
2. Combat spacing should be maintained.
3. Reaction to contact drills would be nice. Taking fire from the front? Get out of your stupid file and get ON LINE and return FIRE
-
As the designer (in conjunction w/ Chris and several multi-run playtesters) I am looking forward to your video on mission 2. It served as a bit of a test to see how close to 'right' CMBS gets US Joint fires capability. Very curious what you and the rest of the community think of it.
I got to this scenario tonight after finishing mission 2. So excited to play it - it's my style of mission!
HI tryspawn, I'm a newbie at these games. I've been messing around with them since cmx1, im not very good. I really enjoyed your thoughts on how to approach the battle in video #1. I have no idea really how to approach a battle, since I have no military background; however I found your introduction on terrain and the scope of battle great. I will watch it again and again. I also found your videos on cmsf , this is what I need to become much better at these games, I really thankyou for making them, the manual doesn't do this part.
Al
glad to be of help! Let me know if I can help in any other way.
Posted "outskirts" mission 2 today. It's a part 2 video. Part 1 has been uploaded, part 2 will be uploaded tommorow:
-
I applaud what you are doing and I am a big fan of your videos.
But SLOW DOWN! You are playing WEGO as if it is RT. Take your time plotting those waypoints. Watch your replays for valuable info.
Good luck!
Yeah I appreciate it. I'm new to WEGO
Thanks for the feedback im trying to constantly improve.
I'll be recording mission 2 tommorow night probably. It may end up being a two part video.. seems like it will be a very long.. terrible and high casualty battle.
-
As the designer (in conjunction w/ Chris and several multi-run playtesters) I am looking forward to your video on mission 2. It served as a bit of a test to see how close to 'right' CMBS gets US Joint fires capability. Very curious what you and the rest of the community think of it.
Will get to that one early next week.
I am honestly terrified about that mission. Should be fun.
-
Oakheart in my pinned topic asked for in game replays of my missions/videos - what is he talking about? Are there ingame replays/AARs in black sea? Am I blind?
-
Aim... raam???
<3 My reputation for excellent pronounciation of bad ass missile precedes me!
could you post the in-game replys aswell?
I hate to be "that guy" but care to elaborate?
The first mission has been posted:
-
Watched your CMSF videos back in a day. Rare stuff to find on youtube
Glad to see you taking on CMBS now. I'm sure many people will find your videos helpful.ps: Actually, going through your other videos, we could've met, back in day. 05/08/13, ARMA2 Ukrainian Tactical Gaming vs United Operations TvT. I was the organizer from the UTG side. Were you there?
I was on teamspeak at UO doing that event but did not participate. I remember it well though! Glad to hear you enjoyed your time at UO - I was an officer in the community during that time but haven't had much time to arma since getting a full time job in the military simulations industry.
Thanks everyone else for the comments, ill be recording the gameplay of this video tonight
-
I hope this is in the right place - I don't see an appropriate subforum
Hey folks, Chris "tyrspawn" Krause here! some of you might remember me from my walkthrough/let's play of the original CMSF, CMSF: Nato and my beta video AARs of Normandy:
Combat Mission Battle for Normandy Beta videos
I am now making a series of videos on Black Sea! My videos will focus on:
1. Discussion of doctrine, military tactics, systems and military history
2. Unedited gameplay footage in WEGO (turn based) - my other videos were real time, but I discovered how cool WEGO is during my Normandy AARs
3. An ongoing review and commentary on the game itself - i'm playing everything for the first time as you see me do it
4. Blackboard style discussions of what went wrong - essentially an after acton report
The new video series will be posted here:
The first video is a campaign introduction and tutorial on how to properly perform a terrain analysis and operations order (in brief) for the TASKFORCE 3-69 campaign:
You can look forward to the mission playthrough being posted within the next couple days
-
i dont have any saved, sorry. are you planning on posting anymore cm vids?
Possibly.
MANPADS in vehicles
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by tyrspawn
It's totally possible since all the MANPADS in black sea are cold launch (it doesn't light the main stage until its clear of the ground by 20-30 feet) - the backblast area is very small so firing from an acute angle does not pose a large risk to the shooter.