LUCASWILLEN05
-
Posts
1,591 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by LUCASWILLEN05
-
-
You could limit US/NATO by requiring them to follow strict ROE (eg require protection of BUA. particularly buildings such as schools and mosques. You might extend the area to be protected for several hundred meters around such an area. Victory Point penalties applyfor breaking ROE depending on damage done.
Syrians could be tasked to kill specific units that they can kill with what they have available with more points for success.
You can also load the scenario in favour of the Syrians by placcing them in defence of the BUA NATO needs to take with the above limitations in place
You can always give the Syrians a points bonus on top of everything else.
In regard to training and motivation I think both are important as of course is leadership. I would suggest the combination of these factors would affect the overall quality of the unit. A Syrian Republican Gaurd unit might be well motivated with average leaders and be considered as Experrience. A smattering of individual units, some better, some worse around this base line is probably a good idea. Your typical US/Nato unit would be at least as good, probably better
-
It seems to me that even if Syrian troops are set to veteran. They are never as good as NATO troops on veteran. That is they flee when they take or veteran IFVs will pop smoke and retreat when they see a bradley. Even if they are in a BMP3 which can perfectly take on a Bradley. I was just wondering if they were coded into the game to be more "rubbish".
Some Syrian units might be over ratedbut that is a scenario design question. But their Russian designed vehicles are not as good as typical NA\tO equipment so perhaps what you see is crews doing the sensible thing.
-
Most Syrian tanks are also outclassed by the M1A2 or Challenger II tanks which is as it should be given the evidence of the two Gulf Wars. Some T-72s have Thermal Imaging as does the T90 which brings them almost to parity. A well motivated and well equipped army or Republican Gaurd unit can and wil put up a good fight against een the best NATO units. You may well still win but you could take heavy losses if you expose your weker IFVs or close the range to soon with your MBTs. Best tactic for the Syrians is to go after vehicles they can kill like Bradleys or Strykers. You can kill part or all of an infantry squad if you destroy the vehicle. The Syrians also have some excellent ATGMs which could kill an M1A2 so their caabilities here are better than those of the Iraqis in 1991 and 2003. Games can also be balanced by the use of ROE )penalties for damaging mosques etc) Attacking built up areas reduces or eliminates US range and gunnery advantages if the Syrian defence is well thought through. As the Syrians you should make up your mind to go for a points win from the start, aiming to channel NATO forces into killing zones and going after achievable kills by taking close range flank shots at tanks where you can and taking out as many IFVs as possible. If you can force NATO into violaing scenario ROE and destroying protected buildings like schools or mosques (scenario specific) you can accrue more points.
In terms of troop ratings the"Elite" Republican Gaurd are probably only as good as the old Iraqi Republican Gaurd. Elite by regional standards but in reality perhaps only Experienced. Probably they should be well motivated. But not Elite in game terms with indivuidual squads or crews rarely, if ever elite. Elite should be rare on the NATO side. The best US Marine units, Paratroopers, and Special Forces (if you use the latter on the tactical battlefield. Most NATO units should be Veteran
-
Been awhile since I have posted out here but this thread is a nice example of things going right and a positive dicsussion as a result.
CMBN should come with a warning label in my opinion. It is a hard game, a very hard game sometimes. I think the look of 3D graphics throws some people off as 3D and hard often do not roll well together. A lot of modern games play out like puzzles and have scripted outcomes. CMBN simply provides a realistic environment and then releases the hounds at you.
Arty, is damned realistic. Maybe a little tight in the CEPs, it has been brought up and will probably be tweaked some but for the most part mortars are spot on. I have run test and shown that the lethal and danger radii are accurate for frag. The ROFs are accurate, keep in mind these guys are not firing on a range but in cbt where speed will save your life. If you let them fire quick they will. Stand still too long and you will die.
You need to employ some pretty solid tactics in this game. Dedicate a lot of your force to recon and for gawds sake...keep moving!!
Some may simply drop away, not their cup of tea but if you stick with it, the game can provide some simply outstanding gameplay.
Also you need to use fire and manouvre tactics to pin down enemy units and suppress their firepower. You need to figure out how to use combined arms ttactics using the capabilities availablee to you in the scenario and in the army of which you are a part.
-
Regarding anti tank guns the Germans and everyone else in the European War found the AT guns were a serious problem by 1943 or even earlier for the very reasons mentioned earlier (lethality to tanks and difficulty of spotting) Tactics were developed to deal with these problems sucgh as sending the infantry in first and keeping the tanks on overwatch, using smoke on likely AT poitions and calling in artillery. In short you needed a combined arms approach to the problem in order to even survive, let alone to win on the late WW2 battlefield.
-
I would love to see a tutorial on how to set up and conduct a rolling barrage, lifting barrage etc in Combat Mission. However, having too much artillery could, as others have mentioned spoil the game. But this does not mean that it should not be available in larger scenarios.
-
A scenario on Juno Beach would be graet when the Commenwealth module is published. A couple of sources I could suggest is the Battleground Europe series Junmo Beach and Fields of Fire: The Canadians in Normandy by Terence Copp. Johm Englih's The Canadian Army in Europe was, I believe, recently republihed by Stackpole HBooks.
-
Hi, just discovered this thread.
The issue with invading from Iraq is the Zagros mountains will be near impossible to cross on the way to Tehran. This effectively prevented Saddam Hussein from advancing any further than he did back in 1980. The direct route from Afghanistan to Tehran would cross the Dasht-e Kavir which would not be practical. Looking at the map it would seem an amphibious invasion from the Gulf of Oman and then heading east of the Dasht-e Lut and south of the Dasht-e Kavir is about the only route to Tehran without crossing deserts or mountains. An invasion from Iraq I think would be most effective as a Blitzkrieg operation to secure the oil fields of Khuzestan although you could maybe push south to secure a port which would make landing in the Gulf of Oman easier ahead of the main offensive towards Tehran.
This is very similar to my thoughts. The only way to tackle the Zagros and Dasht-e-Lut would be to use vertical envelopment by helicopter. The trouble with Iraq is that, to use this nation as a base you need agreement fro the Iraqi Government and either Turkey or Saudi Arabia to give you the required land supply lines. If this is not forthoming then the main invasion would have to be via the Gulf of Oman. Sea supply routes would not be a big problem for the use of a sea supply route as no likely combatant in this war could contest US naval dominence. Thre most Iran could do is contest the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.
-
http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/Siegfried/Siegfried%20Line/siegfried-fm.htm
And a nice link to an official history
-
HUm I would dissagrea, there is not only hurgten forest, but also Rhineland battle, wich is to me quite more important than Hurgten
Wich have similar kind of terrain. But also the breack through the last remant of the siegried line,towns and open terrain. There is even later on some airborne operation to cross the rhine. there is also german armored div. fighting aka 116th panzer div. fallishmjagers, wermatch, cdn, brits and americans. What do you want more? I think it's an awsome end of war teather for the west front! The real german last stand on the west.
P.S. Siegfried line did exist in early 1940s no?
They almost dismentle it later to build the atlantikwall, but in 1945, they used the remenant of it, to try to build the last defensive line before the allied breakthrough in the heart of germany. Atleast that's what I've understand so far
P.S. I'm stoke for the commonwealth breaking through the pak defesive line will be a tought nut!
Well I think the US troops who had to fight through it probably regarde the Hurtgen as being quite important. And certain commanders thought so too since it gave access to the Roer Dams
-
awesome news
but i never saw an insane scottsman charging the beaches with a claymore and bagpipesIs that like the Insane Welshman Quiz
-
Yeah, there is a bit of tricky overlap, as the Market-Garden date brings you into the initial battles all along the West Wall, but the terrain and art needed for those overlaps more with the Battle for the Bulge. I kinda suspect we will see a lot of West Wall content (Ardenne/Hurtgen forests, more fortifications, German towns, industrial buildings etc., fall/winter textures) held for the Bulge, but that both titles will have some date overlap.
iUt may be that Market Garden is actually a misleading title. To most of us, and probably most Brits Market Garden is a specifc operation - the Battle for Arnem, the US Airborne drops and XXX Corp's push up the Airborne Corridor. This is what I mean by too limited.
If, in fact the intent is to cover the earlier West \Wall Battles and do the Bulge as a seperate game (maybe to thwe end of the war) then perhaps Siegfried Line would be a better title and the game should cover September, October and November 1944. Maybe the first fortnight of December finishing just before the Bulge. If there were options for specific German buildings included, grat. If not I can live with the French buildings, As for weather I think rain and mud was more of a feature of the Siegfried Line battles with snow really coming in towards the end of November. If a snow option is included then, again great, but I could live without it/
-
My concern with a new game series covering the rest of the NW European campaign after summer 1944, say Septmber 1944 to May 1945 is essentiallly reinventing the wheel since most of what you woould want would already be available in Normandy and Commonwealth. On this route you would need to add some late campaign orbats, winter weather, Dutch and German buildings and vehicles thjat only saw service late on such as the Pershing.
I would certainly buy an add on moduke covering the later campaign as a whole but less likel to go for something that does something as shrt as Market Garden or the Bukge.
As far as new series of CM games are concerned I would definately be interested in a Med series split into Western Desert and Italy. Or a Russian Front series. Perhaps an Early Blitzkrieg game allowing Polish, Norwegian, French and Balkans campaign. The Pacific might be nice but not enough tank combat.
-
Yes. But what a nine days they were!
Markt Garden does allow for lots of intensive scenarios but by limitindg the game to just one battle we are passing up on an opportunity to do a lot more in the same package like the gaming the entire Siegfried Line campaign which includes Market Garden. Wven if you covered the campaign. If yon untl early 1845 you have 5 months worth of fighting using a range of different terrain and weather conditions If your module extends to the end of the war you can also include the Pershing and Volksturm, Much more worthy of $35 - 40 than an expansion limited to Market Garden considering much of what you want is already there in CMBN and Ciommenwealth.
-
My concern with limiting a release to, let's say Market Garden or the Battle of the Bulge is that these cover a subject that is far too short (9 days and about a month respectively) The addition of new unit will be quite limited. The only major new unit you will get will be the Volksgrenadiers with some minor Allied changes. If most major units have already been introduced by the time Commonwealth has been produced then what do I gain from a module covering such a short period?
On the other hand if you did a Siegfried Line module then it would be possible to cover the period September 1944 to January 1945 (end of the Allied counter attacks to eliminate the Bulge. Now we can do Market Garden, Aachen, Hurtgen Forest, Vosges Mountains, Ardennes scenarios in the same module. Plus of course potential for alternate histories, And you could just extend the module to the end of the war which is only another 4 months.
-
Just finished playing this as the US.. I think they could use another infantry company, some anti tank guns/taank destroyers and an additional tank company coming in around 30 - 40 minutes before the end of the current scenario to face the German counter attack.
Air support would be good!
-
I quite enjoy the US sector Bocage battles but am much more interested in the British sector.
However, after Commenwealth I would really like a Siegfried Line Expandsion game dealing with the rest of the war or at least to the end of the Battle of the Bulge. A final game might cover the final invasion of Germany.
Once that is done perhaps off to the Russian Front but this time could you please release a game covering a longer time span i.e Russian Front June 1941 to December 1942 and January 1942 to May 1945 to maximise potential scenarios.
-
I just happen to like a big tank battle using a 4000 x 4000m map and was thinking a couple of those would be a great way to end your campaign, No problem with static defences but maybe you could do some smaller scale Iranian armoured counter attacks earlier in the campaign so the tankies have someting to do :-) During the final battles of course you get to face the best Iranian armour defending the approaches to Tehran even if you don't want to do a big city fight fot Tehran. But a southern campaign in the future would be great as would a campaign dealing with the thrust out of Afghanistan.
-
Fair enough. Without the ability to base in Iraq an invasion attempt would be much more difficult as previously discussed although we still have to assume supply lines through Trkey or Saudi Arabi. We can still have an amphibiousinvasion by the Marines followed up by some army mechanized divisions to link up with the Afghan thrust, outflank the Zagros range and divert Iranian forces.
As for tank battles these are more likely in the Marine sector as they face counter attacks early in the campaign, Also as NATO forces get closer to Tehran that is the probable point where the major tank battles could be expected. If your campaign extends that far you can still do a big tank battle or two to finish off your campaign maybe including Marine and/or European elents linking up with your units. I think magor tnk battles should use the largest possible maps. After the tank battles the final attack on Tehran would be a good way to end if you don't want to end with the tank battles
Nice looking maps by the way
-
Or, to misqoute a certain film "I'm Peng" :-)
Or is Peng perhaps a renegadwe North Korean General :-)
Or perhaps the Scarlet Peng. They seek him here, they seek him there. That D****d elusive Peng :-)
-
In general bogging and immobilizing if fair enough. Annoying to be sure. The tank might have thrown a track (immobilized), just breaks down (also immobilized) or gets stuck, If ground conditions are bad due to mud then this s whatr happens. Just because the weather is light rain now does not mean it is not very muddy due to earlier heavy rain.
And in rocky ground perhaps you are more likely to throw a track.
-
I like large maps and 2 - 4 hour length games for armoured battles. For a relief scenario something similar might be best depending on what the Iranians are doing at this oint in the campaign.
They could attempt a large armoured counter attack against the Marines. This gives us a magor tank battle or two. Possibly the Iranians get some of their own air/helicopter gunship support at this point. Less likely later in the campaign except the occasional small scale attempt if you are feeling genrous enough. We will still have to consider the effects of US air superiority at this stage nd it will fast become air supremacy.
Later I see the Iranians making a fighting withdrawl towards the north. A bit like Iraqi Freedom except the regular amy puts up more of a fight. The Basij militia meanwhile stay behind to launch insurgency style attacks on US/NATO convoys. US and NATO forces must detatch troops from the spearhead or reinforcements to protect the convoys required to supply the armoured push. Operations are also undertaken to hunt down the Basij, some of whom might establish bases in the Zagros Mountains and in the cities. Plenty of scenarios there for the insurgent types.
We can also have Basij Militia fighting alongside the regular army, particularlly near towns and cities. One interestin possibility would be to base a scenario something on the An Nasiryah bridge but with more effective army nits fighting with the insurgents. There are, I am sure, suitable river crossings for such a scenario in Iran along our selected route of advance. A "Bridge too far" style battle could be a possibility wiith a US/Airmobile unit inserted ahead of the main armoured advance being cut off and hasving to face Iranian armour and militiaon their own,
-
Buy lots of AT guns and minefields. Deploy them on the axis of attack or to channel him into an AT kill zone where you can set up an L or U shaped AT ambush. Whatever way he turns you get flank shots with a better chance of ?Tiger killing particularly at close range.
-
Ach so. Zey sink zey are ze II SS Panzer Korps Summer 1943 :-)
Maybe Hitler Jugund late in the campaign. Maybe not entirely unrealistic. However they will be expensive in points. You could buy lots of ground units and/or air support which could knock out his Tiger. Not a gamey situation at all since that was the kind of thing that actualy happened. Consider for example the variety of claims for who killed Wittmann. If you can immobilize the Tiger it becomes more vulnerable. It will take a lot for the crew to abandon it but, if it is immobilized it is a bit easier tro hit it effectively from the air. You could even buy naval gunfire support. Really heavy naval guns would not do a Tiger much good and kills Panzer Grenadiers as well.
Your opponent might not like you for it of course! But then he started it!
but i never saw an insane scottsman charging the beaches with a claymore and bagpipes
New file at the Repository: Backbreaker (2012-02-07)
in CMSF Scenario and Mod Design Forum
Posted
I played this scenario last night, not realizing until afterwards the lack of AI plans. It has potential. particularly when AI plans have been developed, perhaps initially for Red. What I might suggest is that Blue gets some armoured reinforcements later in the game, perhaps 40 or 50 minutes into the game.Red might also be given a force, perhaps from reservist infantry units to hold the bridge, farm and riverline. Later on some additional armoured forces might arrive to assist these forces. SAince this is a full scale Syrian civil war both sides could be given some air support.
I note there is a NATO scenariobut it does not have a NATO force. The Blue Force could be replaced with Germans, Dutch or Canadians with some air support. Comments for Red as above.