-
Content Count
93 -
Joined
-
Last visited
About astano
-
Rank
Member
Profile Information
-
Gender
Male
-
Location:
USA
Converted
-
Location
Ohio
Recent Profile Visitors
713 profile views
-
IMHO reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Wrong Turn at Albuquerque - New Scenario Available on the Repository
-
New Small SP Scenario - "Shadow and Flame"
astano replied to astano's topic in CM Black Sea Maps and Mods
Hi Gnarly, Glad you enjoyed it and I do really appreciate the feedback. I didn't notice until now that not only comments but also ratings on the Repository are gone, which is a shame as I had got some valuable feedback from those that I didn't record elsewhere. Regarding your thoughts: -It would be possible to create such a "surge" by triggering. Reinforcement spawns cannot be triggered (as I believe they can in ARMA) but you could add reinforcements and cause them to move with a trigger. When I initially made the scenario, I actually considered bringing in a Russian mech platoon or half-pl -
Fizou reacted to a post in a topic: Poll: Would you prefer the original 2008 Syrian setting or something up to date for CMSF II
-
Snipers . What difference does the gun type make?
astano replied to silent one's topic in Combat Mission Black Sea
Are you sure about that? The in-game models of the M110 and the M110 CSASS visually appear to be suppressed, although the squad panel icons for them don't show it. Admittedly, though, whether or not those or any other suppressors' effects are modeled I haven't done any testing to say. -
agusto reacted to a post in a topic: Snipers . What difference does the gun type make?
-
Snipers . What difference does the gun type make?
astano replied to silent one's topic in Combat Mission Black Sea
I believe the point of putting suppressors on sniper rifles isn't to make them quiet or stealthy close-in, but to make them more difficult to locate at longer ranges. Even the best suppressors won't make a rifle totally silent, and a high-power rifle round (like .300, .308, or .388 - even .223) will still make a "crack" as it passes, but they do reduce the muzzle report (as opposed to the sound of the bullet itself) and the muzzle flash. Suppressors on sniper rifles therefore aren't so you can kill sentries or something close-in, it's so the guy across the valley can't tell exactly where you -
astano reacted to a post in a topic: Inferior to CMBB
-
Can't really be done, at least not in the way that you can in CMBS. The new QB unit purchase feature started with CMBN. Best alternative I know of is to open up the Editor, pick a QB map, handpick the forces for it (make sure you at least place them in their on-map setup zones, if not in an ideal starting position), and save it as a new scenario. You can increase the fog of war by making several scenarios with the same Blue and different Red forces for each map you do this on, so that hopefully you don't remember exactly what you're facing when you load one of the scenarios.
-
Future modules ideas (unofficial topic)
astano replied to dams-fr's topic in Combat Mission Black Sea
Curious what you have in mind equipment-wise. The super-tacticool high-speed-low-drag rifles, optics, plate carriers, etc. would seem to me to be almost entirely cosmetic. Obviously if SOF make it into the game those should be modeled, but I'm wondering if there's something beyond essentially visual changes I'm not thinking of? I guess there's also suppressors (also already in-game on at least US marksman rifles) but I don't know how much difference that might make. I don't have enough of an idea to comment on any Ukrainian or Russian elements. I also wonder if anything beyond tha -
astano reacted to a post in a topic: Moscow Victory Day (70 Years) Parade
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Shadow of the Motherland Campaign
-
Thanks very much for the compliment, but I don't know how keen I am on doing a campaign. I barely have the attention span to play a campaign - I think the last one I actually finished was Kunst des Krieges in CMSF (on second thought, that might be the only campaign I've completed) and I haven't even started 2/3 of the CMBS ones - let alone make one. That's a huge amount of work and my hat is really off to anyone who can make one solo. At various points through conceptualizing and designing this scenario, I did consider adding elements of the TF reserve mentioned in the briefing as reinf
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: Troops Occupying Turrets Unrealistically Vulnerble To Small Arms
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Wrong Turn at Albuquerque - New Scenario Available on the Repository
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Wrong Turn at Albuquerque - New Scenario Available on the Repository
-
kendar reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Wrong Turn at Albuquerque - New Scenario Available on the Repository
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Wrong Turn at Albuquerque - New Scenario Available on the Repository
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: CMBS Wrong Turn at Albuquerque - New Scenario Available on the Repository
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: New Small SP Scenario - "Shadow and Flame"
-
astano reacted to a post in a topic: New Small SP Scenario - "Shadow and Flame"
-
My second scenario is now available on the Repository. You can download it here. The scenario features a US Scout Section finding itself in the path of a larger Russian mechanized force. I tried to do something a little more experimental with this scenario and give it a bit of a TDG or "in media res" feeling. Contact has already been made and now you, as the player, must develop the situation in accordance with your higher command's objectives and intent (or at least that's the idea). To that end, the briefing intentionally does not discuss the details of your objectives, any point val
-
New Small SP Scenario - "Shadow and Flame"
astano replied to astano's topic in CM Black Sea Maps and Mods
Glad you liked it. That's just about the difficulty I was shooting for - hard enough to make it interesting, but easy enough that most players should be able to win most of the time; the kind of scenario you can download and beat in an afternoon. Regarding your plan, The first draft of this scenario didn't include the Bradleys - actually, the biggest reason I added them was for the ammunition they carry. In pre-Bradley testing I found that the firepower from the dismounts + Javelins was pretty sufficient, but that they didn't have the ammo or the endurance to take both the hill -
If anyone's interested and hasn't seen it yet, my first scenario, referred to above, is now available on the Repository (link in sig / forum thread). I also have another scenario that is now ready for public testing. I currently have one tester lined up but I'm always looking for more feedback. The scenario revolves around a US Scout Section (+) making contact with Russian mechanized forces, and needing to act accordingly. There are four different Red AI plans. I've tried to give it a sort of Tactical Decision Game feeling, and dropped the player in the middle of the action with unclea
- 5 replies
-
- testers wanted
- scenario
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
New Small SP Scenario - "Shadow and Flame"
astano replied to astano's topic in CM Black Sea Maps and Mods
Hi Wolfseven, Really glad you enjoyed the scenario! However, I'm not sure I follow your last remark. If you're referring to the contact icons at the start of the battle, the spotted units are due to pre-battle intelligence preparation of the battlefield (in this scenario, the earlier UAV overflights), not enemy forces your troops presently have eyes on. As the icons fade and disappear during the mission, it's because your troops have never spotted them to begin with - the contacts are from before the battle and, just like contacts spotted during the game, will eventually fade as they ag -
My new (and first) scenario is now available from the Repository. You can get it here. The scenario is built on a new 800 x 800m map and features a US Bradley platoon (+) attempting to destroy a small Russian rearguard. From the briefing: I'd love to hear how anyone who gives it a try does, and any feedback would be appreciated.
-
Just submitted my first scenario to the Repository. Thanks again to all the testers who provided feedback. Not sure when it will actually be available, but since there are currently no automatic Repository notification threads I guess I'll be making my own when it posts. In the meantime, I plan to maintain this thread for all my WIP scenarios, of which I currently have three. One is reasonably far along in testing so if anyone is interested in having a look at it feel free to post or PM. The other two are still in map-making (they actually cover some of the same geographic area, so abo
- 5 replies
-
- testers wanted
- scenario
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
To clarify, what I would really like to see is the same asymmetric setting of CMSF with the updated TO&E and gear for NATO as CMBS. This is in no small part because I think it's easier to go backwards than forwards with the gear and have much greater scenario flexibility with the 2017 CMBS TO&E than with the 2008 CMSF TO&E - for example, in CMBS for US rifle squads you can get the XM25 (which has been in Afghanistan since 2010) and the M110 at squad level (which I believe has also been the case for some Afghanistan-deployed units for some time, but I'm not positive), with options
-
Update: I've received responses now from all four players that contacted me to test the scenario and got some pretty useful feedback. Remarks were generally positive, especially regarding the map, and pending a few changes I'm pretty happy with the scenario overall, so some comments I'll be incorporating now, and some I'll be keeping in mind for other things I'm working on. I plan to thank my testers by forum name in the release version briefing (unless requested otherwise by PM), but thanks again to all of you for taking the time to play through and get thoughts back to me.
- 5 replies
-
- testers wanted
- scenario
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with: