astano

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 values, reinforcement details, etc. - instead, there is a briefing within the briefing, from which the player is intended to determine what needs to be done.  Specific objective and reinforcement details are included in the Designer's Notes tab as a fail-safe.
 
The scenario is pretty small, with the US player eventually receiving the bulk of a mechanized Scout Platoon plus attachments, and plays out on a new 1200 x 800m map featuring four Red AI plans.  Although I would recommend real time play, both my testers got on pretty well doing WEGO.  It is playable as Blue only; there are no Blue AI plans and it is not balanced for H2H play.
 
Special thanks to knightsabret and bangalor44 who gave me great feedback during testing.
 
From the briefing:
 



 
At the risk of sounding like I'm blowing my own horn, I really enjoyed this scenario while I was testing it.  Even knowing the enemy's possible courses of action, it can turn into a real nail-biter.  As I said in my WIP thread, I've had results ranging from a cakewalk, to my CO and a couple Humvee drivers holed up in a church with only a few AT4s to hold off a platoon of Russian armor.  Depending on your decisions and the breaks it can be really tough, and Blue cannot afford to throw away a single asset if they want to win.  The Red AI plans and number of tactical options available to the player, combined with a relatively short timeframe, should give this scenario some significant replayability - if things don't go your way, another crack at it should be fruitful.  Comments from my testers seem to echo the intensity and replayability.
 
As always, any feedback whatsoever is highly appreciated whether by post here, PM, or email to astanocmscens @ gmail . com, and I'm always interested to hear how people do with the scenario.

Yep, this.  To me, the heart and soul of CMSF was the assymetric, often infantry-focused, frequently COIN-style fights.  If CMSF2 is going to happen, it's much more important to me that it keep that flavor than that it include the most modern NATO forces (and by correlation, the updates I most want to see for NATO are to infantry, not to the M1A2 SEPUBER et al., though it makes no sense to do one without the other).
 
To paraphrase a poster above, if you want a peer-to-peer slugfest, just go buy CMBS.

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 are by light and sound.
 
FWIW, my experience with sniper teams in-game is that the Tac AI has got pretty good about having the third man (in the US teams generally armed with an M4 ACOG) only open fire when enemies are close enough that I would want the whole team shooting anyways, or sometimes when given a direct target order.  Since the snipers' rifles aren't truly "silent" in the first place, this behavior makes perfect sense to me: everyone fires at targets closer in (where the enemy would likely detect the silenced rifle anyways) than further out (where the guy with the M4 doesn't have the accuracy to make any hits).  I find that it's still the case that snipers are most effective when left to their own devices, with at most a cover arc.

I always wanted to play this game in first person commander mode (anyone play Scourge of War Gettysburg using Headquarters in the Saddle mode?). The game could make a great Company commander simulator. Of course the single greatest thing you could do for multiplayer realism is make the game coop (Like SOW does) and then play it in realtime, so you have say a  two or three guys each running a platoon or what not in realtime, locked to their player character. Not everyone's cup of tea, but if CM did this I'd marry it!
 
Los

Dunno.  Would we have batted an eye at killing some of the various Allied nationals that did work on behalf of the Axis?  There's plenty of German-American or Japanese-American folks who either found themselves stuck, or willingly answered the motherland's call, and were cut down without significant hesitation.  Where it gets fuzzy is the question of how legitimate some of these targets are at all in the  modern spectrum of non-conventional warfare.  Most of the very dead American targets unambiguous aided and abetted, or were in the active employ of organizations engaged in military conflict with the US government.  It's a far cry from making craters out of folks who simply disagree with US policy in the abstract.
 
The real debate should be a matter of targeting in terms of collateral damage (value of target vs damage inflicted to the populace) or national sovereignty in the cases of nations that at least above table, give no special permission for drones to operate in their air space (of course, finding a government in some of these places would be difficult).
 
But in terms of the intended targets?  They're folks who'd declared an intent to kill Americans wherever and whenever they can with fairly little discrimination.  That's pretty much hostile intent enough for me to sleep easily when that individual is made into meatpaste (but have some moral reservations when he's meatpasted with the family next door, if the intended target is just some low level dude).
 
 
The western system works for the west because it evolved and grew as western ideals and the like evolved.  It's a system designed for our way of thinking and our way of life.  Thusly it's good for Yankee imperialists, sneering British colonialists, and the French (no prefix required, name is sufficient to imply what I was getting at), but a poor fit for sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and somesuch.  They need a culturally well adapted system of government, and through colonialism, they lost some of that growth, and our continued attempts to make them more like us, we're doing them a disservice.  
 
In terms of the chaos of Iraq, I've said it before but it was coming regardless of who started it.  Centuries of Sunni-Shia conflict, and decades of Sunni minority rule were going to boil over someday (see Syria for a reversal of roles in terms of Shia minority rule over a Sunni majority, with a very similar history of oppression and mass killings).  If it was not the US invasion, it'd have been the fighting between Saddam's sons in 2024 after the old man kicked the bucket, the Arab Spring, or any number of crises.  It's arrogance to assume that the west is powerful enough to change the 3rd World for the good because it's the west, just as much as it is to assign blame for all the problems of the present to western whatever.  
 
I simply advocate we keep our meddling limited to our own interests in a low threat sense (if we do not like your way of doing things, we do not have to do business, vs invasions), the military involvement to breaches of the peace/international law (invading neighbors, or for reals actual genocide sort of beaches of the peace)  and a broad support of human rights (we don't care HOW you rule, just as long as you don't fill your jails or ditches with your opponents).
 
 
I'm there too.  It just happens the russian government is well supported on the internet/military forums which tends to cast me in a more hostile light.  I wouldn't care what it did though so long as it did it within its own borders, and laid off on the nuclear bullying of poor Denmark though.  That doesn't mean I wouldn't make fun of Putin on ponies, just I'd recognize it's someone else's country, and if they dig that well, then it's sort of hilarious but whatever man.  

The Shadow of the Motherland campaign is released. After making adjustments and recomendations from play testers and refining and detailing the maps and narrative I am releasing the campaign to the public.
 
This campaign is a narrative driven campaign similar to my CMRT The Cross of Iron and CMBN In the Fields Where the Poppies Grow. It follows a young Ukrainian Captain, Demitry Koval, of the 79th Airmobile Brigade as he leads his men through a series of missions during the Ukrainian Civil War against Pro-Russian separatists. It is a story of modern war and the tough personal trials that soldiers face while underfire.
 
It is very important that you read all of the Designer Notes  well as the Mission Briefings as these drive the storyline. It is imperative that Captain Koval be kept alive or the campaign will end.
 
Simply download from the link below and place the .cam file in the BS campaign directory and place the mod folder in your data/z directory.
 
Many thanks for those who tested the campaign for me and I hope that this version is relatively issue free. Let me know through this thread of any further issues or suggestions and I will revise.
 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5kv03skb2c180a4/Shadow%20of%20the%20Motherland.zip?dl=0
Here is the dropbox link

No one has yet produced any objective and reproduceable statistical evidence. If you say "Because I can promise you, your statement does not reflect what the game is actually doing.  Not on the average anyway.", that is as worthless as what Codename Duchess said. It is a gut feeling, nothing more.

I just finished the scenario, rushed here to read theforger's AAR, and I can't emphasise enough just how angry I am feeling at myself right now. I destroyed 3 enemy tanks, at least a dozen enemy AFV's and every enemy troop that approached my positions, losing 2 Bradley's and a small handful of my own men. I got overconfident thinking I had killed all the enemy armour so I moved my remaining Bradley forward into the open fields in search of any enemy troops that had retreated, my Helo's hadn't spotted any survivors so surely it was just a case of mopping up, but to my complete horror I spotted 3 T90's moving in column formation straight past my Bradleys exposed flank. Kaboooom, the lead T90 obliterated my Bradley, I turned the game off, my men were all out of AT weapons...
BTW great scenario and map, I will definitely play it again soon.

Hi Astano
appreciate your efforts in putting this together.
 
It would make a great start to the opening moves of a campaign.

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 values, reinforcement details, etc. - instead, there is a briefing within the briefing, from which the player is intended to determine what needs to be done.  Specific objective and reinforcement details are included in the Designer's Notes tab as a fail-safe.
 
The scenario is pretty small, with the US player eventually receiving the bulk of a mechanized Scout Platoon plus attachments, and plays out on a new 1200 x 800m map featuring four Red AI plans.  Although I would recommend real time play, both my testers got on pretty well doing WEGO.  It is playable as Blue only; there are no Blue AI plans and it is not balanced for H2H play.
 
Special thanks to knightsabret and bangalor44 who gave me great feedback during testing.
 
From the briefing:
 



 
At the risk of sounding like I'm blowing my own horn, I really enjoyed this scenario while I was testing it.  Even knowing the enemy's possible courses of action, it can turn into a real nail-biter.  As I said in my WIP thread, I've had results ranging from a cakewalk, to my CO and a couple Humvee drivers holed up in a church with only a few AT4s to hold off a platoon of Russian armor.  Depending on your decisions and the breaks it can be really tough, and Blue cannot afford to throw away a single asset if they want to win.  The Red AI plans and number of tactical options available to the player, combined with a relatively short timeframe, should give this scenario some significant replayability - if things don't go your way, another crack at it should be fruitful.  Comments from my testers seem to echo the intensity and replayability.
 
As always, any feedback whatsoever is highly appreciated whether by post here, PM, or email to astanocmscens @ gmail . com, and I'm always interested to hear how people do with the scenario.

Sounds like this is going to be a great scenario, thanks for sharing mate, I'll let you know how I go when I finish playing.

AAR ********SPOLIERS************
 
 
 
 
Wrong Turn
 
 
Played IRON
 
Really enjoyable, 5* from me
 
Achieved a Major US victory
 
US
11 casualties, 3 AFVs.
 
Russians
76 casualties, 12 AFVs, 4 tanks
 
 
Contact Front!
 
As smoke rose from the destroyed BMP 500m distant, Sergeant Mayes new he had to act fast.
 
He ordered his Javelin section under Specialist Elkins back 500m to the copse to provide cover if they had to bug out in case the Russians were moving in strength.
 
And he ordered his driver, Sergeant Powers to back up the CFV to the church to setup his CP, with Kovacs sniper section.
 
The rest of his small outfit, Crafts Engineers and Askew’s sniper section, were ordered to take up ambush positions in the outskirts of Albuquerque.
 
Sergeant Craft’s team grabbed the 4 AT’s out of the Bradley and dispersed.
 
Within 4 minutes the teams were in position scanning the eastern horizon, with the Raven being prepped to provide some eyes in the sky.
 
All that could be seen or heard was the thick pall of smoke from the wrecked BMP.
 
Mayes thought, “had he gone defensive to quickly?” He knew he was in trouble for getting his team in the wrong position, now would that be compounded by being overly cautious? He would know soon enough.
 
Kovacs shouted down the church stair well “get that Javelin up here, we’ve got 3 BMP's 800m moving fast”
 
The deadly missile was away and in seconds found its mark.
 
Kovac’s sniper team started to pick off the dazed survivors.
 
Two more Jav’s lit up defenceless BMP’s but now Mayes was out of missiles and had to wait for the Russians to get into a close quarter fight, if they still had the stomach for it.
 
08:28 Crafts Engineers cut down Russian Infantry exiting the woods on the outskirts of Albuquerque. Russian tank movement reported.
 
With tanks on the prowl Mayes moved his team to the edge of the town to try and bring his AT4’s into play.
 
From its ambush position Sergeant Daily’s Bradley took out another BMP as it advanced down the side road to Albuquerque.
 
Mayes was buoyant with how his team had handled the infantry and BMP’s. His main concern was the platoon of tanks, which although had much depleted support, could still force him to displace.
 
A Russian T90 brushed past Craft’s Engineers, Daily’s Bradley popped smoke and fired off a wildly inaccurate TOW.
 
The T90 traversed its turret.
 
Daily thought it was all over.
 
Unexpectedly the T90 exploded in a huge ball of flame. Elkins with his Javelin in the copse had come to the rescue.
 
Daily crossed himself. Recovered and pushed his Bradley forward behind a house to get a better position against any other armour pushing down the side road.
 
A 2nd T90 came to grief, this time to a TOW from Sergeant Powers well placed CFV by the Church.
 
Daily’s positive move proved its worth as another tank moved across his front. The tank didn’t stand a chance and was destroyed at point blank range.
 
A BMP closely following the tank, took evasive action to avoid an AT from the Engineers, only to find itself in Daily’s deadly cross hairs.
 
08:35 Sergeant Pak’s Scout section arrived and was ordered to mop up the beaten Russians along the side road.
 
Daily hadn’t finished yet as yet another BMP succumbed to his cannon.
 
Still the Russians kept probing, 2 more BMP’s were taken out, one for Daily and another to Mayes AT team.
 
Pak’s Humvee’s and Bradley swept north to the settlement 800m from Albuquerque.
 
With the immediate threat diminished Sergeant Power’s CFV scouted along Route Dagger, only to be immediately lased. Power’s popped smoke and backed up.
 
Mayes ordered Elkins with his Javelin to the Church and the Raven to start observing along Route Dagger.
 
Pak’s team were the first US casualties of the morning as they cleared the buildings north of Albuquerque.
 
Elkins Humvee was caught in the open as it raced towards the Church by another Russian tank and BMP push from Route Dagger.
 
Daily added two more BMPs to his kill list. A third backed up and unleashed its cannon on the US troops in the Church tower. Kovac and his team were badly cut up.
 
Pak having secured the northern settlement order his Bradley to loop behind the Russian column swinging off Route Dagger to hit them in the rear.
 
Elkins fired off his last remaining Javelin from the copse at the lead Russian tank on Route Dagger. It stopped but didn’t brew up.
 
Power’s CFV took out the BMP that had strafed the Church tower.
 
Mayes ordered in the Helo’s for support. Unfortunately their ETA was 9 minutes. Could they survive this 2nd thrust?
 
Pak’s Bradley spotted the immobilized lead Russian tank and finished it off.
 
Pak and Daily’s Bradleys both got destroyed by the two remaining Russian T90’s. Daily was a huge loss, his well positioned vehicle had destroyed 1 x T90 and 6 x BMP’s.
 
The Helo’s couldn’t arrive soon enough.
 
The T90’s unsupported moved into Albuquerque and destroyed the last remaining US armour.
 
Eventually the Helo’s arrived and took out a couple more BMP’s on Route Dagger but couldn’t get an angle on the 2 x T90’s stranded in the town.
 
It would now be a race to see which side could support their forces fragile foothold in Albuquerque.

Thanks! Will try and report later.

I'll try it out tonight, thanks for sharing.

Just finished my second play-through. The first time I played I took too many casualties, the Russian snipers are brutal.  
 
The map was very well done, lots of flavor objects and good use of terrain, and I liked your use of triggers.
 
 
********SPOILER*****************
 
 
 
My only suggestion would be to either use different light vehicles or keep the TIGR's further back. When they rushed the left flank their gunner was dispatched very quickly.
 
 
 
Overall I really enjoyed the scenario, you have a knack for map design and force balance. If you ever need another tester let me know, I'd be more than happy to help!

Good scenario, there is definitely room for tactical decision-making, management of scarce resources (viable lines-of-sight, mortar rounds initially, Javelins initially) and an element of luck to the whole thing, which makes it a pretty good scenario in my book.
 

Fun mission. I played the US, turn-based, veteran. I was able to keep a steady, cautious pace and get a good result with only scattered casualties. As a measure of comparison, I found the scenario similar in difficulty to the scenarios in CMSF base game, and a bit easier than the CMSF modules.
 

Excellent. Thoroughly enjoyed playing this one. 

very good mission... loved it, but why after I have seen a unit they disappear again when they are known..

The reason for this thread is that John's good intentions, prolific reading and general enthusiasm for BFC games has drawn criticism from other forum members who don't share John's degree of wonderment with the world at large.
 
My opinion is that John should just say something like "Suck it up, princess" in response to the other posters' criticisms, but the apparent level of catharsis it brings him from 'brain dumping' in this forum keeps him wary of being banned or something, and thus on his back foot, and leads him to put too great of a weighting to others' negative opinions.
 
In summary, keep posting, John! Either in this thread or in the forum at large. Whatever works.

Everyone,
 
The purpose of this thread is to provide a central location into which I can put information and the like which I deem significant and worth knowing about, as well as my own observations and opinions, subject to the usual BFC rules, as well as certain request and strictures coming from BFC. In this way, there should be no further thread proliferation and "real post" ranking issues. Other members are, of course, welcome to participate in what I post, but I ask that you be respectful. Argue against the ideas I present; don't attack me. As some may have noted, I have formal requests in to the Mods to kill two separate threads. If they choose to do so, that should further alleviate matters on the CMBS Forum as a whole.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler
 
 

Michael you have no idea what a sacred place this forum is in this regard. On some other forums the average poster is angry, tired and drunk!
 
EDIT:
 
LukeFF upvoting your own posts in response to someone downvoting them is lame. Also i agree with Desertor. Just dont read Johns posts if you are not interested. I dont read 90% of them either.

Yep, this.  To me, the heart and soul of CMSF was the assymetric, often infantry-focused, frequently COIN-style fights.  If CMSF2 is going to happen, it's much more important to me that it keep that flavor than that it include the most modern NATO forces (and by correlation, the updates I most want to see for NATO are to infantry, not to the M1A2 SEPUBER et al., though it makes no sense to do one without the other).
 
To paraphrase a poster above, if you want a peer-to-peer slugfest, just go buy CMBS.

Cpl S - you are already trying to over think things.

Just come up with an idea, and build a scenario around it and then fit it into the backstory if you feel the need. August Morning, which by the way has a very simple map, was based on the first 5 minutes or so of a training film I remembered watching as a recruit many years ago.




The scenario has no real link to the backstory, other than two forces come into contact with each other, at an entirely fictitious location. It can really be that simple

P

I've made two scenarios for CM:RT so i'll throw in my two cents.
 
Making the briefing and the maps used during the briefing (especially the bloody maps) is annoying, difficult, and absolutely no fun. Both of my scenarios are at the "add in tactical/strategic maps stage, and maybe one day they will get past that and I'll release. However, when it comes down to it I have limited free time and I can either play some Dota2 or spend time in photoshop.
 
I general choose Dota 2.
 
And on top of that I generally make scenarios for my personal enjoyment. During the design and testing phase I get my enjoyment out of it.So do I want to put in that extra effort for a dubious reply from the forums?