Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

G. Smiley

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    138

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by G. Smiley

    A few basic Q's about Air Support

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    28 minutes ago, domfluff said:

    Yes.

    Actual time varies, but generally within a minute or two. It's enough time to fast move into the treeline, or disembark AA assets.

    You really have two options - get into cover, or to leave the area as fast as possible (air missions, like artillery, will be called in on a limited area of the field. Which is better will depend on a number of things, including the air assets that are attacking you (e.g., air assets with thermals won't be as degraded by trees as one relying on visual cues only).

    This will vary. The game does simulate air assets as being in a specific location, relative to the map, which means that they need LOS to that attack run - putting AA assets in a position where they can have an unobstructed view of the sky will maximise those chances.

    How close they need to be depends entirely on the asset, but the general rule is that you want to keep them close to what you want to protect. Clearly anti-air missiles are going to have a longer effective range than the cheap Syrian option, of sticking machine guns on the back of pickup trucks.

    Anti-air assets can't be relied on to actually shoot down aircraft, with the possible exception of the Tunguska in CMBS (more on this point later). This means that they're really there to give you enough time to get under cover, or the hell away from that area. AA fire can cancel attack runs and provide you with some extra time. If you're lucky they can actually hit something.
     

    Yes. Point targets from a dedicated air controller will lead to faster call-in times and more accurate shooting. Further, in the modern titles you'll have laser guided munitions that require an observer with a laser designator to fire at all. Smaller target areas (small radiuses, or point targets) will also make it easier for the aircraft to spot targets.

    ***

    Now, a more fundamental point:

    The way that CM models air is pretty bad, in general, and I'm generally of the mind that the game would be better for not having it, as it currently exists.

    The WW2 titles have far too much control over the air assets - that kind of co-ordination on CM scale is wildly unrealistic. The modern titles have too little control (the aircraft behave like the WW2 assets), and since the aircraft behaviour was changed from the original CMSF, they're significantly less useful.

    In a multiplayer sense, they're a highly random asset, that can be blind-countered by anti-air assets, which are also highly random. Air assets as-is will tend to do pretty much nothing, or delete things, at random, and there's little you can reasonably do to influence this, so there aren't any interesting decisions to make. It's random and it's boring, and doesn't add to the game.

    Still, in the modern titles (especially Shock Force), you can't really get away from it or explain it away with scenario design, so some possible solutions using the existing structure:

    My preference in the modern titles would be for fast jets to specialise in being point-target destroyers. They would call in and either deny a small, specific area of space, or be called in on a target to delete a specific building or attack some oncoming armour/whatever. This would probably mean dumping all of their ammunition in a single pass, or something close to that. The purpose of jets would then be single, highly destructive asset, one and done.

    I'd then like helicopters to behave far more like they do in CMSF 1 and CM:A, with increased loiter time and 2-3 passes over a two minute period. That would mean that you'd be able to use helicopters to support an assault by suppressing specific targets, rather than having a strafe Hind come in, strafe something random, then disappear for 5-6 minutes, giving them time to recover.

    Clearly the latter would be hilariously vulnerable to anti-air, and I think that's sort-of the point - it means that employing this kind of thing would involve ensuring that anti-air assets are neutralised beforehand - this would add decisions, not take them away.

    For the WW2 titles, I'd like to see air assets disappear entirely, since they're completely inappropriate for the period and scale. I appreciate that this won't be popular, so if they have to exist, I'd like all WW2 air to work the same way as it does in CMRT - i.e., with zero control, and as much of a risk to your own forces as the enemy.

    Thank you very much for your extensive response, very, very helpful!

    0

    A few basic Q's about Air Support

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

    Aircraft in the WW2 setting are no longer controlled by Spotters. Available WW2 Air Support will now prowl the battlefield independently, without the player being able to command them.  

     

    That was written on page 76.

    Thanks Chuck - just so I don't misunderstand - which of my questions (the five bullets) are you referring to?

    0

    A few basic Q's about Air Support

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by G. Smiley

    I'm a longtime CM player that have returned to the game after a few years hiatus and picked up CW and SF2 so I'm new to the modern titles. I never really learnt how air support worked in the WWII titles and therefore have a few basic questions. I've read the CM2 manual on the subject.

    • When Delivery time is stated as "<1 min, 16 min later" - does that mean <1 min if ordered in the setup phase, and 16 min after action has begun?
    • It seems the defender in the air strike gets a sound cue a couple of minutes before the actual attack, warning for the incoming helis/aircraft - is that correct? When hearing this sound, would one know how many minutes before the actual strike?
    • When under air attack, natural instict would be to take cover, both to avoid being spotted from the air as well as getting protection from direct hits and shrapnel. Is there anything more one should do when an air attack is imminent?
    • How to use AA assets in the best way? I assume they need to be placed in the open with good line of sight? How close do they need to be to the troops or the spot being the designated target? Is having the AA assets on higher ground an advantage?
    • Is having a spotter and/or a designated target considerably more efficient compared to assigning an area that is not spotted as a target?

     

     

    1

    Good, medium sized H2H scenarios?

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 2

    Posted

    I just bought the big bundle with all modules.

    Would anyone be so kind to suggest a few good scenarios for H2H - medium sized or smaller with regards to number of units (larger map ok)?

    I note some scenarios are clearly marked for H2H, which is great, but would be good to get some input on a couple of scenarios that play well in a PBEM game.

    As this is not an opponent finder forum, would anyone be interested in playing one of these suggested SF2 H2H scenarios, please shoot me a private message.

     

     

     

    0

    Looking for PBEM opponent for CMCW or CMFB

    in CM2 Opponent Finder

    Posted · Edited by G. Smiley

    I've been a CM player since a long time ago but have not been playing for a couple of years now. Bought CMCW this week and have CMFB installed since before. I used to use CM Helper with Dropbox but seem to have uninstalled CM Helper - I will need a reminder on how to exchange game files in the most convenient manner.

    I prefer scenarios to QB, and preferrably not too large (large being massive number of units, map size does not matter). For CMCW, maybe Brauersdorf or Czeckmate? I haven't played through any of them but they look interesting.

    Equally interested in FB and CW, side does not matter. 

    One turn per day at least and during CET evening time (19.00-23.00) I would be able to get several turns in (and from time to time, also during the day).

    Anyone interested, please drop me a line.

     

     

     

    0

    Cold War for Mac

    in Combat Mission Cold War

    Posted

    A super basic question - looking at the product side I cannot find the answer however - is there a Mac version of Cold war?

     

    Reason I ask is that I haven’t played Battlefront games since Final Blitzkrieg, and I think I remembered reading that Mac wouldn’t be supported in the future.

    0

    Standard mode of play description

    in CM Final Blitzkrieg Maps and Mods

    Posted

    On 17 April 2016 at 1:05 PM, Derfel 2nd said:

    Friends! Romans! Scenario designers!

    I come not to drivel about some dead roman dude, but to make a proposal about how we describe mode of play in our scenario descriptions.

    Primus; The scenario designer should always include a mode of play description in the primary information. That is the info that can be seen when scrolling thru the scenario menu.

    Secundus; There shall be four, and ONLY FOUR possible descriptions. Namely: 'Playable in all modes', 'Playable as H2H only', 'Playable as Allied vs AI', or 'Playable as Axis vs AI'. Possibly, if you want to sound less peremptory we can agree on 'Recommended play as Allied vs AI', 'Recommended play as Axis vs AI', Recommended Play as H2H' or 'Playable in all modes'.

    So, what say ye? Shall we stand and be standardized or be forever and confusingly sundered?

    I agree 100%.

    0

    Scenarios for H2H suggestions

    in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg

    Posted

    I would be nice to have a thread with recommendations for scenarios suitable for H2H. I suppose you can have different opinions on what makes a scenario suitable for H2H, but I believe everyone will agree on that it has to be interesting to play from both sides. Even though perfect balance is unattainable, both sides must at least have a good chance of winning with two equal players.

    I understand that there are still a limited number of finished H2H games.

    I will return with my own thoughts later on!

     

    0
×
×
  • Create New...