agusto

IIRC it says in the manual that WIAs have a 20% chance of ending up as KIA on the final results screen.

Haha, yeah they did look funny, like a duck family, but in fact i also honestly found that video interesting because there are only a few around that show infantry combat from the SAAs perspective. Or at least i havent found more than a few. EDIT: Ducks using the SAAs combined arms tactics:

I also always provide buddy aid if possible. Picking up equipment and ammo from the dead and wounded is an important aspect of the game that can even be decisive in some situations. To have or not have, that is the question about those Panzerfausts! AFAIK seeing friendlys die does affect morale in CMx2. Always make sure that those units that you assign to mine-clearance-by-stomping missions do it separated from the rest of your force.

SAA tanks and infantry. Intersting combined arms tactics part starts at 2:14: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Mr1-MRRLUE

There are lots of great mods out there. Aris CMBN smoke, tracers and muzzle fire mods also work with CMSF. I prefer Veins muzzle fire though. Tips: - ATGMs are deadly. Especially the Javelin. Western tanks sometimes can take several hits (to the frontal armour) from Syrian ATGMs and still keep going but usually a single Javelin is enough to reliably kill all Syrian tanks from all distances, inculding the T-90. - Assault rifles are deadly too. Just imagine everybody is running around with a STG44. The volume of fire infantry units can send towards the enemy is much greater today then it was in WW2. - Modern western tanks (like the M1A2) can all fire on the move with deadly precision and you dont need to have the commander stick his head out of the turret in order to spot the enemy. Older OPFOR tanks like the T-55 however still need eyeballs to locate targets quickly.

Thanks. Initially this scenario wasnt supposed for H2H play (i personally also have never played H2H) but because you showed interest and i think it might work H2H i tried to make a version that is better balanced or that type of play. I havent uploaded it to the Repository yet, but if you want to give it a try, i will send you the file to the email adress you provided. If you wanto to, you can play vs. me, but if you want a more experienced opponent, you will need to look for sombody else.

So this means you spent up 42 hours in total on making the map. You said that this is over half of the effort needed for finnishing the scenario, wich means that 73,5 hours (if making the map was 75% of the effort needed for the whole thing) may be a good estimate of how long it is going to take you to finnish the scenario. Now this means that if you made a campaign consisting of ten equally large and complex missions, it would probably take 735 (!) hours or 30.5 days of work :eek:. You probably just detered me from ever trying to take on such a huge project . Well, at this point i would like to honestly thank everyone who ever made a campaign without beeing a on BFCs payroll (and of course those who are making the campaigns for BFC deserve respect too, but if you can do this for a living, it is probably easier to find enough time).

T-72 surving a hit: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=809_1373235098 T-55 hit & penetrated (good view of the penetration): http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a80_1373203646

I counter that. I believe that generating a serious external threat (no matter if it is a real one or one that is made up) would help getting the Assad regime more support from the Syrian population. Generating an external threat in order to distract from internal problems is a common political practice to creaty unity within a state and to make people support everyone who is offering them protection (in this case it would be the Assad regime). An extreme example would be way Hitler came into power in 1920/30s Germany. Back then, Germany was facing lots of serious internal economic and social issues. Hitler created/used several external threats and partially also attributed Germanys internal problems to these threats (for example the Teaty of Versailles, the Jewish Consiprcay, the threat of a Bolshevist revolution in Germany, the inferior races threatining the purity of the superior Aryan race and so on) and offerd the Germans the solution for all of their problems by telling them that he and only he could protect them from these threats. And what the Gemans did was that they willingly united behind Hitler and followed his leadership. Hitler also at least partially relied on external theats to stay in power during the war. Less extreme examples of this practice can be found in almost every countrys polotical landscape. It even works in small groups, like peer groups, gangs, drug cartells and so on. Example: A group of 3 young male black friends goes to a bar. Two of them get into a serious arguement about a girl they both want and are about to get physical. But then, however, a group of skinheads appears and starts an unprovoked fight with the black group and suddenly all internal conflicts are forgotten and the two former squabblers within black group unite to fight the external threat. (Note that i dont want to imply any racist BS, like that plack peer groups always solve their internal differences with violence or something like that, i just wanted to create a possible scenario for the purpose of visualizing what i mean.) That implys that "the world" (or to be more accurate: those of the worlds powerful countries that are capeable of exerting any type of pressure on Syria or Israel, may it be economical or militarily) would accept an Israeli nuclear strike on Syria but that it wouldnt accept Syria building a missile complex in order to deter Israel from agressive actions. I dont think that this a likely scenario because a nuclear first strike would probably be perceived as absolute "red line" for any country on the world. I bet that not even Israels allies would accept such actions. On the other hand, maintaining an arsenal of non-NBC offensive weapons to deter possible enemies from attacking is a very common and accepted practice. India and Pakistan do it, South Korea and Nort Korea do it, Iran plays that game with several other Middle Easter countries, and even the US and Russia still do it although the Cold War has been officialy over for more than 2 decades now, just in order to name a few examples. That is an interesting question by itself. Why would Syria want to actually strike a militarily superior enemy in times of internal crisis, especially under the premise that you mentioned earlier that beeing (counter)attacked by an external enemy is a bad thing for a regime under stress caused by internal conflics? Seriously, why the hell would the Assad regime do this? That would be irrational. I dont think that (If Syria was really building an underground cruise missile guidance complex, havent checked that) Syria really wanted to blast Israel with these missiles but that it only wanted to have the option to do so in order to deter Israel. EDIT: BTW before you tell me too that i am ignoring "facts", just like you told Wicky, i just want to remind you that i do not have any proof weather or not those things you call "facts" actually are facts. As i said earlier in this discussion, highly sensitive contacts that only you have access to do not add to your credibility. I dont have access to those sources myself and i dont have any possibility to check if you really do have access to those sources or if they are just a product of your mind. Both is within the realms of possibilty. That is why am i not saying explicitly that i dont believe you, i am just saying that your description of what happened recently in Syria and how the world and Syria reacted does not logically fit into my view of the world.

JonS, how many man hours did it take you to get this scenario to this point? How many man hours do you expect it to take until it is finnished? I am just asking out of interest. BTW the idea of cutting a very large map into several smaller maps is pretty cool.

Low altitude airstrike, close call: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=81b_1363633105

Exploring the inside of a BMP that took a penetrating RPG hit: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ab3_1373031808 Cameraman films T-72 shooting at his position: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a93_1372804328 RPG 29 hits T-72, catastrophic kill, turret blowen off: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=180_1372678336

That is great a DAR, JonS. That is interesting. In CMSF you can do that and it works every time. I even used that specific combination you mentioned of the pond object and the plinth object just recently. So the automatic deletion of 'excessive' flavour objects must be a new feature of the later CMx2 iterations.

Many thanks, i got stuck in the TF thunder campiagn due to a bug in one of later missions. It just didnt want to load beyond somthing like 27%. Now i will finally be able to play the missions that come after that one.

Beeing assigned to crew such a thing must have felt equal to a getting a death sentence...and i am sure that is pretty much what it was. Hell, you cant even run away! It s like a surfaced land-submarine that cant move.

Another screenshot i took during the 2nd test run:

In my experience the following additional effects can be observed if tank loses its commander: decreased spotting ability, lowered morale, lowered command value (usually something like -1 or -2).

Actually making scenarios and maps can be quite fun once you get the hang of it, you should try it if you havent yet.

yay, but only if we get ricochet/penetration decals in exchange for that. Like that: you can clearly distinguish between hits that penetrated and hits that didnt penetrate.

That icon means that the crew ate baked beans for breakfast and are now suffering from flatulence. Gives the germans a spotting bonus if they nearby.

Making a good campaign is a LOT of work, Erwin, i am not sure if i want to do that. Besides that i would also want to gain some more experience at making scenarios before i start such a large project, this one is only my third try. BTW; you can follow the progress i am making with this scenario over at the few good men forums, i am going to post regular updates there: http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/thefgmforum/threads/syrian-civil-war-assault-on-base-46.17618/

"The general who knows when to fight and when not to fight is going to win a thousand battles" - Sun Tzu IMO the reason why attacking may seem to be easier in tactical CM campaigns/battles than defending is because those higher up on command chain made sure on the operational level that you have good chances to win before ordering you to attack.

A screenshot i took 5 minutes into the first test: FSA surpressing SAA positions in order to allow their comrades to move up. That is Mords excellent Civil War Mod i am using here.

I am going to post there as soon as i get that confirmation email.

I am almost done with this semi-historical scenario that is set during the Syrian Civil War and that depicts the final phase of a battle that took place on 18th and 19th November 2012 between the FSAs Al-Tawhid Brigade + Mujahideen and elements of the SAAs 46th Special Forces Regiment. Here is some text based background info: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Base_46 http://www.timesofisrael.com/syrian-rebels-seize-base-arms-trove/ Some satelite images of the IRL location: http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/siege-of-base-46/view/?service=1 http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/siege-of-base-46/view/?service=0 A video of rebels driving through the IRL Base only a few hours after the battle. There are still some fires burning: I tried to be as accurate as it seemed useful to me. I had to scale down the whole battle by ~50% (map and forces) in order to fit it into a CM scale engagement. The real life Base 46 is huge, it covers an area of 12 km² (and in order to have a playable battle you would need some of the surrounding areas too wich would lead to a map sized like 4x4km or even bigger). Anyways, here is the map area IRL (ignore the red dots and the numbers): and my interpretation of it: It is probably going to be playable both vs AI.