MOS:96B2P

Cool game. So much detail.

Were the grenades German potato mashers or something else? They sort of look like they have some red on them.

LOL. That's about how it went. They left the MG42 laying on the ground with their comrade and moved on.

In a PBEM battle my friend went heavy in tanks for his force pick. As a result he has been using crews from knocked out tanks in the role of infantry. The below event made me laugh (I'm sure he did not). A tank crew, after having the tank destroyed, was able to find an MG42 and get back in the fight. And then ................ LOL. Maybe one of the other crewmen will pick it up. I dare them..........

Back in the TOC at PB Rushdi Mullah activity picks up as officers work to stay on top of multiple developing situations. Intel. analysts update the SitMap to reflect the current, fluid, situation in the field. NOTE: The top of the map is West. 1) At least 10 OpFor with RPGs moving east in a ditch line. 2) Two friendly casualties from an IED. CasEvac needed. 3) OpFor moving west in a ditch line. 4) OpFor moving west in a ditch line. 5) The CO reviewed the SitMap and All Source Intelligence reports and suspected an OpFor group (#4 on SitMap) was moving west to take positions in the buildings at BP T148. The previously completed Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield (IPB) revealed that the only place for the OpFor to cross the canal to reach BP T148 was at the Eastern Canal Crossing. Captain Steel was instructed to disrupt the OpFor movement at the crossing with mortar fire. The CO reasoned that if the situation changed the mortar fire could be adjusted to a different threat. 6) Location of current 60mm, linear, air burst fire mission. ADDITIONAL: Radio report from 3rd platoon - incoming light mortar fire west of the SE Canal crossing. Probable 82mm.

/////////////////////////////////////////// SPOILER //////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////SPOILER/////////////////////////////////////////////////////// IED - Two casualties. Now the mission within the mission - getting the casualties CasEvac.......................

////////////////////////////////// SPOILER //////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////// SPOILER /////////////////////////////////////////////// Captain Anglen and his RTO in route to speed up the advance, Appears he may arrive in time to coordinate a CasEvac .....................

///////////////////////// SPOILER//////////////////////////////// //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// SPOILER /////////////////////////////////////////////////// At approximately 0634 multiple tentative contacts were spotted to the north of the maneuver platoons moving west in a ditch. Captain Steel of the Fire Support Team received the reports of possible OpFor activity in the ditch north of the friendly platoons. (Dude on the left) From a rooftop in PB Rushdi Mullah he prepares to rain air burst Steel along the ditch line if OpFor activity is confirmed. (I will have to make a note to look at the BDA on this one during the AAR map review.) Yes, he is leading the OpFor with his fire mission ..........

I am paraphrasing but in a different thread that was talking about bunkers @Vanir Ausf B commented that bunkers are treated as immobilized vehicles in some ways so the same rules that apply to vehicles apply to bunkers. Units can fire through their own bunkers but incoming fire is deflected. (So it would be the same with vehicles) So, if I understood Vanir I think you are correct Bulletpoint. The thread link is bellow.

Heavy wind makes using smoke impractical. So that takes away a tactic I might use. Also certain ground conditions make me cautious about off road movement with vehicles. For awhile now I have thought of a way to develop a TACSOP for a vehicle's off road movement based on the vehicles off-road rating in the UI and the ground conditions (possibly also the ground tile, plowed field vs tall grass?) .............. On my list of things to do. Most of my night battles have been in the modern titles where night vision gear is available. In the WWII titles I think night battles are one of the more challenging to fight with the affect on LOS/LOF. I have learned that light created by burning vehicles makes no difference to spotting in night battles. The illumination is cosmetic. But as far as TACSOPs for WWII night battles I have not yet begun to scratch the surface............

Okay, that makes sense.

Thank you @panzersaurkrautwerfer another informative post. Back in the day (1980s) I worked in a Division G2 shop and remember the NAIs, PIRs etc. The zone vs area recon I don't remember. Maybe our officers just sent the request for information to Division Recon and they did the job without us needing to know what type of recon they actually used. But now I know. Thanks again.

Yep, this. An entire squad should fit. Millions of dollars and years of planning to get a new vehicle and they can't even get a full squad in said vehicle? The fact that the Marine Corps is allowing this makes me wonder if they have future plans to reduce the number of troops in a squad.

Okay, I stand corrected. I put 7 OpFor on the third floor of a three story independent house and had tanks fire at the first floor until the house collapsed. All 7 OpFor were KIA............... So much for my memory.

Interesting stuff. When you have time it would also be interesting to hear about the three recon types. The first question that comes to mind: What is the difference between zone and area?

Sorry it took awhile to get back to this one. I ran some experiments using two of the same independent house structure in CMFB v1.01. One structure I gave a frame skin and the other was masonry. It was a two floor house. I put one German tank hunter team on each floor and one behind each house, Veteran, Normal, Fit, 0. I then had one US squad Target the ground floor of each house (same weapons and soft factors in each squad) from 280 meters. I used the German tank hunter teams since they had MP40 SMGs which have a hard coded range limit of 200 meters. This way they could not fire back. I was afraid using fanatic troops with a small target arc would skew the suppression results. There was no discernible difference in the suppression / casualty rates of the troops inside the two, different skinned, houses. What did surprise me was how unaffected the teams behind the houses were. The game showed a visual of many rounds/tracers going through the houses but the majority of the time the teams behind the houses showed one or no bars of suppression. Only one time did a team behind a house take a casualty and that was behind the house with masonry (stone) skin. IMO I don't think the skin affects anything besides the looks of the building. The size of the building affects how much incoming it can take before it collapses. The next question is does the ability to withstand incoming longer before collapsing translate to better protection/less suppression for troops inside? I'm starting to suspect the type of building has more to do with the protection provided to the troops from suppression & casualties than the size. As in the Church vs barn example. Even when a building collapses with troops inside I seem to remember the troops not being greatly affected.............. Need more experiments but I have PBEMs waiting..........

In MOUT fights I sometimes Fast an armored vehicle or tank out from cover for 15 to 20 seconds and then Reverse back into cover. Usually at the out of cover waypoint I have the vehicle fire on a known or likely OpFor position. Friendly units, including Infantry, will often ID the location of OpFor units that fire on the vehicle. This may also work in your open terrain. In any case good luck. Interesting. I will have to pay attention for this behavior.

I have not played this scenario but I try to have troops on foot take the first look over hills, ridges, out of wood lines etc. If the crew is all that is available I use them. I also Slow them the last action spot or two into their observation spot with a small target arc. I also sometimes place them on Hide at the last waypoint until I think it is safe to un-hide them.

Sorry, double post.

On some vehicles you have to select Bail Out. I don't know why but some vehicles have Bail Out, some have Dismount and some have both. They work the same. The crew can still re-mount.

As long as we are on the topic of artillery and the game mechanics of it I thought I would mention a reminder about the multiple artillery/mortar adjustment situation. This was reported to BFC for CMBN. However I just did some checking and this situation happens in all the Combat Mission titles except Fortress Italy and Shock Force (I don't have Afghanistan). The situation: If one observer has two or more missions all firing at separate targets and adjusts any one of those missions to a new target ALL the fire missions adjust to the new target not just the one fire mission as intended. Just something to be aware of. Below is a link to the discussion with screenshots of the situation.

From the screenshots I'm guessing the OpFor came up the creek from your right and then used Slow to approach the wall. The wall probably did not allow your troops to have LOS/LOF to their right. Until of course the OpFor popped up above the wall and it was to late. Your troops needed the dead area on their right flank covered. They maybe could have been placed along the wall so they could fire over it or another unit could have covered that approach. As for area firing I wonder if that was even an option since your troops probably did not have LOF into the dead ground between the wall and creek. Just FYI. The Target Arc seems a little short for a MG team. I don't think this played a role in what happened but if some OpFor troops had come over the crest directly to the front it seems the arc was to short to reach them. Target Arcs are a frustratingly double edge sword. Just my guess from looking at the screenshots. @IanL is a veteran player and participated in this so would probably have the best understanding of what happened. Maybe he will happen along here and tell us how he did the dastardly deed.

Yes, that seems to be it. I fired off a few more missions. Not enough to get a solid average time but in general Elite was about 35 seconds faster than Veteran and Crack was about 20 seconds faster. Another mystery solved.

I did some experimenting with the effect of soft factors on Fire For Effect (FFE) times for off map artillery and mortars in CMBS v1.03, skill level Iron. Of the four soft factors of off map artillery and mortars the only one that had an effect on FFE time or purchase points was experience. A US Company HQ team (Experience Veteran, Motivation Normal, Fitness Fit, Leadership +1) on foot requested a (no TRP) fire mission from a 105mm medium three tube howitzer platoon. The FFE times were as follows: Elite, Crack & Veteran = 9 minutes. Regular = 10 minutes. Green = 12 minutes. Conscript = 15 minutes. Elite and Crack cost more purchase points for the same FFE times as Veteran. Maybe Elite and Crack are more accurate???

Here is a screenshot of how I mark the locations of TRPs. I put the marking unit on permanent Pause. Then I place move waypoints on all the TRPs. These waypoints are given a 50 meter (100 meter diameter) 360 degree target arc. When on the defense I also mark the locations of friendly mines using a 360 degree 8 meter diameter Armor Target Arc. (So TRPs and mines are displayed in different colors) When the marking HQ unit is selected the marked locations appear facilitating the plotting of fire missions. I just mark the mines so I don't forget where I put them as they are difficult to see and sometimes are placed behind my screening units. I came across this idea on the forum. I can't remember who's post it was now and I'm to lazy to hunt for it but probably @womble. Edit: Sorry the screenshot I grabbed is from CMFB but same concept.