MOS:96B2P
-
Posts
4,589 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
92
Posts posted by MOS:96B2P
-
-
As Marines fight to hold the consulate and protect the non-combatants an RPG strike hits a rooftop position.
The inevitable consequence of such bad behavior.
-
Consulate staff cower inside one of the the buildings. Outside, through the window, Marines fight to hold the perimeter. Will the relief column arrive in time?
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k208/kas4107/MarineinaWindow_zps5fce4c0d.jpg' alt='MarineinaWindow_zps5fce4c0d.jpg'>
-
Arrange for your indirect fire assets to be reinforcements that arrive about 5-10 minutes prior to when you want the bombardment to start. So if you want to shell an area at around the 40 minute point, have the tubes arrive as reinforcements at the 30 minute point. This guarantees that your indirect fire will not be squandered in the early turns of the game.
Thanks Combatintman. I made the AI mortar crew a reinforcement unit. I am now re-playing the scenario to see how the AI supporting fires work out.
Also sent a PM with some follow up questions.
-
In the CMSF editor is there a way to adjust the time of when the AI fires it's supporting fires (mortars/arty)? It starts firing in the first minute or two. I would like to adjust the time back and have it fire when there is more likely to be a target in a certain area. Thanks.
-
Vid of Brits exercising in Poland:
That was a cool video. I hope we get to see that equipment in CMBS with a future module.
-
US isn't really getting much by way of 'occupation' equipment. I recall Steve purposefully kept it out of CMSF too. Occupation and policing is a different tactical situation.
I guess with two modern conventional forces going at it the Hesco barriers might not be all that significant. I hope they release a module with unconventional forces down the road. Then there would be all kinds of potential uses for the Hesco barriers. (and non-combatants)
-
The Hesco barriers would be nice to have. If I am calling them by the correct name. Those big containers that were filled with sand and dirt with a front end loader and used to protect Forward Operating Bases etc.. I think we use some version of those here in the Midwest when the Mississippi floods.
-
Nice screenshots - is a scenario forthcoming?
In theory I would like to however I have never made a scenario for release before. I am in the process of making this one for myself. If it eventually gets refined enough maybe I will give it a shot and release it. It is almost as much fun working in the editor as it is fighting the battles. I still have a lot to learn about the whole scenario making process. I gave the scenario a test run last night. I got about 10 minutes into it. (I think the scenario will be about 45 minutes to an hour long) I kept a list of things to change/improve as I fought the battle. My list had eleven items noted in ten minutes of play. If I make it polished enough for release I will probably need some adult supervision every once in a while.
Also I am reading the book Company Commander by Major Russell Lewis in preparation for downloading your scenario Into the Green. Interesting to read about the differences in TOE and C2 between the US and UK. I had to Google the Viking vehicle to understand what the Major was talking about.
-
Here is a link to the actual thread at CMSF. In my previous post I should have linked the entire thread. Not just my screen shots.
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=117744
-
Years ago I did a '3rd party' CMSF scenario using spies to represent hundreds of rioting protestors storming a UN compound. It was great fun while it lasted but BFC abruptly changed spy behavior in the next patch making spies unworkable for my scenario. I half suspect they changed spy behavior deliberately to kill my scenario off - they didn't much like the concept of shooting down waves of unarmed civilians.
Wish I would have seen that scenario with hundreds of protesters. Sounds cool.
I think it is a good idea to try and keep the simulation within reasonable civilized boundaries. With non-combatants playing a role in modern conflicts it would be realistic to have the ability to have them portrayed directly in the game during appropriate scenarios. Maybe the non-combatant "unit" type could be treated like surrendering soldiers are in the game. So if the rescue mission (or whatever) fails and the OPFOR reach the non-combatants a white flag goes up and after a few turns of uncontested OPFOR control the non-combatants disappear from the map. No war crime allowed but we still get the challenge of working through this type of tactical problem.
-
Thanks Combatintman! That idea of using the red force spies and switching them to be blue non-combatants worked! I still hope someday BF will address the non-combatant issue and include them, down the road, in CMBS. For now this only works with the CMSF title but it is better than nothing.
I took a few screenshots of what I was able to do with the tips from Combatintman. I posted the screenshots over in the CMSF area since they were created with CMSF. Hoping someday we will also be able to do something even better with CMBS and post in this site.
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1566180&postcount=1
-
With some pointers from Combatintman I was able to get unarmed civilian types into a test scenario. Ironically the trick to get the non-combatants into the game only works in the oldest CMx2 title CMSF. Below is a screen shot of embassy staff walking around inside the walls of the embassy compound. Also shown are a few Marines stationed at the embassy.
Here is an overhead shot of the embassy taken several hours before rioters and armed militia filled the streets. Note Marine snipers on some of the roof tops.
Photo of the front gate area.
The mission would be to go rescue the embassy staff and bring them safely to an exit zone before the embassy was overrun. Just one of many examples of how non-combatants could add interesting / challenging scenarios to the game.
-
Jock - Those reserves look good. When RL allows please release them. I got a Stryker Company chomping at the bit.
After the release I will post screen shots so they can be seen in battle.
-
You can upgrade the engine until I am dead.
Mord.
+++1
10char
-
Of course, I have my fingers crossed for Combat Mission : Fulda Gap 1989
Fulda Gap would be cool. Also Arab Israeli wars.
-
My oponent in a pbm
his russian tank flew out from the cover he was in with no los to the target
took a 2 second look at building
Shot thru the building from 200 yards into the side of my pziv.
Can tanks shoot thru buildings at tanks?
I had something Similar happen in a PBEM game. I had an SU-85 target a building I thought might contain enemy troops. I think the building was of light construction. The SU-85 only had armor piercing rounds. The rounds passed through the structure and exploded in the terrain features behind it. If a tank had been parked behind the building I guess I might have knocked it out but that was not my original intent.
I brought up an ISU-152 that had HE shells. This vehicle destroyed the building.
When the PBEM game is over you might want to question your opponent if he knew your tank was behind the building and was intentionally targeting it with his tank. This would help reveal if the incident was luck (for your opponent), intentional tactics or a possible game bug Vanir Ausf B alluded to.
During a PBEM game I keep a list of questions to ask my PBEM opponent during the After Action Review (AAR). I think this aids in the learning curve.
-
I think Brits have to be included in Black Sea at some point. They are our closest ally and have been right there with us in most of the conflicts. (Of course in the first few they were shooting at us instead of with us)
Also can a serious 20th century / post 20th century war game / simulation be made that doesn’t have Germans? It just wouldn’t be the same without them. So, might as well just make a NATO module someday with a strong representation of Poles and eventually all 12 seasons, unconventional forces and non-combatants. -
Thanks Combatintman! That idea of using the red force spies and switching them to be blue non-combatants worked!
I still hope someday BF will address the non-combatant issue in a more comprehensive, intentional way. I’m guessing they never foresaw / intended for shrewd players of the game like yourself, Sburke and others to think of: "switching the spy to non-combatant trick". This spy switching trick combined with the preserve order for buildings will allow most of the scenarios I was hoping for. Of course this only works with the CMSF title but it is better than nothing. This leads to another question that I thought somebody else asked but I don’t remember if an answer was given. Does anybody know if there will be a blue on blue and red on red option in the Black Sea scenario editor?
As a side note: I started to read the book Company Commander by Major Russell Lewis in preparation for downloading your scenario Into the Green. I hope to get enough insight from the book to be able to do a good job in the scenario the first time through with no re-starts allowed. (We will see how that works out)
-
In CMSF, as sburke said, spy units will cover off on most of the scenarios you describe - designate them as blue and assign them as high point value 'destroy' unit objectives for the red player. The only thing you have to balance is to make sure that it is not massively easy for red to get at them and keep them out of red LOS at mission start.
Thanks Combatintman. This might be a kind of work around. I will give it a try. I have worked in the editor to make and modify maps and create simple scenarios. However I don't know how to make units change sides. If that is what you mean by designating a spy unit as blue? I think I can do the rest of what you described. Is it a simple thing for you to explain or should I try to find it in the game manual or search the forum? Thanks again.
-
Very nice screen shots. The one titled "All In A Hard Days Work" made me remember and appreciate the work done by our military and think of the work still to be done.
-
I think it would add interest, realism and variety to the game if small numbers of non-combatants were available for scenarios. Non-combatants would be useful in all the CM titles however they are probably more applicable to the modern titles. It may be a good idea, for Battlefront’s public relations, to have all the non-combatants be portrayed as military aged males. Military aged males should also take less time and effort to model for the game. They could be pretty much what we already have but in civilian clothes with no weapons. For game mechanic purposes maybe they could be purchased as “units”. Small unit = 5 non-combatants, Medium unit = 10 non-combatants, Large unit = 20 non-combatants. Or something along those lines.
In various scenarios these non-combatants could portray embassy / consulate personnel, civilian contractors, local inhabitants, prisoners of war, hostages etc. From these non-combatant units various rescue / collateral damage type missions could be developed.
Scenario designers would understand better than I how to make them work in any given mission. But here are some ideas: Possibly the non-combatant units could be assigned an exit zone for their side to gain points in the scenario. So the idea would be to go get them and bring them out safely. The more brought safely to the exit zone the more victory points. Possibly the opposing side would be penalized if the non-combatants were killed. The idea being they are worth more alive for propaganda purposes than dead. Something like this would be necessary to keep the AI or your PBEM opponent from intentionally trying to destroy them and ending the mission to soon. The non-combatants could also just be present on the battlefield in houses, hospitals etc. Any collateral damage to these non-combatant units would penalize the force that caused their destruction. The scenario designers and programmers would have a better idea how / if this is possible.
If this could be made to work the following are some of the cool mission scenarios that might be possible:
A platoon of Marines and 20 non-combatants are under siege at an embassy. Your mission is to go get them, load them onto your Strykers (or whatever you have for transport) and move them to the exit zone.
You are conducting operations in a MOUT environment. Non-combatants are present. The OPFOR has some crew served weapons set up in action squares adjacent to non-combatant occupied buildings. Clear the OPFOR without destroying the non-combatant units.
Your Platoon is tasked with providing transport / security for a friendly militia leader and his entourage as they travel to a meeting with your division commander. (Good luck with that)
A hostile force is overrunning a city. The last group of allied non-combatants is waiting evacuation at the airfield. The airspace is no longer safe for transport aircraft. Your mission is to reach the airfield before the hostile forces and evacuate the noncombatants over the last open road connecting the city.
You are tasked with capturing a high value target and his four advisors and bringing them safely back to the Forward Operating Base for interrogation.
A friendly research vessel was seized and the crew taken prisoner. It is believed the crew is held in a compound in a hostile port. Find, secure and evacuate the crew. OPFOR reinforcements are 20 minutes away from the compound.
For any Combat Mission game but especially the WWII titles: Free the POWs and bring them back to friendly lines.
CMFI free Mussolini from the Allies. (And actually have a unit that must be moved / protected from harm etc.)
I’m sure smarter people than I could come up with even better scenarios reflecting actual RL situations.
With the addition of non-combatants and the already present map editor the scenario designers / moders could add even more complex, thorough missions to a great battlefield simulation. Especially in the modern area the inclusion of non-combatants and the role they play (willing or not) makes for a more comprehensive simulation. After all, it is a situation RL battlefield commanders and others wishing to simulate and learn the lessons of the complex modern battlefield (ROEs and such) must deal with.
Did I mention, I think it would be a fun element to add non-combatants. (As long as they are portrayed as military aged males. No women or children please).
-
Sometime after publication it would be interesting if BF produced a winter war version of the scenario. Same backstory except you change tghe moths to say November 2017 to March 2018.
A winter war module add on down the road would be great. Being able to fight missions in the winter is one of the things that make CM Fortress Italy so interesting. Also it would be likely the conflict would not be decided in just the warm weather months. It could realistically drag on for at least a year.
A Black Sea game that eventually covers all 12 months plus a NATO module plus the map editor = a lot of German vs Russian rematches. It would be cool to have a PBEM game in WWII Stalingrad with CMRT and then have a rematch PBEM game in Stalingrad (present day Volgograd I think) with CMBS. This would be a great way to see the evolution of tactics and equipment.
-
A Stryker Company steps up it's training after receiving a warning order for a Ukrainian deployment.
-
Medium, cell detonated, roadside bomb (IED).
An embassy with non-combatants
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Meanwhile, out in the narrow winding streets of the fictional city of Al Fubar the relief column fights militia, IEDs and the clock.