MOS:96B2P

+1

Yes. That would be cool.

I think it can be changed during the game (never tried it). If you right click on the game line in the CM helper window EDIT GAME will appear. Use this to tell CM Helper where the Dropbox folder is whenever the Dropbox folder does not match the game file name. You will both have to do this. See if that helps at all. As you probably know now, and hopefully your opponent, whenever using a Quick Battle map instead of a scenario for a PBEM I would always start the game file with a name like: Bullet vs Other Guy 001.

Interesting find @John Kettler. Thanks for posting. +1

Thanks for the information. I just tried it on my test map and had a difficult time trying to make it work. The problem is Action Spots (A/S) are 8x8 meters and the rows are closer together. This doesn't allow a waypoint to be placed on each side of every row. I was able to place the infantry waypoints every eight meters but they still did the end run. My vineyards were only 48 meters (6 A/S) wide. Maybe if the ends were further apart (longer rows) or if there was no-go terrain (deep water) at the ends it might work. Thanks for posting. Something to think about with the new module for CMFI coming out this year.

This I didn't know either. If you can get three rows per demo charge this is a much better return on demo charges. I'll have to try this in the future.

Thanks, good to know. Vineyards are hard on wheeled and tracked vehicles and depending on the direction of the rows block infantry. A jeep can be immobilized after crossing just two rows. The vineyards are usually 15+ rows wide and often perpendicular to my avenue of advance . Artillery can help clear a path if your vehicles don't bog in the craters and if said craters more or less form a path through the vineyard. A combination of artillery, a few demo charges and sacrificing one tracked vehicle may create a path from one side of the vineyard to the other side. Thanks for the demo charge info. Don't think I ever tried that. +1

Yes, if they're on a slope.

This is good information and is something that is probably not known / understood by many players.

Yes. This. Fulda Gap. Anytime in the 1980s. Then with the TOE from this all kinds of proxy war / third world scenarios could be made. +1

Welcome to the CMBS club my friend. Exited RedFor would not count as destroyed points in parameters. (You don't even have the scenario yet & you are already providing useful feedback) The points (set in parameters not unit objectives) is for 60% of the entire RedFor. So these VPs can still be earned by BluFor even if the base camps are destroyed. Any battles for base camps, if that is the decision made by the player, will also increase the percentage towards the 60% goal. It is one of the advantages / disadvantages a player will consider when making command decisions. The risk of clearing a base camp vs the reward of stopping the future attacks that originate from said base camp. I'll send you a PM.

Yep. In CMFB anybody who can call in artillery can also call in airstrikes. I'm not saying I think that its correct for this to happen but it has always been this way in CMFB. I think I started a forum topic on this. I'll see if I can find it. The F/O can normally call in air or artillery. So maybe some problem specific to the campaign/scenario? EDIT: Here is the link for the prior conversation we had on airstrikes in CMFB.

Never reported = never used......... if I understand what you said below. Thanks for the idea that I already had Ian - Sheesch.

Well............. I see in the future I'm going to have to send you a special invitation so your not late again. This is an interesting idea and might work even better in a PDF document. There would be room and ability in a PDF to create an intelligence work up to include photos etc. For this scenario I tried to mitigate what the player is allowed to see in the intelligence code. Some intelligence in the code will never be reported in the game. Some intelligence is used more than once. So the player doesn't know which intelligence he will get, how often he will get it, the location it might be at or how long it will remain accurate. It is of course out of order (B does not follow A etc). The intelligence that the player does receive is not always accurate (The reliability table will offer limited guidance for HUMINT). Also some intelligence is time sensitive. It was reported as probably true that Psycho was at a certain location at 1530hrs. He may or may not be there at 1600hrs. Or he may be there until the player hits a trigger. Some intelligence will lead to additional intelligence. As an example, there may or may not be Tactical Site Exploitation (TSE) at any reported location. So maybe no Psycho at the location but TSE may be discovered there (disseminated through a touch objective). The intelligence revealed by TSE may or may not be accurate and may also be time sensitive. There are also other types of intelligence that have a different means of dissemination that come from the SIGINT shack, the SCIF and the S2 shop all located in the FOB. This intelligence doesn't use the code table. Then there is the more traditional method of obtaining intelligence through the UAV Operations Center, located in the FOB, and both static and maneuver units out in the field. It will be a busy shift in the Tactical Operations Center (TOC). Command decisions (choices) will have to be made with limited resources. The scenario is intended to be an interesting static sandbox campaign. There are many different ways to play it. Every play style has advantages and disadvantages. With the use of triggers and unique ways of using the game mechanics different events will take place at different times. And some will never happen if a player is able to interpret intelligence, unravel the Separatist network (and be a little lucky).

Tactical Operations Center HUMINT. The below is an example of how HUMINT intelligence is collected/disseminated. All names and locations have been changed to protect the guilty . The intelligence from defectors is located in their name field in the user interface. The alpha character at the beginning corresponds to information in the intelligence code table. The format for the intelligence code is as follows: Leadership rating of HUMINT source corresponds to the reliability of the intelligence. Information Code (alpha character), Grid Coordinates, Time. Example: -2 A 44133108 1530 = Separatists will attack at grid coordinates 44133108 at 1530hrs. Intelligence is considered improbable. F = A top lieutenant in the Separatist's organization street name "Psycho" was located at grid coordinates 27435816 at 1530hrs. The intelligence has a +1 reliability which means it is considered to be probably true. The grid coordinates are located on the map. As the UAV Operations Center tasks a UAV to observe the area of the grid coordinates a QRF mounts up and prepares to head out the gate of the FOB.

+1 This.

Interesting AAR as always. +1 I did some experiments in CMSF1 after playing @Combatintmans excellent scenario Operation Neptune Spear. I found that stationary infantry (without night vision equipment) were not able to spot, with a confirmed contact, moving OpFor past 28 meters (OpFor that were not shooting). They did of course get tentative contacts past 28 meters. I haven't played many night battles, without NV equipment, however I suspect Listening Posts (LP)s might be useful to the defender. Especially at night in the WWII titles since there is no NV equipment. In theory a scout team with a short target arc placed in or near a suspected OpFor Avenue of Approach should report multiple tentative contacts if the OpFor takes that route. The tentative contacts would not reveal the exact type of OpFor units such as Tiger tanks but it would reveal a tentative armor contact. So if LP on Avenue of Approach #1 (AA1) had two infantry tentative contacts and one light armor tentative contact while in contrast an LP on AA2 had multiple Infantry, Armor and Light Armor tentative contacts the answer to which AA are they likely to take would be answered. Then, in theory, because of the spotting conditions these LP teams should have a decent chance of surviving and continuing to report tentative contacts (I guess it would be even better if the LPs had radios which the WW2 scouts teams won't). The way you answered the same question worked just fine and is something I have also done. Sometimes intentionally and sometimes not . The conversation just made me remember the above described experiment so I thought I would share how it might work in theory. Good luck and I look forward to more posts.

This is an interesting idea for a two component scenario. Maybe even a short branching campaign. Lots of cool stuff in the editor. Just takes time to figure it out. Yes. Thank you for reminding me of this. I should post a link for that thread. @George MC use of the spot unit objective to cost the player more VP points for more units committed to the fight was a brilliant idea.

Below are the results of some experimenting with Unit Spot Objectives. The experimenting was done in CMBS v2.1 Engine 4. Hot seat. CM Engine Manual v4.0 page 88. Observations: Individual troops within a team are counted for spot VPs. When dismounted a driver is counted separately from a vehicle for spot VPs. The editor will allow you to assign fortifications as unit objectives however fortifications will not be counted as unit spot objectives in the game. Units that are spot objectives are not required to use exit zones but they may. A unit cannot be both a spot objective and a destroy objective however you can have a mix of spot and destroy unit objectives in the same scenario. When a side (RedFor or BluFor) has an exit zone all units that are destroy/destroy all objectives, that belong to that side, must exit or they earn points for the OpFor. Tentative contacts do not count as "spotted" for a spot unit objective. Only confirmed contacts count. EDIT TO ADD: The player will not be notified in game that he spotted a spot unit objective. The AAR screen is the only place where the results of a spot unit objective will be found. EDIT TO ADD: Another useful link. http://community.battlefront.com/topic/121775-cmrt-campaign-kampfgruppe-von-schroif/?do=findComment&comment=1727393 1st Test Description: Ten Igla S teams (one troop each) were made unit spot objectives [U7] worth 100 points total. A RedFor exit was available. None of the RedFor Igla teams exited. Four of the teams were spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Results: BluFor earned 40 points. 2nd Test Description: Ten Igla S teams were made unit spot objectives [U7] worth 100 points total. A RedFor exit was available. Four of the RedFor Igla teams exited. Six of the teams were spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Results: BluFor earned 60 points. 3rd Test Description: Ten Igla S teams were made unit spot objectives [U7] worth 100 points total. Three RedFor trucks were made spot objectives [U6] worth 20 points total. A RedFor exit was available. None of the RedFor Igla teams or trucks exited. The three trucks and two of the Igla teams were spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Result: BluFor earned 20 points for the Igla teams and 20 points for the trucks. 4th Test Description: Ten Igla S teams were made unit spot objectives [U7] worth 100 points total. Three RedFor trucks were made spot objectives [U6] worth 20 points total. A RedFor exit was available. None of the RedFor Igla teams or trucks exited. Two trucks and five Igla teams were spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Result: BluFor earned 50 points for the Igla teams and 13 points for the trucks. 5th Test Description: Seven Igla S teams and one 3 man scout team were made unit spot objectives [U7] worth 100 points total. A RedFor exit was available. None of the RedFor teams exited. One Igla team and all three troops of the scout team were spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Result: BluFor earned 40 points for the Igla / scout team. 6th Test Description: Three RedFor trucks were made spot objectives [U6] worth 20 points total. A RedFor exit was available. After driving the truck into view of BluFor the truck driver dismounted. None of the RedFor teams exited. The truck and truck driver were spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Result: BluFor earned 6 points for the truck. 7th Test Description: Three RedFor trucks were made spot objectives [U6] worth 20 points total. A RedFor exit was available. A dismounted truck driver walked into view of BluFor. None of the RedFor trucks/teams exited. The truck driver was spotted by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Result: BluFor earned 3 points. 8th Test Description: RedFor foxholes were made spot objectives [U3] worth 20 points total. The foxholes were spotted & physically occupied by a BluFor scout team. Cease fire was hit. Results: BluFor earned 0 points. Unit Objective “Foxholes” [U3] was not displayed on the AAR screen. EDIT to add another test. 9th Test Description: One Igla-S team was made a spot objective [U7] worth 100 points total. A RedFor exit was available. The RedFor Igla team did not exit. A BluFor scout team received a tentative contact for the Igla team. Cease fire was hit. Result: BluFor earned 0 points.

Just finishing touches. I think the scenario will need a PDF file to make it easier to understand the new concepts. This is probably the last hurdle and one that I did not anticipate. Thanks for the interest.

Interesting information. Thanks for posting. +1

+1

A little ............... but that's normal .

I wish Ian had the time. Good point. Your assistance and candid feedback is appreciated.

Now that is a cool screenshot!!! +1