Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

MOS:96B2P

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,589

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    92

 Content Type 

Everything posted by MOS:96B2P

  1. MOS:96B2P
    Interesting. There are multiple CM manuals. The CM 4.0 Engine Manual is for all the Combat Mission Games except for CMSF1 and CMA. Then each game is released with a specific Game Manual with equipment lists etc for that game. This sounds like a cool idea and whichever manual you redesign and reformat I look forward to reading it and adding it to my CM source references. Based on your other work that can be downloaded at CMMODs III I'm sure it will be excellent and professionally done. +1 for the great idea.
  2. MOS:96B2P
    This would be nice. Below is a workaround. During the Setup phase I will often (always?) dismount squads from their vehicles and split them into teams. B team stays with their vehicle. A teams rotate one vehicle to the right. If there is a C team it rotates one vehicle to the left. Next the teams remount the vehicles they are now in front of. So now you will have different teams from different squads in the same vehicle that can't recombine into a single squad. Example: 1st Squad B Team and 3rd squad A Team and 2nd Squad C Team are in the same vehicle. Next they Acquire ammo and AT weapons. Now after the game starts you can dismount just scouts or AT teams (C Team generally) or whatever the situation calls for and leave the other teams in the vehicles.
  3. MOS:96B2P
    Very cool. Thank you Sir. +1
  4. MOS:96B2P
    Okay. Thank you. +1
  5. MOS:96B2P
    What an amazing project. Not only a scenario designer but a campaign designer plus a mod builder. Not just a basic mod but a military and buildings. Just WOW . This is such good work I don't see any problem not having the South Koreans visually represented. There are plenty of CMBS battles with no Ukrainians. I'm not sure if you have an interest in CMSF however after CMSF 2 is released with IEDs, VBIEDs, spys, and several nationalities I bet you would be able to create all kinds of cool stuff with that game. Nice work. +1
  6. MOS:96B2P
    Correct. The no radio situation is often referred to as the land line abstraction. Yes you need a leader. A leader with artillery calling authority is what matters. In CMBS some enlisted troops can call for artillery. Especially on the US side (maybe all US enlisted?). So in the WWII titles needing a leader is more noticeable. They can pick up the radio. The second part of your question is interesting. In theory they may be able to use the radio to keep their fire team in C2 with higher but I have not tested this. In one of the examples above an infantry team was able to ride on a Stug from a different battalion and use the Stug's radio so maybe............. The experimenting never ends.........
  7. MOS:96B2P
    FIRE MISSION!!!
  8. MOS:96B2P
    Radios play an important role in C2 so I thought I would add the below screenshots from my notes to this thread. These screenshots are also posted in at least one other thread and buried somewhere on the forum. The below shows how it is possible to Buddy Aid a radio and continue to use it for C2. However this does not effect the ability to call for artillery. The ability to call for artillery requires a troop that has artillery calling authority and is not dependent on the radio.
  9. MOS:96B2P
    Some of @Oleksandr mods at work in the field. Very cool. Thanks for the mod work.
  10. MOS:96B2P
    Thanks @John Kettler. Lots of interesting stuff in the first link. +1
  11. MOS:96B2P
    Nice video .
  12. MOS:96B2P
    I think @Oleksandr is talking about duration. I'm not sure what type of mission (Heavy, Medium, Light, or Harass) he recommends. I generally use a low tube, light, maximum duration mission and walk it around the map as needed. However with this set piece Russian type attack my method would probably not really fit in. For practical reasons it may also depend on what your playing against. Against the AI a long slow mission will probably have good results (ignoring the current 4.0 issue in this discussion). In a PBEM a human opponent will Hide in place or Fast out of the impact area or a combination of the two. So in a PBEM a heavier Artillery mission may work to catch & pin your opponent with a continuing lighter mortar mission to try an maintain the pin after the artillery stops or shifts. And if your mortars are very heavy they are likely to run out of ammo before this set piece attack can be completed. Interesting stuff.
  13. MOS:96B2P
    Well.............. you probably should publish the Ashsh al-Dababir (AKA east Mosul) scenario. You did a fine job. This is a good time while everyone is waiting on CMSF2. All the sequels to it (I think you are planning some?) can be done in CMSF2. Let the Iraqi CTS fight NOW!!!! .
  14. MOS:96B2P
    Olek, is this a truck mod that you made ? I don't remember seeing this one. It looks very cool. Also the artillery = 1/2 the mortar barrage is an interesting idea. Similar to the artillery pinning the OpFor and then the mortars maintaining the pin while the maneuver elements move up to close and hose. Your mods look really cool in this screenshot. +1
  15. MOS:96B2P
    @Erwin and @mjkerner +1 to both of you before the thread is locked .
  16. MOS:96B2P
    This. This is what made me do some testing and realize that the effect of smoke was changed in the game with 4.0. At one time you could work around this by giving the vehicle/team a Target order and it would continue to fire through the smoke after the smoke blocked the LOF. If you removed the Target order while the smoke was still blocking LOF you would not be able to reestablish the order until the smoke cleared. But prior to 4.0 it was a work around. There was a thread discussing the 4.0 smoke behavior. The link is below.
  17. MOS:96B2P
    +1 @dragonwynn Wow, that looks like a lot of work. It also looks very cool. I'm looking forward to following developments on this one. If @kohlenklau is around he would be a good one to refer to for advice and ideas on mods. Interesting stuff.
  18. MOS:96B2P
    +1 NICE job.
  19. MOS:96B2P
    Proceed with caution. As I recall adding onto the map will move troops already placed on the map which may then screw up AI plans. Just FYI.
  20. MOS:96B2P
    +1. This. Well .................. I started to go on a rant about Hollywood etc. caught myself and deleted it................. but yes +1.
  21. MOS:96B2P
    Go to the bottom right of Schrullenhaft's post and hold your mouse cursor over the heart. An upvote will appear. Click on it.
  22. MOS:96B2P
    +1
  23. MOS:96B2P
    Well, like so many things it depends on the circumstances. If the Russian unit to be attacked was thought to be mostly infantry or the unit was Separatists or the Russians had the initiative and were attacking and you had to defend using the closest friendly forces etc.... But I don't have much interest in debating such things and will leave that to smarter people. A more interesting question might be, Who would buy a module / battlepack that contained Turkish TOE? I know I would .
  24. MOS:96B2P
    +1 Interesting post. I've read about the house rigged to blow before but don't think I've heard it called an HBIED. I think @Sgt.Squarehead has a way to create this HBIED in the editor . And now I know the official name for it. Also interesting to read about the intelligence collection and resulting action. I'm working on one scenario where I refer to supply trails through the mountains as goat paths. I think I may change the name to "ratlines" . Thanks for another good post.
  25. MOS:96B2P
    +1 Now this is an interesting idea. I sometimes forget Turkey is NATO. But since they are NATO and so close to the conflict it is plausible an appearance by them would fit into the story line. M60 tanks would be cool. I wonder if Turkey still has M113 APCs? That would also be cool.
×
×
  • Create New...