gnarly

Unconventional combatants and militias are going to be here for a long time to come.

Unconventional warfare is what I've been wanting to see on CMx2 3.0
 
That being said, the uncon stuff in Shock Force with an up-to-date QB system would do it for me.

I just bought Shock Force due the price and to my knowledge that's the only Combat Mission that offers some unconventional warfare (IED's & Spies) which is really hard to achieve in other Combat Mission Games (Normandy, Red Thunder) but in a game with a fictitious battle with NATO & Ukraine vs RU; I think unconventional warfare would be beneficial. I would hope to see a expansion for militia as the troops currently fighting in Ukraine are either rushed musters or civilians. Ukraine's not winning a head on fight against Russia. Realistically they would adapt to guerrilla tactics such as ambushes. Militia can also be offered for both sides of the fight which in my opinion makes a decent expansion for Black Sea.

I have read different accounts of how best to execute an ambush and if the Hide command and a Target Arc will do the job.  I was under the impression that if troops were on Hide they would lay face down and often allow the OpFor to walk or drive up to them and shoot them.  In fact a few years ago I thought I had this happen in a PBEM.  (But maybe I didn’t have a Target Arc with the Hide command?  Don’t remember for sure.) 
 
My SOP has been to leave a few teams un-hid until they spotted the OpFor coming close to friendly positions and then un-hide the rest of the teams.  Over the last few months I have had a few teams with Target Arcs that I put on Hide due to incoming artillery and then forgot to un-hide them.  To my surprise when OpFor troops entered the Target Arcs the friendly teams un-hid themselves and opened fire.  In the last few PBEM games I intentionally started to use Hide with a Target Arc and it seemed to work as an ambush type tactic.  I also tried it out in one of my training/testing maps and the Target Arc / Hide commands worked again.
 
Below are some screenshots of the experiment (not a proper test as Vanir would do) that I took and thought I would share for review and possible feedback before I officially update my TACSOP.
 
This US team volunteered for the experiment.   

 
The team will move into an OpFor Target Arc while the Opfor team is on the Hide command. 

 
The US team entered the Target Arc.  The OpFor team un-hid on their own and engaged. 

 
The OpFor is outside the US Target Arc so the US team does not return fire. 

 
 

 
 
 

Battlepack 1: The Great Swan
Northern France and Belgium
September 1944
 
In just two months, between 6th June and mid August, the Allied armies in Normandy destroyed the cream of the 1944 German Army. Following this resounding defeat the Allies bounded across France in just a few days. It is during this period of stunning advance that Battlepack 1: The Great Swan is set, following the advance of the British 2nd Army from the Seine River, through Belgium, and all the way to the high water mark of the advance along the Meuse and lower Rhine.
 
The first phase of the Great Swan occurred when the 43rd Wessex Division seized a crossing over the Seine at Vernon in an opposed assault crossing. The battle here lasted several days, and the first 24 hours in particular were considered to be very dangerous for the British troops. However the bridgehead was stabilised and then gradually expanded to make room for follow-on forces. Prelude, the first battle of the Campaign Amiens Tonight, is a semi-historical examination of the difficulties of pressing back the determined German resistance which was able to make good use of the thick forests along the Seine river banks.
 
Shortly afterwards the British forces exploded out of the bridgehead and began racing across Northern France and into Belgium. From the first German resistance to the breakout was weak and disorganised - they were too busy fleeing back towards France to form a cohesive front. Engagements during this period tended to be small scale, and highly confusing. The Copse is a tiny scenario that takes a hypothetical look at one of these minor engagements. Overnight the advancing Allies generally rested, and prepared for the next day’s advance, while the Germans continued their relentless withdrawal. Celer et Audax and Nulli Secudus look at what happens when small British force disposed in hasty defence finds itself in the path of some withdrawing Germans in the middle of a rainy night or on a misty morning.
 
During the advance to Amiens the 11th Armoured Division was ordered to advance through the night without rest, culminating in an astonishing advance of 48 miles in just 24 hours. Tallyho follows the vanguard of this drive as they approach the location of a temporary halt at dusk. The next day found 11th Armoured at Amiens, embroiled in bitter city fighting (The Somme), and then pushing out of the city into the open ground across the river (To the green fields beyond). This was not the end of the war, and the Division soon found itself heading east once more (And the beat goes on).
 
Within days the lead elements of XXX Corps, made up as always by the armoured cars, found themselves in the region known as ‘the Crossroads of Europe’, a place where famous battles to decide the fate of nations have been fought since time immemorial (A crossroads near Brussels).
 
Soon after reaching Antwerp and the Belgian boder the advance petered out, stopped more by the logistical strain of leaping forward 200 miles in a few days than by increasing German resistance. Field Marshal Montgomery famously tried to kick-start the stalled advance with Operation Market-Garden. Those battles have been dealt with elsewhere in Combat Mission. However, in the weeks prior to the launch of Market Garden there were about a dozen planned airborne operations, all opf which were cancelled when they were overtaken by events. But what if the advance had been halted in the vicinity of Brussels?
 
One of the planned and cancelled airborne operations was LINNET II, which was to seize bridges over the Meuse west of Aachen, and open a route into Germany. A group of “what if?” fictional scenarios looks at how this never-fought battle might have played out. The flat ground between the Meuse River and Albert Canal would have provided excellent landing grounds (Drop Zone CHARLIE), while securing the river crossings was dependant on holding the high ground just east of the Meuse against counter attacks (LINNET II). As this operation was never launched, the exact details of Operation Linnet II are vague, and this vagueness has been exploited to look at the effect of differences in the detailed organisation of British and American ground and airborne forces when given the same ground and objectives, fighting against the same enemy.
 
Following the failure of Market Garden the British made a concerted effort to close up to the Rhine along its lower reaches before the onset of winter. This phase of the campaign saw a partial reversion to positional warfare, and the re-emergence of deliberate attacks against strong defences (Swansong). Often these attacks were supported by the specialist armour of the 79th Armoured Division (Hobart’s Funnies). With the onset of bad weather at the end of September the frontlines became static, and the heady days of The Great Swan became an increasingly distant memory.
 
In total Battlepack 1: The Great Swan contains over 25km2 of brand new, highly detailed handcrafted mapping.

Now, I won't name any names yet, but 'this guy you all know' yet again came up with this neat new concept. New to CM, that is. The entire gaming world outside of CM has been saturated with it for years. What am I talking about? Achievements! Obviously for use in campaign games only.
Since I'm the go-to-guy for 'this person you all know' for this type of odd-job, I happily sank my modding teeth into this one.
 
I've been playing around with the idea for an evening. It's just a bit of fun, and nothing too serious. I just thought this was too cool not to share straight away:
 
 

Leather helmets used in motor-racing were adopted as head protection. The design of the leather helmets was a ridged dome of pressed and glued together leather to absorb impact. The inner layers are cushioned by quilting a pattern of "pockets" filled with shredded leather or horse hair. A "skirt" around the lower half provides protection from the elements as all early race cars were open cockpit.     
 
This is a photo of a vintage Italian race car helmet.
     

Im new to combat missions,all i played was the shockforce demo before i got black sea. The campaign i have played so far i think is awesome! Granted i am only on the third mission of the american campaign, but its take me about 4-5 hours to compete each single mission. I have had to vary my tactics wildy to fit the mission, and poking the bear is just awesome i think. All the single scenarios ive played so far ( ive only played 5 and beat 3) are really cool. This is probably my favortite strategy game atm. I might be missing something becuase, like i said, i never played the older title, but i just dont see how anyone could call this unimaginative. This is almost the perfect wargame imho, although i dont play it more than 2-3 times a week, usually i am tired from work and working out and i go for lighter game to relax, since this game requires so much planning, attention, and time, But when i need a tactics fix, this is the game i go to

Currently in game we have changing ground conditions based on rain, ie a damp battle field will become wet after certain amount of time has passed if it is raining.  I am wondering if the same will hold true for frost in the upcoming Bulge game. To be specific, will ground that is frozen and hard at 8 am gradually become soft and muddy at around 10 am as the sun warms up the ground?
 
This is something we count on happening in the late fall and early spring.  We farm some wet ground and just about every year we have a major rain storm in the fall and the ground becomes very wet and impossible to work or to harvest.  So we wait for the days when we get a good hard freeze over night and then head out to those fields early in the morning and work there until late morning and the frost is coming out of the ground and the fields become impassable again.  In the early spring, we use the early morning frost to help carry our equipment as we try and frost seed spring grains or to underseed clover into winter wheat.  There is usually a couple of hours each morning where the ground can carry the heavy farm equipment without making too many tracks.   As the sun warms up the ground we need to stop or risk making a mess. In the span of an hour, the ground conditions can go from leaving a light track to making deep ruts.
 
Given that the Bulge title is supposed to cover the war from October through to the end of the war, this is a weather feature the battalion commanders on the ground would have encountered.  I would expect to see many maps in the Bulge title loaded with muddy sections and areas of maps impassible to tanks.  As much as I don't like having my tanks get bogged down, I expect to see it happen with far greater frequency in the Bulge game. The tactical challenges of facing thawing ground will certainly be interesting.

I don't particularly like that idea, as I don't think spotting from these aircraft would feed directly into intel for low-level commanders on the ground. It would go to the higher-ups, whom we don't play in this game..
 
When we start a game and we already have some intel, I think of that as coming from sources such as light aircraft etc. but trickling down through the chain of command.

I´m starting this thread in the hope of opening a debate about the lack of feedback to scenario designers. This is a debate that has been popping up at intervals in threads with other subjects, but to avoid hijacking these threads I´ve decided to start a separate thread on the subject (Even though my previous scenarios have all been CMBN, I´ll post it in this section, because this is the most active part of the forum and probably where most new scenarios will be published)

I´ll try to outline the problem as I see it, briefly describe the work involved with releasing a scenario, possible reasons for the lack of feedback and possible solutions. I very much hope other scenario designers will chime in with their own views and suggestions.

The problem:
A quite regular occurance on these forums is some CM player complaining that there are too few user made scenarios available. This has some times provoked me to reply along these lines:

Dear complainer, you´ve got no-one but yourself to blame for that: If you can´t be bothered to give the scenario designers feedback on their hard work - then they will stop releasing scenarios to the community.

Judging from comments in other threads it is my clear impression that other scenario designers share my frustration about the lack of community feedback. If I felt I was the only one I wouldn´t bother starting this debate. I´d probably just stop releasing scenarios. Still, I can of course only speak for myself and thus I´ll use myself and my own experiences with scenario design when I try to describe the problems as I see them.

Here´s the situation from my perspective:
I really enjoy creating scenarios. Mainly because I enjoy making maps that look realistic, but also because I like to play a scenario where I get to choose the forces and the scenario´s challenges myself. Sometimes I dream up a situation and then make a map that suits it. Most of the times I make a map and then make a scenario afterwards.



It has often been said in these discussions that "you should only make scenarios to please yourself, not the community". That is of course entirely true – and as you can see, this is what I do myself.

But sometimes I decide I´d like to share one of my scenarios with the CM community. And this is where the trouble starts.

Because there is a crucial difference between making a scenario that is playable for the designer himself and making one that is playable for everyone in the community, ie one that is ready for release.

In my experience the time needed to make a scenario ready for release equals the time used on creating the scenario itself.

Making a scenario ready for release means:
- writing a briefing that is clear and hopefully entertaing to the players. Two briefings, if it is a H2H scenario.
- making a correct list of the forces involved
- making a strategic map BMP
- making a tactical map BMP
- making a preview BMP
- making a operational map BMP
- writing designer´s notes

But the most time consuming aspect above all is playtesting the scenario. This involves activating several volunteer testers, who play the scenario while they send me save files, during action reports (DAR´s), comments and suggestions. Then, when the testers have finished playtesting, I begin altering and tweaking the forces, map, victory points or AI plans based on their experiences and suggestions. After this I usually get one or two new testers to playtest the new version of the scenario to make sure there are no oversights.



All in all this process takes at least one month – usually several - and involves between three and six testers.

You see the difference here? If I just want keep the scenario for myself and enjoy it on my own, I can do that right away. But if I want to share my scenario with you guys in the community, I´ll have to work twice as much on it – for months, literally.

And then, when I release the scenario, the feedback is mainly next to nothing. Here are some numbers from my own four hitherto released CMBN scenarios:



In total 1498 downloads that have recieved a total of 18 ratings or comments.

In other words: 1,2 percent of the users that have downloaded my scenarios have bothered to give me feedback (in reality even less, as the people rating often are he same as those that comment)

This is why I have begun to doubt whether releasing scenarios is really is worth the effort. Why bother when the response from the users is so meagre? I could have used all that time creating an entirely new scenario from scratch – for my own amusement.

I must stress that my reason for bringing this subject up isn´t about simply craving praise for my effort – even though praise is very nice to recieve, no doubt about that.

This is mainly about feedback. If I am to maintain any motivation for going on releasing scenarios, I need to know that they are being used, what the users think of them – and especially how they´ve played out. Nothing makes this designer happier than seeing one of his scenarios described in a thrilling AAR with lots of pics.

So what are the reasons for the lack of feedback - and how do we solve it?.

The reasons
I believe the main reason is structural. The scenario ”archives” do not encourage feedback from the users – more like the opposite.

I have nothing but praise for GreenAsJade´s great site, cmmods.com. Unfortunately, it doesn´t provide the ability to comment on the uploaded content. A pity, but I´d never complain: I´m just really happy that we have such a site for our mods and scenarios.

I believe that it is a major problem that The Repository is almost completely isolated from the Forum. There might be good reason for this, that I am not aware of. But in my view this is the main problem: You can rate and comment briefly on a scenario in the Repository, but if you want to post longer comments, screenshots, AAR´s, debate or ask a question, then you have to go a completely separate site, the Forum.

In my view, this greatly discourages feedback to the designers. These activities should in my opnion be integrated.

What to do?
If we are to establish effective user feedback, I believe we have to make the link between the scenario and a review/rating forum as direct as possible. The longer the distance between scenario and forum, the fewer comments.

One of the solutions I can think of, is to incorporate the Repository interface into the scenario thread in the forum. In this way you´ll be able to find and download the scenario in the same place where the scenario is discussed.

I´ve tried to construct a visualization here:



I also think the Repository generally needs improvement. In my experience the search function is close to useless in the Repository – and not very good in the forum either.
That means that even if you want to go back and rate or comment on a scenario, you might have a hard time actually finding the right file or thread.

Another solution could be this:
Make sure that you get the player´s attention exactly at the moment when he is probably most inclined to comment and/or review a scenario: When he has just finished it.

This is why I suggest giving the scenario designer the option to write a short message in the AAR screen. It could look something like this:



The optimal solution would of course be if this message could contain a link that would take the player directly to the discussion thread in the forum. But I bet BFC can think of a lot of problems with placing such a link.
Ian Leslie has suggested something along these lines too:
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1500231&postcount=40

This was my ”short” view on the feedback problem – and how we might solve it. I have no illusions that these suggestions will solve all problems and make the feedback rise dramatically in one blow. But at least it will remove some of the barriers.

I hope you survived reading through it – and that you´ll post your own views and suggestions here.

End of rant

Cheers
Umlaut

http://www.ecfr.eu/article/commentary_russias_military_options_in_ukraine3010

Interesting summary of the Ukraine War and Russia options.
Thought I'd share.

https://youtu.be/wcIB1GFD5hA

Same view but advancing with the squad.
 
The map for this battle is amazing!
 
Heinrich505

SCHNELL, MÄNNER, SCHNELL!!!

I finally completed my first scenario.
 
It's based on this place, that I tried to recreate as best as possible:
 

 
  /SITUATION   16. of August, 1944. North of the village of Pierrefitte-en-Cinglais, Normandy.     /MISSION   Your platoon is one of several that are currently scouting ahead of the main drive in this region. Before you lies the the village of Pierrefitte-en-Cinglais. It commands a vital crossroads, but it is only one of several possible routes of advance through this area. Your recon in force will determine if this village is a weak point, allowing the rest of batallion to follow on.   You are to probe enemy defences and seize the crossroads. If you are successful, follow-up forces will then comb the surrounding area in order to fully secure it (not covered in this mission).      /FRIENDLY FORCES   One platoon of dismounted armoured infantry, with light machineguns and light mortars.     /ENEMY FORCES   Suspected to be platoon strength, possibly with some light support weapons. Likely a mixture of reservists, veterans and possibly hitler youth; highly motivated troops who lack combat experience.     /PLAN   Scout ahead to determine weight and disposition of enemy resistance, then neutralise or bypass as the situation requires. Your main objectives are to secure key locations, while keeping casualties low, rather than to destroy all enemy forces.     ---   The mission has 5 AI plans, and I tried to make the enemy set up in realistic and challenging ways, without making the mission too frustrating. The idea is that the enemy is reasonably competent, but far from elite, and you should be able to do a good job using good standard military tactics. Also, I tried to keep the enemy force maintain C2, even though scattering teams all over the map would probably be more efficient.  
How to get the scenario
 
Actually I thought I would be able to attach it to this post, but the forum tells me I can't do that. But I don't like to upload to the repository before it's playtested (the briefing and images also need updating), so maybe if you're interested you can just send me a private message with your email, and I'll send you the file? As it's my first scenario, I don't know the normal way to do it.