Jump to content

Bozowans

Members
  • Posts

    223
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Bozowans last won the day on November 23 2020

Bozowans had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

905 profile views

Bozowans's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

256

Reputation

  1. It's not too hard to find footage of guys running pretty fast with a Pak 36
  2. This is all really interesting, thanks for taking the time to write all this stuff out. Since you've actually done this stuff, would you say the call-in times in CM are realistic? Like in the modern titles, it surprises me that US forces can accurately bring in off-map mortars anywhere in just 2 minutes flat. What's the fastest things can be called in? Or is there a lot of variability depending on what conditions are and so on.
  3. I've always wanted something like that. You could call fire missions on targets outside of LOS in the CMx1 games, yet they removed that in CMx2 for some reason. I read a WW2 memoir a long time ago, written by a company commander, that described walking artillery onto a target using sound instead of sight. It was in the middle of the night and they couldn't see much, but they knew Germans were out there assembling for an attack somewhere (from the engine noises and whatnot). They called in artillery, listened for the boom, then walked the rounds closer to where they thought the Germans were. To add one more thing, I think it would be nice if you could adjust the intensity and duration of a FFE on the fly, without having to call it in all over again. Like if I call a light or harassment mission onto some suspected enemy position, then later I see that the rounds are landing right in the middle of a huge group of enemies I didn't see before, I want to be able to change the mission to a heavy one. I want the FO to be yelling into the radio to fire faster instead of one round a minute or whatever. I'm not sure how something like that would be done in reality though. It would also be nice if you could repeat a fire mission onto the same spot as before, without having to wait for the spotting rounds again.
  4. Not saying the US Army was outright terrible or anything. They did what they could with what they had. But certainly bad relative to my own expectations and pretty much every other depiction I had seen. Coming from games like Shock Force 2 and growing up in a culture that glorifies US soldiers as a bunch of heroic supermen, it's interesting seeing the US having a tough time during a period that really wasn't very long ago. Even other WW3/Fulda Gap games seem to have a tendency to depict the Soviets as endless red hordes that charge forward and get slaughtered by the vastly superior western forces. I like that CMCW chose to have the two different alternate timelines, showing the huge difference going from the 70s into the 80s. Sometimes the US can do very well and cause a lot of damage, but other times I've seen the US get rolled over like they were little more than a speedbump. I knew very little about this period of history though until recently. I didn't even realize that the Soviets had an edge over the US in some areas. Several months ago I had been reading about Cold War stuff and wanted to learn more about it. I tried playing games like Flashpoint Campaigns and WinSPMBT because it had a lot of WW3 scenarios and I wanted to see what that would be like. Funnily enough, this was just a few weeks before CMCW was announced.
  5. My go-to strategy as the US is to hide units behind buildings or some other hard cover like a hill, wait for the Soviets to pass, then shoot them in the side as they go by. This way you can eliminate their numerical advantage by shooting them one by one as they turn the corner, and at the same time avoid their tough frontal armor. Your biggest advantage as the US is that you're almost always defending, so you can set up ambushes like that frequently. For the first mission of the NTC campaign for example, I picked the "spoiling attack" option instead of the hasty one, allowing me to deploy behind those mountain passes. I figured it would be a bad idea to just deploy all the tanks in a line and slug it out face to face. The Soviets had to advance through those passes to win, so I put almost my entire force hidden behind the reverse slope, hugging the sides of the mountain, then shot them in the side as they went through. I ended up taking almost no losses. I still haven't played that much of CMCW, but it's been very interesting. I had no idea just how bad the US Army was back then. I played one scenario where I was defending on good ground and still won, but took heavy losses and lost even more tanks than the Soviets did, even though I was defending. I was not expecting that.
  6. Trees are not indestructible. I see them get blown up all the time. They can be tough and soak up a lot of hits though. The big tank guns like 122mms can blow them up in a couple hits I think. Even small arms fire can damage trees, but it can take a long time and hundreds of bullets. Order a bunch of tanks to target light at the same spot in a treeline for several minutes and you will see the trees get chewed up by MG fire. Or if you really want to see trees get blown up, load up one of those soviet training scenarios in CM Cold War and plaster the woods with the ridiculous amount of artillery they get. I think the tall bocage in CMBN is indestructible though unfortunately, except to engineers with breaching charges or tanks with the bulldozer things. I've seen them take direct hits from huge airplane bombs with no effect.
  7. Cold War and Fire and Rubble are out and here I am playing SF2. I am determined to finally finish the Task Force Thunder campaign. No distractions! Here is a missile flying right past (and partially through) some dude's head. The missile clipped through his helmet and possibly his skull a little bit. Or maybe it missed his skull by an inch or so? Hard to tell. Never seen anything like it. He should have at least been smacked in the face by those tail fins, or burned in the face by the rocket exhaust. I wonder what that would have looked like IRL. There were two AT-14s fired at this guy almost at the exact same time. Both missiles flew right past him and then exited off the map without exploding.
  8. Yeah I wouldnt want the game to be totally realistic. War is boring. It's just a bunch of guys hiding in a ditch all day. Firefights might last for hours. It could take hours for hundreds of men just to clear a single apartment building. War is a dull, miserable, boring and exhausting slog. What might take hours or even days IRL might take just minutes in CM. It took the Russians a couple of days to clear the reichstag building for example. The game could always be improved though. I wish units would rout off the map. They could in CMx1 but they cant in CMx2 for some reason. Units get pinned against map edges and wiped out. And I wish units could withdraw off the map voluntarily without needing an exit zone. Anyone remember Shock Force 1? Broken troops would get an exclamation point appearing over their head and then vanish into thin air, to represent surrendering, routing, or otherwise going missing. It was realistic in a way. I can see why they changed that so that units would physically run away but they still dont get routed completely.
  9. I don't think this is true. At least not according to the manual. The manual says that units using Move have good overall situational awareness, and that the faster a unit is moving, the more their awareness is reduced, especially to their sides and rear. This does make sense, because someone who is running or jogging is probably not gonna be focused as much on looking for the enemy as they are on watching where they're going, so that they don't trip on something or whatever. Squads using Move are also likely to stop and fire at any exposed enemies they see. IMO though, if your guys are getting shot at by unsuppressed, unspotted enemies at close range, it doesn't make a lot of difference which movement command they're using, since they're gonna have a bad time regardless. So Move isn't really much worse than anything else. I don't usually use the Move command anywhere close to the enemy, but using the Move command in view of the enemy is not always a bad idea. I use it especially often with scout patrols at long ranges from the enemy. Units who are lying prone might not always have a good view of the map because of dense underbrush, tall crop fields in the way etc. This can be a problem in CMRT for example, with a lot of big, open, mostly flat maps covered in tall crop fields. Your troops lying prone in the fields can't see anything, but if they are standing up, they can see over them. If you have your scouts run through those fields, they will have only a momentary view of what's around them (with reduced spotting ability), and then when they get to their destination, they will stop, go prone, and then lose sight of everything again. So running around isn't very good for scouting. If you just have your scouts walk around though, they can see things pretty well. Since they are walking, they go slowly and have more time to spot things. If you have a bunch of small, widely dispersed scout teams walking around in full view of the enemy at very long range, there isn't much they can do about it. Shooting at the scouts isn't gonna do much except give away their position.
  10. I just finished this mission tonight. Went not as bad as I expected! At the beginning I ran my cut-off platoon into one of the walled compounds on the south side of the map and just sat them there for the whole mission. I didn't want to run them toward the trench objectives by themselves with no support, because I figured they would be well defended. Plus I wanted to ambush the enemy troops as they came in. There were buildings several stories tall in the compound, so I put observers on the top floors and had the rest of the men hide at the bottom until I knew what was coming. My plan was to at least harass the advancing enemy, and if things got too hot, I could move everyone down to the lower floors where they were hidden by the tall wall. I was expecting multiple enemy vehicles or even tanks, but turned out it was just one BMP. I had the platoon open fire from the second and third floors at the advancing troops. The BMP got wiped out by AT-4s at close range and the platoon caused quite a bit of damage from up there during a long firefight, but took one dead and two wounded, including the platoon commander himself. They were almost out of ammo by the end of the mission. When the rest of the company arrived, I had them attack the north trench first and then swing to the south. I figured they would come under a lot of fire the moment they crested the ridge, so I kept everyone pretty close together to support each other in the tight spaces of the city. I slowly started clearing the buildings toward the other trench and eventually ran into that huge nest of enemy resistance in the buildings next to the south trench. Even though there were a lot of enemies, my two full-strength platoons still outnumbered them and were able to overwhelm them with a rapid assault through the buildings at point blank range. I took a few more casualties, but got a total victory with just two dead and five wounded.
  11. Here is a grenade exploding literally right in a dude's face.
  12. I always thought it would be cool if they brought back command delays. They had them in the CMx1 games. I don't know why they got rid of them. Back then, a veteran squad might take a couple of seconds to get going, but conscripts might take 30 or more seconds. Buttoned-up vehicles with no radios might take even longer to get going, making it a nightmare to coordinate 1941 Soviet tank units for example. The command delays would vary from unit to unit, so you wouldn't have every single unit in your whole force start moving at the exact instant you hit "go" as well, making the movement look more natural compared to CMx2. They should bring back command delays, and then maybe make it so that the delays are longer when HQs get wiped out. Why not make it dependent on morale state as well? A rattled squad should take a little bit longer to collect themselves and get going. A broken squad out of contact with HQ should have such a long delay that they are basically useless.
  13. If you want a challenge, try playing as the Syrians! You don't always have to play as the 1st world army. Playing as the Syrians will give you a very different perspective on things than any other CM game. Even as the western armies though, the game can be very challenging. The Syrians are not defenseless. From the briefing from the US Army Task Force Thunder campaign: "Approach every situation with caution until you know what you are dealing with. The Syrians are not the backwards, militarily inept pushovers the blowhards rant about. They are motivated, adequately trained and armed, and quick studies of our tactics. The unconventional forces arrayed against us are, perhaps, even more formidable. Many are veterans of fighting against our forces and they have no fear of dying for their cause. While they might not have a chance at the strategic level, at the tactical level every Syrian unit is perfectly capable of bloodying the nose of your task force." Shock Force is one of the more interesting games of the series IMO, and it's also interesting looking back at it now after everything that's happened since the early 2000s. I feel like one of the reasons they made the game in the first place was to kind of push back against the myth of US invincibility that was so common in the early days of Iraq/Afghanistan/GWOT. It's like they wanted to demonstrate through their game that the US can still be tactically defeated with ease if the conditions are right. I remember back during the times this game came out, plenty of people were clamoring for war with Iran and how it would be a cakewalk and only take two weeks or whatever. That said, some of the missions ARE pretty easy. Some of them are like Iraq-style turkey shoots against poorly motivated conscripts in the open desert, where you barely have to do anything except move your troops forward and watch them annihilate everything like a bunch of cardboard pop-up targets. But I think that's the point - to illustrate the strengths of the US military in ideal conditions, while other scenarios illustrate the weaknesses, where you go up against Syrian special forces and fanatical insurgents in dense urban areas with IEDS and suicide bombers or whatever. This game certainly made me fear RPG-29s. Those things are very accurate at long range and can knock out almost anything. SF2 does have a ridiculous amount of content now. I've been playing since the SF1 days and I still haven't finished all the campaigns. There is a huge amount of good user-made stuff including a lot of Red vs Red stuff, which is one of my favorites. Syrian Army vs insurgents is always fun.
  14. I think the devs prefer that there is uncertainty and confusion about what LOS actually is for a given unit. More "fog of war" that way. You can usually tell at a glance what a unit can see (and thus can be seen by the enemy) from any given area, but you can't REALLY know with 100% certainty. So you will get some unpredictability and sudden surprises, like when one of your tanks suddenly explodes from an unexpected direction, from an enemy tank firing straight through a forest that you were certain that they couldn't actually see through.
×
×
  • Create New...