evilman222

Does anyone know if there was anything unique about how the Soviets would have used smoke in this time period?

It often feels like the M113s have armor which is only designed to protect against vigorously thrown paperclips. While playing as the Soviets, I managed to clip the M2 on one with a Sabot round and somehow kill everyone inside the vehicle.

I definitely agree. I literally never play multiplayer. That said, it can still be fun trying to dismantle a static AI defense on some of the larger QB maps. Would also be nice to up the time limit to 4 hours instead of 2 for some of those large urban QB maps (which were mostly just in CMBN, but still...)

Even if it's not the priority for the game, I think QBs need an overhaul for the next patch. The point totals mentioned in this thread for the next patch still feel a bit low (should be about 30k vs 30k default imo), and I'm really surprised that some of the larger maps from the US campaign aren't available as QB maps.

Is it just me, or does the Soviet artillery need to be seriously reduced in this scenario? I've tried playing through it a couple times, and it seems like their arty always leads to one of two possible outcomes. Either I deploy somewhat close to where troops are automatically deployed prior to the battle, and the directly hits US forces completely wiping out the player's force, or I move them back a bit, which preserves my forces (and makes the scenario playable) but Soviet troops end up advancing too rapidly towards the farmhouse/barn and are destroyed by their own barrage. Even if this amount of arty is historically accurate, it feels like it makes this scenario almost unplayable.

I think for that exact reason they'd be included as part of other modules, similar to how additional Syrian formations were included in the various CMSF modules.

I was thinking something a bit more out of the box, and maybe them doing a module featuring Turkish forces fighting in NE Turkey and into the Caucuses.

I personally love the idea of a 1945-1949ish timeframe, but I think it would be best suited if they could somehow establish a system where all CM releases are different modules of the same game, instead of as completely separate programs. That way, they could use assets from CMRT and CMFB and release Unthinkable as a relatively simple scenario pack, instead of having to do a whole new release. That said, I don't see them doing this.

Thanks for the update mate. The whole situation sounds rather odd.

First time I try to buy CW, my internet cuts out before I can complete the purchase The second time, my credit card company throws a tantrum and refuses to allow the purchase through thinking someone has stolen my card. Third time, the website goes down. I'm beginning to think that this outage is partially my fault hahaha

What's your source for the images/info? Seems like something I'd be interested in taking a look at just for the hell of it

Barrack Obama and Slavic, the Chesty Koala

Am I doing something wrong with my tactical approach during this scenario, or is this campaign insanely difficult? Seems like the player is always outnumbered 3-1ish and outgunned. Off-map assets would be able to somewhat counter this disadvantage, but by the time it arrives as reinforcements my force has already been blown to pieces by counterattacking enemy armor. I try and keep the actual strykers out of the fighting and rely on Javelins, but I often find myself stuck engaging armor from extremely close range, negating the ATGM advantage...

I think it's just a problem with the engine tbh.

I haven't noticed it with dismounted ATGMs, but I don't often play as anyone other than the Americans. Javelins seem to have really good spotting (which, if what I've heard about how highly regarded the sights on that thing are, makes a lot of sense).

Is it just me or are some of the American TOW-equipped AT vehicles (Mainly the LAV-AT and the M1134 Stryker variant) absolutely pathetic at spotting enemy units? I don't have any issue spotting (and destroying) enemy armor with TOW-equipped Humvees, and the regular LAV variants see enemy vehicles just fine, but not with AT variants or AT strikers.

Works. Thanks!

Download link is broken

Do you guys find Stummels useful at all? I'm struggling to find a way to use them without getting them (more specifically, their entire, incredibly *$(#ing fragile crew) killed. They aren't well enough protected to use as assault guns unless you have pretty much the entire map suppressed, but in a long range direct fire role, their spotting hamstrings them, and sometimes their crews STILL get picked off by small arms fire at 1000m+...

In most scenarios, using a column in CM is less than ideal. That said, there are times (like if you have an armor-heavy formation in wet, muddy conditions with only one or two usable roads) where it doesn't seem like you have many other options. In a column I sometimes use pioneers as scouts if I don't have any dedicated recon units. Particularly in CMFB campaigns I encounter obstacles well before I take any kind of fire.

Can't believe I hadn't come across this site before. Looks like I'm set on reading material for the near future.

On occasions where you're stuck moving vehicles in a column via road (mostly in WWII titles, but I guess this is somewhat applicable to modern ones as well) how do you organize your forces? I've found that alternating Tank, APC/Halftrack, Tank, APC/Halftrack and so on works fairly well, with infantry without their own transport riding desant towards the middle or rear of the column when necessary for speed, or marching alongside towards the front if expecting contact. This has been effective, but doesn't sound very historical.

I am playing on Iron, but with the Abrams incident they were able to see the tank in front of them. I have been able to give a target area command with my own forces in it, and not have any issues with CAS intentionally attacking my forces (sometimes there'll be casualties due to my men getting caught in the blast radius of munitions meant for the enemy, but that isn't really what I'm talking about). I have never seen intentional BvB from CAS in the modern titles (In the WWII titles, meanwhile, I rarely if ever use CAS, even on the opposite side of the map from my forces, because my pilots seem to have forgotten which side they're fighting on...)

An interesting prospect would be to have Battlefront make the new vehicles/uniforms, then put out a call to the community to do the research and handle the TO&Es on a volunteer basis (and to get their name in the credits). I think that there's enough people on here that would be willing to donate their time to doing such a project. If nothing else, it would be an interesting experiment...

Has anyone else had problems with their M2A3s wiping out their own troops with friendly fire? It seems like these guys are particularly bad about it. I was playing one scenario, where I had an Abrams and a Bradley creeping along in file along a narrow road (with copious infantry support, of course) when a Syrian infantry squad tried to dart across the road in front of us. Both vehicles spotted them, and the Bradley crew decided that it would be a great idea to try and shoot through the Abrams to hit the infantry, in the process knocking out just about every external system on the damn thing. Same thing with infantry. I had a bradley with Infantry about 50m in front of it, and the vehicle spotted an enemy ahead on the fourth floor of a building. Literally every shot landed absurdly short and knocked out the friendly infantry. I get that blue-on-blue fire is still a problem in warfare (side note, has anyone had it happen to them with CAS in the modern titles? I have seen planes strafe friendly forces in the WWII titles but not the modern ones), but this is just absurd...