Nektoman

It's finally finished.
This is a MASTERTOE of General Paulus' 6th Army (And part of Hoth's 4th Panzer Army) and General Chuikov's 62nd Army from September 13th-30th 1942.
The forces accounted for in this file fought in the city itself. There were maybe 2/3 more of 6th Army troops fighting on the Northern flank along the river Don.
I tried to get it as accurate as possible, BUT I did not account for historical strength. So, everything is FULL STRENGTH.
There were very few tanks, maybe 300 with both sides combined. In this MASTERTOE there must be close to 1000 tanks.
There are ~35 pages of hand edited TOE. It took a very long time to create.
I don't even want to find how many troops there are, but I assume roughly 100,000 per side.
 
There are a few small quirks.
There is 1 German Army HQ and 2 Army Corps included (6th Army, 48th Army Corps, 51st Army Corps). 6th Army HQ is "lost" in the file due to some "editor tricks", and the two Army Corps are toward the end. I included Corps level units for 48th Corps, but couldn't find any information for 51st Corps level assets.
For German tank battalions/companies I added signals tanks. Historically these guns were fake, but they function ingame.
The tank companies also have light tank platoons, with a PSW 231 as the platoon leader (I can't fix this).
I forgot a couple regimental level SMG companies for the Soviets, no way to fix this without seriously altering the file.
 
 
IF I MADE ANY ERRORS LET ME KNOW!
Feedback is appreciated, some things were done for a reason. Some things I might have missed (Like the SMG companies).
***There is a section for the Germans with "CORE UNITS". They work fine on my PC, but they might not on yours. I would appreciate it if someone can confirm that they appear in a scenario for you***
 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/syigx5efikp6f0m/6th Army and 62nd Army 12 September MASTER.btt?dl=0
 
Sources: I used Glantz, Joly, Forzyck, TIK (Youtube), and various other small sources online.
My full dropbox of MASTERTOE's for various titles can be found here:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6sd4yw8ckypk7ed/AAAc8MaHw6FsKM7aRmF7gXnja?dl=0

We are acting like we (the people I guess) are going to win something from this war, while it's far from the truth. West is not as united as it seems. And this will be highlighted once the media gets bored from the war as its already starting . Many people at the states are angry with the handling of the Ukraine crisis since 2014 and have started facing shortages in food items and skyrocketed prices. Here in Europe...I don't want to think about what is coming but I can see the first signs. Gas is over 2e per liter, electricity is half a monthly wage. Ukraine is angry with NATO for letting their country get destroyed and I'm wondering how they imagine the day after the war is over, betrayed by the West and flattened by their neighbours. Germany clearly wasn't happy cutting painstakingly built ties with Russia, refused to embargo oil, and now it has to rely on ridiculously expensive LNG from the states. I bet France won't win really anything from this and will continue to get bullied from AUKUS like in the submarine torpedoed deal. Turkey, a pseudodemocracy/autocracy while always two faced and keeping close ties with Russia, is emerging as a respected key player and seems to win the impressions game, probably getting back on track with F35s *and* S400. While at the same time bullying NATO member neighbors and occupying northern Cyprus, wow! Lastly, it's an illusion that Europe can survive pretending that Russia doesn't exist on the map. I'm sorry but this what every serious analyst will tell us. Maybe people of the military and weapons industry can feel happy about the resurrection of NATO and army spending over welfare but the rest of us, not so.

As far as I know, riding on top of BMP de facto became the main method of travelling for mechanized infantry at least since Afghanistan war throughout both Chechnya campaigns and up to conflict in Georgia. 
The major reason was that BMP\BTR unfortunately not only proved to be extremly unreliable in terms of mines protection ( and they caused severe casualties in Afghanistan and Chechnya) but also were insufficiently protected against light machine gun fire.
It was generally believed that if BMP comes under direct enemy fire (especially RPGs) the chances to survive were much higher for those who were on top, while infantryman inside were much more vulnerable, because it isn't easy to escape from the crippled car stuffed with ammo. 
Besides, BMP lacks comfort, it is very densely packed, if it has any room it is a room for improvement (pardon my pun). So no wonder they prefered to be on top while driving through zigzag roads in the mountains.
 

I want to add that the rails circled with red on the picture are not added for the tank crew to mount / unmount. They are meant for the desant (tank riders). So these tanks were purposefully manufactured with this in mind, it is not an afterthought.
 

Good day,
first of all best regards to the campaign developers, I am currently completing the "Pebble in my shoes" mission of the "Ride of the 120th" campaign.
I noticed that I haven't had high losses from infantry mounted on tanks for a long time. Not due to a rising learning curve, but because it is not possible to mount tanks at all.
Is this a deliberate decision of the developers?
Sincerely,
M.H.

https://imgur.com/3UKOUUZ
https://imgur.com/dJokctz
 

Yes, but we didn't need really qualified specialists in our regiment. We had only sergeants (conscripts too), trained in a special training unit for the sergeant staff and then coming to our regiment. Truckdrivers (we had only tracks, not IFVs) were licensed before conscription.
I think that soviet education allowed it because a high percentage of conscripts was qualified in professional colleges before conscription. As far as the military conscription was comprehensive, Soviet Army was never lacking qualified conscripts.
Regarding SRT, I think they have not only best conscripts, but the percentage of specially educated officers was always very high in this corps.

Thank you for your job! When are you going to fix:
* Incorrect UA artillery ammo (they have RU Kitolov-2M for 2S1 and Gran' for 2B1) - or rename (Gran' as Rak) or delete it (UA don't have an analogue of Kitolov-2M). 
* A broken BM Oplot.
And when we will see the patch for steam?

The above unit, in game:


In Quick Battle terms that's fairly expensive - it costs about as much as two US Infantry squads without transport, but that's mostly the extra premium you get for hiring the Technical and Pickup groups. You can't buy individual Pickups or Technicals to add to the formation, so the correct approach would be to buy this for the entire force and then parcel them out, rather than buy the formation and pare it down - you pay the extra cost anyway, so you may as well buy more.

Typical soft factors are Conscript/Green experience, with Extreme or Fanatic motivation. Leadership is variable across the board.
Points without transport for the above were generated at 123, which is about same cost as a single Veteran US infantry squad with +2 Leadership, which is also common on Typical settings.

Yeah, hybrid warfare is something which CMSF can do well, but Quick Battles can't.

There's no need for the networks to be spy-spy of course, so hybrid C2 would look something like this:

Thanks a lot @domfluff for the above links. Starting reading them. Looks like very interesting insights for my little Libya civil war project.

Interesting post!
Back in CMSF1 I played quite a couple of PBEMs with RED. Although those were all scenario's, since the quickbattle format wasn't up to speed yet, so the force selection was done by the scenario author and for good scenario's the objectives were asymetrically balanced. 
My most basic lesson was more on the strategic level (for both regular and irregular RED forces):
* Kamikaze: all assets should be considered expandable to the mission. When you look at it realistically there is little chance for an individual asset to survive a contact and still be combat effective for follow up action. Besides troop and equipment quality, the main reason for this is IMO observation and C2 advantages, coupled with on call accurate support fires. Hence, you usually have only one chance for a unit to achieve their goal. One can learn from how the Japanese dealt with a similar situation: kamikaze tactics.
* Ambush. Hide and covered arcs are your friends: long range firefights will usually lead to your forces getting annihilated without getting much done in return. Ambushes where you can gain temporary local fire superiority are the way to go. Of course there are exceptions like ATGMs, which can and should be used in long range ambushes. However, shoot and scoot is difficult, since near instant accurate heavy return fire is usually a given. So I like to put ATGMs in positions where they can get a nice shot on enemies flanks/rear and have some opportunity to fire a good number of rounds before they get annihilated. In other words: don't put them directly facing the front or their will be a good chance they take 120/20mm HE to the face before their missile has actually reached the target. Packing up and running from a building is possible at times, but more often not. In the field I think ATGMs can be more easily packed up, however they are much more prone to being detected when not hiding in a building and an easy target for indirect fires.
* 'force multipliers' like RPG's and ATGMs are key to causing casualties. Use them during a firefight to tip the scales in your direction. Don't save up ammo, fire off all rounds asap. A round that doesn't cause casualties often does cause suppression, while rounds laying next to WIA/KIA pixeltruppen are usually not easy recoverable.
* Vehicles. Vehicles are in a tough spot going up against all those thermals. Usually I keep them behind hard cover, only to pour in fire on a objective or important enemy asset after a firefight has started.
* Isolation: your c2 is poor, much poorer than the enemy. Don't rely on C2.
From the moment the firefight has started it's mix and mash. A hidden reserve comes in great to punish enemy mistakes and or take on targets of opportunity.
For example: Blue is attacking a town. Our objective is to deny them the objective and or cause heavy casualties. Setup a few sentries on outposts for spotting duties. Have the actual ambush take place deeper inside the town, where direct support fire from outside the town is limited. Have some ATGMs on overwatch in high rise positions.
1. Lure the enemy towards your ambush.
2. hide and wait
3. Give them some false sense of comfort. Spring a small ambush here and there, a little sacrifice to keep them from worrying to much about your main ambush. 
3. wait some more
4. Unleash the ambush at close range. Ideally with an IED of course. And fire those RPGs, use area fire and or Target to make sure they let them fly.
5. Have the units you had hiding, now bypassed by the enemy, move into blocking positions behind/flank of the enemy . They can pour in fire from unsuspected locations or attrit reinforcements that think they are going through a 'safe zone'. 
6. The ATGMs now unhide and target enemy vehicles moving to overwatch/firebase positions with LOS/LOF to the ambush zone. Or else just shoot them at strong enemy positions. Shooting up the cavalry now without their infantry support will psychologically attrit your enemy.
7. Victory at any and all costs!
 

Have been thinking a lot about Opfor in general (sucker for an underdog), and how to approach this with CMSF 2, particularly from a PBEM standpoint, and trying to be somewhat competitive.

Doing some experimenting with CMSF 1:

The heaviest option for civilians in CMSF will allow Combatants (not Fighters (Mujahideen), but the guys in camo and jeans), and possibly VBIED (but not taxis) to remain invisible until very close indeed - it seems like if these are Move-ing along city tiles, these won't be spotted until around 2 action spots away. VBIED seem to have some degree of stealth, but nothing like as much as that. Usually that doesn't matter, since they cover a huge amount of ground pretty quickly.

They are not spotted directly, but the soldiers will still call out "SPOTTED AN ENEMY UNIT", etc. - so there's some contextual clues. Occasionally they might pop up with contact icons, but still nothing they'll directly fire at. Originally I thought this was a problem, but on further thought I think this might actually be okay - the manuals talk about spotting unusual behaviour in civilians, dogs etc., so this could be put down to that kind of observation. I was also originally of the opinion that this "stealth device" approach to modelling insurgents wasn't terribly great, but it does seem to match up to the tactical considerations quite well - hiding amongst civilians to get to point-blank range, etc.

Combatants do not have the firepower to go into a straight fight with any Blufor squad, at least with small arms, and they're mostly equipped with small arms alone. This means that I suspect the correct approach is to force them into something other that a straight fight.

E.g.:

The mission is to attack a US squad, inside a police station. The plan is to use spies to discover their location, infiltrate (whilst holding fire!) to locations surrounding the building, then give them a really good reason to leave the building - ideally a VBIED, but perhaps an ATGM, mortar fire, RPG volley, whatever.  The Combatants can then open up whist he US squad is fleeing the building, giving them the advantage that they need. Any technicals are ideal here as flankers - probably not engaging directly, but cutting off retreat routes.


The TC 7-100 series are the  recent OpFor guides for the US. 2 and 3 are of particular use:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/TC_7-100.2_-_Opposing_Force_Tactics_(December_2011).pdf
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/TC_7-100.3_-_Irregular_Opposing_Forces_(January_2014).pdf

The interesting things here are how generic these are (the same basic concepts work for Syrian Mechanised infantry battalion assaults, or a fighter group ambushing a few HMMWV's). This generally splits a plan into three sections:

Active Element - This is the element that will make the assault/carry out the ambush/manoeuvre onto the target.
Security Element - Early warning for the approach of reinforcements, possibly delaying or preventing this. Typically this might just be an RPG team, but could include spies, IED's, mines, ATGMs, etc.
Support Element - C2, Direct fires, Indirect fires and mobility.

Direct fires will be MG's, RPGs and maybe an ATGM. Mobility is obviously civilian transport.

The "C2" part of that is worth some thought. Irregular forces don't get much in terms of equipment, and I can't remember if there's much in the way of radios in CMSF. The Spy in Passage at Wilcox (CMSF 2 Demo) definitely has a radio, so there's that. I do wonder if it's worth using teams in taxis as messengers, sharing the spy spotting information horizontally? In any case, it's going to be important to pay attention to force (cell?) structure here, and a reasonable percentage of your force allocation should probably go on spies (or at least dedicated to spotting Combatants), since you'll need all the help you can get.


This does leave the Fighters in a slightly odd position. Without the stealth of the Combatants, they're mostly useful for having better equipment (including ATGMs), usually a little better training, and higher motivation. Whilst that means that they're a good choice for the actual attack, they don't have the same ability to get close without some thought - I wonder if they're best used from concealment as the assault element, after the support element suppresses the target? That would leave Combatants in the Security and Support roles mostly, I suppose.

E.g.:

The mission is to attack a US squad, inside a police station. The plan is to use spies to discover their location, infiltrate RPG teams (whilst holding fire!) to locations surrounding the building, then fix them in place -  unleashing a volley of RPGs and MG fire from multiple directions.  The Fighters can then debus from civilian transport and storm the building directly.

One idea I did read in the above manuals which I think could work well in CMSF is using taxis to form an impromptu roadblock - using them to block in either end of a street so that exits are impeded. The taxis will be destroyed, of course, but if it keeps the enemy in the kill zone longer, so much the better.
 

As has been said, first, make sure you have selected "Mix" as the Combat Force in the setup screen.

Then you've got two options on the left hand side:

At the bottom you've got the choice of which arm you're picking from:

Infantry - the only vehicles here are the odd jeep and truck.
Mechanised Infantry - you get access to all the organic light armour and transport in any given battalion; armour and "line" infantry weren't permanently mixed in the TO at this scale.
Armour - the formations here will sometimes contain infantry elements in "HQ companies, but mostly will be pure tanks/TDs
Airborne - wot it sez on the tin
Artillery - This is for off-map artillery assets. They are not considered "core" formations and can't have things added to them.
Fortifications - bunkers, wire, mines and the like


Many of the formations you can buy will have options for some integral, organic light artillery: mortars, infantry guns, flak and the like.

As you can see, this option limits the general type of force that you can select at one time. During the course of your selection, you'll be changing that so that you can get the elements you need to build combined arms.

The other box you're interested in on the left hand side has three options:

Formations - You have to buy at least one of these as the "core" for your force. Each formation you buy is a separate TO; you've already discovered you can delete the bits you don't want. If you buy anything from the other two opitions in this list, the "addons" will be attached to the section of the "core" formation that you had selected when you bought them - there's a yellow arrow to show you, and they'll appear as the last items in that section.
Specialist Teams - everything from scouts (2-3 men, heavy on the SMGs) to heavy ATGs and infantry guns. When you have Armour or Artillery selected at the bottom (as described above) there won't be many options here.
Individual Vehicles - this generally lets you buy singletons of the vehicles that would be available in the formations you see for the given "arm" that you have selected. Hence, when you have "Infantry" selected, there aren't many choices, same as there aren't many Specialist Teams available under "Armour".

There is no reason whatever why you cannot add "Specialist Teams" or "Individual Vehicles" from one arm to a core unit selected from another arm. So you could add Scout teams to a Panzer Battalion, or ISU122s to a pure leg infantry battalion. Or airborne PIAT teams to a Lorried Infantry Battalion.

Whether you buy singletons as add-ons or buy a formation and pare it down depends on two things: Chain of Command and cost.

Buying tanks, say, as a formation means you get tanks in their own, separate chain of command. You get HQ tanks, and once all the tanks have radios, they are in C2 by radio contact most of the time. Buying them as addons mean they are incorporated into the C2 chain of the formation to which they have been added. This might tie them in tighter to the flow of spotting data, but generally means C2 is less easy to maintain.

Buying elements as addons carries a points cost premium. For vehicles, it's usually 15 points. However, every formation you buy carries a premium of 50 points. So the break-even is around 3 vehicles, if you can get them in the same formation, and you have to allow for any "unwanted" elements that the formation requires you to have (like HQs, if you're buying a bunch of pioneers for your tanks, say).

After that, there are further layers of customisation, but I think that's enough for today.

Ok, try this one: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0issbq9hkftsh6j/Objects.pdf?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eh2n63i3ahqjz33/Semenovka (2608 X 2608).btt?dl=0
I've deleted the old version, this is a link for the last one. Couldn't edit it in my post.

Size: 2600x2600 m
Semenovka is an eastern suburb of Slavyansk. In 2014 , during the struggle between Ukrainian army and DPR militia, it became a battlefield. In june it was the last supply route for the DPR forces in Slavyansk who controlled it until the withdrawal. 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f8vt26mk622h75o/Semenovka.btt?dl=0
 
 

Here is the latest updated .cam file for this campaign. It adds or corrects the following:
1. Mission 1: Added additional support assets such as a heavy arty section and some fixed wing assets for support. Missing mortars, FO's and Air Controllers previously missing have also been added.
2. Added the missing Air Controller Team to mission 4.
3. Added a few more support assets to some of the missions.
Hopefully this will make the campaign more enjoyable.
For new downloaders download the main files here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4vrkcpcr3q5tkei/The Mountains of Allah.zip?dl=0
Place the mod folder into your dataz and delete the .cam file.
Download the updated .cam file here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/bwopzmdouzml3cz/The Mountains of Allah.cam?dl=0
Place the new .cam file into your campaign directory.
Michael

(I am looking for a few play testers to give this campaign a try and to offer suggestions or find bugs. For anyone interested PM me and I will send you the link.)
The Mountains of Allah: Operation Scepter is a CMBS Campaign depicting a hypothetical incursion into Chechnya by Russian military forces to find and locate a Islamic Warlord named Abukhan Zakayen and his militant forces that have been launching attacks into the Russian homeland. In the campaign you are in command of elements of 58th Army stationed in the North Caucasus District. Your force consists of:
1 Bn 20th Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (Core Unit)
2 Bn 20th Guards Motor Rifle Brigade (Core Unit)
22nd Spetsnaz Brigade (Core Unit)
1 Bn 108th Guards AA SLT Regiment (Airborne VDV) (Core Unit)
2 Bn 108th Guards AA SLT Regiment (Airborne VDV) (Core Unit)
Other Units Featured During the Campaign:
19th Motor Rifle Brigade
33rd Mountain Recon Brigade
The Enemy Forces:
The Wolves of Islam: Commander Abukhan Zakayen
The Lecha (Falcon) Brigade
The Makkahl (Black Kite) Brigade
The Azyru (Eagle) Brigade
The campaign consists of 9 battles and features offensive, defensive and special operations missions. It takes place in January 2017 and features the excellent Winter Modification Mod designed by the WMT for CMRT but that works seemlessly in CMBS. I have included my own additional modifications of winter effects for all vehicles and troops in the campaign for immersiveness.
The Chechens are featured using Blimy's excellent Seperatists Mod under the Ukranian Digital Cammo slot to give them a militant feel. I added some winter effects to them also for immersiveness.
The maps are all my creations with the exception of two heavily modified quick battle maps. Some are based on actual places and some are fictional.
The actions depicted here are all hypothetical, though they are based on some real world data.
In Chechen society many names and titles are based on their respect for nature and its wildlife. Thats why I used actual Chechen Muslim names for the miltary formations used in this campaign.
Be sure to read the Designer Notes at the Campaign beginning to understand the background that leads to the conflict. Its a bit lengthy but has some interesting real world data that leads into the storyline.
Once I get it tested by a few players I will release to everyone.
Regards
Michael (dragonwynn)
 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eh2n63i3ahqjz33/Semenovka (2608 X 2608).btt?dl=0
I've deleted the old version, this is a link for the last one. Couldn't edit it in my post.

https://mega.nz/file/tqwj1aKa#E3kbm7ZY_1tMS06Npcvt4uxOP4FED2KOBHSxv6j1r88

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eh2n63i3ahqjz33/Semenovka (2608 X 2608).btt?dl=0
I've deleted the old version, this is a link for the last one. Couldn't edit it in my post.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/eh2n63i3ahqjz33/Semenovka (2608 X 2608).btt?dl=0
I've deleted the old version, this is a link for the last one. Couldn't edit it in my post.

Cool.  Thanks...

Thanks for the update!

Yes this is what I want the most too in the next module, fairly low tech stuff like DShKs, ZU-23s, BRM-1s and GRAD launchers rather than the latest developments in tank technology. Well ideally both of course but if I'd have to pick it'd be real stuff that actually saw some action on the field.
How are air assault units equipped differently than what we have at our disposal now?