Zloba

Currently i'm trying small scenarios to enjoy the game without recording anything. But i'm looking forward to play the advanced training campaign and report with my story from there. I needed a change as the work on my last video took huge amount of time. I think i spent more time shooting and editing the video than playing the game actually. I need to balance that. I'm thinking about splitting the stories to multiple shorter videos, something like episodes.

Oh that one, i got confused, because you didn't quote it so i thought you were replying to the last post. To correct you, that wasn't Taskforce Raff campaign, but the Tank Section Attack drill made by Bil. In that scenario, you have only 5 Sherman tanks and need to proceed carefully to destroy few AT guns and other enemy assetts. You have no mortars or infantry support. That example however was posted to show that TARGET from a waypoint is not gamey, because even when it showed no LoS for the tank towards the enemy AT gun, the tank got destroyed by it in the end, so it's not something i can always count on. It's hard to keep conversation in one direction if you keep taking something out of context and start a completely different topic .. just saying

There's no AT gun or tank in the video above.

Ok guys, first of all, i'm not frustrated and i was not complaining about anything. It was just reaction to somebody calling a game's feature (turning off trees in this example) being "gamey". My point was that i don't think it's gamey and i used example from my last video, where you can see from 4:33 that my squad concealed behind trees (their crowns, not stumps) was fired upon by HMG, which couldn't saw them at all. You can see the bullets coming through the trees and at 5:03 there's a PoV from the HMG, which says everything by itself. So if things like these happens in the game (the AI sees through foliage), turning off the trees to help orient myself and plot movement during the command phase can't be called gamey at all. I understand that it's just a feature that helps the player to see and it doesn't affect waht the pixeltruppens see and that foliage is not a cover, but a concealement Here's the part of the video i'm talking about:

I completely understand, i just don't see a reason to not use it, when the AI will see over the foliage no matter if you use it or not. You are putting yourself in a disadvantage as the camera feature doesn't let you "see" everything correctly from the pixeltruppen's PoV, which is a bit of an annoying problem in the woods. So i wouldn't call turning off trees or checking LoS from a waypoint "gamey" in the first place. Like Bil said, we don't have "eyes" on the actuall ground, like the units would have IRL. But i also understand if someone likes to get immersed and just tries to do it like he would IRL. That's also completely OK. I just don't like to see calling game features "gamey" as it doesn't make too much sense to me

I was recently playing the Tank Section Attack scenario (made by @Bil Hardenberger) and i was trying to move by a concealed route from an enemy AT gun. After setting a waypoint and checking the LoS from there i confidentely left one tank on that position. It took about 30 seconds to take a deadly shell from the AT gun and my tank was gone. During my last mission of the Devon - Basic Training i was moving one Infantry squad concealed by trees from an enemy HMG position. At some point for no reason the MG just opened up fire through a very thick foliage of the trees. I checked those angles multiple times and there was no way the AI's MG could spot anything behind those trees. Yet i read some posts about turning off trees being gamey ... If you enjoy making games harder for you, be my guest (sometimes in other games i do it also). But we're all playing the same GAME in the end and i think calling a playstyle or using a feature of the game itself "gamey" is a bit over the top. Everyone likes to play their games in their own way and there's nothing more "gamey" than trying to simulate something real .. there will always be something, that makes it "gamey" one way or another Oh BTW. I'm playing on Iron difficulty settings

SPOILERS! SPOILERS! SPOILERS!

SPOILERS! SPOILERS! SPOILERS!

Well in that regard .. the AI in the last mission opened HMG fire on Squad 3 through very dense foliage of trees. So if AI can see through it i don't see a reason to not turn it off when it gets in the way. One ocassion when i needed them off was just before the final assault on the trenches. The lowest camera position is still a bit higher than a pixeltrupp that is standing and much more higher than a crouching one. Because of that i couldn't see what my units see when looking up the hill. It's still a game and i think it's a usefull optional feature.

I get that part. I was asking about the commands you use and if i understand the sequence in which you use them correctly? - ASSAULT command to position 20m away from the assaulted position - at the same time TARGET command on the assaulted position = this should make the squad elements which are stationary, provide covering fire for the team, that's moving - TARGET ARC command from the waypoint 20m away from the assaulted position

That's interesting. Didn't notice that they actually aim down their sights with the TARGET ARC command. Thanks, will definitely try it next time. I would like to ask about the Recon part. What do you mean by that? What i understood from this, is that you're using a Scout team to advance ahead of other elements. But what i don't understand what you exactly mean by movement to contact order. Do you mean HUNT? If so, do you use restricted TARGET ARC command for them to not give up their position by attacking the revealed enemies, or do you let them fire at will? And do you assault the enemy with the rest of the team without the scouts? Correct me if i'm wrong, but i think the ASSAULT command is available only to a full-sized squad. That means, you would need to get the rest of the team to the scout's position to regroup them into the squad and only after that use the ASSAULT command. Am i right?

Is this something different, than what i wrote earlier? Or do i understand this correctly?

New day, fresh mind, i'm gonna try to clear it for me. Btw. i love the discussion, thank you guys So the point of the discussion is - what's the "better" way of assaulting a position in CMBN. We have 2 (or 3) options: Option 1 (How i like to do it): - one element is used as Base of Fire (BoF) suppressing the position (be it a whole squad or a a team) - another element is used as a Maneuver (MAN) element (again, whole squad or a team) - i give the BoF TARGET command on the position, which is going to be assaulted - i get the Maneuver element to a distance of around 30m of the assaulted position and give them TARGET command towards it - after they throw grenades, i give them MOVE or QUICK command towards the position - in the same time i redirect BoF TARGET so they don't suppress the MAN, or i give them CLEAR TARGET to cease fire Option 2 (Recommended by @Sgt.Squarehead: - one squad = BoF - another squad = MAN - TARGET command for BoF to suppress the position - ASSAULT command for MAN to a position, which is in grenade range of the assaulted position (20-30m?) - after they throw grenades, ASSAULT command on the assaulted position itself (maybe with CLEAR TARGET for BoF?) Option 3 (Recommended by @chuckdyke: - one squad is used to suppress the enemy and the same squad is used to assault the position - ASSAULT command to position 20m away from the assaulted position - at the same time TARGET command on the assaulted position = this should make the squad elements which are stationary, provide covering fire for the team, that's moving - TARGET ARC command from the waypoint 20m away from the assaulted position @chuckdykeCould you please elaborate more on why you recommend TARGET ARC close to the assaulted position and what you recommed after that? And maybe how long to leave the squad with that TARGET ARC command, before they move?

@chuckdyke Sometimes it's really hard for me to get the idea about what you're trying to tell me. Maybe it's the fact that english is not my native language so i apologise .. i'll get back to it when i'm out of my beers

I think i've maintained C2 without much of a problem apart from the one squad, which i intentionally sent another way than rest of the platoon (and the base of fire group obviously). I was having more trouble after i've split the squads to teams and tried to move them up by bounding, or moving whole squads by Bounding Overwatch and Fire & Movement as described by @Bil Hardenberger. The main problem for me was finding the right length of movements mixed with the right length of Pause command. When i thought i had it almost right, after my scouts encountered enemy infantry and let's say they killed them, instead of continuing forward, they stayed in place for the rest of the replay, while the teams which were trailing behind them didn't stop (as they didn't saw the enemy at all) and they were ahead of the scouts by the end of the replay. If it was real-time or the replay lasted only for 30s, i will be able to micromanage that situation and keep the scouts ahead. And about the squad splitting .. from what i read and experienced, when a whole squad comes under heavy fire, all of it's members becomes pinned. If i split them, only the forward element becomes pinned, while i have one or two available elements which can provide suppresing fire and flanking maneuvers. And i learned that the fire superiority is very important in Combat Mission, while getting pinned down is one of the most bad things that can happen as it practically makes an element non-responsive to my commands. So that's the only reason i'm trying to split the squads to teams whenever i see the opportunity. It might be a bad thing, i don't know, but so far it gave me only benefits. oh .. one time, when i was assaulting the trenches i used ASSAULT command for one whole squad while splitting the other two to teams and moving them manually. The ASSAULT command was a little bit quicker in comparison, but then they threw grenades AFTER they got into the trenches, towards enemy soldiers which were surrendering and very close in proximity to my other squads. So i found the command weird tbh.

Task Force Raff will be next, but not before the Infantry Squad Attack and Tank Section Attack drill made by @Bil Hardenberger. I feel like i could benefit from those as i'm still not very confident after i split my squads. It really needs time practicing the commands, to synchronize the teams. And sometimes i feel like 60 seconds for the action replay is just too much. I think some more options like 30 or 45 seconds would make a nice blend of Real-Time and We-Go and would help keeping the teams under more precious control while playing We-Go. But it is what it is and i will need to get used to it i guess.

I was finally able to finish the last mission of the Basic Training Campaign and edit the footage. I'm really looking forward to hear your feedback for this one guys. And i also hope you'll enjoy it at least a little bit. So Mission 3: Battle Drill

Will see how it goes. Maybe i'll replay scenarios if i won't learn anything. About the sounds .. so far so good for me. But i'll definitely look out for some mods in the near future. Thanks for your suggestions

I'm not completely sure what does that mod do .. do you mean removing the background "sounds of war"? I don't know .. i find them atmospheric ... maybe i'm too green to tell the opposite

I totally get it. Once you play a scenario, the Fog of War is lost forever in some extent. I was really thinking about this in the last couple of hours and i think i came to a conclusion. I'll play every scenario only once. I'm pretty sure if i won't be successful and get back to it after doing bunch of other scenarios, i'll have the proper feeling of experience bringing into the 2nd playthrough, while not remembering much of the scenarios details. I know it's against the suggestions (which i know they're right) to play one scenario multiple times until i get through it and "learn the lesson" but i'm more of the type of player who likes to learn things in a more natural way, while experiencing them. I'm just not sure if it will go hand-in-hand with the cinematic style of videos i would like to produce, because .. let's face it .. who likes defeats, right? But only time will tell i guess

Oh nevermind, now i totally get it. I was reading through this whole thread and even if you might think you didn't achieve your former goal .. i still believe the opposite .. the time and knowledge you did put into your blog is something spectacular and the information given is really like nothing else i comed by as a "casual WW2 player". I'm just a 2021 Combat Mission novice and getting response on the forums from guys like you, with a decade (or 2) worth of experience, is like ... it's really something you won't see regularly nowadays. You sir and a lot of other members of this community (i'm sorry to not name anyone else, there are just too many .. really) are the reason i enjoy this "game" more, than i enjoyed it yesterday. every. single. day. Whish you all the best, stay healthy and strong. And keep up the good work man, Thank you!

Yeah, that might be a bit too big for the start. But i can't wait until i trust myself enough to do the "real thing"

Thanks for the recommendation. ATM my plan is to finish both tutorial campaigns and then continue to learn the game in small bits. The Tactical Problems blog looks interesting and i also have some tiny to small scenarios in mind. I would like to learn to crawl, then walk and only after i know what i'm doing, start with the bigger, more complex campaigns that gives a whole bunch of companies to command, if you know what i mean That being said, i don't have a clue how big the campaign you recommend is. I will need to check it out for sure.

@Bil Hardenberger Thank you kindly for your very informative blog full of useful topics. Outstanding work, much appreciated. I'm pretty new to the CM games (just bought CMBN a few days ago) and have a lot to learn. Going through the blog i just want to make sure i'm not missing something here ... i can see 2 downloadable scenarios for CMBN - Infantry squad attack and Tank section attack. I can see also 2 PBEM scenarios made for CMFB and CMRT respectively, which i can't try now as i don't own the games. Are there any other Tactical Problems scenarios and if so, could you please point me in the right direction because i'm not able to see them on the blog.

Roadblock? Hm .. i think it's the mission available in the demo (?). I remember it said something about training mission in the full game. If it's part of the advanced training campaing i will sure play it. But first i need to finish the basic one (didn't had the time to start the 3rd mission yet).