Davis06

On Discord I've heard of a mod that adjusts vehicle gunner animations in order to make them less 'exposed' and harder to hit by the enemy AI? Is anyone familiar with this and could direct me to it?

Interesting. I'm going to have to try this. Thank you!

Here's a 'tutorial' scenario that takes a US infantry PLT through a point ambush. Most of the steps are within the Mission Briefing. This is one of the first scenarios I've done working with the ENY AI. I've generally used the SQD Ambush Ranger Board (level 20/30) and it's still applies fine for a PLT as well. Ambush Tutorial (US Infantry).btt

Is there a way to create a scenario with non-player controlled units on their side? I am looking to provide adjacent units or scenarios where the player has to FPOL/RPOL (forward passage of lines/rearward passage of lines), etc. etc.

Here's the scenario. I tried to request access over at The Few Good Men but never heard by from them.

All, Here's the scenario from a video essay I posted a bit ago on the US Infantry Battalion. US IBCT IN BN DOCTEMP .btt

Thanks Artkin, I'll work on uploading.

I recently used the newer ClipChamp (from Microsoft) to put the final touches on a video I made a while ago about the real size and composition of an IN BN within CMBS. This was partly for my own practice and partially to show, and suggest, how Battlefront could expand the T&EOs to provide a wider range of scenarios and the flavor objects that may be good to add someday.

It strikes me as odd games like CMSF2 and CMBS do not have additional military equipment in the map editor that a BN and below would have. I'm meaning more of the GP medium or large tents, OE254 antenna's, COM201B antenna's, generator carts, satellite dish carts, ULCAN netting, HEMMIT (even static) for refueling points, etc. Has anyone been working on these? I have found a couple camo nets, tents, and HESCO barriers from modders. Is there anything else? I do hope engine 5 or the next CMBS DLC addresses this a bit.

I would like to reiterate, that possibly the most valuable improvements could be toward; -Quality of life improvements for the scenario editor, especially in the map making and enemy plans. --Every type of linear objects; roads, streams, rivers, walls, etc. should have the path making option available. Buildings and so on should have a big square procedural generation option in order to make towns/cities faster. The fidelity of curses and angled lines needs to be improved. --Personally, I am very interested in the upcoming VBS3 planning tools, where I can assign a tactical task and timeline (video editor style) to the unit. The current tools are good and it need to keep the postures and and fire control guidance. It just seems it would be easier to design and plans with more intuitive tools. --PS: task organization options; I'm sure a balance could be generated IOT develop more customizable task organizations without the risk of franken units. This seems to be a continual request in the community. All this would make content generation faster and more accessible for more players, which will (pun intended) should provide the games with a "force multiplier" to attract and keep more players!

Dang, that would be interesting if able to replicate!

Yes, the javelin (and tow) through the BST (Basic Skills Trainer) is easy to become proficient with. As are the real systems. As are they are designed. And yes we are seeing how effective these extremely expensive systems and rounds are because of that (60-75k per javelin round but at 90% effectiveness at full range). I am personally impressed with these expensive systems that are actually justifying their costs (b/c SACLOS doesn't cut it).

Steve, Thank you for the clear messaging. I admit I am eagerly awaiting the next addition, but also respect your prudence. There are a good amount of folks who look to your 'simulations' as the next best thing to understanding potential realities. I look to you for this as well, but understand there's so much more that goes into these engagements than just composition of forces and tactics on the battlefield, and only take what you offer with a healthy dose of salt. Much of the higher limitations or classes of supply completely negate any tactical options or opportunity a side, with real human lives, have. Thank you for being patient to wait out this historic conflict.

Good points. Yeah, the suppression and cowering mechanics seem like they may not be entirely accurate. I also am not completely satisfied with how 'to the death' many AI (both TAC-AI and Scenarios) will hold their ground instead of retreat or surrender en mass. However, the your marksmanship point may be more accurate than it would seem. Numerous battlefield studies have confirmed how many rounds are expended per WIA and KIA, and it's A LOT. It may stem also from the physiological reluctance to kill as is discussed in "On Killing" by Dave Grossman. Not as much small arms combat has been about killing as it has been about driving the ENY away or compelling them to surrender. I do not find the inaccuracy un-realistic b/c of these considerations. I have this game as my choice of simulation to practice on b/c on the whole it still seems more closely realistic than all else so far. When you do put your troops into a bad position you are punished extremely quickly and costly. There's a weird mix of macro leading the bigger fight, then getting down into micro-management of each unit that teaches good lessons on terrain understanding, fire control measures, setting conditions for the battle, experiencing optics and engagement ranges that are closely approximate to the real thing. I wish they could upgrade the TAC-AI to be better, but it also forces you to understand what each fireteam and squad leader should be thinking and communicating amongst the team. What do you think? Does any of this make sense, or still not quite what you're asking for?

Uhm, old Mattis may take issue with that. In his book, 'Call Sign Chaos' he believes the initial Marine insertion into Afghanistan was the longest amphibious invasion to date. It just used aerial assets from ships instead of ships and landing ships initially.