Search the Community

See title. Anyone else got simple advice for new players? Here's a short list of mine: Do not get shot at. Shooting makes you easier to see. Cover arcs are not magic. Maybe allow your troops to wait a minute before flogging them onto their objectives. Don't call in that airstrike. No seriously, don't. It'll hit your own guys. It doesn't matter how thick your armor is. You don't assault a position by running straight into it. Use more ammo, you don't get bonus points for frugality. Limit your leaders exposure. Split your squads. Three guys in one action spot are not as vulnerable as six. Maybe we can make a community contributed list Murphy's Laws of Combat Mission. At the very least, let's have a fun thread for once.

Hi everybody, I started compiling a document of the best tips I came across in these forums. They mainly relate to CMBS but many of them are applicable across all CMx2 games. Then I realised these might be of use to other players. It is a bit ad-hoc but I hope everyone is credited for their good ideas and sage advice. So here it is: https://www.mediafire.com/file/ytpps4p2fcwall7/Treasure_Trove_CM_Tactics_Info_V1.4.docx/file It is a docx so you can add your own tips or edit as you wish. (if you want to suggest other places I should put it then do so. I'm going to upload it to A Few Good Men too)

Do you guys split your units often? Perhaps to have many people occupying buildings at the same time for area control? Only time I've actually used it wasn't a real combat situation, but during the training exercise. It does make people useful for scouts at least. Speaking of which, can buildings be used as scouting locations once you shorten the targeting cone? I'm trying to learn about every tactic I can use to my advantage, this game is really tough, even on the training difficulty.

So, after getting this game yesterday, I'm having a hard time with it. I'm loving the game regardless of my failures, but I just have to ask, why do tactics fail here but succeed everywhere else? In most other games, there is the general idea of, "push first, and push hard" in order to capture your objectives. While I attack with what I believe are "overwhelming odds" (although without any intel to support this), by the time the battle ends, it was a horrific, bloody draw. In my current game, the first campaign mission, I've gained control of multiple areas, but barely nobody is alive to continue the attack, with most of the units written down as casualties (also, learning how to heal people would be great). So, making my attacks at least somewhat more efficient than a Skaven bumrush would be very useful information. My next question would be about artillery. I find myself completely dry halfway through the battle, which I wouldn't mind if I knew that it was being used effectively. My first targets at the beginning of the match are the objectives, in this case I bombard the school, or other clumps of buildings with hope to suppress or just wipe out many squads at once. What fire modes do you guys use under what situations? In exchanges of fire with other infantry, I tend to use light fire for short periods of time, and for groups like machine guns and infantry in buildings, I would use heavy for short as well. I don't use Long much because I'm worried that the fir will continue long after we push upwards into the location. Something someone posted that got me curious was to "always leave units in reserve". Does this help? Won't your attacking forces just get overrun immediately without strength in numbers? My last qustion is, how can you preserve the health of your units, and how can I reduce the number of times they just drop what they're doing to run away? It feels like the moment a fight begins, a unit is running away, and their fear level is difficult to manage.

So, I'm new and I'm wondering which game would be right for me, between Shock Force and Normandy; here's my perspective: World War 2 has much more declassified material on it, making it easier to study and use for advice on tactics, roleplay, and scenario creation, with a lot of varied equipment and combat doctrines. On top of that, WW2 combat was much slower paced compared to today, which may or may not translate to game mechanics, but seems like it could lead to some fun, hair raising situations on the battlefield. When it comes to Shock Force, it seems more immersive, being able to relate to the modern equipment that's being used and that you have available, however, information is still rather classified, so unless you just want to recreate missions from Steel Beasts and other things, that seems as close to active combat as we can simulate, so Im not sure how accurately a Niger campaign can be made. So, this is my own personal perspective about things, and what is personally important to me when I look for games like these. I would love your guys' advice!