Future modules ideas (unofficial topic)

[DreDay]

Panzersaurkrautwerfer, I think that we are pretty much in agreement. I really have nothing to contest with what you've written. My original point though, was that SOF units would use max firepower/aggression when facing an enemy that is likely to succumb to it; otherwise they will stay low and slow and rely on the support assets to deliver fire missions on their targets, while staying concealed as much as possible. Would you not agree?

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Yeah, but what I'm saying is you're describing the sort of mission that doesn't translate out to being worth playing in a game.  If you're going to model the SOF doing a mission that is well replicated by CMBS it's going to be the high energy raid sort stuff, or they're going to have to allow for mission timers that go out to days to replicate how slow infiltration actually is, and weeks to show how long duration observation rolls.

[DreDay]

Yeah, but what I'm saying is you're describing the sort of mission that doesn't translate out to being worth playing in a game.  If you're going to model the SOF doing a mission that is well replicated by CMBS it's going to be the high energy raid sort stuff, or they're going to have to allow for mission timers that go out to days to replicate how slow infiltration actually is, and weeks to show how long duration observation rolls.

Oh, I am with you. I certainly was not advocating having "low and slow" missions in CMBS. The only reason that I had mentioned those types of scenarios was to highlight the fact that SOF teams are not some game-changers; but rather just another component in the overall OOB of CMBS forces (with all the strengths and weaknesses that come along with them).

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

And I'm saying the "bonuses" are off base.  SOF isn't harder to stop vs some regular infantry dude, they're just allocated with the time and resources to accomplish their given mission accordingly.  So if they're doing a movement to a hide site, they've got the 12 hours to go 2 KM sneakily.  Having some baseline "harder to spot" thing is dumb, as it's not like SOF is trained to run on their tip toes sneakily or something, the kind of stealth movement training they do is the long duration infiltration stuff, which is not something done in CMBS.  

 

Whatever advantage in skills or fitness can already be played out using the tools CMBS has, its just we lack the proper SOF type organizations to use those tools

[DreDay]

And I'm saying the "bonuses" are off base.  SOF isn't harder to stop vs some regular infantry dude, they're just allocated with the time and resources to accomplish their given mission accordingly.  So if they're doing a movement to a hide site, they've got the 12 hours to go 2 KM sneakily.  Having some baseline "harder to spot" thing is dumb, as it's not like SOF is trained to run on their tip toes sneakily or something, the kind of stealth movement training they do is the long duration infiltration stuff, which is not something done in CMBS.  

 

Whatever advantage in skills or fitness can already be played out using the tools CMBS has, its just we lack the proper SOF type organizations to use those tools

I disagree. When talkig about SOF/Sniper/Recon concealment bonuses, I am refering to their stationary positions (i.e. OPs) and not some generic movement. Realistically speaking, these units receive special training in OP cammo/concealment; so I don't see why CMBS cannot replicate that.

[agusto]

Why not sir? What's wrong with having an SOF team having +50% (just as an example) concealment bonus; or let's say +50% lethality bonus when operating within a building? Surely that can't be that difficult to program in one of the future modules...

 

I thnk what you want can be done with the tools available in CMBS. In the scenario editor, make an infantry unit with Fanatic motivation and Elite training. They spot faster, shoot more accuratly and are less likely break under heavy fire than Regular infantry. They are the best of the best. And there you have your SOF soldiers.

 

Go try it out, take a small MOUT QB map and match a russian infantry only platoon with Regular/Normal stats vs. a US Elite/Fanatic infantry only platoon. You will be surprised by the results. For even more extreme results, set the Russians to Conscript/Low/Unfit. The Americans will masaccre them.

[DreDay]

I thnk what you want can be done with the tools available in CMBS. In the scenario editor, make an infantry unit with Fanatic motivation and Elite training. They spot faster, shoot more accuratly and are less likely break under heavy fire than Regular infantry. They are the best of the best. And there you have your SOF soldiers.

 

Go try it out, take a small MOUT QB map and match a russian infantry only platoon with Regular/Normal stats vs. a US Elite/Fanatic infantry only platoon. You will be surprised by the results. For even more extreme results, set the Russians to Conscript/Low/Unfit. The Americans will masaccre them.

Thank you for your advice sir. As a matter of fact, I have tried it out... And I am really not all that obsessed with MOUT/CQB to begin with. My only point was that different branches of service receive different training and it is perfectly fine to have an elite Mech Infantry team recieve different perks than an elite SOF team...

Edited May 21, 2015 by DreDay

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

I disagree. When talkig about SOF/Sniper/Recon concealment bonuses, I am refering to their stationary positions (i.e. OPs) and not some generic movement. Realistically speaking, these units receive special training in OP cammo/concealment; so I don't see why CMBS cannot replicate that. 

 

i worked in the recon end of things for a while.  The inherent stealthiness of an OP or similar position isn't the end result of Delta extreme master force team membership.  It's the training and the experience of the team doing so.  From that, a team formed of the absolute best mechanized infantrymen to ever walk the face of the earth will outperform recent graduates of the Q-Course.  The SOF guys would certainly outperform a normal rifle team though.

 

Which gets to me, the absurdity of your argument.  The CMBS doesn't recognize SOF as different kinds of humans.  It works off of different quality of humans (in terms of experience and training) with different equipment.

 

Which is a much better model, it just happens folks really overestimate just how "elite" a mechanized infantry platoon is.  You really should be seeing a large pool of regular, maybe 30ish percent veteran, and then like zero elite level guys outside of tier awesome zulu operator doom squad guys.  Trying to break down which type of infantry "earns" bonuses is problematic too, as given your logic, the scout teams because of their superior scoutness should get stationary bonuses too for being scoutstealth, when in reality, again, a green scout team is going to be worse than a regular rifle team at hiding, training or not.  

[DreDay]

i worked in the recon end of things for a while.  The inherent stealthiness of an OP or similar position isn't the end result of Delta extreme master force team membership.  It's the training and the experience of the team doing so.  From that, a team formed of the absolute best mechanized infantrymen to ever walk the face of the earth will outperform recent graduates of the Q-Course.  The SOF guys would certainly outperform a normal rifle team though.

 

Which gets to me, the absurdity of your argument.  The CMBS doesn't recognize SOF as different kinds of humans.  It works off of different quality of humans (in terms of experience and training) with different equipment.

 

Which is a much better model, it just happens folks really overestimate just how "elite" a mechanized infantry platoon is.  You really should be seeing a large pool of regular, maybe 30ish percent veteran, and then like zero elite level guys outside of tier awesome zulu operator doom squad guys.  Trying to break down which type of infantry "earns" bonuses is problematic too, as given your logic, the scout teams because of their superior scoutness should get stationary bonuses too for being scoutstealth, when in reality, again, a green scout team is going to be worse than a regular rifle team at hiding, training or not.

With all due respect sir, I fail to see the absurdity of my argument. Of course SOF personnel are not different from any other kind of humans; they are mere mortals like the rest of us… however, they do receive extensive training in certain areas (i.e. concealment) compared to regular Mech Infantry grunts. Would a conscript level SOF guy (I know that it's a bit of an oxymoron) be as good at concealment as an elite Mech Infantry TL? That is for the game engine to decide, but it is perfectly reasonable to adjust the SOF guys' attributes per the unique training that they receive. Same goes for recon/sniper/scout and similar elements.

As I have mentioned, I have never served - so I would not want to challenge your personal experience. However, I do have quite a few close friends that have made it to E-7/E-8/E-9 grade through multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. I would consider them to be the elite of our light/mech infantry; yet when they talk about being trained by SOF guys, it is very clear that there are some skillsets that they simply don't poses compared to their SOF comrades... Much like the SOF guys would not know what to do with an M2A2, unlike my buddies that know it like the back of their hand...

Edited May 21, 2015 by DreDay

[Melchior]

Rather than trying to shoehorn special ops into the CM game engine, wouldn't you just be better off trying to design a game around those kinds of operations?

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

As I have mentioned, I have never served - so I would not want to challenge your personal experience. However, I do have quite a few close friends that have made it to E-7/E-8/E-9 grade through multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. I would consider them to be the elite of our light/mech infantry; yet when they talk about being trained by SOF guys, it is very clear that there are some skillsets that they simply don't poses compared to their SOF comrades... Much like the SOF guys would not know what to do with an M2A2, unlike my buddies that know it like the back of their hand... 

 

I wouldn't consider anyone I've ever worked with on the "regular" side of the army to qualify for elite.  That's what veteran-crack represents well, very well trained, or very experienced regular troops.  A "green" well trained SOF team fits well within the "crack" or perhaps just "veteran" ratings.

 

We don't need to make a separate class of soldiers, with separate ratings, balance, magic numbers etc.  If we wanted to include SOF type teams, the best route is just to meet in the proverbial middle between "elite" rated regular troops as a stand in, or building a complex SOF simulation based upon tacsop uberleet stealth skills, they're just troops with special tools, and we'll leave it up to the scenario designer to tailor the various skill ratings to properly match the performance required.  

[Apocal]

No. At best that gives you a rough equivalent of a Ranger battalion. Special Forces use unique equipment, org structure, and skill sets.

 

Most of their skill-set is not applicable to CMBS though; you're not going to see specialized insertion/extraction techniques, there is no personnel management system for you to simulate "growing" an unconventional force around your A-team or showcase the team medic's skillset outside of battle, Blufor can always talk to other Blufor so no language/cultural specialization necessary, you can't capture or use enemy weapons so the foreign weapons proficiency doesn't matter, there is no operational layer or supply system so you're never going to see the benefits of superior fieldcraft on the ability to field a force with austere logistics, etc.

 

You're basically left with the direction action stuff, but even those either involve a lot of picking battles carefully because a dozen dudes getting into a gunfight is something that can go tits-up in a heartbeat or overwhelming amounts of support and backup for those same twelve.

Edited May 22, 2015 by Apocal

[agusto]

I would like to see irregular forces, both Ukrainian Nationalists and Donbass Seperatists. They are #1 on my module wish list. Most conflicts today are -to some degrees- civil wars, and having a some some sort of generic guerillas would allow CMBS to be used to simulate a whole bandwith of conflicts from all around the world.

[Haiduk]

I would like to see irregular forces, both Ukrainian Nationalists...

 

No more irregular forces on Ukrainian side. Volunteers units, which were established in conditions of extremity in May-July of 2014 now either re-forming in regular formations under jurisdiction of MoD, National Guard and police or now in process of re-forming. So, due to conditions of 2017 no UKR irregulars will haven't to be. Russian-backed forces, of course need to be in module.   

Edited May 24, 2015 by Haiduk

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

No more irregular forces on Ukrainian side. Volunteers units, which were established in conditions of extremity in May-July of 2014 now either re-forming in regular formations under jurisdiction of MoD, National Guard and police or now in process of re-forming. So, due to conditions of 2017 no UKR irregulars will haven't to be. Russian-backed forces, of course need to be in module. 

 

Think they'd still be worth including in either/both of the following formats:

 

1. Ukrainian elements still active in the east after the Russians push through (as all of the scenarios have an initially successful Russian offensive)

 

2. The low tier former volunteer units that might now be better controlled, but still less equipped than the standard units.

[Haiduk]

1. Ukrainian elements still active in the east after the Russians push through (as all of the scenarios have an initially successful Russian offensive)

2. The low tier former volunteer units that might now be better controlled, but still less equipped than the standard units.

 

Ok, this can call like "resistance", "partisans", but not certainly "nationalists". But I think, these group will very small and controlled by SBU for special purpose. Now in occupied Donbas territory operates semi-mythical resistance group "Shadows" (ukr. "Tini"). Unknown exactly who are they. They don't provide any scale operations, just sometime unverified reports are appearing that they shot out some separatist field commander or blow-up something. Our volunteer units in some cases have better equipment, than regular infantry %)  

Edited May 24, 2015 by Haiduk

[Thewood1]

If you want to simulate SOF in detail, I would think one of the ARMA games would be better at that.  Especially a more mature one like ARMA 2

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

Ok, this can call like "resistance", "partisans", but not certainly "nationalists". But I think, these group will very small and controlled by SBU for special purpose. Now in occupied Donbas territory operates semi-mythical resistance group "Shadows" (ukr. "Tini"). Unknown exactly who are they. They don't provide any scale operations, just sometime unverified reports are appearing that they shot out some separatist field commander or blow-up something. Our volunteer units in some cases have better equipment, than regular infantry %)  

 

Which is to say some sort of Ukrainian irregulars in the fictional scenario are not unlikely, and would be good to model.  Having a "high" tier one that's well funded, and a "low" tier one fitted out with scavenged weapons would allow for a variety of scenarios, and matches up pretty well with the way unconventional dudes were modeled in CMSF.  

 

 

 

If you want to simulate SOF in detail, I would think one of the ARMA games would be better at that.  Especially a more mature one like ARMA 2

 

I don't really.  I just think it'd be a neat low(er)-effort inclusion.  Direct action raids are something CMBS can really do already just fine, but it's a bit odd to have a scenario where an errant rifle squad/platoon somehow has worked its way into an an ADA Battery/logistics park/command node.  A semi-generic (or just narrowly defined "The SEALs/Marine SOF/Delta had other engagements, so all you've got is regular Army SOF") special forces team would fix this.  It'd also be good for modeling a Green Beret type team working alongside the various uncon forces.  

 

If there were to be an unconventional module, a few SOF teams would be nice additions to the original MTOE forces.  

[MOS:96B2P]

<Snip>  A semi-generic (<snip>) special forces team would fix this.  It'd also be good for modeling a Green Beret type team working alongside the various uncon forces.  

 

If there were to be an unconventional module, a few SOF teams would be nice additions to the original MTOE forces.  

 

Yes!  This would be cool.  +1 for an unconventional module down the road. 

[Stagler]

Don't we already have an advisory attachment team?

[Melchior]

One of the best missions in any of the games was the first mission of the CMSF Marine Campaign if you ask me. That was pretty SOF and a good example of how flexible the engine is. Sneak these recon teams through the city, spot dug in armor and enemy strongpoints. Knock out choice targets with precise naval artillery fire. Avoid becoming pinned or heavily engaged. Was great.

Edited May 25, 2015 by CaptHawkeye

[agusto]

Yeah that mission was as SOF-ish as the CM engine gets.

[Kieme(ITA)]

With the new features of CMBS such as the precision arty strike + UAVs a similar mission could only be better.

[A Canadian Cat]

Do you mean pull up, in your super fast sports car, to your air conditioned trainer in the middle of the Nevada desert fire up the control panel and go fly over some town on the other side of the world looking for enemy armour and strong points and then obliterate them with the flick of a switch?  I think the first version of that scenario from CMSF sounds more fun as a game.

 

[HUSKER2142]

In the following module it would be desirable to see for blue USMC or NATO, and for red VDV or marines of the Russian Federation. Why not the CSTO but because I don't think that the countries of a military alliance would begin to be at war for interests of Russia in the local conflict.

 

P.S. HI developers , but whether you thought to make the editor who will allow the player most to recreate organizational regular structure of military formations.

 

В следующем модуле хотелось бы увидеть за синих USMC или NATO , а за красных ВДВ или морская пехота РФ . Почему не ОДКБ , а потому что я не думаю что страны военного союза стали бы воевать за интересы России в локальном конфликте .

 

P.S. Уважаемы разработчики ,а не задумывались ли вы сделать редактор который позволит игроку самому воссоздовать организационно-штатную структуру войск .