Combatintman Posted September 26, 2017 Share Posted September 26, 2017 Ok so here are mine: The Red occupy bug is top of the list - as a Beta tester I have reported this, so it should be on the radar. I agree with @SLIM regarding improving capabilities of reconnaissance vehicles. I would like to see some changes to IED behaviours: One frustration is that AI triggermen default to 'fire the AK-47' rather than 'press the t1t'. Proposed fixes are - either change the behaviour so that the triggerman views the IED as the primary weapon system or take their weapon away from them. The second anomaly is that VBIEDs require separate triggermen. My solutions therefore are either to retain the existing system but give the option for the driver to be the triggerman or to get rid of the separate triggerman entirely. I agree with @Sgt.Squareheadregarding improving IED detection capabilities - there is (and was at the time of the Scenario setting) equipment capable of doing that. Based on a question asked on this forum, and I can't remember if we ever worked out the answer but a quick rummage around the editor indicates that ECM is rare or unavailable to most nations. Brit vehicles have ECM defences against RCIED/Cell IEDs, that does not seem to be the case for other nations and I would certainly expect the US and Canadians to deploy with such defences. UAVs were widely deployed in the real World timeframe of the game in the US Forces and to a lesser extent with the UK. These would be a nice feature to port across from CMBS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted September 27, 2017 Share Posted September 27, 2017 Definitely like the idea of the slimmed down one man VBIEDs. I'd like to see a few more vehicle chassis available as options (anything up to and including a turretless T-55/62), would it be possible to add a new vehicle state: OK Immobilised Destroyed Burning VBIED Also some sort of exotic mortars of the 'Hell-Cannon' variety would be a cool touch, but now I'm deep into the realm of wishes again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 4, 2017 Share Posted October 4, 2017 The selection of T-72s available to the Syrians needs some revision, the T-72A & T-72AV are missing from the current TOE (yet have been in service for decades) and the TURMS-T system should be an option on any of the types in service (T-72 Ural, T-72A/AV, T-72M1). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) Would it be possible to make the 'Destroy' & 'Preserve' terrain objectives a little less 'granular', ie: if a large zone is painted over a number of buildings would it be possible to start awarding points at a lower level of overall damage to the combined structures (tricky request to explain)? Edited October 5, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) @Combatintman Re: Point 1 I think you can do this by assigning them to an AI group and setting them to Hide.....I wouldn't 100% guarantee they won't still take a pot-shot now and again, especially if they take a scare, but it does seem to have some effect, to me at least. I also pre-activate all or most of the bombs in Preview mode.....No idea if this bit makes any difference at all, but it makes me feel like I tried. Edited October 5, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 Not sure if a designer can stipulate a certain % of damage b4 penalty points are awarded. However, I have been surprised at how much damage can be inflicted without incurring a penalty. Have found it quite common to have inadvertently flattened a couple of buildings where there may be a dozen or so to be protected and still not be penalized in the final score. So, am not sure if this feature is something to worry about - so long as you don't try to flatten a significant number of buildings. Having tanks etc use TARGET LIGHT is safe. One or two HE blasts vs a small-medium building is usually safe. Two or three minute bursts of 30mm and similar vs a small-medium building is usually safe. Large buildings can take a lot of HE fire b4 a penalty occurs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 That's pretty much my own experience, I've tried to make civilian casualties a feature of my Mosul stuff, because, well, you've read the same reports I have.....But at present the player has to go the full Stalingrad for them to have much impact. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 "The Full Stalingrad" - yah... I like that phrase. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 9 hours ago, Erwin said: Not sure if a designer can stipulate a certain % of damage b4 penalty points are awarded. However, I have been surprised at how much damage can be inflicted without incurring a penalty. Have found it quite common to have inadvertently flattened a couple of buildings where there may be a dozen or so to be protected and still not be penalized in the final score. So, am not sure if this feature is something to worry about - so long as you don't try to flatten a significant number of buildings. Having tanks etc use TARGET LIGHT is safe. One or two HE blasts vs a small-medium building is usually safe. Two or three minute bursts of 30mm and similar vs a small-medium building is usually safe. Large buildings can take a lot of HE fire b4 a penalty occurs. No the designer cannot set damage percentages. A one off test I did with a single storey single action spot building deducted 50 VPs out of 100 VPs when a single wall was dropped by a sh1t tin of 30mm Rarden rounds. The issue with 'destroy' or 'preserve' objectives is really about scenario designer choices coupled with: A limited number of terrain objective slots in the editor. The fact that terrain objectives cover a minimum of a whole action spot. The fact that some buildings in the editor don't cover a whole action spot. Probably (and if anybody has seen any threads on this then I'd be grateful) there isn't much data on the behaviours of 'preserve' and 'destroy' objectives and their associated VPs. Assuming that most scenarios will have some 'touch' or 'occupy' objectives (and generally there will be at least two in most scenarios) that leaves the designer with six other slots to use for 'preserve' or 'destroy' and that is not many in even the smallest maps. In an ideal World there would be more slots so that every structure could potentially be painted as a 'preserve' or 'destroy' objective but this is not an ideal World so the designer has to make choices. The general solution (and I know @Sgt.Squareheadhas wrestled with this in his Mosul scenario) is to paint a whole city block. This is where the issue of action spots/building sizes and an absence of data comes into play. Say that city block has 10 buildings and you allocate 100 VPs as a 'preserve' or 'destroy' objective. Absolute preservation or destruction of every structure will always return 100 VPs but partial destruction becomes less certain. You would hope that if one building is destroyed then 90 VPs would be awarded but to be honest I don't know. It gets even more complex when say a single wall of three buildings gets destroyed and maybe the roofs of a couple of other structures have been subjected to a couple of short mortar stonks that have left the roof damaged but intact. How many VPs do you get then? As with everything VP-wise the other factor is the designer's narrative: How they perceive destruction or preservation should be rewarded. What constitutes a 'fair' result. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 "The fact that some buildings in the editor don't cover a whole action spot." That would explain why it's possible to flatten a wall and/or damage a building and get no penalty. But, in general, if one is not indiscriminate one should not be penalized for destruction. During the dozens, maybe hundreds of CM2 mission I have played where one has to preserve certain structures, after a few mortar hits on a roof, or a wall being flattened or a house damaged, it's quite common to suffer no penalty. As SS said, you have to go "The Full Stalingrad" to be sure of being penalized. And that seems good, since if one knows that an enemy is holed up in a particular building, flattening it is not "indiscriminate" destruction. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Jack Ripper Posted October 6, 2017 Author Share Posted October 6, 2017 On 9/26/2017 at 7:11 PM, Combatintman said: I would like to see some changes to IED behaviours: One frustration is that AI triggermen default to 'fire the AK-47' rather than 'press the t1t'. Proposed fixes are - either change the behaviour so that the triggerman views the IED as the primary weapon system or take their weapon away from them. The second anomaly is that VBIEDs require separate triggermen. My solutions therefore are either to retain the existing system but give the option for the driver to be the triggerman or to get rid of the separate triggerman entirely. Better yet, make the triggerman a "spy" unit type. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) On 06/10/2017 at 4:26 PM, Erwin said: And that seems good, since if one knows that an enemy is holed up in a particular building, flattening it is not "indiscriminate" destruction. But what if one knows that the enemy has also trapped civilians in the same building? This was what I was really struggling with.....To a certain extent civilian casualties should be unavoidable, but in the current format it is quite unlikely that you will be penalised unless you go 'The Full Stalingrad'. Frankly I'd prefer grey marked, unarmed, neutral AI controlled Groups that I could just place, but I'm not sure if the engine could add a third 'side'? 20 hours ago, SLIM said: Better yet, make the triggerman a "spy" unit type Simple & elegant solution, I like it. Edited October 7, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 @Sgt.Squarehead This would not have FOW but you could put some of your civies in a room with no exits forcing the player to fight their way in and not being able to resort to heavy weapons. You still wouldn't know the size of the enemy force around them but you'd be limited even when you start spotting them from resorting to flattening the structure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 I hate using spies for the role though, their spotting capabilities are too powerful for the role I want them to play, if I had 'Grey Civvies', I'd probably stick one or two spies amongst them in some issues to represent friendlies with mobile phones etc. Whatever the team decide to do, this game is the brightest point on my horizon right now, can't wait to see it.....Please, please, get the UnCons right, fighting those bastards is what it's all about IMHO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 On 7/10/2017 at 2:26 AM, Erwin said: "The fact that some buildings in the editor don't cover a whole action spot." That would explain why it's possible to flatten a wall and/or damage a building and get no penalty. But, in general, if one is not indiscriminate one should not be penalized for destruction. During the dozens, maybe hundreds of CM2 mission I have played where one has to preserve certain structures, after a few mortar hits on a roof, or a wall being flattened or a house damaged, it's quite common to suffer no penalty. As SS said, you have to go "The Full Stalingrad" to be sure of being penalized. And that seems good, since if one knows that an enemy is holed up in a particular building, flattening it is not "indiscriminate" destruction. The law of armed conflict begs to differ. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 But I like being a hero and popular with my pixeltruppen... and I rarely get fragged. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 (edited) 14 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: But what if one knows that the enemy has also trapped civilians in the same building? This was what I was really struggling with.....To a certain extent civilian casualties should be unavoidable, but in the current format it is quite unlikely that you will be penalised unless you go 'The Full Stalingrad'. Frankly I'd prefer grey marked, unarmed, neutral AI controlled Groups that I could just place, but I'm not sure if the engine could add a third 'side'? Simple & elegant solution, I like it. I doubt that BFC have the appetite for this- Pages 101-102 of the CMSF manual lay out the design philosophy and abstracted mechanics supporting the non-inclusion of civvies. Edited October 8, 2017 by Combatintman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Yah, but that was a long time ago.....The battles we are fighting now are somewhat different, plus one should always live I hope. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Looks like ISIS morale is crumbling. There are still for sure going to be some diehards, but the collapse of the caliphate is here. What remains to be seen is what happens next. The underlying disaffection that feeds these organizations isn't changing so inevitably it will simply morph into something else given time and no change on the ground. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/08/world/middleeast/isis-iraq-surrender.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fworld&action=click&contentCollection=world®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0 For an extremist group that has made its reputation on its ferociousness, with fighters who would always choose suicide over surrender, the fall of Hawija has been a notable turning point. The group has suffered a string of humiliating defeats in Iraq and Syria, but the number of its shock troops who turned themselves in to Kurdish officials at the center in Dibis was unusually large, more than 1,000 since last Sunday. The fight for Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, took nine months, and by comparison, relatively few Islamic State fighters surrendered. Tal Afar fell next, and more quickly, in only 11 days. Some 500 fighters surrendered there. The Iraqi military ousted the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL, from Hawija in 15 days, saying it had taken its forces only three days of actual heavy fighting before most of the extremists grabbed their families and ran. According to Kurdish officials, they put up no fight at all, other than planting bombs and booby traps. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 They'll be back, somewhere else, plus they'll continue to claim responsibility for every atrocity, accident or act of god that they can get away with. Vermin.....It's what Buratino was invented for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Jack Ripper Posted October 13, 2017 Author Share Posted October 13, 2017 >Logs into forum. >Notices new title of section: "Combat Mission Shock Force 1" > GOES COMPLETELY NUTS!!! WOIOOOOOOO!!!!!1111!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtsjc1 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 4 hours ago, SLIM said: >Logs into forum. >Notices new title of section: "Combat Mission Shock Force 1" > GOES COMPLETELY NUTS!!! WOIOOOOOOO!!!!!1111!!!!! When I first saw that yesterday I'm thinking "was that always there?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotte Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 BF are throwing us a frinking bone here! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 44 minutes ago, TJT said: BF are throwing us a frinking bone here! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jotte Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 38 minutes ago, akd said: Thanks! I've not read the forums in a few days and missed that. Thats not even just some bones... thats a whole freakin skeleton! 4 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.