What the actual hell is this game?

[IICptMillerII]

19 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

Yeah I just loaded it up again to make my dream scenario with the location come true in the editor and I do remember now that it is explicitly a hospital. I'm still going to allow one of the F-18s in support though for use at player discretion with perhaps a demerit or points off for using it on the hospital.

Just so you know, bombing hospitals is generally considered to be a bad thing, if not a blatant war crime, regardless of what is actually in the hospital. CNN would have a field day...

Extra-CM considerations aside, the F-18 is a Navy aircraft. While it’s possible for Army units to receive support from the Navy, they are far more likely to receive support from an Air Force aircraft such as an F-16, F-15E, or an A-10. 

[Erwin]

30 minutes ago, SimpleSimon said:

the Syrian Garrison is plenty large enough to warrant the Hospital as a fair target

Agreed.  Yes, it's a hospital, but with all the 40mm and 50 cal being used, no doctor or patient would be safe.  Best to assume they've been moved to the basement(s).

Nice video.

[SimpleSimon]

1 hour ago, IICptMillerII said:

Just so you know, bombing hospitals is generally considered to be a bad thing, if not a blatant war crime, regardless of what is actually in the hospital. CNN would have a field day...

This is a very good point. I think the Syrian Force count in the Hospital is large enough to warrant it as a legitimate target, but the presence of civilians and especially patients inside it would definitely make a direct attack on it pretty distasteful in any context. Ain't war hell? 

Quote

Extra-CM considerations aside, the F-18 is a Navy aircraft. While it’s possible for Army units to receive support from the Navy, they are far more likely to receive support from an Air Force aircraft such as an F-16, F-15E, or an A-10. 

Yeah I figured that, I was going to highlight the F-18 as "loaned" from the Navy because Army Aviation assets are up with the SBCTs further inland.  

EDIT: So the Briefing states the Syrians occupied the building aware that its status as a Hospital would discourage the use of aerial bombing. No mention is made of whether its occupied by civilians or not but if the Syrian Commander is ruthless enough he might well chose to keep hostages in the facility to make that point. However, his force is very large and there are visible defensive fortifications around the structure. Perhaps i'll score destruction of the main building very harshly and encourage external objectives more since i'm enlarging the map. I've added a 3 story building down the road from the entrance (a "sniper house" the Defenders have been using to harass traffic) and low ground opposite the main entrance the Americans might want to move men inside of to discourage the escape of a such a large force or catch deserters. 

Realistically if such a situation presented itself I doubt either the original designer's scenario or my scenario would happen at all. Too much shooting around a large number of vulnerables with enormous potential for a humanitarian disaster. Just keep the place bottled up convoys will be routed down other routes etc. 

Edited August 13, 2020 by SimpleSimon

[IICptMillerII]

2 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

This is a very good point. I think the Syrian Force count in the Hospital is large enough to warrant it as a legitimate target, but the presence of civilians and especially patients inside it would definitely make a direct attack on it pretty distasteful in any context. Ain't war hell? 

Very much agree. Just to be clear I wasn’t trying to be snarky and kick up heated conversation, just pointing it out for context as to why the scenario is designed the way it is. 
 

2 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

Yeah I figured that, I was going to highlight the F-18 as "loaned" from the Navy because Army Aviation assets are up with the SBCTs further inland. 

Very fair point, and this does happen in reality pretty regularly. I just had to point it out for grog reasons.

[MikeyD]

Quote

...but with all the 40mm and 50 cal being used, no doctor or patient would be safe. 

For the coming CMRT module I did a scenario with Russians tasked with liberating a slave labor camp. Now that I think of it, that's another building complex behind high walls and (theoretical)  friendlies trapped in the fire zone. Scenario title - "Arbeitslager". Keep a lookout for it.

Hah! I just remembered an ooooold CMSF1 3rd party scenario of mine from years ago. "Lone Star Shopping Plaza". Drunk Marines take over a Texas shopping mall and (drunk) Stryker Inf is called in to clear them out. Taking place on July 4. Another building complex behind high walls and (theoretical)  friendlies trapped in the fire zone! I'm starting to sense a pattern.

Edited August 13, 2020 by MikeyD

[Bozowans]

That slave labor camp scenario sounds awesome. I'm gonna watch out for it. I wanna try that Texas shopping mall one too lol 

It would be interesting to see more hostage-situation type scenarios. Something like the Beslan school hostage crisis in Russia in 2004. The school had 30 or so terrorists and hundreds of hostages inside, and the Russians assaulted and stormed the building with special forces and army units using tanks, APCs and thermobaric weapons and it still took them hours to clear the building while taking heavy casualties in the process.

A complete catastrophe IRL but I wonder if you could design a CM scenario to reflect something like that. It's not possible to trigger something to blow up using the editor right? I don't really know much about using the editor. But you could penalize the player very heavily for damaging any buildings. Most of the time when I see preserve objectives it's just a couple of buildings here and there on a huge map, like a mosque, that you can safely ignore or bypass. I don't recall seeing any scenarios that are entirely built around one big preserve objective. Or maybe a "don't cross this line" trigger? Forcing you to adopt different tactics like laying siege to the building at a distance, posting snipers all around the place hoping to pick off enemies without risking a big assault and so on.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

1 hour ago, MikeyD said:

Hah! I just remembered an ooooold CMSF1 3rd party scenario of mine from years ago. "Lone Star Shopping Plaza". Drunk Marines take over a Texas shopping mall and (drunk) Stryker Inf is called in to clear them out. Taking place on July 4. Another building complex behind high walls and (theoretical)  friendlies trapped in the fire zone! I'm starting to sense a pattern.

That thing is truly a bloodbath! 

@Bozowans  I have Lone Star Shopping Plaza if you want a copy.....It's not quite so easy for the player as the other scenarios mentioned here. 

Edited August 13, 2020 by Sgt.Squarehead

[IICptMillerII]

1 hour ago, Bozowans said:

A complete catastrophe IRL

Absolutely. They ended up killing something like half of the hostages, I think 150+ children because they literally blasted the school with thermobarics. Beslan came to mind earlier in this discussion but I refrained from mentioning it as to not derail the thread. Though it certainly is more relevant to the discussion now. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

2 hours ago, Bozowans said:

It's not possible to trigger something to blow up using the editor right?

Oh yes it is! 

How many do you want & how big do you want them?

 

Edited August 14, 2020 by Sgt.Squarehead

[37mm]

14 hours ago, Boche said:

Well that wasnt too bad! Bad luck with that squad but apart from that didnt go too badly. Quick question what sound mod was that again? Cheers!

Basically an updated version of the Heaven & Earth soundscape... it's still WIP but the version from a few weeks back did come with the Syrian modpack I released.

10 hours ago, Heinrich505 said:

That was a really nicely done video.  I thought the lighting and the rendering was particularly effective, and made parts of it seem almost photo-realistic.   We were definitely there in the middle of the firefight with the guys.

It was a small map & I've recently replaced my big screen TV/monitor so I thought I'd try out the 4k resolution... that, combined with Barabaricos movie shaders (and with just a touch of reshade), is probably what you're seeing.

[Bozowans]

On 8/13/2020 at 6:27 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

That thing is truly a bloodbath! 

@Bozowans  I have Lone Star Shopping Plaza if you want a copy.....It's not quite so easy for the player as the other scenarios mentioned here. 

If you still have a copy yes I would love to try it!

 

On 8/13/2020 at 8:16 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Oh yes it is! 

How many do you want & how big do you want them?

lol how do you do that?

I've wanted to make my own scenarios for a long time now but it's hard to find the time for it. It seems like playing around in the editor can be an entire game in itself, and there are still a million other scenarios and campaigns I haven't even tried yet.

[ZackTactical34]

Thing with Combat Mission I've learned is it punishes impatience and rewards thoughtful planning. My very first game I played I thought I could just wing it and successfully rush into a city and take over...that was a bad mistake. Lost most of my armor and my team was wiped out. You have to be careful with how you approach a situation.

Also, if battles were so easy to conquer, why does it take on average 250,000 bullets for every enemy killed IRL: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-314944.html

It's not easy. War is freaking hard. And Combat Mission does a good job exhibiting that difficulty.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

12 hours ago, ZackTactical34 said:

Thing with Combat Mission I've learned is it punishes impatience and rewards thoughtful planning. My very first game I played I thought I could just wing it and successfully rush into a city and take over...that was a bad mistake. Lost most of my armor and my team was wiped out. You have to be careful with how you approach a situation.

Also, if battles were so easy to conquer, why does it take on average 250,000 bullets for every enemy killed IRL: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-314944.html

It's not easy. War is freaking hard. And Combat Mission does a good job exhibiting that difficulty.

Couldn't agree more.

Go slow and recon, recon, recon.

[Saint_Mattis]

I do think the accuracy for the units needs to improve, I had Marines shooting down at a stationary target around 230 meters away and it took more than 10 rounds with an M16a4 to hit him while they were prone. If I recall correctly the units were not exhausted and barely moved into position from a LAV, with a clear line of sight it should have taken 2-4 rounds at the maximum to hit the stationary target.
I can see a poor sightline at 400 meters taking a few hundred rounds, mix an oversized fire team element and I would put around a thousand rounds of small arms into a small building while moving closer to clear it unless you had a 50 cal with SLAP rounds you can probably use a box or two.

The article posted makes sense, training on ranges before deployments, ranges on deployment, and suppressing a target with sustained fire, training alone take a few hundred thousand rounds. The most brass casings I've ever seen was in 29 palms, fun times

Edited September 7, 2020 by Saint_Mattis
Grammar

[Sulman]

On 8/12/2020 at 2:30 PM, SimpleSimon said:

I think what stands out to me is how inadequate a Stryker Brigade is for the circumstances. The given battle is very set-pieceish though with lots of forces crammed into a relatively small space. It's not that the circumstances are invalid, but that the force composition and stated objectives lend themselves to a scripted blood bath that annoys me as always.

If was the local XO i'd tell the Combat Team troops to just push on down their route of advance and then have infantry and engineers find ways to prep the site for later capture. Capture 1 is ground with good oversight on low ground West of the facility etc and will make it impossible for the Defender to just slip out. Objective 2 is a destroy/clear. A warehouse external to the site that snipers have been using sometimes to attack transports moving up the highway outside the map. You can vaporize it with the F-18s if you want, or save them for enemies revealing their location in the factory. If you're crazy you can engage the factory directly and try to clear it now but if you chose to give battle to the enemy's main body you will be scored harshly on own losses. The peripheral objectives are attractive in that they're less likely to cause a battle. You could have the F-18s just pummel the factory too but the enemy force is likely holed up in the very deepest parts of it. Or...maybe I randomized the spawn area so they're all on over watch at the highest floors waiting for you to go for one of the lesser objectives thinking its safer. If that is the case, then those Mk84s the F-18s are carrying will definitely ruin the defender's day. Decisions decisions...

It's not the only scenario that has these issues; there's a couple in CMBN as well. I just did a recap/mini-AAR on one in CMSF2 'Into the Valley' which has similar plausibility problems. I can believe all of it but the insane ROE and mystifying lack of support make it a tough mental exercise. 

'School of Hard Knocks' in CMBN was the tentpole one for me, missions that seem intended to poke the player in the eye, with very tight victory conditions, frustrating setup, and seemingly everything against you.

But, everything works, and there's lessons in all of it. It sort of keeps me coming back. Stockholm Syndrome probably, haha.

[SimpleSimon]

AI defenders are almost always reliably static and this has a knock-on effect down the entire game causing players to count on static defense for every scenario. So you can always deploy your forces optimally for a siege without needing to consider the risk of a spoiling attack. That the AI does not conduct very intricate attacks or very sophisticated attacks to me is no excuse for this. It's a major absence. 

If the AI force is strong enough and equipped well enough to push the player right off the board then its too strong for the context and the scenario's narrative needs revision or the designer needs to chop headcounts. 

I like to imagine situations where the enemy's line is breached and the main objective captured, only to discover that it's abandoned and a new uncomfortable question has arisen as to where exactly the enemy is. Blunting the Spear in Red Thunder point out that the enemy likely withdrew through their own designated Exit objectives and are being fed VPs for unit preservation. (One among many reasons why that is such an excellent campaign) 

In other situations, perhaps you should've set aside a Company to watch the Foret Jaques after all...

[Erwin]

3 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

That the AI does not conduct very intricate attacks or very sophisticated attacks to me is no excuse for this. It's a major absence. 

Generally, I agree with that.  However, there are a few talented designers who have created clever AI plans that have made me feel I was playing against a cunning human.  So, a clever and challenging AI attack is possible.  (Probably most designers don't want to invest the time.)

Eg:  I found the AI counterattack(s) in CMFB's "Mission to Maas" (designed by "theforger") to be tough and compelling.  

Edited October 31, 2020 by Erwin

[FlemFire]

4 hours ago, SimpleSimon said:

AI defenders are almost always reliably static and this has a knock-on effect down the entire game causing players to count on static defense for every scenario. So you can always deploy your forces optimally for a siege without needing to consider the risk of a spoiling attack. That the AI does not conduct very intricate attacks or very sophisticated attacks to me is no excuse for this. It's a major absence. 

If the AI force is strong enough and equipped well enough to push the player right off the board then its too strong for the context and the scenario's narrative needs revision or the designer needs to chop headcounts. 

I like to imagine situations where the enemy's line is breached and the main objective captured, only to discover that it's abandoned and a new uncomfortable question has arisen as to where exactly the enemy is. Blunting the Spear in Red Thunder point out that the enemy likely withdrew through their own designated Exit objectives and are being fed VPs for unit preservation. (One among many reasons why that is such an excellent campaign) 

In other situations, perhaps you should've set aside a Company to watch the Foret Jaques after all...

 

This is why I like missions that design for a bit of back and forth flow; such as beating back an attack in the initial moments, and then evolving into a counter-offensive where you have to go and then take objectives to close out the map.

[Sulman]

As I progress through TF thunder I keep thinking how life imitates art. Specifically when rolling a Mech Inf company into a city, you give up on using the crunchies pretty bloody quickly, and just rely on the tanks because they're the only thing that stands a chance of surviving.

There's a mission by George called 'Point Blank' and it's a very steep challenge. Here's a screenie showing the map after I successfully completed it (Just the link as I don't want to spoil it for anyone.)

Note the sheer amount of infantry, and that's after the battle. My initial plan was to take the back alleys and scout the intersections with infantry teams. I made  it one block and quickly had my scouts cut up by effective fire from the buildings. The new infantry behaviour exacerbates this too, because they hold onto those apartments a lot better. This isn't a complaint, it's just a matter of fact. 

Every building near the objectives has infantry on it, it's far too much for one platoon, and even the Bradleys were held back. One Abrams got hit by three RPG 7s in one turn, and they were all from different apartments. The armour was the only thing keeping them alive. And he was supposedly under watch by Sgt. Cataracts in the Abrams behind.

The other thing is scouting tanks < 500m when they have TIS is nigh impossible if they happen to be facing your direction.

It made me think of Simon's arguments about realism. I don't think such a mission would really have happened, or would have at least lasted one block before the Coy commander halted it. The objective is the enemy armour, and arguably there's better tools for this, like the AH-64. Also you have SPAG support, but it's very difficult to get a spotter to live long enough to call it. This mission would really have benefited from the addition of a UAV and PGM from the SPAG, but it was created back in the CMSF1 days.

As regards collateral damage, CNN et al I can completely see how places like Grozny and Homs got completely obliterated, and that's surely a gift of these simulations.  Total War in far off places doesn't necessarily consider the nature of the targets.

[Sulman]

2 hours ago, Khalerick said:

 

This is why I like missions that design for a bit of back and forth flow; such as beating back an attack in the initial moments, and then evolving into a counter-offensive where you have to go and then take objectives to close out the map.

There's some fatigue in constantly attacking, too. You get a little bored with the grind. Even the occasional meeting engagement is a nice break.

[Erwin]

6 hours ago, Sulman said:

My initial plan was to take the back alleys and scout the intersections with infantry teams. I made  it one block and quickly had my scouts cut up by effective fire from the buildings

If you are interested in training in urban combat with only inf and soft vehicles, "Relief of Joker 3" is recommended.  Amazing Ramadi map.   

In CM2 one has to learn how the game system works in order to fight effectively.

[THH149]

Not bragging but scored this against a very experienced H2H opponent ... but i think the scenario favours the Amies about 70/30 (in terms of Victory Conditions being able to be met), so the Syrians should be tougher (eg able to set up anywhere in the hospital complex).

 

[Erwin]

Yes... when defending vs an oppo with high firepower one should never set up in positions where he can see your units (or you can see him in most cases other than for spotting perhaps).  Units should always be set up one wall into the building so that it's impossible to shoot at or hurt them (unless the whole building can be collapsed).  That way when the enemy's inf assault they face your full strength as soon as they enter thru the first destroyed wall.  

Good designers set AI units up this way and it can be very hard to attack in those circumstances.

[chuckdyke]

Total victory and I played on Iron, 1st get all the Javelins out of the Strykers use the buildings for hard cover. Achieve fire superiority with the Strykers and get them to support the infantry. Don't stop the Stryker, let the Strykers fire on the move. The key weapons of the Syrians pair them with the Javelins. Don't move in the hospital till you don't take fire. Have your infantry move to the roof. Grenades and explosives are the killers your small arms merely suppress the enemy. It is basics base of fire and breach the perimeter walls. If I see that amount of fire power hide in the inner rooms and booby trap the entrances and have something like claymores to cover the corridors. CM doesn't have claymores funny enough.  

Edited December 23, 2020 by chuckdyke

[THH149]

On 12/24/2020 at 1:56 AM, Erwin said:

Units should always be set up one wall into the building so that it's impossible to shoot at or hurt them

Thats very good advice, and what my H2H opponent was doing.