Playing with conscripts only

[Artkin]

The game feels so much better like this. Firefights are longer with more ammunition expended per kill. Close quarters battle inside houses is now possible, with troops taking time to search rooms before they find the enemy. My men rarely kill everyone in a house before they have to storm it.

Not everything is perfect. Snipers miss often, AT guns shoot much much slower, javelins and other atgms take longer to fire (I find this pleasant considering how fast AT weapons can be whipped out), and the troops can stay ducked for a pretty long time. If the fanaticism is bumped up they will be more responsive. I find Extreme to be the sweet spot, since Fanatic limits the natural behavior of the AI. If you forget about troops on a balcony they can be mowed down turn after turn and will never move under fire.  

Here is an example of an improved experience. If my assault troops saw the enemy in the house earlier (look at 0:19), they would have killed them with rifles from afar. But since we were able to get in close enough they opted to toss a grenade through the window:

 

 

Edited July 10, 2022 by Artkin

[Artkin]

I will submit more vids of positive conscript encounters to prove my case!

[Anxel Torrente]

Get them videos coming, bro.

[Artkin]

On 7/11/2022 at 11:29 AM, Anxel Torrente said:

Get them videos coming, bro.

Boom. Conscripts clear church room by room. No more killing everyone from 300m away.

 

Edited August 6, 2022 by Artkin

[landser]

I understand your point about how this improves your experience. In a different but related way this is why I think WW2 titles would be better with early war (1939-1942). I think that lower lethality results in more tactical game play and it's why I think Combat Mission would be well-served by starting to focus on this part of the war.

It's a similar result as your thread illustrates, but because the weapons are less lethal, not the soldiers manning them. A less lethal battlefield would be great in this series to put a premium on tactics, even more so than it already does, and it does a good job as it is. More suppression, more damaged but not destroyed vehicles. More failed penetrations, more casualties to administer to. Shorter ranges, more freedom to maneuver without being killed from afar.

So yeah, we need early war. I know this isn't the point of this thread, but I do think it hints at why this time period would suit this game so well.

Either way, your thread makes perfect sense and shifts the dynamic a little to change the gameplay patterns, expectations and results. And well, it's more tactical, isn't it?

[Artkin]

35 minutes ago, landser said:

I understand your point about how this improves your experience. In a different but related way this is why I think WW2 titles would be better with early war (1939-1942). I think that lower lethality results in more tactical game play and it's why I think Combat Mission would be well-served by starting to focus on this part of the war.

I agree. Having played a bunch of 1942 orientated scenarios, and ww1 even, the slower pace makes for a very satisfying experience... despite playing with mostly infantry and field guns. The lower lethality is definitely from the lower caliber of guns. This is probably the worst part of CM. You can seriously abuse the mechanics of the sim if you drive your tank around blasting every known enemy position, killing everyone. If you tried that in a Early war setting, it doesn't really work as good.

39 minutes ago, landser said:

It's a similar result as your thread illustrates, but because the weapons are less lethal, not the soldiers manning them. A less lethal battlefield would be great in this series to put a premium on tactics, even more so than it already does, and it does a good job as it is. More suppression, more damaged but not destroyed vehicles. More failed penetrations, more casualties to administer to. Shorter ranges, more freedom to maneuver without being killed from afar.

I would say it's both in this case, since the troops are also conscripts. I felt that infantry are too lethal when it comes to house to house fighting, and that's why I bumped their veterancy down.

When you play only infantry things can get pretty close in range, particularly over objectives. I agree this is where CM shines. I have had really enjoyable PBEMs on barren maps with this format. The CMCW maps run great on CMRT if you want to have huge infantry battles like that :)

42 minutes ago, landser said:

Either way, your thread makes perfect sense and shifts the dynamic a little to change the gameplay patterns, expectations and results. And well, it's more tactical, isn't it?

Thank you. This feels more right. It definitely shifts the dynamics, now I have to enter every single house to make sure I'm not missing anybody. I have to assign rear security guards, etc. The experience is definitely different in general in many ways. It can only be described appropriately when you try it for yourself. :)

[BornGinger]

50 minutes ago, landser said:

this is why I think WW2 titles would be better with early war (1939-1942). I think that lower lethality results in more tactical game play and it's why I think Combat Mission would be well-served by starting to focus on this part of the war.

How would the early war time period affect game play when a veteran in the early war period, been fighting for three months, would be just as much a veteran as in the 1944 games in the same game engine and a fanatic in a 1940 game would be just as much a fanatic as in a 1944 game using the same engine?

[Artkin]

1 minute ago, BornGinger said:

How would the early war time period affect game play when a veteran in the early war period, been fighting for three months, would be just as much a veteran as in the 1944 games in the same game engine and a fanatic in a 1940 game would be just as much a fanatic as in a 1944 game using the same engine?

Well the same could be said for any CM game. The Brazilians in CMFI probably weren't Crack or Elite soldiers.

[landser]

4 minutes ago, BornGinger said:

How would the early war time period affect game play when a veteran in the early war period, been fighting for three months, would be just as much a veteran as in the 1944 games in the same game engine and a fanatic in a 1940 game would be just as much a fanatic as in a 1944 game using the same engine?

 Because he is shooting a PaK36 instead of a PaK40.  You quoted me but I'm not making my point based on skill of the soldier, but the lethality of the weapons system he is using. Or maybe it's a Mosin instead of a PPSh. 76mm field gun instead of a 122mm tube. BT7 instead of a T-34-85. Less range, less accurate, less lethal. Slower fire rate? Inferior ammunition?

[SimpleSimon]

Ideal scenarios with Conscripts would feature a lot of maneuvers or a lot of fighting but not a mix of both. It was generally hard enough to get Conscript troops to show up as arranged at all let alone expect serious willingness to engage in a pitched fight with enemy outside of anything but the most favorable circumstances. Don't get me wrong you can make interesting scenarios and narratives with them-but expecting them to be very heroic is a lot to ask of guys who were drafted or even shanghaied into uniform. 

[Artkin]

1 hour ago, SimpleSimon said:

Ideal scenarios with Conscripts would feature a lot of maneuvers or a lot of fighting but not a mix of both. It was generally hard enough to get Conscript troops to show up as arranged at all let alone expect serious willingness to engage in a pitched fight with enemy outside of anything but the most favorable circumstances. Don't get me wrong you can make interesting scenarios and narratives with them-but expecting them to be very heroic is a lot to ask of guys who were drafted or even shanghaied into uniform. 

Of course if you wish, you can pretend Elite troops are navy seals. 

I don't connect with your point. Scenarios in CMCW come loaded with crack and elite troops. That's not reasonable to me. 

The way troops perform at the conscript level is much better. Combat actually feels drawn out, and firefights are better. Troops shoot at houses 20 seconds after they lost the spot

[Codreanu]

This really does look a lot more realistic. The first battle of the Tukums campaign for Fire and Rubble has you in command of a company of green SS troops mostly clearing forest and it felt good having them instantly trying to hit the deck after their squad gets a burst of PPSh shot at them just as they would in real life. It required a lot of heavy use of suppressing fires and maybe even lowered the casualties because my men would just enter a pinned status instead of continuing to run at the enemy. Crack units in CM more often just feel like robots instead of elite soldiers but it looks like conscripts act a lot closer to an average soldier. Have you tried any scenarios with conscript tank crews?

[Artkin]

Thanks for giving it a try

I have tried lots of scenarios by this point, forced my opponents into this cult...

Infantry and tanks do well. Some units suffer: AT guns can fire as slow as 2 rounds a minute and then stay prone for a long time, I've actually managed to temporarily break a 88mm flak 36 in a related way, forcing them to area target the ground resolved their issue I believe. Snipers can use a boost as well, their aim could be better (Seems to be an issue regardless) but sometimes the conscript snipers wind up surprising me with some good kills. Usually a lot of ammunition is wasted for them in particular. Javelins on conscript take around 30s to fire, so no more instantly picking up the AT and killing. Recent videos of Ukrainians using the system shows something similar. I haven't noticed if AT-4 or RPG-26 is more delayed or not, but if it is, I would be happy with the change.

There are quirks and a few small drawbacks to playing conscript, but the end result is better IMO. I like the drawn out firefights. I can't see troops getting to the front and instantly getting shredded like we normally do with regular troops around here.

 

[Artkin]

The conscripts definitely like to hit the deck and start navigating the floor quite a bit more than other troops, and it ultimately does lead to higher survivability. It seems this doesn't only go for rifle fire, but for explosives as well.

[Artkin]

Also the green troops are good, but they are still too good in urban combat. If you mix Conscript with Extreme and +2, they should perform very similarly to regular troops, although more easily suppressed under fire, and far less accurate. Conscripts can perform cqb in individual houses if they are large enough. It's so rewarding, especially in pbem. I will have more clips coming since I have at least 3 conscript games currently

[kohlenklau]

This is an attempt to make an early war scenario. well, at least in early Barbarossa. @Artkin, feel free to edit to change to your desired mix of conscripts and whatever works best.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/uw734oj917n33dx/AAD9XWZS-klhS3tB6brHXELxa?dl=0

I took a summer break from all things CM. But I have been playing lots of VASL...and also LnL Tactical Digital on steam.

In a few months I will surely get a hankering for some new CM efforts.  

 

 

[Artkin]

29 minutes ago, kohlenklau said:

This is an attempt to make an early war scenario. well, at least in early Barbarossa. @Artkin, feel free to edit to change to your desired mix of conscripts and whatever works best.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/uw734oj917n33dx/AAD9XWZS-klhS3tB6brHXELxa?dl=0

I took a summer break from all things CM. But I have been playing lots of VASL...and also LnL Tactical Digital on steam.

In a few months I will surely get a hankering for some new CM efforts.  

 

 

Thanks, I'll give it a try. Knowing your style this will be a smaller one.

I've been playing SPMBT lately myself, the game has too much quality content to be left alone. It's just hard relearning a full keyboard worth of commands, and I'm sure vassal  can be similar at times with all the different modules.

I was actually looking into vassal so I could form a game on my stalingrad mockup map, but I was unsure if I was putting chits in correctly. Do you have experience creating modules by any chance?

[kohlenklau]

8 hours ago, Artkin said:

Do you have experience creating modules by any chance?

No, I do not have any at all. Try @nathangun I know he made up a VASSAL(?) related product that a CM player manually uses to interface with an operational layer without needing a referee. Maybe not exactly what you want, but maybe he has module creation experience...

[Artkin]

I am waiting on his response already. I figure the more opinions the better.

I just need pieces to move around on a jpg is all. 

[Artkin]

Conscripts on a long march. Oddly they sent two small teams to walk alongside either side of the main trail. Is this intentional behavior? Will look out for this in the future. Very cool:

Conscripts getting in there:

[chuckdyke]

Yes, it was introduced in Engine 4 as units split according to terrain. You need to keep an eye on it as some units can get lost.

[quakerparrot67]

is it possible to change the motivation, etc. for the troops in an existing scenario without changing the units themselves? lets say i want to play the bn/mg scenario 'boys against men', still as the airborne and ss units already in game, but set to 'conscript, extreme, ++.   or would i have to start from scrap for the troops?

 

cheers,

rob

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by quakerparrot67
spelling

[Artkin]

29 minutes ago, quakerparrot67 said:

is it possible to change the motivation, etc. for the troops in an existing scenario without changing the units themselves? lets say i want to play the bn/mg scenario 'boys against men', still as the airborne and ss units already in game, but set to 'conscript, extreme, ++.   or would i have to start from scrap for the troops?

 

cheers,

rob

 

You can.

1) Open the file in the Scenario Editor.

2) Minimize the scenario's formations on the right. This will save you time instead of having to set every team individually.

3) Click the scenario's formation so it's highlighted

4) At the bottom, set the attributes. It will override everything that's highlighted. You want to minimize the Battalions so you can do this step in 1 go per formation.

5) Save the file in your scenarios folder again, with a different name. I like to name mine Conscript after.

Campaign scenarios get kind of weird when you change the troops to conscript. I tried the Tukums battle ages ago with conscript troops, but I broke it.

The regular scenarios should be fine.

[Artkin]

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

Yes, it was introduced in Engine 4 as units split according to terrain. You need to keep an eye on it as some units can get lost.

I wonder if this is why I see troops getting lost in hedgerow often

[chuckdyke]

3 minutes ago, Artkin said:

I wonder if this is why I see troops getting lost in hedgerow often

Yes, you need to set a waypoint just before a hedgerow and just behind it. The same for small bridges. Anyway that is my solution which seems to work.

Edited September 1, 2022 by chuckdyke