Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by JasonC: In re Moon's comment - perhaps you are right and I just don't know how to use the existing system to do what I want to do. I am willing to be instructed. I will describe the fight I want to try, you tell me how to do it in the present system. The Americans have a standard Stryker mounted medium infantry force, with some fire support, air or 155 arty will do. The terrain is town and they conceive their mission as being to clear and hold the town. It is an attack type mission. The Syrians have a special forces group consisting as nearly as possible of the following - a) A single platoon of good quality infantry, armed with late model RPGs and extra LMGs, well led. Plans to reposition repeatedly, back alley routes, originally centrally located, ground floor building interiors. 4 separate 2-man sniper teams with scoped rifles, high quality. Dispersed and hidden on upper floors around town. c) 4-6 separate small teams each with late model RPGs and 1 SAW, again good quality Syrian special forces personnel. Also dispersed, ground floors and keyholed down alleys to main street crossings. d) 1 or 2 14.5mm AA MGs with fanatic crews and abundant ammo, in fortified building location(s), plenty of overhead cover (bunker(s) effectively). Overlooking a main drag, square, or park area. e) one car bomb sized IED, prepositioned and remote detonation - at same main drag square park etc. 3 other smaller ones, can be short range wire detonation, scale a few 155mm rounds daisy chained together. Those on back routes to the bunker's and coordinated with (overseen by) the separate RPG and SAW teams. f) 2 separate ATGM teams sighted down long thoroughfares, crossing pattern. Not a single vehicle (too easy to spot). No hordes of useless AK touting conscripts to be shot to rags by vehicle 50 cals. No masses in the same building to all be whacked by the same bomb. 60-70 guys total. Mission - inflict maximum losses on the attacking Americans, completely uninterested in terrain control of any kind. Secondary mission, keep the expert units alive (snipers and ATGM teams in particular, squad and RPG-SAW teams much less important and bunker MGs totally expendable). Those are the tactics I want to test standard US doctrine against, so I need to be able to tailor that sort of Syrian force and I need to command it. Is there a QB setting that will do this? If there isn't, then I submit there is a significant and overwhelmingly legitimate case for selectable forces. I am aware (from another thread) that how comms are modeled is one reason to stick to known force compositions. But if the above can't fit into CMSF, its value as a tactical simulator is limited to testing against a cookie cutter version of enemy doctrine (which I already known will not work against US strengths, making it rather moot to simulate). One man's opinion... You ask for a gigantic list of very specific OOB and terrain limitations and then ask if you can get a specific QB setting for it...you're talking about a custom built scenario (and from the sounds of it, a very well-thought out, balanced and eminently entertaining one), not a Quick Battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zipuli Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Just tried multiplay... aside from the fact that in our first match we had the same deploy zones (WTF!?) that caused a 10 second slaughter of Syrians, the lack of "buying" (or choosing or whatever) is a huge step backwards. Why you ask? because with same settings I had in one match 2 Rechoilles, 2 AT-3 and 2 BMP-2 + few riflemen and FO with nothing to shoot and in next match 3 T-72s and the FO with no ammo. Combine that with the maps that are not random, no WEGO in bigger battles and deploy zone bugs and voila, you really need to try hard to like it AS IT IS NOW. For me the campaign is OK and fun (even with no knowledge of bigger picture etc.) but Quick Battles in any form are simply awful. It gets fixed... It gets fixed... I hope! Too much potential in this game to just throw away (and I know BF will not). Zip 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Chapuis Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: You ask for a gigantic list of very specific OOB and terrain limitations and then ask if you can get a specific QB setting for it...you're talking about a custom built scenario (and from the sounds of it, a very well-thought out, balanced and eminently entertaining one), not a Quick Battle. I disagree. In CMx1 terms, if Jason was wanted to test out his tactics he could have just started up a QB, picked the units he wanted, set-up his defense and then let his opponent come after him. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: You ask for a gigantic list of very specific OOB and terrain limitations and then ask if you can get a specific QB setting for it...you're talking about a custom built scenario (and from the sounds of it, a very well-thought out, balanced and eminently entertaining one), not a Quick Battle. Nahh, you could customize a force almost down to that level in a CM QB. -dale 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Mm, forgot you could import maps in the later CM titles. Still, I hope JasonC will build that as a scenario and release it for the rest of us to see. Or write one of his AARs. Or both. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Chapuis Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I agree, it does sound like a neat scenario 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Zoidberg Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Would like to see it made, certainly. And while I am thoroughly annoyed about the lack of really functioning QB's, I realise I'll probably forget about it if there are zillions of varied and entertaining scenarios to play. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Steiner14: But i admit, that maybe a player has to go through this phase first, to recognize, that the most fun lies in the intentionally constructed scenario and not in random factors. What a load of BS. I guess that seven yrs were not enough for me to *relaise* that all the fun I had was just imaginary, and the canned scens, that I did not like as much, was somehow superior. Dont try to pretend that your way of playing the game is somehow superior to the others, and we that do not accept your preposterus claim, is somehow not enlightend enough. What an arrogant p***k u must be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSX Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 How about the right click brings up the whole command menu, then you choose the main command to access the sub commands? Works the same as clicking the start button in windows? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fritzthemoose Posted August 30, 2007 Share Posted August 30, 2007 I prefer RT and personally have no problems controlling a company-size force on Elite level in the campaign so far. [/QB]also against a human opponent or just against an incapable ai 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.