DaveDash Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Im back from holiday. Over the holidays I read Staff Sergeant David Bellavia's "House to House". For those unfamiliar with the author, SSG Bellavia was awarded the Silver Star and Bronze Star (and nominated for the DSC and the MoH) for his actions in Fallujah. In this book he writes accounts of his units actions in Fallujah an other areas in Iraq. After reading this book, I am totally convinced that my earlier mantra about Stykers, Bradleys, etc being too weak, and firefights being far too deadly are true. In the initial assault in Fallujah, Bradleys ran over numerous IEDS and not only survived, continued to manouver and fight. Some explosions were so powerful they put the Bradleys in mid air and they still managed to fight with minimal combat damage. Bradleys and M1A2's took a stupid amount of RPG-7 hits, and while the outside gear got burnt and beaten up, they continued to fight effectively with no crew or squad casualties. Weapon malfunctions were probably the biggest problem they faced. Firefights were not fast, lethal, and over in seconds like in CM:SF. They were slow and deliberate. Many insurgents whacked up on drugs just wouldn't die. Platoon level fights lasted for hours due to the amount of cover involved. Im CM:SF one RPG will eliminate half your squad who has cover in a building, these army guys not only survived numerous RPG's exploding on their covered positions, but IED explosions as well that levelled entire city blocks. In one firefight they had NO COVER and were hiding behind rocks on top of a building, the firefight lasted for hours. In CMSF they would have been wiped out in seconds. The guys they were fighting wernt slouches either, many of them were highly trained veterins from Chechnya etc. They must have been suffering from the LOS bug. The reverse is also true. Despite advanced optics, M4's resulted in minimal kills and were pretty ineffective against enemies in covered positions. Most of the infantry level damage was caused by M246 and M240's against exposed insurgent positions. However it still took about 200 M246 rounds to kill an insurgent STANDING IN THE OPEN wearing U.S. Kevlar body armour at relatively short range. The real damage was caused by AT4s, Javelines, Tows, 120mm tank main gun rounds, airstrikes, and Bradley HE, which I feel are all quite well modelled in the game at present. Now to make cm:sf more in line with reality would really throw the balance out of whack, especially with timelimits and the strength of U.S. IFV's and Stykers. But in any case I still think some 'tweaking' needs to be done in 1.06. Funnily enough however, the gaggle of taffic jams you get into moving your IFVs, Tanks, and APCs through an urban enviroment isn't entirely unrealistic. The marine assault was delayed by hours into Fallujah as their tracks got into huge taffic jams trying to enter the city. In one firefight, the supporting Bradleys and Tank couldnt effectively engage the enemy because they were stuck in a traffic jam and couldnt manouver around each other while buttoned. The army squad was in danger of being surpressed and eliminated, and one guy named Fitts had to hang off a building, completely exposed to enemy fire, and talk the commanders over the radio how to get out of their traffic jam and support his squad. If not anything, read the book, it's a real insight to modern MOUT warfare. Many tactics we use in the game they used in Fallujah, such as covering fires on any building that looked dangerous. They were also pretty lucky. Many times when they were caught in danger zones that would have resulted in them being cut to bits, there was no enemy to actually respond. [ January 06, 2008, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: DaveDash ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 One excellent book from the British perspective is Sniper one, about a British army sniper team in Al Amarah. They didnt just do sniping, they also went out on patrol, and some of the contacts they had were truly remarkable. One guy claimed to have a RPDs 7.62 rounds fly between his legs. Good though Shockforce is, I suspect they would have a job modelling something like that! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 @ DaveDash Great work ! With one batch you approved what i think about the small arms moddeling and cover moddeling in CMSF ! Firefights were not fast, lethal, and over in seconds like in CM:SF. They were slow and deliberate. Many insurgents whacked up on drugs just wouldn't die. Platoon level fights lasted for hours due to the amount of cover involved.I think Battlefront should read that book to and change something ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Originally posted by Wiggum: @ DaveDash Great work ! With one batch you approved what i think about the small arms moddeling and cover moddeling in CMSF ! </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Firefights were not fast, lethal, and over in seconds like in CM:SF. They were slow and deliberate. Many insurgents whacked up on drugs just wouldn't die. Platoon level fights lasted for hours due to the amount of cover involved.I think Battlefront should read that book to and change something ! </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Originally posted by stikkypixie: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Wiggum: @ DaveDash Great work ! With one batch you approved what i think about the small arms moddeling and cover moddeling in CMSF ! </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Firefights were not fast, lethal, and over in seconds like in CM:SF. They were slow and deliberate. Many insurgents whacked up on drugs just wouldn't die. Platoon level fights lasted for hours due to the amount of cover involved.I think Battlefront should read that book to and change something ! </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londoner Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Dave/Wiggum, I recall BFC and others have stated more than once that the realities and time scales of CQB have to be bastardised for the purposes of a game. This is an argument that dates back to CM1. How fun would a platoon level fight be if it lasted 6 hours and consisted mostly of slowly and deliberately blasting building after building, with a little rest, reorganisation and resupply in between? And as the Syrians just imagine spending 6 hours trying to inflict 5 or so casualties!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Same way for me, just that most CM players are not patient enough to act accordingly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Battlefront dosent have to go over the top (6h Battles)... But some changes are inescapable at the moment, or CMSF will be another "just fun" wargame. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marek Brzezowski Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Well, I dare to say CMSF tries to model full medium scale conflict between regular forces. Guerilla warfare experience, like from book you quoted, isn't fully representative for the intensity of firefights. But I think it's true that big guns are tue killers on the modern battlefield 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secondbrooks Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Originally posted by Wiggum: When i play CMSF the Pixel Guys are "My Men" and every dead is one to much ! Thats the way i try to play CMSF ! So do you lift you hands up and say "i can't do this with given man- and firepower and/or time and/or in this terrain. Screw the objectives, my mens' lives are the first priority"? Is it more important to you to save pixel-blood of you pixel-men than reaching your's objectives? i must admit i'm just gamer who usually tries to reach objectives and not caring so much about health of my pixel-me: If i have to spill lots of pixel-blood of my own pixel-men to reach objectives than so be it, i'm not quitting because of that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Originally posted by Secondbrooks: i must admit i'm just gamer who usually tries to reach objectives and not caring so much about health of my pixel-me...That is your Problem. I think most people will try to get as few looses as possible. And yes, i will hold back on the way to an objective if the looses i will take will be to high. Better a draw with few dead as a win with 100 dead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secondbrooks Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 So they quit the mission, apply for ceasefire or attempt break contact to enemy and wait mission time to end if it's pretty clear that completing mission will demand buckets of blood :confused: Oh you seemed to edit your post: Kudos to that way of playing. I've nothing againt that kind playing style. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 Thanks for the comments guys. Just to clarify I'm not proposing a complete realistic simulation, as that would be out of the scope of any game. I'll requote what I said in my original post Now to make cm:sf more in line with reality would really throw the balance out of whack, especially with timelimits and the strength of U.S. IFV's and Stykers. But in any case I still think some 'tweaking' needs to be done in 1.06.Just some tweaking to put it more in line with real life, so the immersion factor is greater. E.G. Reduce the lethality and accuracy of small calibre rifles at longer engagement ranges of 250m+ and increase arbitary cover, especially inside buildings taking fire from outside of buildings. For the record I don't take that many casualties in game. But I do feel the game is 'spoilt' sometimes by the overmodelling of certian aspects, even after 1.05 improvements. Another big part of the difference between CMSF and reality is *how* the men fight when they are engaged. CMSF has a natural tendency to have the infantry use a volume of fire doctrine - they will unload a lot of fire on an enemy squad's 8x8 location rather than fire select and few aimed shots at actual targets they are likely to hit. The side affect of this is also that squads can't fire sporadically and maintain some ambiguity as to where they actually are.Adam from what I have read and seen on videos it seems that real life infantry tend to do a lot more 'area' fire than what's shown in the game. My understanding that it's more about surpressing the enemy than actually killing them. Leave the killing for heavy arms direct or indirect fires, or draw them into the open and kill them. If anything, the fires in CM:SF are too accurate. However the game does model cyclic fire vs controlled fire quite well. At close ranges your guys do go a bit cyclic, at far ranges they're much more controlled. I've noticed this at least. [ January 07, 2008, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: DaveDash ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Originally posted by DaveDash: E.G. Reduce the lethality and accuracy of small calibre rifles at longer engagement ranges of 250m+ and increase arbitary cover, especially inside buildings taking fire from outside of buildings. Thats the point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritter_85 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Originally posted by Secondbrooks: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Wiggum: When i play CMSF the Pixel Guys are "My Men" and every dead is one to much ! Thats the way i try to play CMSF ! So do you lift you hands up and say "i can't do this with given man- and firepower and/or time and/or in this terrain. Screw the objectives, my mens' lives are the first priority"? Is it more important to you to save pixel-blood of you pixel-men than reaching your's objectives? i must admit i'm just gamer who usually tries to reach objectives and not caring so much about health of my pixel-me: If i have to spill lots of pixel-blood of my own pixel-men to reach objectives than so be it, i'm not quitting because of that. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secondbrooks Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Infact that might be the answer. No emotinal ties to the flag they (both) are carring in their shoulder. But heck! You don't want to be my private! ... Well you know what? That is cowardness and gets you to courtmartial. Now, AttachThatBayonetToYourRifleAndGoGetMeAMedal! GO-GO! I've earned all those medals and promotions which i missed because of that too-much-casualities-bull****... My superiours just are so miserable soft and weak. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ritter_85 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 right....well thank god I am at reserve now..have been 2.5 years.... but I wont go to courtmartial...I just get an transfer to another unit ^^ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 My games enjoyment is at its best when my imagination is wrapped up in it and I treat my pxel troops with quasi real concern for loses. CMSF is the best game for me at doing this since my teenage years. I do, however, balance this with the objectives, especially in MP. 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.