In Search of a Ghost - New Campaign

[Webwing]

Originally posted by SlapHappy:

The Bridges Counterrattack mission is insane!

Could someone please tell me how they possibly beat that one? I haven't had much luck with any of the missions, honestly, but this one made my jaw drop to the ground.

He, he...

---------------------------------------------

********* SPOILER ALERT *****************

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

In one word: Ambush.

In more words: The briefing is misleading about the fall back. Falling back leads to disaster. I'll take that out of the briefing in the next version.

You don't know the enemy forces so hide and wait. You have good cover inside de buildings. They will have to cross the bridges in the open. Wait, wait. The BRMDs are weak and at the right distance will desintegrate with your troops fire.

Just be patient, wait, and fire at the right moment and hide again as necessary.

This can easyly become a Total Victory, then.

--

[Taki]

Im right at the Moment playing the TF Narwick Campaign. I dont play it like "RPG" and its not so much Fun if you play every Scenario as One. As i noticed the Missions are tied together to Campaign and losses are count so i will start over New later on.

But what i noticed that there are HUGE Diffrence in playing 1.06 then in 1.05 both Campaigns need to get down Tweaked in Enemy Strenght because every UNits "Tactical Value" counts more now. Totally diffrent Game.

[handihoc]

I'm in the middle of mission 3 in Ghost, called Sweep and Clean, I think.

Really great mission - very tough indeed, this one. I had to restart twice after losing too many men on the first house assault.

***** Spoiler Alert!!********

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

I went for house 3 first , got major grief from the unwelcoming occupants, which is what obliged me to restart. Eventually managed it through encirclement then a 3 pronged blast/assault through the garden walls. Trooper took a hit from the sniper, but fortunately it was a flesh wound, and he got fixed. Mmg took out the sniper before he did any more harm.

Two men down after the assault, but better than the earlier six or seven!

Then I let 2nd platoon deal with Houses 1&2 (two more men down,) with 1st platoon's mmgs providing additional support. First platoon then occupied the hill on the right, while 2nd and 3rd moved up to the ridge overlooking the village.

And this is where the going gets really tough! I'm taking unacceptable losses every time I try to move even a few metres towards the village. The defenders are very determined, and extremely well positioned, with reinforcements pouring out of the woods to back them up.

Gonna have to think this one through much more carefully. Is it winnable at Elite level? Dunno, but I'm going to keep trying 'cos I love the challenge its presenting. It does seem that 1.06 and eLOS have made a lot of difference to Syrian aggression and accuracy. Those guys are no pushover, and it feels like they know exactly what they're doing. Great!

No CTDs so far - keeping fingers crossed.

There's a nice WW2 feel to this - almost a touch of the Private Ryan's in the opening stages.

Landscape could easily be Greece or even Southern Italy, which adds to the War in Europe sensation. Like it a lot, and in terms of the resistance, the most testing so far. Now, back to working out how to win the damn thing!

[Webwing]

handihoc,

I'm glad you are enjoying it. The WWII feel is present in all missions I hope!

Some people hate the need to restart a mission, but this is almost a must in this campaign! Just too hard to win most of them the first time.

1.06 makes a big difference specially with the guys in the houses.

Most people that played this mission said it is just impossible to get to the village. Biggest problem being the reinforcements and the lack of a good fire support position. Add to that the fact that this is your "green" guys!!!!

It needs rebalancing, I guess.

***** Spoiler Alert!!********

*

*

*

*

*

*

The idea was to have Blue put his troops along the ridge overlooking the vilage. To take the house on the ridge first. This way you would have a good command of the area. Unfortunately it doesn't work very well.

Best solution for me has been to put only a few troops there (on the ridge)and take most of your man on a flanking manouver to the far right. At this point you need to really flank the reinforcements since they seem to dig in pretty fast!

A bit of air support at this point would definetely help.

[handihoc]

I tried sitting on the ridge and taking the house first, but got punished. The Syrians pick my guys off enough to put them off advancing. My intention now, like you said, is to try a far right flanking manouevre into and through the woods. But it's possible that with such greenies I won't be able to advance enough.

We shall see!

[handihoc]

I won! I won!

Total Victory with only 3 dead, 10 wounded, which surprised me as a heck of a lot of my guys seemed to be dropping. Even bigger surprise, the enemy only lost 10 dead, though I saw many more go down - at least, I thought I did.

Is it a fact that small arms fire is rarely fatal? If so, it's presumably due to body armour, but do the Syrians have it? Seems to me the casualty rate should've been a lot higher. It'd be interesting to know how closely this kind of casualty rate - in what was a very intense battle - simulates the real battlefield.

Anyway, I'm very chuffed. It was a long, hard slog . . . via the right flank, using short bounding overwatch manouevres with my mgs suppressing. Very tough, though I did have 30 minutes to spare in the end.

Now, on to the bridges counterattack. From what I've seen, it's going to be the hardest yet.

[ February 18, 2008, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

[Webwing]

handihoc,

How did you do in the Bridges counterattack??

--

To all,

I posted this in the main forum but here it goes again:

I have uploaded to CMMODs a new file of the campaign for this version. I named the file v1.3 so you know you have the latest one.

I found out that I made a mistake the first time I compiled it and used an old file for the 6th mission. The way it was the mission was just too hard and not much fun. Definitely the hardest in the campaign. I had fixed it adding a lot more air support and also artillery. Now it's more fun, still challenging.

The previous file also had a loop if you didn't win this mission. Now you can lose and still go to the last mission. But for the bonus you still need a TV in the last one.

-

[handihoc]

Webwing, I couldn't complete it. Got massive CTDs after starting it (this was with V1.06) and couldn't play on. Couldn't play anything, in fact.

I've now downloaded your updated version, so will start the campaign again from scratch. Thankfully, 1.07 has made the game very stable (touch wood!!) and also sharpened AI and own troops' behaviour, so I'm looking forward to it.

atm, though, I'm playing through bardosy's TF Narwick campaign. It's great fun, and as I edited the briefings I want to run through it to give him f/back and, if necessary, rework the briefings before he uploads an update later.

I'm looking forward to replaying the Ghost, though. And then there's Paper Tiger's campaign, and a new Ba Badu, and the African battles, and so many more... Oh joy!

[Webwing]

Yes, loads and loads of new missions! And also MODs! The game is going through a very positive period!

bardosy's TF Narwick seems really interesting! Got to give it a go.

-

[handihoc]

You (or was it Paper Tiger?) made a relevant point somewhere else - can't find it now, about playing without restarting, for maximum realism.

This made me think. Yes, I'm claiming Total Victory, but sometimes (not always) it's after having had to restart because I'd taken big punishment in the early stages of a battle.

In the real world, we don't get to make that choice. From now on I'm going to make a note of that, and see how far I can get by playing right through without reverting to restart or earlier saves. It'll change things a lot - particularly in the opening minutes, which is where I usually find I make the biggest mistakes.

[Melnibone]

Really enjoying this campaign. Finished Battle 2 last night. Really refreshing to be using only infantry - not being able to rely on armour makes it tough. Great way to learn the best methods of handling the grunts.

[Webwing]

Originally posted by handihoc:

You (or was it Paper Tiger?) made a relevant point somewhere else - can't find it now, about playing without restarting, for maximum realism.

This made me think. Yes, I'm claiming Total Victory, but sometimes (not always) it's after having had to restart because I'd taken big punishment in the early stages of a battle.

In the real world, we don't get to make that choice. From now on I'm going to make a note of that, and see how far I can get by playing right through without reverting to restart or earlier saves. It'll change things a lot - particularly in the opening minutes, which is where I usually find I make the biggest mistakes.

I almost never save, unless I need for some design purpose. I also never restart mid battle. If I lose and mad too many mistakes I play it again.

Personal taste, that's all.

-

[Webwing]

Originally posted by Melnibone:

Really enjoying this campaign. Finished Battle 2 last night. Really refreshing to be using only infantry - not being able to rely on armour makes it tough. Great way to learn the best methods of handling the grunts.

I'm glad you are enjoying it.

I played the last missions again and I don't really like them anymore. Just too many troops to deal with. I think company size battles is the ideal.

I wanted to have the campaign growing in size and scope but to be honest it did not work very well. I like the maps and I think there is great potential for those battles but I have to admit I was not successful with them.

The bonus mission is enjoyable I think.

Anyway the next campaign will be completely different. Well, in more than one sense.

--

[Darkmage]

Originally posted by Webwing:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Melnibone:

Really enjoying this campaign. Finished Battle 2 last night. Really refreshing to be using only infantry - not being able to rely on armour makes it tough. Great way to learn the best methods of handling the grunts.

I'm glad you are enjoying it.

I played the last missions again and I don't really like them anymore. Just too many troops to deal with. I think company size battles is the ideal.

I wanted to have the campaign growing in size and scope but to be honest it did not work very well. I like the maps and I think there is great potential for those battles but I have to admit I was not successful with them.

The bonus mission is enjoyable I think.

Anyway the next campaign will be completely different. Well, in more than one sense.

-- </font>

[Wiggum]

I just started this campaign and played mission one (1 KIA ; 5 WIA ; US Tactical Victory).

I play version 1.2 and have seen that 1.3 is out. Should i restart with 1.3 or is the difference "not so big" ?

Another Question:

Only the dead are "lost" soldiers right ?

Great work Webwing...

[Webwing]

Wiggum,

Get 1.3 and play the first mission again. Else you will get stuck on mission 5. Or maybe not!

Nope! Casualties. KIA + WIA. Tougher hey!?

God luck and please post some feedback after you play it.

By the way, what did you think of the first one?

-

[Wiggum]

Originally posted by Webwing:

By the way, what did you think of the first one?

The only negative thing i found is the time limit, but this is a general problem in CMSF Scenarios.

I think 30min are not enough to take out 2 havy defended MG positions with infantery only, not in real life and not in game. I only take the first MG position (with only one WIA) but then with only 5min on the clock i "rush" the second one and take 1KIA and 4WIA while dont reach the objective. More time makes the mission more realistic i think, you can move your troops carfully, fall back, attack from a differend direction ect.

[Webwing]

Wiggum,

I'm slow player and I like to take my time too. I used to think all battles should have a maximum time limit ( 2 hours ) for them and let the player decide when he want to finish it. So, I know where you are coming from.

Fact is that after reading posts from people that think otherwise and playing good missions that have a time pressure well implemented in them I changed my mind about this.

Usually the Blue side can win ANY mission if given unlimited time.

The missions we try to replicate in the game would in real life take a lot longer, that's true. But they would most likely take more than 2 hours.

Do we need more than 2 hours in our missions then?

That's another topic I changed my mind about.

Today I think what we need is for the campaigns to carry the damage from one mission to the next. This way you can have a campaign in the same map that would simulate an engagement that would take 4, 6, 10 hours and have reinforcements, resuplies, etc. Also this would be more fun than a 4 hour missoin in one go.

-

[Wiggum]

Originally posted by Webwing:

Wiggum,

I'm slow player and I like to take my time too. I used to think all battles should have a maximum time limit ( 2 hours ) for them and let the player decide when he want to finish it. So, I know where you are coming from.

Fact is that after reading posts from people that think otherwise and playing good missions that have a time pressure well implemented in them I changed my mind about this.

Usually the Blue side can win ANY mission if given unlimited time.

The missions we try to replicate in the game would in real life take a lot longer, that's true. But they would most likely take more than 2 hours.

Do we need more than 2 hours in our missions then?

That's another topic I changed my mind about.

Today I think what we need is for the campaigns to carry the damage from one mission to the next. This way you can have a campaign in the same map that would simulate an engagement that would take 4, 6, 10 hours and have reinforcements, resuplies, etc. Also this would be more fun than a 4 hour missoin in one go.

-

I understande you. My problem with short time limits is that CMSF goes into the "fast action" direction when i have to do things to fast.

I think give 2h time but let the blue not much room for KIA is a option.

[DaveDash]

Currently playing through this campaign, and I've been doing pretty well up until mission 4.

SPOILERS

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I fended off the enemy attack suffering around 11 KIA and 18 WIA on ELITE WEGO. It was one hell of a fight that I enjoyed immensly. The enemy suffered around 150 WIA/KIA + 4 dead vehicles, but still had roughly 100 troops intact.

I was surprised to see that I suffered a minor defeat. I had control of both bridges and fire superiority across the map. Most of the enemy were stationed at the back of their end of the town. It looked like they were reinforcements that were meant to be the 'third' wave but were lacking an AI plan. Those in the buildings were set to hidden and wouldnt attack. I had no idea so many enemy were left.

There was no way to defeat them apart from launching an attack into that side of the town myself, and given the time limit, this would have been impossible.

I thought it a bit harsh that the enemy gets 300 points for a failed attack (albiet inflicting casualties against me, but not that heavy given the size of the assault) whereas I only got 200 for repelling their attack AND controlling the bridges, and effectively controlling their side of the town.

I have no doubt I probably would have had a total victory if the remaining AI units actually attacked, but I dont think it should have had a defeat because they sat around out of harms way on their side of town. Is this a bug perhaps?

[Rekka]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I was wondering if this campaign still works with 1.11. I was having a blast playing it in 1.08 but didn't get to the final and I would be happy to re-do it again since I prefer infantry fights.

[Webwing]

Hi Rekka,

Nothing to be sorry about!

I guess it is playable although there have been so many major changes to the game with the last patches!!!

I´m planning on updating this for quite some time now. Time is short though.

I´d love to convert it to UK and so update it completely. But I can´t promise anything just yet.

-

[Rekka]

Ok. Thanks for the update. I guess i'll give it a shot and see how it goes. Last time I tried there was some strange visual bugs with the preview of squad positionning but I didn't push on.

If this campaign is ever updated with the UK module be sure you'll have a fan here.

[noxnoctum]

Liked the maps and the scenarios are well-designed ... BUT

Increase the times. There is NO reason for US inf to rush assaults. THis is a common problem and I never see the reasoning behind such rushing. If you want to create tension, have the enemy closing in on your objective - ie game it.

Allow players to deploy. At the moment a lot of your missions waste some of the precious time simply getting troops into a decent attack plan.

Cut that ludicrous 'take the hill' mission. No-one in their right mind would assault such a position with NO in-place attack plan and one battery of 81mm mortars - it was plainly doomed to failure and, seeing the impossibility of it, I did not bother, so conserving the valuable lives of my troops. Too Hollywood. If you want to rescue it rather than ditch it, give the US more arty or air, which is the only one to clear them off the top of the hill with minimal casualties.

Not sure about the parameters of the 'defend the bridges' option. I killed everything that stepped on them, had troops occupying one of them at the end and still got a Total Defeat.

Apart from that - good campaign.

Sorry to necromance this thread but this threw me into a fit of rage.

lol.

No but seriously, the take the hill mission is quite easy if you go about it in an intelligent way. I kept my MGs and snipers and one full platoon in the back and assaulted with the other 2 platoons (though like I said ALL the MGs were in the back in covering positions). I had all the supporting elements (MGs, the sniper, and the covering platoon) spread out to get as many different possible angles on the hill. Then I slowly but steadily advanced my troops.

I play RT only these days... I've found WEGO just doesn't work for modern combat. Automatic weapons are just too lethal. As soon as an enemy appeared (which was about when my two platoons were 1/3 the way up the hill), I pause and direct all my fire on whatever popped up (area fire so when they get pinned and I get a ? they keep them down). And so on, until I reached the top. By that time my supporting elements had killed about 75% of the guys on the hill (since my attacking platoons were drawing fire). Then I just set my two platoons on "Hunt" and finished off whoever was left. Then I left one platoon and the sniper and spotter on the hill and called in arty on various buildings (which drove out some fleeing infantry into the open to be gunned down). The other two platoons I snuck up on the LEFT hill (across the "bog" or whatever it is to tackle the tank (which I'd of course spotted by now). I had basically everyone (6 infantry squads + 2 HQ squads with 3 AT weapons each... can't remember the specific type) open fire at once. Lots of misses but I got like 3 or 4 hits. Boom, the tank is dead. After that I left one platoon on top to cover and proceeded to area fire every building in the area for about 2 minutes straight.

Then I started moving squads down one by one and area firing each building individually (within grenade range) and clearing all of them. Eventually I got a surrender (remember I was still killing people in the village across the bridge). Total victory. They lost something like 65+ KIA and 45 WIA plus the dead tank. My losses were 1 KIA and 3 WIA.

Not a hard mission. But fun certainly!

As for the bridge defense mission. I don't know what you guys are talking about. I set up all my squads/MGs inside the top floor of buildings with the HQs a floor under (to be more safe). It was a complete and utter slaughter. I gunned down everything they threw at me, not a SINGLE enemy soldier even made it to the bridge, or anywhere close to it. I found the key was to kill any RPG teams that showed up ASAP (when I saw one I'd direct as many units as possible to fire on it... resulting in near instantaneous death of said RPG team)... same for snipers. These were the only 2 that were really capable of causing casualties.

As for the BRDMs, I just let them get a bit close and then had my squads fire simultaneously their AT weapons at them. Got 3 of them that way and the 4th I must have immobilized or something with 40mm grenade fire.

Again, I got a surrender.

So I guess you guys all just suck

Personally, I found the first mission much more challenging. Much less room to maneuver. The Clean Sweep mission with the green and conscript troops was pretty tough too since they'd get pinned almost instantly (such pussies)... but I won it by taking the two southern most buildings (the ones kinda up on a hill) and then calling in repeated apache attacks on every building and "?" in sight. Got a surrender after the enemy got tired of that . Didn't use the stryker at all except to get ammo and to fire on one building from a distance.