zippoflames Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Is there anyway to tweak a scenario so that it ends only when the last man or vehicle of the opponent is kill,wounded or destroyed? (I like long battles) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Nope. Sorry. Although I guess you could add in massive reinforcements that come in after the battle is over, which will prevent the enemy from surrendering, but the problem that way is that you could have killed all of the enemies on the map and just be waiting for the timer to expire. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSwan Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 So you can't really get rid of the time limit in scenarios/campaign battles? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Nope. Not possible. If you really, really wanted to, with patch 1.20 you can set the time limit to 4 hours, which is more than enough time to complete the vast majority of scenarios. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I still think this could and should be tweaked. Why not have it as an option to except the enemy's surrender, much like how the cease fire works in H2H. If you choose to decline, then the enemy could run off the map where the designer designates as the retreat side. Bottom line, people, myself included, love to mop up the enemy. Especially when your devising a plan and it's just about to come to fruition and the battle ends. Or maybe right before a big arty or air strike just to have the fireworks show cut short. Give us the option! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippoflames Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 Exactly,that's what I want. I want to be able to mop up.It would be cool to form a special group composed of members from different units tasked with doing such a thing. I'm tired of the battle coming to an end with three enemy squads and two enemy tanks still on the map.Maybe I can tweak their morale? I don't see it to be very realistic when this happens, especially with units that are supposed to be religious fanatics.There wasn't much surrendering in Fallujah.In fact most of the insurgents came there to fight to the death(most of them were Syrian.) Another feature I would like, which the the original Combat Missions had was being able to view an "animated" battlefield(not still)after the battle ended. There is nothing like looking over the destruction after a battle,tanks burning etc.Like Patton said,God help me I love it. Yes I know,I need serious help,but hey, it's just a game. All an all this game has really shaped up.I have every add on and I'm totally addicted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 There may not have been much surrendering in Fallujah but there may have been many evaders. At the end of the day this is down to your style of play - you clearly are an attritionalist and are very competitive. The truth is that your views on realism are skewed towards these tendencies - they are not realistic as you claim. If you want scenarios that favour these tendencies then yes they are possible as has been stated by ensuring that the enemy has a huge reserve that never appears. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippoflames Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 There may not have been much surrendering in Fallujah but there may have been many evaders. At the end of the day this is down to your style of play - you clearly are an attritionalist and are very competitive. The truth is that your views on realism are skewed towards these tendencies - they are not realistic as you claim. Clearly you have some sort of "superpower" enabling you to grasp a person playing style and disposition all by reading two posts.Amazing.How DO you do that? Personally I consider myself a maneuverist, who, as a child, spent long hours listening to my grandfather,an ex-marine,talk about his experiences in the battle of Iwo Jima,and because of this, I know it is total B.S. when I see the Syrians in this game surrender with so many men and tanks on the map.Maybe their regular troops would surrender with six squads and four tanks in perfect condition,but not the guys wearing hoods over their heads. Now if you will excuse me, I must go watch the news now,a report just came in from Iraq that six squads of insurgents,composed of religious extremists, plus five suicide bombers driving trucks rigged with IEDs decided to stop in their tracks and surrender to the marines without firing a shot,all because the marines were able to occupy some strategic areas.Man what a wacky war, huh? You never know what's going to happen next. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 No I don't claim superpowers but the way the question was posed in the first post and your wish to 'mop up' in your second post indicated that you wanted to hunt down every last enemy unit. If I'm wrong then fine I'm not going to get into a urinating competition about it - as you say its a game and if you want to get enjoyment from it in that fashion then fine. There are ways of doing it that have been explained. For what its worth, the vast majority of insurgents in both Iraq and Afghanistan are not religious zealots intent on wasting their lives recklessly no matter what the various elements of the news media may wish people to believe. Yes these things can and do happen but it doesn't reflect the majority enemy view. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippoflames Posted August 23, 2009 Author Share Posted August 23, 2009 No I don't claim superpowers but the way the question was posed in the first post and your wish to 'mop up' in your second post indicated that you wanted to hunt down every last enemy unit. If I'm wrong then fine I'm not going to get into a urinating competition about it - as you say its a game and if you want to get enjoyment from it in that fashion then fine. There are ways of doing it that have been explained. For what its worth, the vast majority of insurgents in both Iraq and Afghanistan are not religious zealots intent on wasting their lives recklessly no matter what the various elements of the news media may wish people to believe. Yes these things can and do happen but it doesn't reflect the majority enemy view. How do you know this? Do you have first hand knowledge? Oh,but the information YOU read is true? That sounds like the mindset of most paranoid conspiracy theorists."The information I read is true, but YOUR news sources aren't truth, etc." Absolute B.S. I have four friends,who fought in Iraq, two of which who are still there. And from what they have told me,most of the insurgents they're encountering don't even have military training, and there is no command and control structure. The military has confiscated countless video recordings of insurgents being trained in whats know a "flash courses," where they are brought into Iraq and met with an inside handler who gives these groups of men a ten minute intel briefing and a map with locations of military installations.These men then get in cars and drive off to die,and they die quick, because they want to die and because they suck. If you don't want to enter urinating competitions, maybe you should consider not pissing on people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 24 years colour service in the British Army including tours in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan, I think is sufficient qualification. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippoflames Posted August 26, 2009 Author Share Posted August 26, 2009 24 years colour service in the British Army including tours in Northern Ireland, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan, I think is sufficient qualification. Really? Tell me something- What's the color of the boat house at Hereford? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Should have done this about 2 posts ago ... it would have saved a lot of hassle - PM me 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippoflames Posted August 28, 2009 Author Share Posted August 28, 2009 Should have done this about 2 posts ago ... it would have saved a lot of hassle - PM me Lol! Flame war officially over. Truce. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabal23 Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 There may not have been much surrendering in Fallujah but there may have been many evaders. At the end of the day this is down to your style of play - you clearly are an attritionalist and are very competitive. The truth is that your views on realism are skewed towards these tendencies - they are not realistic as you claim. If you want scenarios that favour these tendencies then yes they are possible as has been stated by ensuring that the enemy has a huge reserve that never appears. I don't think that is what he was getting at. I also agree that regardless of what soft factors you have set, sometimes the enemy surrenders way too easily. If we were to apply your rationale then the enemy would surrender soon as they came into contact with the coalition forces. The fact that the AI seems to surrender a little too easy does not dictate realism, nor pigeon hole me as a attritonalist. By the way what is that? Not in the King's English dictionary. I also second the remark about Fallujah. It was some of the hardest fighting of the war. What does that have to do with three squads and two tanks just sitting there and deciding to surrender? I have seen it where if the enemy wouldn't have surrendered they would have won. I have seen it where my troops couldn't get near the objective due to accurate sniper/hvy weapons fire and the scenario just ended with me having secured all six objectives (each which had troops in them), which obviously I had not. It felt cheap. The forces were not push over conscripts either. Made no sense with 45 min on the clock left. And if we apply that rationale, then I assume the opposite would be true as well if the coalition was the AI and the player was the Red forces? Could you imagine elite US forces evading a few chewed up squad's and losing their objective? I feel this is a minor flaw to a great game. But it does appear to a flaw none the less. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 Lol! Flame war officially over. Truce. Amen to that - apologies for any offence caused - it was not intentional. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zippoflames Posted August 31, 2009 Author Share Posted August 31, 2009 Amen to that - apologies for any offence caused - it was not intentional. I apologize as well.I overreacted,period. Peace. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falconander Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 Glad that's over.... What were we talking about.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I suspect this is a nugatory response but Zippoflames was looking for advice on how to stop the Syrians surrendering early. As many will testify it is difficult to work this out straight off - it requires a lot of testing to get things right. The only way that I know is what was posted by others - have a huge bank of reserves that never rock up. So I think we're squared away now ... thanks for asking though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomir Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Hi all! I'm picking up this thread since I'm working out a way of the Syrian forces not surrendering too soon in my new scenario, as well. Actually, I have to say that I'm a little bit confused with the Parameters (Blue and Red) in the Mission Editor... :confused: Let's see, the CM:SF Field Manual says: CASUALTIES - the number of casualties the side is allowed to endure [bROWN and RED]. CONDITION - the number of units allowed to be panicked, routed, tired, or wounded [YELLOW]. For each parameter the scenario designer determines the threshold in % (from 0% to 100%) and the amount of victory points associated with each once the threshold is reached. Specifically, you get the points if: Enemy Casualties > X% Enemy Condition < X% Friendly Casualties < X% Friendly Condition > X% Casualties is casualties suffered, e.g. 100% means the whole force was wiped out. Both soldiers and vehicles are factored into this and you get partial credit for immobilizing a vehicle. Condition is a combination of (from most important to least) morale, fatigue, suppression, and light wounds [YELLOW] (more serious wounds [RED] or death [bROWN] are part of casualties, not condition). Well, unfortunately I've never been very good at maths, but I understand that Condition is a positive thing, opposite to Casualties, isn't it? E.g. Let's say, 100 men on each side (no vehicles). RED Force: 40 KIA [bROWN]; 40 WIA [RED]; 10 lightly wounded [YELLOW] and the last 10 routed or tired. BLUE Force: 10 KIA [bROWN]; 10 WIA [RED]; 10 lightly wounded [YELLOW] and another 10 routed or tired. (Enemy Casualties) 80 > 75% (good work! you get 100 points for your good marksmanship) (Enemy Condition) 20 (???) < ?% (Friendly Casualties) 20 < 30% (well done! you get 100 points for keeping your casualties low). (Friendly Condition) 20 (???) > ?% I'm sorry. I don't understand how Condition works. Unless, Enemy Condition is 80 (100-20) and it's a "positive" factor. If not, how can you get points for a number that is increasing when you are doing things right (wounding, suppresing and tiring the enemy) and shouldn't go over a threshold? And the same works for Friendly Condition, as far as I understand. I'm not very strong on Maths, as I've said, so, could someone explain it to me, please? About the topic of how to stop the Syrians surrendering early, it might be that the "problem" lies in the surrender threshold being reached when you get at the number of points given by the manpower and NOT the vehicles. E.g. 100 Syrian infantrymen (100 surrender points) and 10 T-62 (70 surrender points). If the surrendering threshold is set at 100% (100 surrender points instead of 170) and then you'll easily destroy that T-62s with your Abrams/Challenger 2s (70 points) and after just killing/seriously wounding 30 Syrian infantrymen (30 points), they surrender (because the 100 surrender points have been reached), of course you are going to say "WTF! there still are 70 Syrians paratroopers with ATGMs and they give up?!". I don't say that it's a bad thing, but because the Blue Force usually chews up very easily (read superior MBTs, but also Javelins, artillery and air assets!) all the Red Force vehicles, you are getting a lot of points for the "easiest" part of the work and we don't realize that when the Syrian infantry units, in perfect condition, surrender. My apologies in advance, because I may be wrong and the surrender threshold counts with the add on of the surrender points given by all the units on the map (e.g. 170 points), as it is said in the Field Manual. Just a guess. Please, correct me. I found this in a previous thread and it can be very useful to understand the topic: Sorry for the delay. It's been years since this stuff was set and it's probably been tweaked since then, therefore I had to wait for Charles to give me the exact figures. And here they are. The first number represents the multiplier for Unit Objective based values, the second for Surrender based values. For example, a Thin Armor vehicle is worth 4x as much as a soldier for Unit Objectives, 3x for Surrender calculations. Soldiers 1x 1x Soft Vehicles 2x 2x Thin Armor 4x 3x Light Armor 6x 4x Medium Armor 8x 5x Heavy Armor 10x 6x Main Battle Tank 12x 7x Modern Battle Tank 15x 8x As you can see it's not as simple as saying "a vehicle is worth x more than infantry". You also have some vehicles being worth more/less than others. Which is why I figured checking with Charles before answering was a good idea Steve And my last question about the Parameters (Blue and Red)... What is the Friendly Bonus and how it works? Cheers, Lomir 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.