USMC Gung Ho! campaign

[AkumaSD]

I tried to use them in a more offensive role in the second scenario and the got smoked before they could even identify a target.

Yup, that's what happens to me when I bring them out in the open. They hit hard when they actually find something to shoot at. I find myself using them more against buildings and bunkers than tanks. Backing them up right after firing will help them survive longer. Unlike the inf AT weapons the vehicles will reload while on the move. They tend to be a AT magnet so I keep them behind the rest of my forces. I prefer the TOW Humvee since it's weapon can be dismounted with the crew.

[Pvt. Ryan]

You don't want to bring the LAV-AT out of hiding until all enemy armor and ATGMs have been destroyed. Even if you think you have a good hull down position, the enemy will manage to hit the TOW launchers rendering the vehicle useless. If you try to fire through trees there is a good chance the missile will detonate prematurely. In this mission I use it to destroy buildings with some effectiveness. Using them against trenches is nearly useless and the missiles hit a few feet in front of the trench. I think the target point is the bottom of the trench and the ground gets in the way.

[AkumaSD]

Using them against trenches is nearly useless and the missiles hit a few feet in front of the trench.

I've had some success with targeting just behind the trench but it's not very reliable and you could end up wasting a few missiles. If it hits then you're pretty much guaranteed your target is dead. I'll target trenches only if I have an abundance of TOW missiles sitting around.

[SlapHappy]

So the ultimate role of these AT missile vehicles in CMSF is to fire their expensive guided missile systems into trenches of conscript troops? And in fact not even particularly effective in that role?

To me that means one of a couple of things: The units themselves aren't particularly useful in REAL LIFE or

The game does a poor job of modeling their capabilities.

[Boche]

So the ultimate role of these AT missile vehicles in CMSF is to fire their expensive guided missile systems into trenches of conscript troops? And in fact not even particularly effective in that role?

To me that means one of a couple of things: The units themselves aren't particularly useful in REAL LIFE or

The game does a poor job of modeling their capabilities.

all weapons are useful given the right circumstances

[Dennis50]

You hit it when you said "The game..."

It's a game and all games can be gamed and will be gamed by some people.

Regards,

Gunz

[Dietrich]

So the ultimate role of these AT missile vehicles in CMSF is to fire their expensive guided missile systems into trenches of conscript troops? And in fact not even particularly effective in that role?

To me that means one of a couple of things: The units themselves aren't particularly useful in REAL LIFE or

The game does a poor job of modeling their capabilities.

I think the tactical situation of the scenario in question is hardly a basis for (1) stating that the "ultimate role" of the LAV-AT is firing TOW-2 missiles at entrenched infantry or (2) reckoning that the LAV-AT isn't particularly useful in reality.

LAV-ATs are designed to take out armor. In this scenario, the armor consists of T-72s. The T-72s are hull down and dug in, making them distinctly harder to hit. Because they're T-72s (rather than T-62s or T-55s), they have fairly good optics and are thus apt to spot the player's units. These tanks are better dealt with by the rotary-wing air support than by the LAV-ATs. Likewise, the entrenched infantry are better dealt with by the M1A1s or the LAV-25s.

I reckon that if the tactical scenario were reversed -- with the LAV-ATs dug in and hull down on the high ground with Syrian tanks (let's say T-62s) probing forward in the pre-dawn twilight -- the LAV-ATs would have a better chance of displaying their usefulness.

Also, the LAV-AT does have an M240 with which it can engage enemy infantry from beyond RPG range.

[Pvt. Ryan]

In mission 2, the LAV-AT is dead meat if it pops its head up before all of the red armor is destroyed. It takes a long time for the LAV-AT to spot the tanks, and before they do they are usually hit by and ATGM. Then you have to deal with all the ATGM teams. Since you have limited time to win the scenario and waiting for mortars and artillery consumes valuable time, it is best to use the LAV-AT in a shoot and scoot role against suspected (and if you reload enough times, known) entrenched ATGMs. I also use them against buildings containing enemy troops, with much better results than against trenches.

Last night I was able to manage a minor victory. I was just edging into High Chaparral as time expired, so the extra 30 minutes would have given me enough time to get a total victory.

[Paper Tiger]

I was quite surprised to find that digging tanks in to 'hull down' positions makes them very hard for the BLUEFor to spot in low light conditions. The very first version of the Chaparral featured the original 'Orchard Road' tank placement and the LAV-TOWS could spot them almost instantly. Hitting them was a bit iffy but sometimes it was 100% shot-hit and other times it was less than 50%. I guess that's just the God of Random Numbers playing with my head.

Agreed that the LAV TOW is better employed on the defensive. It spots exposed stationary tanks quite quickly and moving ones are dead meat. One of the reasons why you won't see any RED tanks moving in the open in this campaign. Night or day, BLUE has the tools to kill them on sight. They were there originally but they were just a waste of time as they couldn't achieve anything.

The mission's helicopters, and the Harrier, are much better suited to the task of taking out the emplaced tanks. And, of course, once the Infantry arrives with their javelins it matters not a whit how well RED is dug in.

[Chainsaw]

Im lacking time right now unfortunly, but I have managed to find the time to play thrue scenario one and I have to say I love it, really good one! and im like 20mins into scenario 2 with my favorites, the LAR platoon with LAV-25s!

But in scenario 1 I got:

Total Victory

Marines/ Syrian

153 men OK/ 67 men OK

2 KIA / 85KIA

8 WIA /53WIA

. /90 MIA

. /4 tanks lost

525Points/ 77Points.

I was really scared I would fail the scenario because I accendently blew upp a few walls here and there, but aparently In the right places because I didnt get any points lost for it.

Great scenario as usual PT!

[Paper Tiger]

I'm back at work on this campaign again. I never had a chance to post a revised version of the campaign as I was to busy with other things.

I am toning down the difficulty of the last three missions and should have a new version up, hopefully later today or tomorrow to give you guys something to chew on until NATO is released.

[Paper Tiger]

I have just finished uploading a revised version of my Marines campaign, Gung Ho!. However, it might take some time for the revised version to make it through BFC's screening process :mad: Be sure to check that the version is v1.2 and the upload date is 17th October 2010 otherwise you'll download the original version.

I have made quite a few changes to this short campaign based on my experience working on the NATO campaigns. Here is a list of the important changes:

Mission 1 - Flintstones: No changes

Mission 2 - The High Chapparal: Mission time extended to 3 hours in both versions. Otherwise, no changes

Mission 3 - CAAT Fight: Reduced the 155mm Heavy Howitzer ammo to LIMITED to give BLUE a wee bit more of a challenge, but otherwise no change. It was too much fun to make any more changes.

Mission 4 - Detectives: Reduced Syrian morale by at least one level. Special Forces reduced in experience.

Mission 5 - Bridges: The Syrian Special Forces have been toned down substantially in experience and morale. They will only appear if you have won all the previous missions. Otherwise, you will encounter a second Reserve Infantry Company in their place. Also found and corrected a major error in the AI plans.

Mission 6 - Al Qusayr: You should now be able to use heavy artillery in this mission. Syrian Airborne forces have been dumbed down by at least one level of experience and morale. Also added DUEY to v3. They should have been present in this version but not HUEY but I forgot to add them in.

The campaign script

I have also revised the campaign script to resuply BLUE's forces more frequently. The chances of vehicular damage being repaired between missions is much higher (90%) if you are winning missions but drops off dramatically if you lose. After that, the chances of repair between missions gradually increases the more you win.

Hopefully, these changes should allow more folks to get through to the final mission and give them a good chance to win it as well. I figure AkumaSD never managed to beat the final mission because he had virtually no artillery assets available in it.

[AkumaSD]

Sounds like some nice changes were made. Looking forward to going through this again. Thanks for keeping it updated.

[Paper Tiger]

Hmmm... the upload didn't work for some reason. I was told that it was all done and assumed that all was well but when I looked this morning, it was still the old version. So I've deleted the old file (v1.0) and uploaded the file afresh. Of course, that will require yet another LONG delay while BFC clears it.

[Dietrich]

Looking forward to it, PT!

Hmmm... the upload didn't work for some reason. I was told that it was all done and assumed that all was well but when I looked this morning, it was still the old version. So I've deleted the old file (v1.0) and uploaded the file afresh. Of course, that will require yet another LONG delay while BFC clears it.

Doesn't help that it's Sunday, I reckon. (Uploads to the Repository are cleared by BFC personnel rather than automatically, correct?)

[Erwin]

Just downloaded the Oct 18 version. Thanks!

Is is basically a bit easier than the original version, or were there actual bad flaws in the original?

[ZPB II]

SPOILERZ:

Missed this the first time around, playing the first mission as I'm writing this. Brutal urban fighting, long quiet breaks followed by all hell breaking loose for a few seconds. I got to admit that because I was a bit tired with flu and all that I skipped the briefing and called down 155s on the main objective, oops, wonder how that will affect my scoring.

Fun.

[ZPB II]

Yay, just got a tactical victory from the first mission. 1 KIA, 5 wounded and 1 AAV damaged. 61 Syrian KIA, 37 wounded, 125 prisoners and all armour wiped out.

I failed all the mission parameters but saved the lives of my men while utterly annihilating the opposition. I like to think that now my men adore me while my superior officers dislike my ham-fisted approach towards mosques and civilians in general. War is hell.

Great mission.

EDIT: I think I had approx 35-40 minutes left on the clock, how short was the original time limit?

[Waaarg]

@Erwin - Did you see PT's change log on the previous page? Apologies if you did, I just know I miss things all the time.

[Paper Tiger]

I failed all the mission parameters but saved the lives of my men while utterly annihilating the opposition. I like to think that now my men adore me while my superior officers dislike my ham-fisted approach towards mosques and civilians in general. War is hell.

THAT'S the way to do it! I didn't change anything in the first mission. It was intended to be easy.

were there actual bad flaws in the original?

no bad flaws that I'm aware of... the only error was that I used the wrong air support in one mission but that got corrected for this version.

[Erwin]

thanks you guys! (Still enjoying Dinas btw. But, I haven't played Blue for such a long time, I may start Gung Ho!)