NATO scenarios more difficult?

[phil stanbridge]

I'm loving the new NATO stuff but the difficulty level has definitely gone up a couple of notches too. Is that what people are finding?

I've just completed 'All flights are delayed' and without giving away spoilers, I couldn't even get near the primary objective within the time limit! I was awarded a tactical victory surprisingly but I found this a real pig of a mission - I had 3 KIA and 7 WIA in the end which was far less than I anticipated considering the action taking place. I hear the German campaign is tricky too, well I haven't even started that yet.

[Boche]

yeah ive noticed the missions to be more challenging, but its mostly due to restrictive ROE or small numbers in the NATO armies still best campaigns ive played

edit: oh and ofcourse due to the fantastic work of the scenario creators!

[c3k]

phil standbridge,

Agreed: the designers seem to have incorporated the same learning curves! The defenses make far better use of Syrian force's strengths. The testers are doing a great job of quality assurance!

"Thanks" to both designers and testers. The challenges you've laid out are quite, um, challenging.

(Regarding the scenario you mention, again staying away from spoilers, I achieved the same victory level but I did reach the primary objective BEFORE the time ran out. The cost was borne by my much higher number of K/WIA and destroyed vehicles.)

Ken

[phil stanbridge]

Yup, I had vehicles immobilized all over the place, also, I like to advance caustiously with infantry, which was perhaps a mistake. Takes too long! You'd think an hour would be sufficient, well, maybe if I replay it it will be, but I got bogged down in several places. Food for thought. I've started a new battle today, and it's erm.. Massive! Looks like a whole battalion either side.. lol

Ohhh.. and it's Stanbridge, not Standbridge, or Standonabridge, or Van Stanbrigge, or Stumblebridge, or Sandwich.

[shauny1987]

I lost 4 Marders on the first German mission

It's brilliant :D

[Sergei]

Stan Philbridge,

it could be that the scenario designers decided to unleash all their evilness for the last CMSF module. On the other hand, it could also be a matter of you not having yet completed the doctrinal transition required by the different strengths and weaknesses of the new armies. Eg. German mech infantry does not compare to US Marines in their ability to absorb casualties.

This is also the first module with no Javelin, a very easy to use ATGM. EuroSpike (Gill) is a great fire-and forget weapon, but it has no soft launch so it can't be fired from indoors. It also has a minimum range of 200m. So for in-city fighting it can be difficult to utilize. Milan is also a very good tank killer, but it's wire guided and it's got a minimum range of fricking 400 meters! That's almost as bad as AT-3 Sagger with its 500 meter minimum range. Then there's ERYX, which is also very effective and I love it but has a maximum range of 600 meters. Dealing with Syrian tanks was so easy before NATO, now it requires some more pre-planning!

[ChrisND]

Your lack of casualties is what allowed you to still get a win in that scenario, despite you not moving fast enough. One way to speed up your advance is as a platoon is clearing a tier, have another mount up, and rush to the next tier, with generous supporting fires. Smoke is your friend in making fast mounted rushes to the next "tier" of buildings. Of course, that also requires planning ahead so as to not be waiting around on the fire mission.

For my scenarios, my philosophy when making the victory points was that a player should really earn a victory. A total victory would be quite rare, earned from a true butt-kicking, with draws, minor victory, and tactical victory being more common. I had the impression that prior to the UK module, scoring often seemed to give the US a total victory practically by default, and I wanted to change that.

[c3k]

Sorry for the misspelling. In my defense, I've had two very influential mentors who are, indeed, StanDbridges.

To Normal Dude: you have achieved your objective! Prior to these Nato scenarios I would not be satisfied with anything less than a total victory against the AI. That just seemed to be the normal "passing" grade. I think a total victory in the Nato scenarios would be much more highly prized. Thanks for your work; I'm certainly enjoying it!

Regards,

Ken

[CaptRio]

Will we see more of these scenarios or maybe entire campaigns in the repository?

[ChrisND]

Thanks C3k.

Will we see more of these scenarios or maybe entire campaigns in the repository?

I know for a fact there are at least a couple of the scenario designers working on their own unofficial campaigns for the Repository right now. I'm working on Normandy scenarios, so I won't be making too many, but I do have a couple of maps that did not get finished in time for NATO, so they will be coming out, in addition to the fact that I plan to completely revamp Task Force Panther.

[phil stanbridge]

Your lack of casualties is what allowed you to still get a win in that scenario, despite you not moving fast enough. One way to speed up your advance is as a platoon is clearing a tier, have another mount up, and rush to the next tier, with generous supporting fires. Smoke is your friend in making fast mounted rushes to the next "tier" of buildings. Of course, that also requires planning ahead so as to not be waiting around on the fire mission...

I absolutely tried this - without offering any spoilers I tried to use platoon clearing to the best of my ability, but the natural defenses and positioning of walls made the particular areas so darn hard to clear (without explosives). I eventually got my own way, but not until there was less than 30 minutes left on the clock and a significant area still to advance, with lots of fields of fire. It was only then it dawned on me how 'impossible' this scenario felt to me - I actually 'feared' progression. I'm amazed I got a tactical victory all things considered. I had a lot of my vehicles damaged and I had a lot of my men injured but amazingly low casualties all the same. Smoke works a treat, but only if the conditions are right. A stiff wind blows it away rather quickly.

[finalcut]

Maybe it just seems harder due to the inferior equipment and training of the German/Dutch/Canadian armed forces compared to the total leetness(yes,it's a word)of the American forces. I am kidding,please don't flame me.

I actually am enjoying the challenge,and Love the Leopard.I believe Imho it may be the best tank in the World.These things don't die.I had one take 3 hits from ATGM'S and the thing kept on shooting.

Have not tried the Dutch or Canadian campaigns yet,gonna fire them up tonight.I am actually getting ready to clear all my saved games,and start all 6 campaigns at the same time.Gonna do the whole war from all Allied sides simultaneously and see how we fare against the Syrians.

[Lethaface]

The Dutch grass mod has some influences as well, Nato forces keep losing C2 due to misplaced radio's. Someone has discovered those radio's make nice convertible stash boxes, which explains the radios going down when they're leaving their vehicles.

[phil stanbridge]

I actually am enjoying the challenge,and Love the Leopard.I believe Imho it may be the best tank in the World.These things don't die.I had one take 3 hits from ATGM'S and the thing kept on shooting.

I beg to differ! I've had several die on me and quite easily from T-62s although I haven't had any hit from ATGM yet. I must admit they've taken a few RPG rounds quite well. They seem to be lower profile than the US/British tanks? Could just be me.

Have not tried the Dutch or Canadian campaigns yet,gonna fire them up tonight.I am actually getting ready to clear all my saved games,and start all 6 campaigns at the same time.Gonna do the whole war from all Allied sides simultaneously and see how we fare against the Syrians.

Good luck with that! Campaigns are hugely time consuming but I love them all the same. Best aspect of the CM series in my opinion. I'm going to focus more on single scenarios for the time being until a patch appears (some of them are HUGE!) - there's a few little niggles that need to be sorted before I invest my time on one of the campaigns. Either that, or I'll get to work on my first campaign in Afghanistan now the 1.02 patch is out..

[Erwin]

"I had the impression that prior to the UK module, scoring often seemed to give the US a total victory practically by default, and I wanted to change that."

Yes, thank you for finally giving us challenging scenarios. I had started to feel that I could play a typical CMSF game in my sleep with same old tactics, and the game would end early giving me a Total Victory no matter how much I sucked. You have made the game much better.

[ChrisND]

Yes, thank you for finally giving us challenging scenarios. I had started to feel that I could play a typical CMSF game in my sleep with same old tactics, and the game would end early giving me a Total Victory no matter how much I sucked. You have made the game much better.

Hey now, I only did a portion of the scenarios. Plenty of other people helped make this possible. Paper Tiger, for example, put in an ungodly amount of work on the campaigns, not only designing them, but making a lions share of them as well. The victory scoring of the campaigns is his brain child.

[Webwing]

PT is taking some time off, since he was really exhausted after the work in the campaigns was over. But he will soon be joining the discussions, I´m sure.

-