toxic.zen Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 this is s smallish scenario i have been tweaking. It involves US army assaulting a terrorist base/opium manufacturing center. I need volunteers to give it a go and give whatever feedback they come up with! if interested contact me at toxiczen(at)live.com thankyou! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 20, 2011 Author Share Posted April 20, 2011 thankyou Erwin! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 e-mail sent:) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 20, 2011 Author Share Posted April 20, 2011 thankyou Rick! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Sent you these first comments on looking at scenario: 1) Most curiously altho’ your Afghan troops are armed with AKM’s and RPK’s that require 7.62x39 ammo, there is actually very little of this ammo and tons of the useless 7.62x54 as well as 5.56. 2) Briefing should have a bit more intel re expected enemy forces as well as whether any friendly. 3) It’s odd that there appears to be no arty or air support for this sort of operation. 4) Am unclear why the troops are in the trucks when they have Strykers. Without air or arty one will need the Javelins and it’s a pain to have to load and unload all the infantry before starting play. Not sure why there are trucks either. (A better briefing could explain.) 5) The map is odd in that the swamp area to the NE is useless for LOS to the target, so why is that part of the map there at all? I’ll wait for your reply b4 playing. Cheers… Tony PS: If you don;t want me to post feedback here, just let me know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 21, 2011 Author Share Posted April 21, 2011 1) I purposely lowered the available ammo to the Afghan troops in an attempt to balance forces a bit. 2) yes, it will be more descriptive... 3)I thought about it, and decided it would just tip the scales to far towards blue side... I suppose I could later tweak it to include some mortar support, and balance by increasing amount of red forces? 4) the trucks were to limit the amount of weapons the blue side has to use for balance purposes, since the strykers have some pretty effective mounted weapons... I'm sure I could come up with a good explanation for it... 5) I guess it was just part of the terrain originally that I never did anything with, I think in the final version I will make map a little bigger to allow for possible flanking... feedback here is welcome! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Some quick observations: 1) More detailed briefing should be added before final 2) After mounting all the troops I ended up with an Afghan HQ in a Stryker... I believe all troops should be mounted... and thus maybe the ammo issues will also go away... I have troops in AFV's that cant get the ammo they would require... I dont care about the volumes, just that I have the right ammo for the right troops... 3) When addressing my troops I had a tough time keeping command and control in place... They seem to be a hodgepodge of units from different Battalions, Companies, and Troops... Maybe you could give them some sort of appropriate 'naming convention' to address this... 4) Map looks great, though I am concerned that my only objective is stuffed in the corner... leaving me with no flanking capabilites. It must be a head on attack. A suggestion here would be to give another 300m or so off both corners where the HQ is located. I really enjoy the look and feel of the scenario... and like I said the map is excellent... I am at the 38 minute left mark and should finish it off later today... I will post any additional comments then... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 21, 2011 Author Share Posted April 21, 2011 so far i know of some definite changes to be made due to the insightful feedback. expand the north and west portions of the map to allow more depth and possibilities of flanking or at least flanking fire from a distance. rework the blue forces to have a more uniform setup of units and unit command. I'm still thinking no artillery support, as it still seems it may tip the scales to much... flesh out the briefing better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Ok ... I played until the 25 minute to go mark... I think I will wait to retry with the expanded map... I feel it is just to limited in what you can do for attacking the HQ... When you have a modified version, send it this way... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 22, 2011 Author Share Posted April 22, 2011 very good, i'll send you the updated version tomorrow. if you want to do the same i'll send yours tomorrow as well Erwin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 22, 2011 Author Share Posted April 22, 2011 files re-sent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 25, 2011 Share Posted April 25, 2011 Not sure I received it... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 26, 2011 Author Share Posted April 26, 2011 re re sent let me know if you get it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 26, 2011 Share Posted April 26, 2011 Thanks. Map looks much better with many new decisions and opportunities to consider. Am still puzzled why the ANA BTR's are full of ammo the ANA troops can't use. (Or, in CMSF, can an AKM use 7.62x54mm ammo as well as the 7.62x39mm?) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 27, 2011 Author Share Posted April 27, 2011 thankyou! as for the ammo load-out, i didn't mix vehicles this time, so I'm unsure why there may be compatibility issues... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 Hi toxic.zen... I am still playing your scenario... but give me a few days, as I got a new rig that showed up yesterday, and I am in the process of migrating... Also I will lokk at the Ammo-loadouts also to see whats up wit dat... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 My question was why load up ANA vehicles with 7.62x39 (and 5.45mm) ammo when no ANA weapon in the game can use it... I suppose it's possible that (in the game) AKM's and RPK's can use the copious supplies of 7.62x54mm in addition to the meager amounts of 7.72x39mm supplied. Another CMSF abstraction?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 27, 2011 Share Posted April 27, 2011 Also, The new version of OPIUM FIELDS disappeared again. Can you resend plz. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 28, 2011 Author Share Posted April 28, 2011 re re re sent! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 i ACTUALLY FOUND THE ORIGINAL FILE. hAVE NO IDEA WHERE IT WAS HIDING AND NOW IT'S BACK. bUT THANKS FOR THE RE RE RE SEND. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 28, 2011 Share Posted April 28, 2011 PS: Re the briefing... Found these interesting comments on CMBN are that might be helpful when writing your briefing: "I think the fault of most briefings is that they are devoid of any kind of useful intel, the kind of which a lot of commanders would have had. most actions would be part of bigger operations and therefore, local intelligence may well be very good on such things as enemy positions. Even in the worst war movies, where they get everything else wrong, you'll see the "Ok, son whats the situation here?" " Well sir, There's Germans are holed up in the village, were pretty sure it's remanants of the battalion that was holding xxx, they're a prettty ragged bunch. They have an a/t gun in the village square thats knocking out anything that comes down the main road, and thats the only route through to the bridge for our armour, there's also a sniper working in the area sir" Now thats a crap movie yet I have played many good scenarios where the briefing is only really used to tell you what your facing, in the sense that at the end of it all you know is that There are a company of germans, with tanks holding a village, now that level of intel is ok but not all the time, every battle you fight should not be a point unit advancing into the unknown. Now if you look at the intel maps for some battles, you see known position of weapons pits, mg sites, mines, pillboxes and such all marked. Granted not every battle would have that level of intel but most times your forces would be relieving other units or such like and there would be local knowledge that would be shared." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 29, 2011 Author Share Posted April 29, 2011 I wanted info to be scant, even the mined outer wall around the main compound was a giveaway... so I should make it more clear in the briefing that the info is second hand, from the Afghan scouts, that have been spying on the compound? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 My point is that in modern warfare one usually gets to know a lot more than what is in your briefing. And that leaves aside the fact that the US virtually never goes anywhere without arty and air cover. Just trying to be helpful. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toxic.zen Posted April 29, 2011 Author Share Posted April 29, 2011 thankyou Tony, the help is appreciated! so since this scenario is a bit "unusual" for US military tactics, the briefing should reflect that with a reason of some sort... perhaps the US troops are just a spur of the moment detachment brought about by an impulse from the upper ups to win hearts and minds by helping the Afghan authorities raid a drug compound? I could also work it as maybe due to attacks suffered at base after deployment artillery and air support is not available. i'll come up with something 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted May 1, 2011 Share Posted May 1, 2011 OK toxic.zen I am winding down my 4th attempt to take that friggin HQ, so far this is by far my best attck... I will send you some game files via email when I am done so you can see this last battle... I am really enjoying the battle as I have used almost all of the map, which is very well done btw. I have blown holes in walls, had infantry charges, attacked from 3 directions, and I still can't get within 150 yards of the HQ without taking a complete beating... I know what I am missing 'ARTY'!!!!!!!!!!!! Stay tuned as I lose somemore pixeltruppen in the heat of battle. 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.