And I thought it was just a CMSF issue....

[womble]

In any event, whenever I advance my infantry platoon leader, his three squads, and an "attached" MG team and ammo bearer past the hedgerow before the objective farm on the left, my troops get fired on from multiple directions. Some of them are killed or wounded, and I suppose the ones shown as "cowering" are considered suppressed. My Shermans do glimpse Germans and fire off a few MG rounds, but in nothing approaching the numbers I've seen in dakuth's tutorial video.

It's important not to advance past any cover until you've suppressed or neutralised whatever will shoot at you when you do. You need to spend a minute or two with your infantry snuggled into the back of that hedge just short of the farm. They should not be "Hide"ing, but the first minuted it's probably a good idea to have them all with very short (circular) cover arcs so you get a chance to see what can be seenbefore anyone fires. You should quickly see any opposition behind the long wall, and a little 'reconnaisance by fire' from behind the bocage will probably draw some more contacts. You have the firepower to drown out any opposition, and your Plt HQ can call in mortars on salient targets like HMG teams that pop up. Once you start getting some rounds downrange, you can think of adding armour to the suppression mix, but be wary of slotting them in too soon; you might be able to flush any ATGs without having them shoot at a tank.

When I try sending out scouts, they draw German fire and die without providing useful info. Their extinction isn't always immediate; they sometimes cower a while before death.

It seems your troops aren't spotting very well. I can think of two reasons why that might be, in this scenario:

1. You have them using "hide" behind the bocage: this seriously degrades their spotting ability, to almost nil behind any obstacle with a vertical compnent, like the berm of a bocage hedgerow.
   
2. You're not snugging them in close enough behind the hedge. The action point adjacent to the hedge allows you to see a short distance through the hedge, but you can settle in the half-AP on the 'safe' side of the hedge, and from there you can see without hindrance past the hedge.
   

I like to move quickly (Quick or Fast) to the last AP before the hedge, then crawl up to it. I generally set a short, circular cover arc at the quick waypoint so that teams won't give themselves away by firing in an uncoordinated manner at any enemy they see. At the beginning of the minute when I want them to be able to fire, I kill the cover arc on them all at once. You can doubleclick a platoon's subunit to select the entire platoon, then hit Del to kill all the arcs at once, or at the beginning, you can set the same short cover arc for the whole unit.

This approach seems to give good results, with my advancing units not being instantly spotted in their new nests in the hedge, unless the enemy are verrrry close. US squads are well supplied with binos it seems, so they are at least on a par for spotting with the Germans, and Slowing into position doesn't seem any more visible than being static, at least behind hedges.

Another alternative would perhaps be to try a right side approach. Ranges to the next cover are shorter there, and if your troops aren't seeing the enemy you're definitely doing something unusual.

[dieseltaylor]

Go to the excellent wiki referenced in my sig and you can see the 2.40 hr playthrough and learn stacks of stuff very easily. The video is on Youtube but going this way means I need not remember the Youtube link : )

[MOSwas71331]

Go to the excellent wiki referenced in my sig and you can see the 2.40 hr playthrough and learn stacks of stuff very easily. The video is on Youtube but going this way means I need not remember the Youtube link : )

I've watched that video repeatedly, and it certainly has a lot of good info. I had no idea before seeing the video that mortar fire could be called in during the scenario set up, and experimenting with various fire patterns and seeing their results gave me the only fun I've had so far with CM:BN.

However, the video has never shown me much about what commands are given the US troops. I can see the paths they will follow, but I haven't seen much beyond that. (A few times in the video, pending commands to a unit were cancelled, and I didn't know how that was done. I asked, and a few posters explained the use of the "stop sign" icon.) Giving a lengthy Quick movement path to a mortar team will exhaust the team, yet the video shows such a path with the team reaching the end of the path in a fully effective state. Somehow the real-time movement of the mortar team must have included pauses to "catch their breath", but I saw no such commands.

[Pak40]

...but no. This game is hard as f***. It's harder than...well, I will just stop there.

Finally getting a chance to fire this bad boy up and I am getting my balls ground into a fine paste by the AI. Could be that I am just a noob but as a CMBO, CMBB and CMAK vet...I doubt it. Not sure why I am sucking it but I am looking forward to finding that out.

Good job, BFC. You brought it!

Mike,

As a CMx1 vet, the two most valuable lessons that I've learned in CMBN so far are:

1. Split your squads. Especially split a 2 man scout unit to scout ahead of your main force. They will most likely be sacrificed but they will expose enemy units for your other units. Splitting squads also helps when assaulting or advancing across open ground. Instead of getting a single 12 man squad pinned, the enemy will have to split it's firepower against several "mini" squads.

2. On board mortars are the most important units on the battlefield. However, the must be used in a DIRECT fire role for maximum speed and effectiveness. 3 or 4 minute fire missions through a spotter is just too long to wait in many cases and also not as accurate. Instead, put your mortars on the hedgerow with direct LOS to enemy MGs, guns, and squads. Mortars should have some MGs or squads on the same line of hedgerow to help give them support (give the enemy something else to shoot at instead of chewing up your mortars). In the direct fire role, a mortar will usually start firing within 30 seconds and after 1-2 spotting rounds it will FFE with incredible accuracy. 10-15 rounds from a 60mm is usually enough to kill an entire MG or squad.

Just watch your ammo count, the FFE is quick. Also, with the new patch the mortars will choose targets on their own as they see fit if you do not hide or give them a cover arc.

[Sublime]

Mike,

As a CMx1 vet, the two most valuable lessons that I've learned in CMBN so far are:

1. Split your squads. Especially split a 2 man scout unit to scout ahead of your main force. They will most likely be sacrificed but they will expose enemy units for your other units. Splitting squads also helps when assaulting or advancing across open ground. Instead of getting a single 12 man squad pinned, the enemy will have to split it's firepower against several "mini" squads.

2. On board mortars are the most important units on the battlefield. However, the must be used in a DIRECT fire role for maximum speed and effectiveness. 3 or 4 minute fire missions through a spotter is just too long to wait in many cases and also not as accurate. Instead, put your mortars on the hedgerow with direct LOS to enemy MGs, guns, and squads. Mortars should have some MGs or squads on the same line of hedgerow to help give them support (give the enemy something else to shoot at instead of chewing up your mortars). In the direct fire role, a mortar will usually start firing within 30 seconds and after 1-2 spotting rounds it will FFE with incredible accuracy. 10-15 rounds from a 60mm is usually enough to kill an entire MG or squad.

Just watch your ammo count, the FFE is quick. Also, with the new patch the mortars will choose targets on their own as they see fit if you do not hide or give them a cover arc.

Agreed. Initially I wondered if it was just the 60mm mortars because of their small size, but this works very well for me with 81mm mortars too. Even with the Germans too. But especially with the Americans, I advance my troops, when they get to a hedgerow my mortars are close behind them. Extremely effective at destroying MG positions, AT guns, etc. Definite game changing strategy when theyre used in this way. And splitting the squads as well. I do this with the Germans as well. I almost always split my squads once theyre in a position I plan to hold or where I think they'll be in combat. When advancing, I have a few scout teams taken from squads to spring ambushes etc. When defending, I split the squads to minimize losses to bursts from artillery or direct he fire. Also if I split a Wehrmacht squad, Ill usually put the MG42 half on the top floor of a building, with the smg/rifles on the ground floor (if Im defending buildings)

But like he said, the splitting squads tool is very effective once you learn how to use it properly. The big american squads are great for this, if they have a bazooka you can easily detach an AT team and still have a large infantry squad left. FWIW..

[womble]

However, the video has never shown me much about what commands are given the US troops. I can see the paths they will follow, but I haven't seen much beyond that....

Off the top of my head, you can see from the colour of the movement paths that most of the orders are Quick, with some dark blue Slows.

Giving a lengthy Quick movement path to a mortar team will exhaust the team, yet the video shows such a path with the team reaching the end of the path in a fully effective state. Somehow the real-time movement of the mortar team must have included pauses to "catch their breath", but I saw no such commands.

Not at all. You can Quick a 60mm Mortar team quite some distance before they hit "Tired". Certainly startpoint-to-firsthedge is entirely reasonable, if my recollection is sound. In my current scenario, I'm having to bring the back end of the caterpillar forward by about 1000m and they're a mix of "Tired" and "Fatigued" HMG and 60mm teams (apart from the one that managed to flag down the one jeep I have ). Once they reach their new firing line, they'll have plenty of time to catch their breath.

Still, there's actually no real need to shift the mortars at all in "Road to Berlin". They can work just fine in indirect mode.

1. Split your squads. Especially split a 2 man scout unit to scout ahead of your main force. They will most likely be sacrificed but they will expose enemy units for your other units. Splitting squads also helps when assaulting or advancing across open ground. Instead of getting a single 12 man squad pinned, the enemy will have to split it's firepower against several "mini" squads.

I agree here. Other advantages include the ability to control where the little blighters go in tight terrain, and the ability to control when things like rifle grenades get used with more precision. There's some evidence that the teams suffer, morale-wise because they have worse leaders than the formed squad does, but my feeling is that it takes about the same number of casualties to Rattle a team as it does to Rattle a squad.

2. On board mortars are the most important units on the battlefield. However, the must be used in a DIRECT fire role for maximum speed and effectiveness. 3 or 4 minute fire missions through a spotter is just too long to wait in many cases and also not as accurate...

This, I'm not, personally, seeing. I rarely find the wait for a strike onerous, and I've seen as many DF missions go astray as spotted ones. For me, the most important units are Tanks. Look after them better than the other guy and you've got a big advantage.

Also, with the new patch the mortars will choose targets on their own as they see fit if you do not hide or give them a cover arc.

Little beggars have been picking targets of opportunity (mostly the middle of a field) even with tight cover arcs lately, for me.

[Pak40]

This, I'm not, personally, seeing. I rarely find the wait for a strike onerous, and I've seen as many DF missions go astray as spotted ones. For me, the most important units are Tanks. Look after them better than the other guy and you've got a big advantage.

Trust me, it works well. I started out doing fire missions with my on board mortars. The wait time is unrealistic, even with the mortar right next to the spotting unit. So, I started moving my mortars up to where the spotting unit is located. Not only does this drastically reduce the amount of time to drop rounds on the target, but the accuracy is pin point (after the spotting rounds fall). You just need to wait for the spotting rounds, usually there are only two spotting rounds. This is modeled really well in the game: They fire a spotting round and wait for it to fall, then they adjust, then fire another spotting round. Usually after the second spotting round falls they will start plopping down round after round and they all fall within 10m of the specified target spot. You can even put the target spot just behind the hedgerow. 81mm mortars are devastating with this method. You can even do this under 100m distance.

Little beggars have been picking targets of opportunity (mostly the middle of a field) even with tight cover arcs lately, for me.

I have seen no evidence of this. Target arc always works for me. Hide works well too. Sometimes they will fire one or two more rounds after you give the cover arc, but they will stop.

[LJFHutch]

If you really want a challenge try out CMA, that's one of the most difficult games I've ever played, getting my guys crushed in the campaign :|

[womble]

Trust me, it works well.

I know what the principle is, and have tried it out. Last time the monkey-arses dropped 15 rounds, after the two 'spotting' shots, none of which were within 10m of the target, which is less than 350m away. Whereas a popup Sherman took it out in 1 shot.

I have seen no evidence of this.

[shrug] I'm pretty sure that's what I was seeing. Maybe what they were shooting at was considered sufficiently threatening to override their TA.

I haven't completely given up on direct firing mortars, I'll give them a few more goes to prove themselves. I'm wondering if they suffer greatly from shooting in high winds.

[Pak40]

I know what the principle is, and have tried it out. Last time the monkey-arses dropped 15 rounds, after the two 'spotting' shots, none of which were within 10m of the target, which is less than 350m away. Whereas a popup Sherman took it out in 1 shot.

Well, I have yet to play a map with a 350m field of view. Most of my direct mortar fire has been in the 100-200m range, and often less than 100m with some of these bocage maps. In fact, I'm surprised how well it has been working for me - when I first started using the tactic I thought the AI would pound the mortar teams with small arms fire, but that hasn't been the case so long as I have other units giving suppressing fire. However, I can certainly see how the accuracy drops off a bit at a 350m range, especially with a 60mm.

If you've played the Road to Montebourg Campaign you will need to employ this tactic. You will rarely have armor assets to help you.

[shrug] I'm pretty sure that's what I was seeing. Maybe what they were shooting at was considered sufficiently threatening to override their TA.

I haven't completely given up on direct firing mortars, I'll give them a few more goes to prove themselves. I'm wondering if they suffer greatly from shooting in high winds.

If there's one thing I've learned, it's to not give up on something just because it doesn't go right the first time. I wouldn't give this advice if it didn't work for me so well.

[Sublime]

I haven't completely given up on direct firing mortars, I'll give them a few more goes to prove themselves. I'm wondering if they suffer greatly from shooting in high winds.

The winds may be exactly what it is. High winds especially. I dont have a lot of experience off the top of my head with high winds, but if you think of how a mortar works the round dropping after it reaches the apex of its arc would certainly seem to be affected by winds. Mortars drop a lot slower than artillery, if you move the view to up high in the game you can definitely watch the mortar rounds fired arc and fall onto whatever target you're aiming at.

I'd also assume that 60mm mortars would be even more susceptible because their light weight.

[Pak40]

The winds may be exactly what it is. High winds especially. I dont have a lot of experience off the top of my head with high winds, but if you think of how a mortar works the round dropping after it reaches the apex of its arc would certainly seem to be affected by winds. Mortars drop a lot slower than artillery, if you move the view to up high in the game you can definitely watch the mortar rounds fired arc and fall onto whatever target you're aiming at.

I'd also assume that 60mm mortars would be even more susceptible because their light weight.

Yea, it's very possible the BFC actually modeled the wind effects on mortar rounds. Wind should definitely be a big factor. Most of my experience comes from the Road to Montebourg Campaign where the winds were light to very light, although if my historical memory serves me correct, there should have been some stormy days following the D-Day landings. Still, an experienced crew should be able to adjust for strong wind after the spotting rounds although the dispersal will probably be greater.

[Chek]

Don't really see it as an either or.

1 60mm mortar hiding behind some bocage is very effective at removing Pak 40s.

Then you bring the tanks up and let those big boys loose.

[Pak40]

Never argued that it was either/or. It question of what assets you have to do the job. If you've played Road to Montbourg, then you know what I mean. You rarely are given armor assets. My main point is that on board mortars are far superior if used in the direct fire role, at least against the AI. A human opponent might render this tactic useless by unleashing all hell upon any mortar that is spotted on the battlefield... I know I would. So, it makes me wonder if the AI is only spotting the mortar units as a ? or if they can actually identify the unit as a mortar.

[Michael Emrys]

So, it makes me wonder if the AI is only spotting the mortar units as a ? or if they can actually identify the unit as a mortar.

I think the AI always plays in iron mode, so whatever spotting information is available in that mode.

Michael

[womble]

I think the AI always plays in iron mode, so whatever spotting information is available in that mode.

Michael

Ah, the question then becomes: "Does the AI click on the floating icon to see what the unit info display shows?"

Though I'm not certain the AI does always play on Iron mode. Mortar fire seemed to arrive much more quickly while I was still in Basic Training. Could just be perception, I know.

[Chek]

Never argued that it was either/or. It question of what assets you have to do the job. If you've played Road to Montbourg, then you know what I mean. You rarely are given armor assets. My main point is that on board mortars are far superior if used in the direct fire role, at least against the AI. A human opponent might render this tactic useless by unleashing all hell upon any mortar that is spotted on the battlefield... I know I would. So, it makes me wonder if the AI is only spotting the mortar units as a ? or if they can actually identify the unit as a mortar.

Sorry should've been more specific but womble was suggesting that tanks had an edge over mortars at eliminating enemy positions due to to them being consistently more accurate and then cites an example of this occuring.What I was attempting to suggest was that exposing a tank to possible enemy fire might not be such a good idea when a concealed mortar can do the job from comparitive safety,even if it's going to take longer and expend more ammo.The right tools for the job are hard to beat.Of course sometimes determining and utilising those tools can be a puzzle in itsself.

[Sublime]

I know what you mean Pak. I just tried a new strategy (ill describe below) in Road to Montebourg, I won a total victory in Orchard Hill with 6 kia 4 wounded, vs 61 kia 23 wia (or something like that for the German wia) with a Wehrmacht surrender. I play RT on Veteran. In fact the Road to Montbourg and the abundance of US campaigns have actually honed my Allied tactics and led to my development of my current DF/mortar use, etc.

When I play as the Wehrmacht Im often dismayed at how poorly I do. But then again if I had a couple of 16 mission mega campaigns I'd be a lot more experienced with my traditional side.

What Im toying with now is assaults emphasizing speed and shock. So more often than not that means NOT calling in strikes with FO's or the support button. What it DOES mean is preplanned arty on likely lines of defense, with troops advancing quick to each hedge or objective, supported by lmgs, hmgs, and mortars in DF. If I spot an enemy HQ I target that first, with MGs or guns coming in second.

This method can work brilliantly and not only that, but you can advance pretty quickly with this method, which can play hell with a lot of defenses. Of course this hasnt been tried against a human player which makes a gigantic difference obviously.

Sometimes I do wait for called in 81mm off board strikes, but thats not a bad wait and usually only when it's a major threat, or if its a threat spotted ahead of my troops I can get LOS to, then I plaster it and continue my advance towards it.

[Agua]

I know what you mean Pak. I just tried a new strategy (ill describe below) in Road to Montebourg, I won a total victory in Orchard Hill with 6 kia 4 wounded, vs 61 kia 23 wia (or something like that for the German wia) with a Wehrmacht surrender. I play RT on Veteran. In fact the Road to Montbourg and the abundance of US campaigns have actually honed my Allied tactics and led to my development of my current DF/mortar use, etc.

When I play as the Wehrmacht Im often dismayed at how poorly I do. But then again if I had a couple of 16 mission mega campaigns I'd be a lot more experienced with my traditional side.

What Im toying with now is assaults emphasizing speed and shock. So more often than not that means NOT calling in strikes with FO's or the support button. What it DOES mean is preplanned arty on likely lines of defense, with troops advancing quick to each hedge or objective, supported by lmgs, hmgs, and mortars in DF. If I spot an enemy HQ I target that first, with MGs or guns coming in second.

This method can work brilliantly and not only that, but you can advance pretty quickly with this method, which can play hell with a lot of defenses. Of course this hasnt been tried against a human player which makes a gigantic difference obviously.

Sometimes I do wait for called in 81mm off board strikes, but thats not a bad wait and usually only when it's a major threat, or if its a threat spotted ahead of my troops I can get LOS to, then I plaster it and continue my advance towards it.

Yes, I have noticed a distinct element of momentum contributing to allied success in CMBN.

[Dynaman216]

Lack of WEGO TCPIP is a killer for many.

Less situational awareness is a killer for others.

[womble]

Sorry should've been more specific but womble was suggesting that tanks had an edge over mortars at eliminating enemy positions due to to them being consistently more accurate and then cites an example of this occuring.What I was attempting to suggest was that exposing a tank to possible enemy fire might not be such a good idea when a concealed mortar can do the job from comparitive safety,even if it's going to take longer and expend more ammo.The right tools for the job are hard to beat.Of course sometimes determining and utilising those tools can be a puzzle in itsself.

In this particular case I had already determined that I didn't have enough ammo in the conditions for the mortar to do the job: 90s fire direct-lay from a 60mm hadn't even suppressed the gun. Further observation suggests that it is, indeed the high wind conditions that were screwing me up. Called point missions from 81mm are falling with 50-75m spreads, for both sides (which IME is not what I'd expect). The Germans' heavier missions are coming in in appropriately tight sheaves. The only thing I can think of to explain this is the wind affecting lighter munitions.

Every time you employ a tank, you're taking a risk. It's a matter of judging whether the return is adequate. Leaving the ATG in place meant I couldn't push any tanks forward. Ambushing it with a 20s (2 shot) popup from behind cover at a location that only exposed the tank to ground I'd had good eyes on for a while in a direction towards which the PaK would have to slew seemed like a manageable risk.

[Pak40]

In this particular case I had already determined that I didn't have enough ammo in the conditions for the mortar to do the job: 90s fire direct-lay from a 60mm hadn't even suppressed the gun. Further observation suggests that it is, indeed the high wind conditions that were screwing me up. Called point missions from 81mm are falling with 50-75m spreads, for both sides (which IME is not what I'd expect). The Germans' heavier missions are coming in in appropriately tight sheaves. The only thing I can think of to explain this is the wind affecting lighter munitions.

If I get some free time I will setup a map with some 60 and 81 mortars and test out varying wind speeds to see what kind of spread pattern happens. I'll also test out spreads of 100m direct fire missions vs spreads of fire missions over 300m

[womble]

If I get some free time I will setup a map with some 60 and 81 mortars and test out varying wind speeds to see what kind of spread pattern happens. I'll also test out spreads of 100m direct fire missions vs spreads of fire missions over 300m

Throw in some meatier ones too if you've the time. I'm not sure what nasties the Germans are throwing at me, but some of it's dropping in as close a sheaf as ever, and they're meant to have support that includes "heavy mortars".

[Michael Emrys]

I'm not sure what nasties the Germans are throwing at me, but some of it's dropping in as close a sheaf as ever, and they're meant to have support that includes "heavy mortars".

Those would probably be the 120mm they copied off the Soviets. Very, very mean, those would be.

Michael

[womble]

Those would probably be the 120mm they copied off the Soviets. Very, very mean, those would be.

Michael

They certainly smart some. Especially the ones fired at TRPs... :-/ Poor I-3 :-(