Just fired up my first battle. I played as the Russians tasked with attacking a town held by a Ukranian mech unit.
I totally got my ass handed to me.
The main problems I need to address are laziness and impatience. I'm careless with my troops and I fail to utilize all of their assets when necessary. I habitually ignore smoke when moving across open ground, almost never suppress a location prior to advancing troops, and almost never prioritize getting spotters to high ground where they can call in accurate support. Additionally, I typically try to get units to their targeted locations as quickly as possible, rather than as cautiously as possible. I need to keep my finger off of the quick and fast advance comments and use hunt and slow more often.
Failing to do the above will lead to catastrophic failure with gruesome results.
I had the same issue in Shockforce for awhile, but I eventually played out the Marine campaign professionally and the results were dramatically improved.
I think I played the same scenario except as the Ukranians. The Russians got into the town by attacking simultaneously from different directions and lots of combined arms maneuvering. Lines of site are critical and lethal both ways. Definitely a different dynamic from WWII
Con
Quote from: Con on January 31, 2015, 11:16:41 AM
I think I played the same scenario except as the Ukranians. The Russians got into the town by attacking simultaneously from different directions and lots of combined arms maneuvering. Lines of site are critical and lethal both ways. Definitely a different dynamic from WWII
Con
The Ukrainians hold the high ground in that scenario and they have an AGS-17 in a good overwatch position. The Ukrainians also have heavier armor and access to a MBT. I'll try to organize my forces better so that the initial push is more coordinated. However, for an attack of this nature, the Russians are definitely at a great disadvantage. Heck, it looks like the Russians only outnumber the Ukrainians 2 to 1, which isn't much of a numerical advantage when you're attacking in an urban environment.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 31, 2015, 10:30:41 AM
Just fired up my first battle. I played as the Russians tasked with attacking a town held by a Ukranian mech unit.
I totally got my ass handed to me.
The main problems I need to address are laziness and impatience. I'm careless with my troops and I fail to utilize all of their assets when necessary. I habitually ignore smoke when moving across open ground, almost never suppress a location prior to advancing troops, and almost never prioritize getting spotters to high ground where they can call in accurate support. Additionally, I typically try to get units to their targeted locations as quickly as possible, rather than as cautiously as possible. I need to keep my finger off of the quick and fast advance comments and use hunt and slow more often.
Failing to do the above will lead to catastrophic failure with gruesome results.
I had the same issue in Shockforce for awhile, but I eventually played out the Marine campaign professionally and the results were dramatically improved.
You may be doing this already, so I apologise in advance if I'm teaching you to suck eggs... but using small scout teams through cover as a screen is very helpful to pinpoint enemy positions for relatively little risk. Once you have ID'd an enemy position pull them back - they are not there to engage, and then try to scope out the supporting positions. Once you have an idea of the enemy positions you can formulate your plan to advance to engage - preferably through a covered route to avoid casualties. Hope that helps to reduce your losses. :)
Just had a very odd thing occur. I loaded my saved game, issued orders and then set it to play the minute. It then took about 10 minutes for the "blue bar" to progress!! Then when the orders did start, half my units weren't moving!!
My T-90's moved for the first part of their move, then just sat there even though they both had a 90 degree turn and a continue (fast move). My BMP didn't move towards the troops to be loaded and the troops didn't move towards the BMPs!
Very bizarre.
Had a fascinating quick battle against the AI. I had randomized almost everything with large battle and chose a mix of Russian and Ukrainian forces. I ran with the Russians and was given two tank companies of T-90 (one strong company with three full platoons and one short company with two platoons). Also attached were a platoon of BMP-3 Motorized Infantry and a platoon of RPG Anti-Tank teams in MTLBs. I think the Ukrainians had roughly two companies of tanks and two companies of motorized rifle.
The battle had one minor objective on either side of the map with a small village in the middle. Heavy forests dominated the approaches to the town but the area around the town afforded clear fields of fire to the opposite side.
I ran the short tank company and the AT Platoon through the heavy woods and straight towards the village in the center. The tank company lined up along the forest edge and overwatched the village while the AT platoon hauled ass towards the village. No Ukrainians in site. My full company with motorized rifle swung out towards my minor objective and then advanced on the middle village. AT platoon dismounted and scattered by occupying numerous buildings to set up an anti-tank strongpoint. Still no sight of the Ukrainians and so the heavy tank company advanced towards the village and also took up positions in the forest tree line while one tank platoon moved directly into the village and the motorized rifle platoon dismounted and occupied the village objective by joining the AT platoon. By the time the Ukrainians arrived, I had the two dismount platoons firmly in control of the village objective with T-90 platoons in the forest line in overwatch. The result was a massacre and the Ukrainians never even made it to the village and were destroyed in the forest on the far side.
Final result was a Russian Massive Victory at a loss of two tanks (Short Tank Company Commander and one of his platoon leaders) and five soldiers KIA. Ukrainian losses were 18 tanks and 12 AFVs and 101 men KIA.
Had a complete blast. One of the Ukrainian Tank Company Commanders accounted for both of my tank losses.
Trey
Quote from: Great Ajax on January 31, 2015, 12:25:48 PM
Had a fascinating quick battle against the AI. I had randomized almost everything with large battle and chose a mix of Russian and Ukrainian forces. I ran with the Russians and was given two tank companies of T-90 (one strong company with three full platoons and one short company with two platoons). Also attached were a platoon of BMP-3 Motorized Infantry and a platoon of RPG Anti-Tank teams in MTLBs. I think the Ukrainians had roughly two companies of tanks and two companies of motorized rifle.
The battle had one minor objective on either side of the map with a small village in the middle. Heavy forests dominated the approaches to the town but the area around the town afforded clear fields of fire to the opposite side.
I ran the short tank company and the AT Platoon through the heavy woods and straight towards the village in the center. The tank company lined up along the forest edge and overwatched the village while the AT platoon hauled ass towards the village. No Ukrainians in site. My full company with motorized rifle swung out towards my minor objective and then advanced on the middle village. AT platoon dismounted and scattered by occupying numerous buildings to set up an anti-tank strongpoint. Still no sight of the Ukrainians and so the heavy tank company advanced towards the village and also took up positions in the forest tree line while one tank platoon moved directly into the village and the motorized rifle platoon dismounted and occupied the village objective by joining the AT platoon. By the time the Ukrainians arrived, I had the two dismount platoons firmly in control of the village objective with T-90 platoons in the forest line in overwatch. The result was a massacre and the Ukrainians never even made it to the village and were destroyed in the forest on the far side.
Final result was a Russian Massive Victory at a loss of two tanks (Short Tank Company Commander and one of his platoon leaders) and five soldiers KIA. Ukrainian losses were 18 tanks and 12 AFVs and 101 men KIA.
Had a complete blast. One of the Ukrainian Tank Company Commanders accounted for both of my tank losses.
Trey
WHAT? :o
Quote from: JudgeDredd on January 31, 2015, 12:51:59 PM
Quote from: Great Ajax on January 31, 2015, 12:25:48 PM
Had a fascinating quick battle against the AI. I had randomized almost everything with large battle and chose a mix of Russian and Ukrainian forces. I ran with the Russians and was given two tank companies of T-90 (one strong company with three full platoons and one short company with two platoons). Also attached were a platoon of BMP-3 Motorized Infantry and a platoon of RPG Anti-Tank teams in MTLBs. I think the Ukrainians had roughly two companies of tanks and two companies of motorized rifle.
The battle had one minor objective on either side of the map with a small village in the middle. Heavy forests dominated the approaches to the town but the area around the town afforded clear fields of fire to the opposite side.
I ran the short tank company and the AT Platoon through the heavy woods and straight towards the village in the center. The tank company lined up along the forest edge and overwatched the village while the AT platoon hauled ass towards the village. No Ukrainians in site. My full company with motorized rifle swung out towards my minor objective and then advanced on the middle village. AT platoon dismounted and scattered by occupying numerous buildings to set up an anti-tank strongpoint. Still no sight of the Ukrainians and so the heavy tank company advanced towards the village and also took up positions in the forest tree line while one tank platoon moved directly into the village and the motorized rifle platoon dismounted and occupied the village objective by joining the AT platoon. By the time the Ukrainians arrived, I had the two dismount platoons firmly in control of the village objective with T-90 platoons in the forest line in overwatch. The result was a massacre and the Ukrainians never even made it to the village and were destroyed in the forest on the far side.
Final result was a Russian Massive Victory at a loss of two tanks (Short Tank Company Commander and one of his platoon leaders) and five soldiers KIA. Ukrainian losses were 18 tanks and 12 AFVs and 101 men KIA.
Had a complete blast. One of the Ukrainian Tank Company Commanders accounted for both of my tank losses.
Trey
WHAT? :o
Sounds like the AI jacked around for too long at the beginning. Hopefully it's been improved in the quick battles since CMSF.
Quote from: Boggit on January 31, 2015, 11:51:15 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 31, 2015, 10:30:41 AM
Just fired up my first battle. I played as the Russians tasked with attacking a town held by a Ukranian mech unit.
I totally got my ass handed to me.
The main problems I need to address are laziness and impatience. I'm careless with my troops and I fail to utilize all of their assets when necessary. I habitually ignore smoke when moving across open ground, almost never suppress a location prior to advancing troops, and almost never prioritize getting spotters to high ground where they can call in accurate support. Additionally, I typically try to get units to their targeted locations as quickly as possible, rather than as cautiously as possible. I need to keep my finger off of the quick and fast advance comments and use hunt and slow more often.
Failing to do the above will lead to catastrophic failure with gruesome results.
I had the same issue in Shockforce for awhile, but I eventually played out the Marine campaign professionally and the results were dramatically improved.
You may be doing this already, so I apologise in advance if I'm teaching you to suck eggs... but using small scout teams through cover as a screen is very helpful to pinpoint enemy positions for relatively little risk. Once you have ID'd an enemy position pull them back - they are not there to engage, and then try to scope out the supporting positions. Once you have an idea of the enemy positions you can formulate your plan to advance to engage - preferably through a covered route to avoid casualties. Hope that helps to reduce your losses. :)
Thanks, I know. My problem isn't that I don't know what to do...its that I'm too lazy and impatient to do it. I've become too accustomed to games that are not authentic and that do not punish the player for tactical errors or sloppiness. This game is definitely going to reform my evil ways!
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 31, 2015, 10:30:41 AM
Just fired up my first battle. I played as the Russians tasked with attacking a town held by a Ukranian mech unit.
I totally got my ass handed to me.
The main problems I need to address are laziness and impatience. I'm careless with my troops and I fail to utilize all of their assets when necessary. I habitually ignore smoke when moving across open ground, almost never suppress a location prior to advancing troops, and almost never prioritize getting spotters to high ground where they can call in accurate support. Additionally, I typically try to get units to their targeted locations as quickly as possible, rather than as cautiously as possible. I need to keep my finger off of the quick and fast advance comments and use hunt and slow more often.
Failing to do the above will lead to catastrophic failure with gruesome results.
I had the same issue in Shockforce for awhile, but I eventually played out the Marine campaign professionally and the results were dramatically improved.
So what you are saying is -and I'm not being facetious- that you have to use actual tactics. It's not any more realistic in the game to expect fully combat loaded infantry to sprint across an open field without suppressing Fire and smoke than in real life?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 31, 2015, 02:56:39 PM
its that I'm too lazy and impatient to do it. I've become too accustomed to games that are not authentic and that do not punish the player for tactical errors or sloppiness. This game is definitely going to reform my evil ways!
+1
this morn i played the first smallest scenario (August) ...accidentally i started it on continuous time, not a good idea ...and managed to get a draw.
then this eve i though: now i do it by the book! (and in WeGo of course)
It was almost like in a war movie.
All went well, i lost one MG team by enemy mortar fire, got the Intel from the destroyed enemy HQ vehicles had only 9 min left on the clock and 2 casualties in the rilfe squad near the now cleared central objective... i wanted to give them medical attention ... the heavy wounded got treated ... not much time left on the clock. now i rushed the rifle team and the MG team uphill back to the exfill where the HQ and the observer were already waiting ... far on the other side of the map a single soldier must have survived all my artillery barrages airbursts somewhere in a hedge ... he got one of my guys in the open close before reaching the woodline (like in the movies) ... my mortars were already Winchester, so no help form HQ or the observer ... of course i want to treat this heavy wounded too ... No one shall left behind! ... i order the MG team also on its way to exfill to stop , drop, turn and immediately give suppressive fire ... the bastards jogged on ... another 1 minute passed by ... the situation on the open field got dramatic: another casualty and all others but one lucky guy light wounded ... finally the MG team stopped and opened up ... only 3 min left on the clock ... i didn't made the exfill-in-time condition, ....but at least a Minor US victory:-)
who says you cant have fun with only a handful - literally! - units and on a small map.
Just finished the Tutorial campaign...man...
1: Engagement ranges. Yeah...too much CMRT &c. lately...wow. In this respect, the two gunnery range missions are a helpful tonic.
2: I am a fan of CAS, if I can get a bit impatient waiting for it to arrive. Also, it's a hard thing to calibrate, i.e., what's too much, too little, too long?
3: Like Mike suggested above, the up-gunning of the individual soldier is one of the bigger shifts for me. In CM's WWII iterations, troops, even those in the weeds, had best stay hid most of the time when AFVs are about. DEFINITELY not so here, particularly in CQB. I also like his comment about it feeling like a war movie at the best of time. It truly does. It makes clear that there's few cases where even victorious troops don't get badly hit and hurt. Admirably real.
4: I can't exactly say why, but I've never split squads on a regular basis. It strikes me as necessary for recon.
5: UAVs are remarkable, particularly when you stir the bee's nest and everything inside comes into the clear running.
6: Oh my goodness the toys you can play with. I've been listening to "The Outpost" on CD and suddenly having to fool about with an LMVT makes me understanding the frustrations expressed by the soldiers in that incident related in the book all the more.
And this, of course, makes me all the more eager to have them bolt the CMx2 3.0 back onto CM:SF as they had suggested they might.
Great stuff so far.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Quote from: mikeck on January 31, 2015, 03:31:40 PM
So what you are saying is -and I'm not being facetious- that you have to use actual tactics. It's not any more realistic in the game to expect fully combat loaded infantry to sprint across an open field without suppressing Fire and smoke than in real life?
Nope, nor is it good practice to move AFVs in the open, or neglect overwatch, etc. The CMx2 games require good tactics. You need to scout, you need to plan, and you need to exercise caution. If you "hurry up so you can get to the good stuff" as a recent poster put it, you better play on the lowest difficulty levels, because otherwise you're going to get shredded.
Quote from: Boggit on January 31, 2015, 11:51:15 AM
You may be doing this already, so I apologise in advance if I'm teaching you to suck eggs... but using small scout teams through cover as a screen is very helpful to pinpoint enemy positions for relatively little risk. Once you have ID'd an enemy position pull them back - they are not there to engage, and then try to scope out the supporting positions. Once you have an idea of the enemy positions you can formulate your plan to advance to engage - preferably through a covered route to avoid casualties. Hope that helps to reduce your losses. :)
What about use the UAV's to scout the area? O0 I just thought of this after my first quick battle and my vehicles got smashed badly. My problem is arty support. I never used it. Never got the vantage point early enough to rain down on the defenders.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 31, 2015, 02:56:39 PM
Quote from: Boggit on January 31, 2015, 11:51:15 AM
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on January 31, 2015, 10:30:41 AM
Just fired up my first battle. I played as the Russians tasked with attacking a town held by a Ukranian mech unit.
I totally got my ass handed to me.
The main problems I need to address are laziness and impatience. I'm careless with my troops and I fail to utilize all of their assets when necessary. I habitually ignore smoke when moving across open ground, almost never suppress a location prior to advancing troops, and almost never prioritize getting spotters to high ground where they can call in accurate support. Additionally, I typically try to get units to their targeted locations as quickly as possible, rather than as cautiously as possible. I need to keep my finger off of the quick and fast advance comments and use hunt and slow more often.
Failing to do the above will lead to catastrophic failure with gruesome results.
I had the same issue in Shockforce for awhile, but I eventually played out the Marine campaign professionally and the results were dramatically improved.
You may be doing this already, so I apologise in advance if I'm teaching you to suck eggs... but using small scout teams through cover as a screen is very helpful to pinpoint enemy positions for relatively little risk. Once you have ID'd an enemy position pull them back - they are not there to engage, and then try to scope out the supporting positions. Once you have an idea of the enemy positions you can formulate your plan to advance to engage - preferably through a covered route to avoid casualties. Hope that helps to reduce your losses. :)
Thanks, I know. My problem isn't that I don't know what to do...its that I'm too lazy and impatient to do it. I've become too accustomed to games that are not authentic and that do not punish the player for tactical errors or sloppiness. This game is definitely going to reform my evil ways!
It's not just that.
It's also "programmed" into you from the game. It's very difficult to gauge how long it's going to take you to cross the map, engage and take objectives. So if you have 30 minutes or 3 hours means virtually nothing. You don't know how long to wait until that smoke arrives. You don't know how long to spend scouting that first kilometre. You order an airstrike on an area you know to contain enemy and it's really, REALLY difficult (and against the grain) to sit and do nothing for 6 minutes waiting for that airstrike! You're always thinking about where you have to get to and with no idea of how long it will take you to do so.
Add on to all that uncertainty the certainty that you have 60 minutes to complete the task, and you're bound to throw caution to the wind.
As an example, and maybe the other end of your problem, is I tend to baby step forward...then realising time is moving and I have a shit load of map to cover, I then throw caution to the wind - only to be mowed down....even though my first half hour showed no contact (or very little and far away).
I've just lost 2 T72's in quick succession in my game because I cautiously advanced for the first 20 minutes and, meeting nothing, went forward more than I should've...mainly because I was aware of the time and how far I had to go.
^ Dredd, I think I'm going to get shredded in this game. That's a long wait. I think I'll have a long learning curve ahead
Oh I wasn't just meaning this game. And it's totally subjective. People will totally react differently probably. But I do feel under pressure with a timer and I have no idea how long it's going to take me to move across xKM of terrain, which compounds the issue.
Of course, the time constraint is a real world issue. But not knowing how long it will take your troops to slow, quick, move, fast move and assault across terrain (and how much each of those will affect fatigue) seriously affects your judgement within the game.
Quote from: panzerde on January 31, 2015, 04:19:04 PM
The CMx2 games require good tactics. You need to scout, you need to plan, and you need to exercise caution. If you "hurry up so you can get to the good stuff" as a recent poster put it, you better play on the lowest difficulty levels, because otherwise you're going to get shredded.
This is exactly right. Your default mode in CMx2 has got to be 'cautious'. Knowing under what circumstances to go 'aggressive' is what's going to separates successful from frustrated players. But aggressive definitely cannot be standard operating procedure if you want to succeed.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on January 31, 2015, 06:16:32 PM
It's not just that.
It's also "programmed" into you from the game. It's very difficult to gauge how long it's going to take you to cross the map, engage and take objectives. So if you have 30 minutes or 3 hours means virtually nothing. You don't know how long to wait until that smoke arrives. You don't know how long to spend scouting that first kilometre. You order an airstrike on an area you know to contain enemy and it's really, REALLY difficult (and against the grain) to sit and do nothing for 6 minutes waiting for that airstrike! You're always thinking about where you have to get to and with no idea of how long it will take you to do so.
Add on to all that uncertainty the certainty that you have 60 minutes to complete the task, and you're bound to throw caution to the wind.
As an example, and maybe the other end of your problem, is I tend to baby step forward...then realising time is moving and I have a shit load of map to cover, I then throw caution to the wind - only to be mowed down....even though my first half hour showed no contact (or very little and far away).
I've just lost 2 T72's in quick succession in my game because I cautiously advanced for the first 20 minutes and, meeting nothing, went forward more than I should've...mainly because I was aware of the time and how far I had to go.
JD makes a great point.
With a hard time limit, you don't often have the luxury of taking the time to probe at your leisure. I always felt very rushed in the CMx2 series, as if I was fighting the timer more than the enemy.
They should consider a soft timer which very slowly adds a penalty to your end result the longer you go past the end. Perhaps the creators would consider this too easy, but it has always felt like the attacker is too rushed to use a methodical approach and is forced into sacrificing more casualties for speed if using the tactics suggested previously in this thread.
Hard time limits used as a large part of the difficulty just isn't as enjoyable in one-off scenarios IMO. At least ones which force you to throw caution to the wind. The timer was always an issue in CMSF and CMBN with me, especially if I decided to use turn-based mode, because it would just force me to push risky suicide attacks in the latter part just like JD mentioned. :-\
Played a few hours today and even though I'm an East front obsessive I'm tending to think this is the best CM yet. The stock graphics for starters are streets ahead I feel on previous titles, esp the terrain.
The selection of toys is a joy and so far the scenarios I've played have been superbly designed and have excellent terrain features\layout.
A HUGE thumbs up from me. Far exceeds my already high expectations!
I can't wait for future modules.
For those that prefer not to play the game with a timer, can't you just use the scenario editor and select the largest timer option possible? Not sure if changing the timer impacts the designed scenario, but might be worth a shot since it only takes two seconds to change.
Do you guys play Iron? That's the only level I play in CMSF. But wondering if I should lower it down since I'm having a hard time.
Quote from: jomni on January 31, 2015, 09:53:06 PM
Do you guys play Iron? That's the only level I play in CMSF. But wondering if I should lower it down since I'm having a hard time.
Heck no:) Since I am not very good at the game, I rarely stray above Veteran level, especially when starting out. I know pretty lame, but rather have fun than frustrate myself right now:)
Quote from: jomni on January 31, 2015, 09:53:06 PM
Do you guys play Iron? That's the only level I play in CMSF. But wondering if I should lower it down since I'm having a hard time.
I've been playing at Iron, but it is tough. Much tougher than CMSF. You are definitely going to take more casualties than in CMSF, even if you are careful.
I'm not a fan of "Iron" as all it does is mess about with your ability to spot your own men...
I prefer "Elite" over all...
Combat still as brutal as Doug describes.
Thanks I guess I'll forget about Iron and Elite for now since the additional rules relate to information discovery. I'm now looking at 2 levels... Veteran and Warrior. Which one is recommended?
I suspect most canned scenarios are made with Veteran in mind.
WEGO- Elite for me.
Quote from: TacticalWargames on February 01, 2015, 02:50:36 AM
WEGO- Elite for me.
+1
Jommi,
the difference to
Warrior is only that it is not immediately revealed what battlefield-function an enemy infantry contact has, so player cant (gamy) priories to go for HQ and ATs, before they have given themself away
(and ammo from dumps are not distributed automatically between all units any more?)
The difference
Warrior to
Veteran is shortend times for Med Evac (abstractly handled) and Artillery and Air Support in 'Veteran'-setting
On the 2017 modern battle field those times are already short compared to WW II ....so 'Elite' in CMBS
feels already somehow like 'Veteran' concerning reaction times in CMRT ;)
i recommend the Elite-setting
@Judge
you can load the scenario in the editor and change the setting to variable length
IIRC there is a random extra-time added.
I also like Nefaro's
house rule of: add time and give yourself a point penalty for every minute 'overtime'
Concerning the movement speeds dilemma
As a physichist i would recommend to do a field experiment ;-) in the training scenarios, if you really want to calc sometimes later instead of gut instincts:
Just let a generic team quick, hunt, or crawl 200m in different terrains (maybe wood, field, town) ...and note the times they need each 25 m and when then exhaust level changes.
Assault is different, you can decide the number of leapfrog-points used (there is one leapfrog between start and target point) so just let them assault a typical short distance you would order with one leap frog in the middle and note that time ...a longer distance is covered by chaining shorter assault commands, so you generate the number of leapfrogs you would feel comfortable on that given longer distance
Well I played Warrior just now and it doesn't really improve my results compared to Iron. :D
I'll try Elite next.
By the way, can the UAV in observation mission help in plotting artillery? I read it in the manual but I don't know how to actually do it?
Thanks MikeGer...I might just do that. I presume that's not a problem for campaign missions? Also, how do I know what missions to change? I don't want to load the campaign, then the scenario and then go out to change it to log back in again...especially as it takes between 5 and 10 minutes to load my game.
What I would love (and I know I'm probably in a minority because people like to know how they won) is the removal of the scoring aspect. I would like to see me presented with my objectives in the briefing. Even have some of them be given importance (primary, secondary). Then at the end of the battle, not being shown the stats and the points given, but a more general an military style debriefing where I'm told a good job was done and we've received our next mission. The stats for me ruin the military feel. You of course need to know your casualties.
Overall - this is turning out to be a superb experience. As someone mentioned, stock graphics are a high standard. The terrain especially seems to be very undulating - at least in my attempt to secure a crossing at the Dnieper.
One thing I don't get is the time delay. So I have a couple of 120mm mortars and a couple of bad ass self propelled guns waiting. I get my spotters into a position and order a barrage of linear smoke...and I'm told it'll take 8 minutes. 8 MINUTES? I was never a spotter or had to call arty irl, but I did know a gunnery sergeant and I'm pretty sure, the way he explained receiving orders, laying spotting lines and firing that he'd be chewing serious arse if his team were taking 8 minutes to lay down smoke.
And this kind of thing ties in with the above mention on the time...what exactly do you do for 8 minutes. That's a long time to sit and twiddle your thumbs. You can't really move. The whole point of the smoke is to give your troops a chance to cross open ground. So you are literally sitting there holding your troops back
BUT - this is a huge thumbs up. I need to check a couple of things - but overall, superb gameplay.
And I play either Elite or Veteran...never anything else.
Quote from: jomni on February 01, 2015, 04:20:16 AM
By the way, can the UAV in observation mission help in plotting artillery? I read it in the manual but I don't know how to actually do it?
thats there main task! O0
they work like a normal unit and their spotting information is distributed through the network, so a Observer, a HQ or who ever has access to the Support without LOS can order a fire mission ....you will probably use the new Point Target plus precision type shells, to take out spotted vehicles
when you are to exhausted to play/explore yourself the sim anymore on a days ending, maybe then take a look at ChirsND's videos (playthroughs) on YT.... they really hepled me to get into the groove for the new setting and toys :D
8 minutes or more is reasonable. it's not the gun battery's responsiveness that is the issue, it's the queue of missions that is probably in backlog. Your unit may not have fire priority of fire within the brigade which means you are going to have to wait for fire or get your request denied all together.
Trey
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 01, 2015, 04:42:14 AM
Thanks MikeGer...I might just do that. I presume that's not a problem for campaign missions? Also, how do I know what missions to change? I don't want to load the campaign, then the scenario and then go out to change it to log back in again...especially as it takes between 5 and 10 minutes to load my game.
What I would love (and I know I'm probably in a minority because people like to know how they won) is the removal of the scoring aspect. I would like to see me presented with my objectives in the briefing. Even have some of them be given importance (primary, secondary). Then at the end of the battle, not being shown the stats and the points given, but a more general an military style debriefing where I'm told a good job was done and we've received our next mission. The stats for me ruin the military feel. You of course need to know your casualties.
Overall - this is turning out to be a superb experience. As someone mentioned, stock graphics are a high standard. The terrain especially seems to be very undulating - at least in my attempt to secure a crossing at the Dnieper.
One thing I don't get is the time delay. So I have a couple of 120mm mortars and a couple of bad ass self propelled guns waiting. I get my spotters into a position and order a barrage of linear smoke...and I'm told it'll take 8 minutes. 8 MINUTES? I was never a spotter or had to call arty irl, but I did know a gunnery sergeant and I'm pretty sure, the way he explained receiving orders, laying spotting lines and firing that he'd be chewing serious arse if his team were taking 8 minutes to lay down smoke.
And this kind of thing ties in with the above mention on the time...what exactly do you do for 8 minutes. That's a long time to sit and twiddle your thumbs. You can't really move. The whole point of the smoke is to give your troops a chance to cross open ground. So you are literally sitting there holding your troops back
BUT - this is a huge thumbs up. I need to check a couple of things - but overall, superb gameplay.
And I play either Elite or Veteran...never anything else.
Quote from: MikeGER on February 01, 2015, 04:49:43 AM
Quote from: jomni on February 01, 2015, 04:20:16 AM
By the way, can the UAV in observation mission help in plotting artillery? I read it in the manual but I don't know how to actually do it?
thats there main task! O0
they work like a normal unit and their spotting information is distributed through the network, so a Observer, a HQ or who ever has access to the Support without LOS can order a fire mission ....you will probably use the new Point Target plus precision type shells, to take out spotted vehicles
when you are to exhausted to play/explore yourself the sim anymore on a days ending, maybe then take a look at ChirsND's videos (playthroughs) on YT.... they really hepled me to get into the groove for the new setting and toys :D
Do they work with on map mortars? I don't have enough money to buy off map biggies.
yes they do.... the mortars must have to be in commnand range of a HQ (access to the network) to show up in the support menu so
Non-strategy question, but game related.....
I see a lot of screenshots for the game that really look impressive and capture some cool action, with that in mind....
1) I have a pretty decent video card ATI R9 270x, but my graphics never seem to look as good as other people even with maximum graphic options turned on. Does anybody have a similar video card or have tips on what settings (either in the game or on the card itself) could be made to further improve the graphics? Don't get me wrong, they are certainly good and acceptable as is, but it just always seems I see people with better.
2) Using WeGo and replaying a turn minute.....it doesn't seem like you have the ability to slow down the replay speed extensively. I know the buttons exist to fast forward and such, but is there any more granular control that I am missing? In some cases would like to view some of the action in super slow-mo/frame-by-frame but haven't figure out how to do that, if even possible.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 01, 2015, 04:42:14 AM
Thanks MikeGer...I might just do that. I presume that's not a problem for campaign missions? Also, how do I know what missions to change? I don't want to load the campaign, then the scenario and then go out to change it to log back in again...especially as it takes between 5 and 10 minutes to load my game.
I also suggested the same thing about editing the time for the scenarios, but now I realize that may not be easily possible for campaign missions. You certainly can do it easily for the stand alone missions, but from what I read it is not immediately available within the game to alter the missions with the campaigns. My understanding is that you would need to use a third-party tool like the one linked below to uncompile the campaign and make the changes. However, doesn't appear it is compatible yet with CMBS.
http://cmmods.greenasjade.net/mods/5426/details
Quote from: MikeGER on February 01, 2015, 06:03:39 AM
yes they do.... the mortars must have to be in commnand range of a HQ (access to the network) to show up in the support menu so
Ok. Just watched the video tutorial. I think I'm good to go. O0
Quote from: MikeGER on February 01, 2015, 06:03:39 AM
yes they do.... the mortars must have to be in commnand range of a HQ (access to the network) to show up in the support menu so
Yep they do ... and the combination of the new precision artillery strikes with an HQ and a drone are absolutely lethal. Probably the single biggest game changer I have seen so far.
Drones are huge in the game.
The only thing I would comment on so far is that I haven't seen any AA fire at them yet.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2015, 06:32:45 AM
Non-strategy question, but game related.....
I see a lot of screenshots for the game that really look impressive and capture some cool action, with that in mind....
1) I have a pretty decent video card ATI R9 270x, but my graphics never seem to look as good as other people even with maximum graphic options turned on. Does anybody have a similar video card or have tips on what settings (either in the game or on the card itself) could be made to further improve the graphics? Don't get me wrong, they are certainly good and acceptable as is, but it just always seems I see people with better.
2) Using WeGo and replaying a turn minute.....it doesn't seem like you have the ability to slow down the replay speed extensively. I know the buttons exist to fast forward and such, but is there any more granular control that I am missing? In some cases would like to view some of the action in super slow-mo/frame-by-frame but haven't figure out how to do that, if even possible.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
1. May help if you explain in what way you have seen better. Some videos out there use post processing - and of course there is the movie lighting option - which I liked at first but got tired of later.
2. No - no way to do that.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 01, 2015, 09:25:38 AM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2015, 06:32:45 AM
Non-strategy question, but game related.....
I see a lot of screenshots for the game that really look impressive and capture some cool action, with that in mind....
1) I have a pretty decent video card ATI R9 270x, but my graphics never seem to look as good as other people even with maximum graphic options turned on. Does anybody have a similar video card or have tips on what settings (either in the game or on the card itself) could be made to further improve the graphics? Don't get me wrong, they are certainly good and acceptable as is, but it just always seems I see people with better.
2) Using WeGo and replaying a turn minute.....it doesn't seem like you have the ability to slow down the replay speed extensively. I know the buttons exist to fast forward and such, but is there any more granular control that I am missing? In some cases would like to view some of the action in super slow-mo/frame-by-frame but haven't figure out how to do that, if even possible.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
1. May help if you explain in what way you have seen better. Some videos out there use post processing - and of course there is the movie lighting option - which I liked at first but got tired of later.
2. No - no way to do that.
1) Graphics just seem sharper and more crisp...hard to explain but maybe they look better because they are screenshots versus actual in game footage. I'll have to watch some videos instead to see if any major differences.
2) Just curious if this doesn't exist, how do people create those screenshots where you clearly see the missiles and such in mid flight and right before impact? Maybe they actually record the video and then use screenshots from it.
I get the impression there's a fault or two with the game - I have ordered two Soviet squads to assault and for five impulses (so 5 whole, very long minutes) they've sat there and done nothing. They are in command...the HQ unit is with meters of them...and they aren't pinned...just sitting there.
There just doesn't seem any reason for them not to be obeying the command. There's very little going on around them.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2015, 09:29:38 AM
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 01, 2015, 09:25:38 AM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 01, 2015, 06:32:45 AM
Non-strategy question, but game related.....
I see a lot of screenshots for the game that really look impressive and capture some cool action, with that in mind....
1) I have a pretty decent video card ATI R9 270x, but my graphics never seem to look as good as other people even with maximum graphic options turned on. Does anybody have a similar video card or have tips on what settings (either in the game or on the card itself) could be made to further improve the graphics? Don't get me wrong, they are certainly good and acceptable as is, but it just always seems I see people with better.
2) Using WeGo and replaying a turn minute.....it doesn't seem like you have the ability to slow down the replay speed extensively. I know the buttons exist to fast forward and such, but is there any more granular control that I am missing? In some cases would like to view some of the action in super slow-mo/frame-by-frame but haven't figure out how to do that, if even possible.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
1. May help if you explain in what way you have seen better. Some videos out there use post processing - and of course there is the movie lighting option - which I liked at first but got tired of later.
2. No - no way to do that.
1) Graphics just seem sharper and more crisp...hard to explain but maybe they look better because they are screenshots versus actual in game footage. I'll have to watch some videos instead to see if any major differences.
2) Just curious if this doesn't exist, how do people create those screenshots where you clearly see the missiles and such in mid flight and right before impact? Maybe they actually record the video and then use screenshots from it.
1. You will need to set options for Anti Aliasing and anisotropic filtering in your Graphics card control panel - and then set the game to use anti aliasing. Just doing one or the other wont work. If you haven't set AA or AF up in you graphics card then you are missing a whole world of difference in what the game will look like as standard. For example gun barrels that don't have jaggies etc -
those two are the most important things to set AA I usually just set to 4x and AF to 2X - that gives me the result I Like.
2. they use the pause button - takes a little practice - especially with something flying as fast as a missile - but that's what they do. I do it far too much on some turns and it takes me half an hour to complete a one minute turn cause I am skipping round the battlefield looking at all the little incidents which is one of the things I love about the game.
I thought having AA set in a game AND on the graphics card setting caused a slowdown because they fought against each other?
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 01, 2015, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: MikeGER on February 01, 2015, 06:03:39 AM
yes they do.... the mortars must have to be in commnand range of a HQ (access to the network) to show up in the support menu so
Yep they do ... and the combination of the new precision artillery strikes with an HQ and a drone are absolutely lethal. Probably the single biggest game changer I have seen so far.
Drones are huge in the game.
The only thing I would comment on so far is that I haven't seen any AA fire at them yet.
My drone was destroyed by a manpad. :(
Finally won by first total victory in QB as Russian Mech vs Ukrainian Mech.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 01, 2015, 09:47:30 AM
I thought having AA set in a game AND on the graphics card setting caused a slowdown because they fought against each other?
Not at all for me. In fact I thought you had to set in the game and on your card. Its always been that way. The options inside the game don't have any way to assign the settings - just tells it to use them - that you have to do in the card. Never had any issues doing it that way and the games looks excellent.
Quote from: jomni on February 01, 2015, 10:02:25 AM
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 01, 2015, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: MikeGER on February 01, 2015, 06:03:39 AM
yes they do.... the mortars must have to be in commnand range of a HQ (access to the network) to show up in the support menu so
Yep they do ... and the combination of the new precision artillery strikes with an HQ and a drone are absolutely lethal. Probably the single biggest game changer I have seen so far.
Drones are huge in the game.
The only thing I would comment on so far is that I haven't seen any AA fire at them yet.
My drone was destroyed by a manpad. :(
Finally won by first total victory in QB as Russian Mech vs Ukrainian Mech.
Good to hear - though not for you obviously ;D
Playing at the moment - wont tell what so as not to spoil - but my drones paired with precision mortar strikes have accounted for around 8 vehicles so far. Sometimes I allocate two guns for the strike sometimes one - but even calling "immediate" they seem to hit pretty well. The modern battlefield seems an incredibly lethal place to live compared to WWII.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 01, 2015, 10:13:43 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 01, 2015, 09:47:30 AM
I thought having AA set in a game AND on the graphics card setting caused a slowdown because they fought against each other?
Not at all for me. In fact I thought you had to set in the game and on your card. Its always been that way. The options inside the game don't have any way to assign the settings - just tells it to use them - that you have to do in the card. Never had any issues doing it that way and the games looks excellent.
I turned on all those settings on my card, but didn't notice much of a difference within the game, if any.....maybe the difference is just so little, hard to notice. Oh well, not a big deal....not a major issue.
If AA is on in the video card software, then it is overriding the in-game setting. Not at odds with it.
Anti-Aliasing is the most demanding gfx setting. It basically redraws each frame multiple times, depending on how high you have it set, to smooth out the jagged edges. Just by the description, you can see that it doubles the processing power required for each frame displayed, for each step up. AA is a hog, so if your fps is hitting some choppy troughs in any game, lowering the AA will provide the greatest improvement to framerate.
Antisotropic Filtering (AF), on the other hand, doesn't make much of a framerate difference at all. It just improves the look of the textures a bit but doesn't require extra frames. If you run something at AF 2x, you probably won't notice any difference in performance if you set it to 8x or even 16x. When it was first introduced many years ago, it made a bit of a difference but anymore it's negligible if you have a passable video card.
I'll tell you what is still there...the commander being the first to get chopped.
My T-90 was hit in the wheels with an RPG and right away, the only casualty was the commander. I've also lost a lot of the commanders of my other vehicles...whether they were unbuttoned or buttoned.
US M1 tanks are freaking brutal. A platoon of these guys in ambush can wipe a motorized company in a couple of minutes. It was like a bad move with my Motorized Rifle Battlegroup. Within two minutes of starting, two of my three recce BRDMS are knocked out along with my Battalion spotter heading to a sweet observation post. Now going in blind, my motorized rifle company proceeds to get wiped in two more minutes. We didn't even get a shot off on the M1s.
Trey
The M1A2 SEP is crazy good.
Noticing the same thing as JD re: vehicle commanders dying first. I'm used to it from all of the rest of the CM games, but it does seem skewed.
On the plus side, I am noticing the crew/passenger survivability in US vehicles is fairly high. I've had a lot more guys crawl out of the wreckage than I'd expect.
Question - any ideas why this infantry unit (in a BMP and closed up) can spot that Ukrainian MG unit through smoke and when it's in a forest...both of which I would've thought would hinder the ability to see something...nevermind the fact they are enclosed in a BMP!
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1160.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq499%2Fwmar1967%2FGame%2520Screenies%2FSnap7_zps2aqvvwl0.jpg&hash=6145b3ebb6c7240bd75ad2af34b2b14308e9b117)
JD -- Which difficulty are you playing at?
Jim
Veteran
It was particularly odd because sometimes my units are being fired at and all I can see is tracer...not the unit doing the firing...and yet here I am, quite a distance away, holed up in a BMP and I can see a single guy running in a forest through smoke :o
It was still a blast!
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 01, 2015, 12:19:04 PM
Veteran
It was particularly odd because sometimes my units are being fired at and all I can see is tracer...not the unit doing the firing...and yet here I am, quite a distance away, holed up in a BMP and I can see a single guy running in a forest through smoke :o
It was still a blast!
I think that's a BMP 3 in the picture ?
Vesna-K thermal imager would explain seeing through the smoke. I notice in the picture that its white smoke which doesn't block Thermal imagers (the other type of smoke in the game which is brown does). Woods are also not a brick wall - it depends how far back in the woods they are.
You should also read up on all the other targeting systems a BMP 3 has. Obviously the infantry unit is in the BMP so benefits from what they can see.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 01, 2015, 03:27:32 PM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 01, 2015, 12:19:04 PM
Veteran
It was particularly odd because sometimes my units are being fired at and all I can see is tracer...not the unit doing the firing...and yet here I am, quite a distance away, holed up in a BMP and I can see a single guy running in a forest through smoke :o
It was still a blast!
I think that's a BMP 3 in the picture ?
Vesna-K thermal imager would explain seeing through the smoke. I notice in the picture that its white smoke which doesn't block Thermal imagers (the other type of smoke in the game which is brown does). Woods are also not a brick wall - it depends how far back in the woods they are.
You should also read up on all the other targeting systems a BMP 3 has. Obviously the infantry unit is in the BMP so benefits from what they can see.
Happens to me as well in the BMP 3 but why does the passengers and not the vehicle itself get the LOS?
I'm having an absolute blast with a Woodland QB defence. My US company vs Infantry battalion and coy of recon
Very intense as my left flank is being overrun. Some great story/movie type moments being made some turns.
Finally was able to sit down for the game.
Download was finished in about 16 mins, installation went without a hitch. O0
Started the training campaign to take a leisurely look at some new toys. Veteran difficulty was recommended by the scenario creator, but I choose Elite, being the stubborn bastard that I am sometimes. Well... it turns out the enemy isn't just waiting for my guys to use them as target practice! :2funny:
Perhaps this is due to the difficulty setting, but as soon as the enemy infantry spotted my men on the small arms range, they immediately opened fire.
I had them outnumbered, so once all my men had taken a spot at the wall, the enemy resistance was quickly smashed to bits. :smitten:
Then followed some butt kicking with the M1's and the Bradleys. :smitten:
After this I started the 'Crossing the Dnieper' campaign. Still in the first mission, but I'll close off for today.
I lost one BMP-3 with full crew, pax and cargo to a concealed MBT, but otherwise my advance is going as planned. I try to think about getting some screenshots tomorrow.
So far its good old CM! Loving it!
Is there friendly fire from air support? I suspect my hinds are hitting my men (basically similar looking equipment as Ukrainians) but I'm not sure.
Quote from: jomni on February 02, 2015, 10:50:00 PM
Is there friendly fire from air support? I suspect my hinds are hitting my men (basically similar looking equipment as Ukrainians) but I'm not sure.
Yes, and it's more likely at night. I don't know that's what happening to you, obviously, but some of the worst casualties I ever took in CMSF came from friendly fire from CAS. Keep your troops well away from airstrike targets if you can!
Well I was thinking the helos would be intelligent enough to know friend or foe. These aren't dumb bombs but guns. rockets. It looks like they are deliberately attacking my guys within the attack area. Never again. [emoji14]
IIRC in 2008! 9 British soldier from 2nd Para got wounded in Stan by 30mm fire from own choppers
...found it:
QuoteNine British paratroopers have been wounded in a 'friendly fire' incident in Afghanistan as they came under fire from a British helicopter gunship.
The soldiers from the 2nd Battalion The Parachute Regiment were locked in a ferocious close-quarter combat with Taliban fighters and called in air support to save their patrol from being overrun.
The Apache helicopter from the Army Air Corps successfully attacked one enemy position with its powerful 30mm cannon, but in the confusion of battle then turned its fire on a British position close by, mistaking the Paras for the enemy.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1034126/Nine-Paras-shot-British-gunship-mistaken-Taliban-friendly-disaster.html#ixzz3QfTvulCK [/size]
Jomni where your troops inside the 'blue circle' ?
You have to take care to keep your troops away from any hot zone of your helo's. This is pretty realistic IMO.
There are hardly any Rambo 3 scenes in real life where helo's circle a given area full of friendlies and hostiles and start firing away willy nilly. :)
The engagement zone can be a bit rough, especially when the air controller or spotter doesn't have a clear view over the whole area, just like with artillery.
I am going to continue my campaign this afternoon. I'll post some screens later.
Nice. No more recreating action movies for me (inside blue circle) Lol!
Downloaded on the weekend, no issues, and had a chance to poke around and play a couple small battles. Modern is not my favourite but this is freak'in awesome! The pace is so much quicker and things go boom once seen. Interestingly, the move to WWII from CMSF required a mental shift in how I accepted casualties, now I will need to adjust again especially since this environment seems so much more deadly. Whole squads even with body armor can be wiped out with one burst. I am really sensitive to the Russian air burst capabilities! :o
It is a cliche, but if you use RL tactics in CM you will be successful, if not then you will be punished. This game more than any other has always emphasized that. Clear thinking, planning and patience are what's required. Recon and cautious advances are generally the best practice though not always. Sit still too long in a scenario like August Morning and you will not have any toys to play with. :)
I am an admitted fanboy of CM from the very start, but this game is the best yet imo. Kudos to BFC and all involved in putting out a product of this caliber.
The biggest issue I have is reading the land. I find it difficult to get down to the ground and check for elevation and LOS. I wish there was a feature that would clearly show you both LOS and level of concealment from any given position on the map.
Definitely.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 03, 2015, 10:49:50 AM
The biggest issue I have is reading the land. I find it difficult to get down to the ground and check for elevation and LOS. I wish there was a feature that would clearly show you both LOS and level of concealment from any given position on the map.
Well I think the 3D terrain does a good job giving you the lay of the land graphically, and while cumbersome, the LOS can be checked from any point, ie unit or waypoint, with a target command. Something to keep in mind is there are 3 different heights, as I recall, to check from on the Z axis, so a standing soldier will see more than a kneeling soldier who will see more than a prone one.
It just may come down to familiarity with the engine. Things I still get burned on occasionally is the 'transparency' at times of trees or vegetation. Because it is modelling at a higher fidelity there is no magic number like in CMx1 where you knew 15m into woods you couldn't be seen for example.
I think I have linked this before but here is Bil Hardenbergers tactical primer website http://battledrill.blogspot.ca/2013/08/combat-mission-tactical-problems-cmtp.html Some light reading. :)
He didn't say you couldn't do it - just that an easier option would be cool. :buck2:
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 03, 2015, 11:52:43 AM
He didn't say you couldn't do it - just that an easier option would be cool. :buck2:
Exactly. Thank you.
Some games have this feature, where you can pick any spot on the map and instantly see graphically what a unit in that spot can see, or from where a unit in that spot could be seen.
One of the problems discovered with LOS in CMSF, and continued on into CMBN, was that stands of trees are not drawn consistently. If a stand has three trees at points X, Y, and Z, when you reload the game or a save, those trees might not be in the same spot. They can move randomly within the 8m square. I don't think it was ever fixed. It makes it almost impossible to set up some ambushes with tight LOS in saves or PBEM.
The ultimate problem is that BFC keeps saying WYSIWYG...except issues A, B, C, D, etc. They never document where the big limitations are in any type of FAQ. So the same issues keep having to be addressed with new players.
Quote from: Zonso on February 03, 2015, 11:49:07 AM
Well I think the 3D terrain does a good job giving you the lay of the land graphically, and while cumbersome, the LOS can be checked from any point, ie unit or waypoint, with a target command. Something to keep in mind is there are 3 different heights, as I recall, to check from on the Z axis, so a standing soldier will see more than a kneeling soldier
i would like to add, when you place yourself virtually in the landscape and tilt, pan,turn the cam and check the vista...you can also zoom in 20x resolution
.i saw this in ChrisND vids, when he was checking how a TOW2 shooter traced a line to a target far far away . And in some other vids when he adjusted waypoint ending until there was a perfect LOS that way
I think its part of the realism of the tactical sim, you could do what a soldier could do, 'sneak' to the spot and take a look through your binos (while in reallife even not all spots on the map area healthy to wander in of course)
when it comes to vehicles IIRC the correct position of the MK1 eyeball behind the optics and the entry point of the optics is modeled (not just 3 heights as for soldiers in the field)
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 03, 2015, 11:56:22 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 03, 2015, 11:52:43 AM
He didn't say you couldn't do it - just that an easier option would be cool. :buck2:
Exactly. Thank you.
Some games have this feature, where you can pick any spot on the map and instantly see graphically what a unit in that spot can see, or from where a unit in that spot could be seen.
Ah I see, I misunderstood. I get where you are coming from and there have been more than a few heated debates on just such a feature from 'it is gamey to have such perfect knowledge' to 'the game is inherently gamey, this just reduces the workload' etc. No doubt if such a tool existed I would use it. :) The LOS tool is cumbersome and imperfect for the reasons stated above.
Working with what is, an excellent tool is to setup a game in hotseat to learn the intricacies and limitations of the engine in different terrain, with different movement orders etc. It will likely be an eye opener if you are new to the game, and is probable necessary information to learn when playing other people.
Quote from: MikeGER on February 03, 2015, 01:59:06 PM
i would like to add, when you place yourself virtually in the landscape and tilt, pan,turn the cam and check the vista...you can also zoom in 20x resolution
.i saw this in ChrisND vids, when he was checking how a TOW2 shooter traced a line to a target far far away . And in some other vids when he adjusted waypoint ending until there was a perfect LOS that way
I think its part of the realism of the tactical sim, you could do what a soldier could do, 'sneak' to the spot and take a look through your binos (while in reallife even not all spots on the map area healthy to wander in of course)
when it comes to vehicles IIRC the correct position of the MK1 eyeball behind the optics and the entry point of the optics is modeled (not just 3 heights as for soldiers in the field)
Yes the camera is pretty flexible. However something to keep in mind, and this is getting more and more technical, I recall the lowest camera setting only goes to 2m above ground level which is still higher than a standing soldier, so what you see isn't exactly what a unit may be seeing.
Holy Cow this game is fun! So far I cannot get enough.
I would LOVE to play a real person sometime soon.
I am playing a pbem game and already made a big mistake. The intel told me the town was clear and I rushed a Ukrainian BMP and squad to a point where I could overwatch the bridge leading into the town to hopefully stop any Russians from making it over. Of course Mil Intel is known as Green Slime for a reason (their motto is We bet YOUR life) and I guess Ukrainian is even worse. Result one sniper half squad took out my entire squad before my BMP either killed him or suppressed him. Its a different world with modern weapons for sure.
I also wanted to add something about immersion factor I have changed my tune on the flavor objects in the game. Seeing modern bus stops, stores with banners outside (similar to IKEA etc) and other modern European touches have really made me feel like these battles are happening today. Its sometimes the small things that make the biggest differences and there is something very unsettling about watching rifle fire and modern arty ripping up homes that look like where I lived in Europe.
Con
Quote from: Con on February 03, 2015, 03:37:21 PM
I am playing a pbem game and already made a big mistake. The intel told me the town was clear and I rushed a Ukrainian BMP and squad to a point where I could overwatch the bridge leading into the town to hopefully stop any Russians from making it over. Of course Mil Intel is known as Green Slime for a reason (their motto is We bet YOUR life) and I guess Ukrainian is even worse. Result one sniper half squad took out my entire squad before my BMP either killed him or suppressed him. Its a different world with modern weapons for sure.
Could have been worse. An ATGM could have taken out your BMP...with your squad inside of it.
Quote from: Con on February 03, 2015, 03:37:21 PM
I am playing a pbem game and already made a big mistake. The intel told me the town was clear and I rushed a Ukrainian BMP and squad to a point where I could overwatch the bridge leading into the town to hopefully stop any Russians from making it over. Of course Mil Intel is known as Green Slime for a reason (their motto is We bet YOUR life) and I guess Ukrainian is even worse. Result one sniper half squad took out my entire squad before my BMP either killed him or suppressed him. Its a different world with modern weapons for sure.
I also wanted to add something about immersion factor I have changed my tune on the flavor objects in the game. Seeing modern bus stops, stores with banners outside (similar to IKEA etc) and other modern European touches have really made me feel like these battles are happening today. Its sometimes the small things that make the biggest differences and there is something very unsettling about watching rifle fire and modern arty ripping up homes that look like where I lived in Europe.
Con
You should try some of the mods already released - the background one that adds electricity pylons and a TV antenna are great - such a small change such a big difference.
Will we see Product Placements next? Coke, KFC, or GM. What about an Apple store? Or Geico? If I was living in the Ukraine, I would definitely want insurance.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on February 03, 2015, 11:56:22 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 03, 2015, 11:52:43 AM
He didn't say you couldn't do it - just that an easier option would be cool. :buck2:
Exactly. Thank you.
Some games have this feature, where you can pick any spot on the map and instantly see graphically what a unit in that spot can see, or from where a unit in that spot could be seen.
Agree with all this....would love something like this.
Quote from: Sir Slash on February 03, 2015, 04:43:28 PM
Will we see Product Placements next? Coke, KFC, or GM. What about an Apple store? Or Geico? If I was living in the Ukraine, I would definitely want insurance.
LOL.
Maybe the Ukes should hire that Allstate Mayhem guy in the suit with all the bandaids on his face to drive all around Donetsk and Luhansk until the rebels start waving white flags from under the wreckage of their shops and garages.
"Protect yourself from Putin. Like me". ;D
I get artifacts when I try to capture screenshots with Prt Scr and load them into GIMP from memory. And there isn't a shortcut in-game that I am aware of, so I am curious to find out how others make good screenshots of their CM games?
Anyway here are two I managed without too many artifacts:
Here we spew fire from a concealed position to the tower housing a sniper.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbJLlZdz.jpg&hash=e103c3e9cab9d1acc5bf405d36fa1eacc104d8e6)
And here we see our rifle squad assaulting the building. An IFV is on overwatch just outside the viewpoint of the camera.
Result; 2 hostiles dead and successful capture of the building. No casualties.
The soldiers running towards the building show some serious artifacting around their legs and backpacks. Not so in-game. :S
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Ftky96WM.jpg&hash=6988385f975cd3f818d05fdd8c3f45b5f28221fa)
I had an instance in game last night of soldiers on conveyor belts sliding across the ground. :-\
Apparently some Modders have already come out with new gun flash effects and sound effects but the repository isnt hosting yet. Sometimes I have trouble with the drop box links so does anyone know of another site that hosts Battlefront mods?
GreenasJade's site is awesome, but he is not supporting CMBS. I have been looking also.
Quote from: mikeck on February 04, 2015, 11:16:59 AM
Apparently some Modders have already come out with new gun flash effects and sound effects but the repository isnt hosting yet. Sometimes I have trouble with the drop box links so does anyone know of another site that hosts Battlefront mods?
It looks like the Repository for CMBS will be online very soon, from the forum discussions. Then we won't have to be downloading from Dropbox links. http://cmmods.greenasjade.net/ is another CM Mods site, but I've heard that he won't be hosting CMBS mods, just continued hosting for the WWII series games.
Ok, thanks
Quote from: Yskonyn on February 04, 2015, 09:43:43 AM
I get artifacts when I try to capture screenshots with Prt Scr and load them into GIMP from memory. And there isn't a shortcut in-game that I am aware of, so I am curious to find out how others make good screenshots of their CM games?
When I was doing the Public Beta AAR for CMRT I couldn't take screen shots with prt scr. It was the first time I had tried to take in game screen shots with a new Windows 8 computer. My son had been using Bandicam to take screen shots of Minecraft, so I tried that and it worked well.
I'm stuck in my Black Sea Russian campaign. Second mission I have to navigate through terrain securing areas...but I've only got spotters, HQ's, a couple of snipers and some engineers (sappers?). My vehicles have MGs as do the tracked transports for the sappers.
I have no idea how I can clear these areas out. I just don't seem to have the firepower. I've got kind of bogged down and losing interest rapidly. I could do with a few platoons of infantry and a tank or two.
Quote from: Yskonyn on February 04, 2015, 09:43:43 AM
I get artifacts when I try to capture screenshots with Prt Scr and load them into GIMP from memory. And there isn't a shortcut in-game that I am aware of, so I am curious to find out how others make good screenshots of their CM games?
Anyway here are two I managed without too many artifacts:
Here we spew fire from a concealed position to the tower housing a sniper.
And here we see our rifle squad assaulting the building. An IFV is on overwatch just outside the viewpoint of the camera.
Result; 2 hostiles dead and successful capture of the building. No casualties.
The soldiers running towards the building show some serious artifacting around their legs and backpacks. Not so in-game. :S
I use fraps and the jpeg quality is also bad.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 04, 2015, 05:08:42 PM
I have no idea how I can clear these areas out. I just don't seem to have the firepower. I've got kind of bogged down and losing interest rapidly. I could do with a few platoons of infantry and a tank or two.
I'm currently doing this mission as well. Let's see how far I get. So far so good. Eliminated a sniper team but I lost one man and a vehicle gunner.
Getting back to the OP discussion, here is the start of a youtube playlist on CMBS by Tyrspawn (did some excellents playthroughs for CMSF). The embedded video begins meaningful analysis around the 14 minute mark. I always like to see others thought processes, even if just to reinforce what not to do. :)
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118015-walkthrough-and-lets-play-of-the-black-sea-campaign/ (http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118015-walkthrough-and-lets-play-of-the-black-sea-campaign/)
Quote from: jomni on February 05, 2015, 08:10:55 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 04, 2015, 05:08:42 PM
I have no idea how I can clear these areas out. I just don't seem to have the firepower. I've got kind of bogged down and losing interest rapidly. I could do with a few platoons of infantry and a tank or two.
I'm currently doing this mission as well. Let's see how far I get. So far so good. Eliminated a sniper team but I lost one man and a vehicle gunner.
Looks like I'm bogged down. 40 minutes to go and I am ready to assault the Horse Shed and I have gotten to the beaches yet. :/
How did you deal with the Quarry??
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 06, 2015, 01:30:48 AM
How did you deal with the Quarry??
Note: directions are relative to my axis of approach.
One squad and sniper up the south hill provide overwatch. Pretty good in killing most infantry in the area. HQ in the house (Entrance of quary). One flanking squad up behind the east ridge to get to the grenade launcher and attack the BTR. But I bombarded the BTR with mortars and it got destroyed. I even got the sapper ready for action and picked up some RPGs from their APCs. Probably better with pics.
I put an HQ unit in the house you speak of and brought some arty down on the inside of the quarry, but they couldn't get eyes on the APC so I put another HQ unit up on the hill and they were engaged by a unit from across the ridge you are talking about (the ridge behind the house where it decends at the north end).
There's also a Ukrainian machine gunner there that I can't get shot of.
I've been there for more than 10 minutes. I've got 2 spotter units (one in the houses in the quarry), 2 HQ's and a Sapper unit, 2 Jeeps and an APC. I'm stumped and times a-moving on
Have you looked for the OP to the East? Lost a squad there too.
Yeah don't think time's enough. But replaying is a cheat as I know when to rush and when not to. Took a lot of time maneuvering to the hot spots in this round.
Quote from: jomni on February 06, 2015, 03:47:38 AM
Yeah don't think time's enough. But replaying is a cheat as I know when to rush and when not to. Took a lot of time maneuvering to the hot spots in this round.
Yeah - I think I ate 15 minutes hunting up the road towards the quarry.
I was hoping I could move on...kind of hoping this was a recon mission but it's not. I just wish I had a couple of decent APCs and a couple of squads or - even better - platoons
Judge I got a tactical victory. I think it's a bad result but the mission was tough.
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-6lTaVp1AONY/VNTPBg70pnI/AAAAAAAAJh0/yMI3h9S2Ar4/w1598-h899-no/CM%2BBlack%2BSea%2B2015-02-06%2B22-15-10-31.jpg)
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Hw58rVdhkMM/VNTPB-ckL1I/AAAAAAAAJh4/k5q3J6JIc2M/w1598-h899-no/CM%2BBlack%2BSea%2B2015-02-06%2B22-16-09-39.jpg)
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-UkD0Hch1w3I/VNTPCID_cXI/AAAAAAAAJiE/-edNe4_KrpI/w1598-h899-no/CM%2BBlack%2BSea%2B2015-02-06%2B22-16-30-77.jpg)
My biggest disappointment was the quarry. I did not capture it!!!! The MG guys are right below me. But how could I have missed them when I blasted the wall and climbed up the roof? I didn't bother clearing the place since I thought it was clear.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Z1Lxw6TbD54/VNTPAsVkBjI/AAAAAAAAJho/eHiLjrU18Qc/w1598-h899-no/CM%2BBlack%2BSea%2B2015-02-06%2B21-39-36-64.jpg)
The shed was tough to capture as it was guarded by 3 APC's. I blasted through the walls to get behind them then attack them at close range. When I ran out of RPG's I got back to the vehicles to pick up some more.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-O7oH6CaF4jc/VNTPAzzghEI/AAAAAAAAJh8/tiBfCg7gz-4/w1598-h899-no/CM%2BBlack%2BSea%2B2015-02-06%2B21-58-41-20.jpg)
I got both beaches and tried to send my guys through the water to the Blocking Point. I thought it would be a safer route. But the Ukrainians have helicoper and I cannot counter it. I lost two APC's. The blocking point is well defended so I did not attack it but I got close to the defenders without them noticing since I went through the water.
I lost a full squad of sappers due to some automatic grenade launcher. Those stuff are nasty.
The next mission is scary. An amphibious assault across the vast river. Might lose a lot of men there. It will be epic.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 03, 2015, 03:45:58 PM
Quote from: Con on February 03, 2015, 03:37:21 PM
I am playing a pbem game and already made a big mistake. The intel told me the town was clear and I rushed a Ukrainian BMP and squad to a point where I could overwatch the bridge leading into the town to hopefully stop any Russians from making it over. Of course Mil Intel is known as Green Slime for a reason (their motto is We bet YOUR life) and I guess Ukrainian is even worse. Result one sniper half squad took out my entire squad before my BMP either killed him or suppressed him. Its a different world with modern weapons for sure.
I also wanted to add something about immersion factor I have changed my tune on the flavor objects in the game. Seeing modern bus stops, stores with banners outside (similar to IKEA etc) and other modern European touches have really made me feel like these battles are happening today. Its sometimes the small things that make the biggest differences and there is something very unsettling about watching rifle fire and modern arty ripping up homes that look like where I lived in Europe.
Con
You should try some of the mods already released - the background one that adds electricity pylons and a TV antenna are great - such a small change such a big difference.
I also recommend MikeyD's red spot mod - bright red for serious wound and dark red for dead, also Veins base markers and tracers. The shorter Veins tracers are more realistic, but I prefer the medium options. You can get them at the Battlefront repository in the CMBN Base area. Just put them into the Data/Z folder (or add a Z folder to /data if you haven't got one for your mods).
Just been playing another Quick battle, and getting fragged for the most part! This time I've been playing a US Bradley Infantry company. I had to add +10% on medium to get enough points to buy it - they are really expensive, but boy are they good units. I've taken out quite a few 30mm BTR's with them where they seem to get the drop first. The only downside was that I ran into an ambush after being held up by an arty stonk at a bridge I had to cross to get towards my village objective (I'm playing a medium size village map with a couple of rivers near my deployment area), which left one burning and another with serious equipment damage (TOWs, and optics all gone). Still all good fun. Jarhead's point about getting the squads out of the vehicles resonated, but luckily I was able to bail with only one squad member and one crew casualty - luck most likely! Edit:It didn't last - a Saxhorn I thought I wiped out has just toasted a Bradley in the side armour, wiping out the squad within - yet the crew got out without a scratch - costly. :(
I think this is my favorite Combat Mission game to date. Just plays really well as it really seems to capture the pace and lethality of modern warfare. I've never used smoke so much in my life. Bradley's with the improved "top down attack" TOWs are deadly. Pop up, fire, pop smoke (they are radio guided) and reverse back down. I enjoy using the Bradley's and infantry with Javelins more than tanks which is a change from previous games. I used to be all about the armor
Quote from: mikeck on February 07, 2015, 11:20:54 PM
I think this is my favorite Combat Mission game to date. Just plays really well as it really seems to capture the pace and lethality of modern warfare. I've never used smoke so much in my life. Bradley's with the improved "top down attack" TOWs are deadly. Pop up, fire, pop smoke (they are radio guided) and reverse back down. I enjoy using the Bradley's and infantry with Javelins more than tanks which is a change from previous games. I used to be all about the armor
The Javelin is a cheat. The Russians don't have an equivalent weapon. >:( Wonder if people complain about it in PBEM or are there "no Javelin" house rules.
If there aren't any restrictions, I will use Javelins all the time. Haven't done PBEM yet.
Is the Russian Metis/Saxhorn-2 ATGM available in game?
Quote from: Staggerwing on February 08, 2015, 08:02:24 AM
Is the Russian Metis/Saxhorn-2 ATGM available in game?
Weapon systems included......
United States:Vehicles:
LMTV
M1064A3
M1126 Stryker
M1127 Stryker
M1128 Stryker
M1129 Stryker
M1130 Stryker
M1131 Stryker
M1132 Stryker
M1134 Stryker
M1151A1 Humvee
M1151A1 Humvee (Recon)
M1152A1 Humvee
M1167 Humvee
M1200 Armored Knight
M1A2 SEPv2 Abrams (APS)
M1A2 SEPv2 Abrams (ERA)
M2A3 Bradley (APS)
M2A3 Bradley (ERA)
M3A3 Bradley (APS)
M3A3 Bradley (ERA)
M7A3 Bradley (APS)
M7A3 Bradley (ERA)
Small Arms:
M107A1
M110
M110 CSASS
M249 PIP
M25 CDTE
M4A1
M4A1 w/ ACOG
M4A1 w/ grenade launcher + ACOG
M4A1 w/ M320A1 grenade launcher
M4A1 w/ thermal sight
M9A1
Precision Sniper Rifle (.300)
Precision Sniper Rifle (.338)
Precision Sniper Rifle (7.62)
Heavy Weapons:
FGM-148 Javelin
FIM-92 Stinger
M120
M224A1
M252A1
M136 AT4 CS
M240L
M2A1 .50cal
Mk.19
TOW ITAS M41
Artillery Support:
M109A7 Paladin
M119A3
M777A2
Air Support:
AH-64D Apache Longbow
AH-64E Apache Guardian
F-15E Strike Eagle
F-16CJ Fighting Falcon
UAV Support:
MQ-1C Grey Eagle
RQ-11B Raven
RQ-7B Shadow
Russia:Vehicles:
2K22M-Tunguska
2S24
9K35 Strela-10M3
9P149-Shturm-S
9P157-2-Khrizantema-S
BMP-2
BMP-2K
BMP-2M
BMP-3
BMP-3K
BMP-3M
BMP-3M (Arena)
BMP-3M (ERA)
BMP-3M (Shtora)
BRDM-2
BRDM-2 (AT-5B)
BRDM-2M
BRDM-2M (AT-5B)
BRM-1K
BRM-3K
BTR-80 (1V152)
BTR-80A
BTR-80AK
BTR-82
BTR-82A
MT-LBM
MT-LBM-6MA
MT-LBM-6MB
MT-LBu 1V14 "Mashina" KSAUO
PRP-4M
T-72B3
T-72B3 (APS)
T-90A
T-90AM
T-90AM (APS)
Tigr
UAZ 469
Ural 4320
Small Arms:
AK-74M
AK-74M w/ GP-30 grenade launcher
AKS-74U
Makarov PM
PKP
SVD
Heavy Weapons:
2B11 Sani
2B14 Podnos
AT-13
AT-14
AT-4C
AT-7
Igla SA-18
Igla-S SA-24
PKM
RPG-26
RPG-7V2
RPO-M Shmel
Artillery Support:
2A65 Msta-B
2S1 Gvozdika
2S19 Msta-S
2S19M1 Msta-S
2S19M2 Msta-S
2S34 Chosta
2S3M1 Akatsiya
2S3M2 Akatsiya
2S7M Mialka
MT-12 Rapira
Air Support:
Ka-52 Alligator
Mi-24PN Hind
Mi-28N Havoc
Su-24M2 Fencer-D
Su-25SM Frogfoot
Su-34 Fullback
UAV Support:
Orlan-10
Yakovlev Pchela-1T
ZALA 421-08
Ukraine:Vehicles:
9K35 Strela-10M3
9P149-Shturm-S
BM Bulat
BM Oplot
BMP-2
BMP-2K
BRDM-2
BRDM-2 (AT-5B)
BRM-1K
BTR-4E
BTR-70
BTR-70K
MT-LBM
MT-LBu 1V14 "Mashina" KSAUO
PRP-4M
T-64BV
UAZ 469
Ural 4320
Small Arms:
AK-74
AK-74 w/ GP-30 grenade launcher
AKS-74
AKS-74U
Makarov PM
RPK-74
SVD
Heavy Weapons:
2B11 Sani
2B14 Podnos
AGS-17
AT-4C
AT-7
Corsar
Igla SA-18
MT-12 Rapira
MT-12K Rapira
PKM
RPG-22
RPG-26
RPG-7V1
RPO-A Shmel
Skif
SPG-9
Artillery Support:
2A65 Msta-B
2S1 Gvozdika
2S19 Msta-S
2S3M1 Akatsiya
2S7M Mialka
MT-12 Rapira
Air Support:
M-24P Hind
M-24PM Hind
Su-24M Fencer-D
Su-25 Frogfoot
QuoteAT-13
Looks like it's there. While not quite as capable as the Javelin, the AT-13 should give the Russians similar top-down kill capability. The Ukes are stuck with the older AT-7. Something for the modders to fix, making use of captured equipment possible.
Quote from: Staggerwing on February 08, 2015, 08:02:24 AM
Is the Russian Metis/Saxhorn-2 ATGM available in game?
Russians have these ATGM's. But these are dedicated ATGM teams. The American Javelin can be found in the APC's.
So any squad can become a lethal tank killer by just picking this up.As for the Russians, the APC's only carry disposable tubes of RPG26 and extra rockets for the reloadable RPG7. None of them gets a guided missile for free.
Quote from: jomni on February 07, 2015, 11:32:33 PM
Quote from: mikeck on February 07, 2015, 11:20:54 PM
I think this is my favorite Combat Mission game to date. Just plays really well as it really seems to capture the pace and lethality of modern warfare. I've never used smoke so much in my life. Bradley's with the improved "top down attack" TOWs are deadly. Pop up, fire, pop smoke (they are radio guided) and reverse back down. I enjoy using the Bradley's and infantry with Javelins more than tanks which is a change from previous games. I used to be all about the armor
The Javelin is a cheat. The Russians don't have an equivalent weapon. >:( Wonder if people complain about it in PBEM or are there "no Javelin" house rules.
If there aren't any restrictions, I will use Javelins all the time. Haven't done PBEM yet.
Well it's an actual weapon system so it can't be a "cheat". In other words, it's not an exploitation of a game bug or a hypothetical weapon. If you want to play the Russians, better figure out how to deal with then like the real Russian army has to. It isn't easy...only way I have found is to watch where the missle comes from and start sending rounds there to supress further shots.
Tell you what though...give me a platoon with some javelins and 2 M3 Bradley's with ToW2b's and I can wreck crap against the AI. I'm sure I wouldnt find it so easy against a human.
Edit: also use a ton of smoke. Doesn't help once a javelin has locked you up but keeps it happening to begin with. Smoke, stay behind hills and use woods with infantry support
STOP tempting me to buy this game dammit!!! :tickedoff:
Me and this game (and the other series) have a love/hate relationship, I really can appreciate what JH said earlier in this thread about not being patient and not doing the right things to be successful because it seems like work. We are given a lot of options to plan our missions, but I mentally break down and fail to use all the resources (i.e. fire support, smoke, LOS, etc.) to my advantage. And because of that, I end in defeat. My mind just can not comprehend the correct tactics for some reason and/or I fail to be patient enough to execute them.
Using an example, I have been trying to play the tiny battle "August Morning"....I play as the blue force, which I only have something like five units to control which one would think is manageable. The main mission is to recon a bunch of knocked out vehicle locations that were hit in a previous strike. My units start concealed in the woods on top of a hill, overlooking a valley that leads up to the enemy positions. In order to get at any of the enemy locations, I have to cross this wide open valley with my limited troops. It seems no matter what I do, I can't get my soldiers safely across this valley without getting many casualties, which pretty much render my force useless to continue with the mission. I have tried prep fire on some of the locations, which seem ineffective and then I run out of ammo for it. I am guessing I need to make more use of smoke and other tactics to make it across, but that is when I end up losing my patience.
Just curious, anyone else play this battle with any success?
Even with my own personal frustrations, I think it has great potential once I figure out making things work for me.
The timer keeps ticking - that's part of the problem. The other part is sitting there doing sod all. It's counter intuitive to some (myself included) to sit there and do nothing for 4,5,6,8 minutes until the smoke lands. So you do get impatient and end up putting your troops in danger.
I'm having a blast at the moment moving through the second mission of the Dnieper crossing. Quarry is secured. Cattle Sheds secured. Beach A secured. All Phase Lines have been crossed. Just Beach B and the end target to go.
You know its a great game when a successful plan gives you a tremendous sense of accomplishment, while on the other hand, failure brings you a troubling sense of loss.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 08, 2015, 04:46:43 PM
Me and this game (and the other series) have a love/hate relationship, I really can appreciate what JH said earlier in this thread about not being patient and not doing the right things to be successful because it seems like work. We are given a lot of options to plan our missions, but I mentally break down and fail to use all the resources (i.e. fire support, smoke, LOS, etc.) to my advantage. And because of that, I end in defeat. My mind just can not comprehend the correct tactics for some reason and/or I fail to be patient enough to execute them.
Using an example, I have been trying to play the tiny battle "August Morning"....I play as the blue force, which I only have something like five units to control which one would think is manageable. The main mission is to recon a bunch of knocked out vehicle locations that were hit in a previous strike. My units start concealed in the woods on top of a hill, overlooking a valley that leads up to the enemy positions. In order to get at any of the enemy locations, I have to cross this wide open valley with my limited troops. It seems no matter what I do, I can't get my soldiers safely across this valley without getting many casualties, which pretty much render my force useless to continue with the mission. I have tried prep fire on some of the locations, which seem ineffective and then I run out of ammo for it. I am guessing I need to make more use of smoke and other tactics to make it across, but that is when I end up losing my patience.
Just curious, anyone else play this battle with any success?
Even with my own personal frustrations, I think it has great potential once I figure out making things work for me.
Real world tactics work best in this game.
First assess the terrain. Where would you put troops if you were the Russians. Those buildings on the ridge look like they would have a good field of view.
2. Formulate your plan - In this case you need to recon those vehicles, your forces are 1 platoon of infantry a command unit and two MMG companies plus a FIST team. Split the platoon into two squads to give increased flexability. Put the automatic weapons where they will be able to fire into suspected enemy positions (if you cannot do it in setup area put them as close as possible and have them go SLOW to the spot).
A good tip on determining line of site is to take a unit and issue a move command to where you think the enemy are located). Then click on the white ball where the move command terminated and issue a combat target command. Now where you move your cursor the game will draw LOS from the end of that move command at potential enemy positions. I use this to try and scout out where are good potential LOS areas to move to. Doing this you will notice that along the hedge below the second blue setup area there are some good spots where LOS is available from your side of the valley to those houses.
3. Move your split squads in overwatch positions. Wait until the heavy weapons are setup and sighted. Try and use as much cover as possible. Along the hedgerow of the sunken road is a good start. Dash (FAST) move between gaps in the hedges but dont worry about time its more impt to set up your squads in overwatch. Use you HQ unit to help keep all of them in Command and Control. If you are getting fired upon know that in this game Arty will be raining down on that position in 5-10 minutes so be ready to move dont get into a stand up fight with your squads.
4. Get into the valley and leap frog to the houses. A good tip with houses is to move a squad at hunt to the outside of the building and issue a cover fire arc into the building. Wait a turn or two and if there are any unfriendlies in there your guys will at least have some cover from the walls of the building etc.
5. Be patient and paranoid. When you rush to something thinking its unguarded is where a good scenario designer always has an unpleasant surprise waiting for you. Always think LOS and cover
Doing this I got my guys out with three wounded 1 dead and Total US victory
Con
Thanks for the tips con, I will give them a try tonight...I always forget about splitting the squads:(
Honestly the best teacher is playing PBEM games
Those are way more unpredictable and brutal in a fun way then playing the AI. As Hans said "Good against remotes is one thing. Good against the living, that's something else."
Con
Quote from: Con on February 08, 2015, 06:16:45 PM
Honestly the best teacher is playing PBEM games
Those are way more unpredictable and brutal in a fun way then playing the AI. As Hans said "Good against remotes is one thing. Good against the living, that's something else."
Con
Yeah. Both sides are impatient and prone to error. O0 who ever wants a quick battle, just send me a PM.
I cheat. I play and if something goes REALLY wrong (I lose 2 m1's from a 3 tank platoon), I reload the previous turn and try again. I do this for about 3 scenarios and then about 4-5 quick battles. Did it in previous CM games too. This way, I learn how to overcome various problems using the game system. I find I don't really learn by taking a drubbing and then playing again. I learn by trying move "a". If I lose my arse, I change something up and then try "b" and so on. Really gives me a chance to see what types of things work and what don't. Then I fire up the campaign and never reload
I just find that I learn much more about the way the game works this way instead of playing through the whole thing at once...there are so many things I do wrong that i can't remember when I try the scenario again.
Anyway, my two cents
(Even reloading 5-6 times a scenario after a big mistake, I still only manage tactical victories against veteran AI).
That sounds like a pretty reasonable method of self tutorial.
I think there was some skepticism about how popular a new modern title would be over on the BFC forums. But I don't think I have seen that much activity and that much new blood brought into the forums since CMSF days. I hope it was as commercially successful for BFC as it looks. I also hope they can pace the CMBS modules to take advantage of it.
QB AI gave me a tough time!
My tactics were a little slack- the AI stonked me bad with numbers, and arty.
US company against a Battalion and a half in thick forest fighting,
Lessons re-learned:
1. Never spread a company too thin in close terrain. They need to support each other, especially when it gets tight.
2. Arty is deadly. Mobile defence will be my plan instead of static next time.
3. Damn it, I know to have a reserve- so why oh why did I not position one from the get go.... :idiot2:
Use smoke, then use smoke then when you think you've used enough, use smoke. When I am done with a battle, hardly any off units have any smoke left. I use it before I move anything across any open terrain
Quote from: RyanE on February 09, 2015, 02:58:05 PM
I think there was some skepticism about how popular a new modern title would be over on the BFC forums. But I don't think I have seen that much activity and that much new blood brought into the forums since CMSF days. I hope it was as commercially successful for BFC as it looks. I also hope they can pace the CMBS modules to take advantage of it.
I got CMSF. I skipped all WWII titles. Modern is the way to go for me.
I think Black Sea is more popular than CMSF because the sides are quite even in capabilities.
+1
I love CMSF but I never really cared for the "fictional" battle and didn't care for the "war against terror". Loved the kit though.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 09, 2015, 05:12:19 PM
+1
I love CMSF but I never really cared for the "fictional" battle and didn't care for the "war against terror". Loved the kit though.
There are some CMSF scenarios in the Repository that replicate historical engagements in Afghanistan that I enjoyed. I think those worked because they were less one-sided, or at least placed the NATO forces in a difficult position. Usually the victory conditions are such that you just can't take very many casualties.
Having said that, none of them hold a candle to CMBS. This is the best CM game yet as far as I'm concerned, and I loved CMRT.
CMSF had a pretty rocky start. Releases have gotten better with each one it seems, as far as technical and gameplay issues. CMSF with all the modules is probably one of my favorite games of all times. But CMSF 1.0 was a steaming pile on release.
Patch is out:
http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=339&Itemid=584
How to determine if the save is command or replay phase? Especially PBEM.
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on February 08, 2015, 04:46:43 PM
Me and this game (and the other series) have a love/hate relationship, I really can appreciate what JH said earlier in this thread about not being patient and not doing the right things to be successful because it seems like work. We are given a lot of options to plan our missions, but I mentally break down and fail to use all the resources (i.e. fire support, smoke, LOS, etc.) to my advantage. And because of that, I end in defeat. My mind just can not comprehend the correct tactics for some reason and/or I fail to be patient enough to execute them.
Using an example, I have been trying to play the tiny battle "August Morning"....I play as the blue force, which I only have something like five units to control which one would think is manageable. The main mission is to recon a bunch of knocked out vehicle locations that were hit in a previous strike. My units start concealed in the woods on top of a hill, overlooking a valley that leads up to the enemy positions. In order to get at any of the enemy locations, I have to cross this wide open valley with my limited troops. It seems no matter what I do, I can't get my soldiers safely across this valley without getting many casualties, which pretty much render my force useless to continue with the mission. I have tried prep fire on some of the locations, which seem ineffective and then I run out of ammo for it. I am guessing I need to make more use of smoke and other tactics to make it across, but that is when I end up losing my patience.
Just curious, anyone else play this battle with any success?
Even with my own personal frustrations, I think it has great potential once I figure out making things work for me.
Doing proper scouting and recon is required for success.....as it is in the real world. A unit trying to spot can hide and not fire as to not give its location away. The target arc and the hide command, applied with patience are essential to proper recon.
In this scenario give all your units a small target arc and move them back into cover except your FO or leader. Give your FO or leader a small target arc and move him to the edge of the tree line with a good field of view. Click on the white node of your last movement path and issue a hide command to him. Within 5 minutes you will start to see indications of enemy positions. Call in Support. Follow on from there. Scout first and move carefully.
Target arcs are very useful for moving carefully. A combination of hide with a target arc can place a crew served weapon in a building for instance very quietly. It can set up while hiding and remain undetected until you decide to use it.
Quote from: fabius on February 10, 2015, 06:16:28 PM
Patch is out:
http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=339&Itemid=584
Well that was quick. Some good fixes in there. This is, like all the others, a superb game.
Did the bridge bug get fixed? I am looking at picking this up down the road when I get ahead of the bills. :'(
Quote from: Capn Darwin on February 11, 2015, 11:18:16 AM
Did the bridge bug get fixed? I am looking at picking this up down the road when I get ahead of the bills. :'(
Same here - I owe con some pbem pain
Quote from: Capn Darwin on February 11, 2015, 11:18:16 AM
Did the bridge bug get fixed? I am looking at picking this up down the road when I get ahead of the bills. :'(
What is the bug?
Quote from: jomni on February 11, 2015, 08:06:54 PM
Quote from: Capn Darwin on February 11, 2015, 11:18:16 AM
Did the bridge bug get fixed? I am looking at picking this up down the road when I get ahead of the bills. :'(
What is the bug?
Believe it this
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/117824-bridge-bug/
lol
That tank MG is doing a good job of stabilising.
that's part of the army's new "Reactive Armor Scheme". It's called "Seizure Armor". ;D
Quote from: Capn Darwin on February 11, 2015, 11:18:16 AM
Did the bridge bug get fixed? I am looking at picking this up down the road when I get ahead of the bills. :'(
Not yet
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118207-cmbs-v101-patches-are-now-available/?p=1582878
Quote from: Sir Slash on February 12, 2015, 10:23:05 AM
that's part of the army's new "Reactive Armor Scheme". It's called "Seizure Armor". ;D
I think the commander misunderstood his orders.
They didn't say "Seizure The Bridge".
They may be on to something. If I saw that kind of behavior in an enemy tank, I'd probably run like hell.
I just noticed that when a brick wall in the enemy side mysteriously crumbles, that means an AFV just passed by. That means environmental damage is not masked by fog of war?
I think its always been like that. Any think that is built on the map has no real FOW.
Yeah in the other CM games you can pan the camera around deep in the rear areas and sometimes hear vehicle movement sounds as they pass through different terrain and fences and walls and such.
Quote from: jomni on February 13, 2015, 04:32:51 AM
I just noticed that when a brick wall in the enemy side mysteriously crumbles, that means an AFV just passed by. That means environmental damage is not masked by fog of war?
I agree. I noticed that today in a Fortress Italy game I was playing. As a side note, if the other side are using assault guns it is a really exploitable advantage if you have "real" tanks.
I'm doing a two hour campaign mission but I've been at it for a week already. Lol! After every minute, I go look around the map and give orders, check LOS, etc even if I don't really need to. And I really feel that the game is like work. It takes a lot of effort, concentration, micromanagmeent. Will I get CM burnout? :buck2:
Quote from: jomni on February 15, 2015, 06:07:55 AM
I'm doing a two hour campaign mission but I've been at it for a week already. Lol! After every minute, I go look around the map and give orders, check LOS, etc even if I don't really need to. And I really feel that the game is like work. It takes a lot of effort, concentration, micromanagmeent. Will I get CM burnout? :buck2:
Yup probably unless you can get into the 'zone'. The zone being a razor edge balance of the necessary micromanagement (which CM requires) coupled with the ability to roll with the unexpected (which will happen regularly) whether AI or human. It helps to have a clear plan to begin with and not lose focus of the overall goal. Sometimes you will realize your plan was faulty and there are lessons to be learned. Is it work? Likely for some, hence why so many step forward but considerably less answer the call. Not elitism, just simply the nature of the beast.
Review is on the front page :)
I finally finished the 2 hour game with a Major Victory. The 2nd half of the scenario was done in one sitting with lots of action (and casualties). Generally went according to plan but one company was almost eliminated. Lost 15 BMPs. Ouch. My guys will be walking from now on. Hehe.
Now I'm stoked for the next mission of the campaign. Good thing a fresh company is assigned.
This series could do with a "follow" order. Quite often I want my infantry to follow a tank or an APC providing cover for each other and I want to keep them close - not really possible with the speed options.
Assigning it to armour (to follow infantry) would make the armour keep a set distance and make the armour follow the infantry at the same speed. Doing so with infantry on armour would do the same thing...though issuing a FAST move order to the tank and assigning a follow order to the infantry would slow the tank down to the infantry's fastest speed
...or perhaps there was one manageable speed for the follow command based on infantry movement.
It would also help for those times when you want vehicles to follow each other...
So come on BF - give us a FOLLOW order
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 09:32:03 AM
This series could do with a "follow" order. Quite often I want my infantry to follow a tank or an APC providing cover for each other and I want to keep them close - not really possible with the speed options.
Assigning it to armour (to follow infantry) would make the armour keep a set distance and make the armour follow the infantry at the same speed. Doing so with infantry on armour would do the same thing...though issuing a FAST move order to the tank and assigning a follow order to the infantry would slow the tank down to the infantry's fastest speed
...or perhaps there was one manageable speed for the follow command based on infantry movement.
It would also help for those times when you want vehicles to follow each other...
So come on BF - give us a FOLLOW order
Wow - there's no follow??
Quote from: bayonetbrant on February 15, 2015, 07:44:02 PM
Review is on the front page :)
http://grogheads.com/?p=7451
Good write up. I enjoyed the read and got some good info. Thanks boggit. O0
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 09:32:03 AM
This series could do with a "follow" order. Quite often I want my infantry to follow a tank or an APC providing cover for each other and I want to keep them close - not really possible with the speed options.
It's much more difficult in turn-based mode. That's why I often just went back to real-time. Trying to get APCs and infantry un/loaded and moving in a decent amount of time was a crap shoot. I would sometimes end up with APCs moving out with the infantry running along behind them, attempting to load up, if I didn't get the time delays just right. Or they would unload too early/late. Was a mess. Far easier to just pause and do it when you want in real-time, although you miss watching what's going on without the replay. No happy middle ground there.
Quote from: Nefaro on February 21, 2015, 02:40:30 PM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 09:32:03 AM
This series could do with a "follow" order. Quite often I want my infantry to follow a tank or an APC providing cover for each other and I want to keep them close - not really possible with the speed options.
It's much more difficult in turn-based mode. That's why I often just went back to real-time. Trying to get APCs and infantry un/loaded and moving in a decent amount of time was a crap shoot. I would sometimes end up with APCs moving out with the infantry running along behind them, attempting to load up, if I didn't get the time delays just right. Or they would unload too early/late. Was a mess. Far easier to just pause and do it when you want in real-time, although you miss watching what's going on without the replay. No happy middle ground there.
That is indeed still an issue. What I've learned to do is just give the load order and leave the APC at station for the duration of the minute.
Of course - that does compound my other main gripe with the game - the time aspect. You're constantly clock watching and all the while wasting time with things like this.
I would
love them to fix these things
- Vehicles moving off even though troops have a load order...just leave the unit their for as long as the troops are loading and then off it goes! (sounds simple)
- This "can't see the base of the unit firing on me and so I can't fire" crap...does my head in. It's not a mahoosive issue - but when it does show up, your troops are decimated
Apart from that, I'm loving Black Sea. O0
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 02:45:48 PM
Quote from: Nefaro on February 21, 2015, 02:40:30 PM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 09:32:03 AM
This series could do with a "follow" order. Quite often I want my infantry to follow a tank or an APC providing cover for each other and I want to keep them close - not really possible with the speed options.
It's much more difficult in turn-based mode. That's why I often just went back to real-time. Trying to get APCs and infantry un/loaded and moving in a decent amount of time was a crap shoot. I would sometimes end up with APCs moving out with the infantry running along behind them, attempting to load up, if I didn't get the time delays just right. Or they would unload too early/late. Was a mess. Far easier to just pause and do it when you want in real-time, although you miss watching what's going on without the replay. No happy middle ground there.
That is indeed still an issue. What I've learned to do is just give the load order and leave the APC at station for the duration of the minute.
Of course - that does compound my other main gripe with the game - the time aspect. You're constantly clock watching and all the while wasting time with things like this.
I would love them to fix these things
- Vehicles moving off even though troops have a load order...just leave the unit their for as long as the troops are loading and then off it goes! (sounds simple)
- This "can't see the base of the unit firing on me and so I can't fire" crap...does my head in. It's not a mahoosive issue - but when it does show up, your troops are decimated
Apart from that, I'm loving Black Sea. O0
Yeah. Being on a timer means that leaving your APCs sit, loaded, for a whole minute is a lot of extra wasted precious time. Same could be said for coordinating anything in turn-based mode.
I have managed, for the most part, to deal with the time issue damage free...for the most part. In Black Sea, however, I have had troops running after my APC's. Often, when that has happened, they've just ran into trouble and died. Also, a compounding issue is that even more time is wasted because you have to get the motor vehicle back to where the troops are and load them THEN move the vehicle. It can end up wasting 3 or 4 minutes of game time - just getting troops loaded.
And all you are doing is being smart with the time...but the game doesn't let you. Vehicles that are the target of a load order need to hold until the troops are loaded. A lot of pain and dead pixel troops will be saved :P
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 02:21:00 PM
Good write up. I enjoyed the read and got some good info. Thanks boggit. O0
Thanks for that, I appreciate it. I'm glad you enjoyed it. It makes the whole thing worthwhile. :)
BTW, I think your idea for the 'Follow' order a good one. I know 'Slow' is supposed to move vehicles at the speed of infantry, but I find they don't always manage to keep up.
There have been requests for a "follow" command since the traffic cluster-screws of CMx1.
We continue to wait.
Game's truly awesome, though...
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Quote from: JudgeDredd on February 21, 2015, 02:45:48 PM
- Vehicles moving off even though troops have a load order...just leave the unit their for as long as the troops are loading and then off it goes! (sounds simple)
FWIW I find I can generally get around this by giving the vehicle a pause order followed by a move order. It's a bit hit or miss, so I tend to err slightly on the generous side - maybe an extra 5/10 seconds to get the troops on board then continue moving within the turn. I don't know what I'd do playing real-time, as I prefer playing the game turn based.
I hope that is some help for you. :)
I use the pause order too.
Still I do find it strange that after all this time they still have not implemented some sort of awareness for vehicles to know when infantry want to board...
.
well now im confused........
i have played CM meticulously for the last 8 years, WEGO, carefully plotting every step and carefully micro-ing every avenue of approach
i have been playing Wargame ALB non stop for the last few weeks and decided to do some you-tubing for a rest and came across a Black Sea lets play - the guy was playing it like i play ALB, not so much the perfectionist, not so anal - and it looked awesome, he certainly seemed to enjoy it more than i do with my approach
i may splash the cash and play it like he does
Quote from: undercovergeek on March 06, 2015, 06:33:35 PM
well now im confused........
i have played CM meticulously for the last 8 years, WEGO, carefully plotting every step and carefully micro-ing every avenue of approach
i have been playing Wargame ALB non stop for the last few weeks and decided to do some you-tubing for a rest and came across a Black Sea lets play - the guy was playing it like i play ALB, not so much the perfectionist, not so anal - and it looked awesome, he certainly seemed to enjoy it more than i do with my approach
i may splash the cash and play it like he does
Well playing RT does have its perks. But it does become really confusing in large battles as you can't watch the whole battlefield at the same time. I used to play RT since the beginning (first campaign mission) but moved to do TB eventually so that I can watch what everyone is doing at all times and give them the appropriate orders. This game needs more micromanagement than ALB.
i think id still play WEGO, the guy hears tanks exploding and has no idea why or where the fire came from - its more his, im going to send some of these over..............here, and these.......... there, and these over here and lets see what happens approach that i find refreshing
It will make IMO for a short game in CMBS.
The firepower and lethality of modern combat is breathtaking
Con
you ready for some PBEM action when its bought?
Playing my second PBEM game on CMBS right now. The first one was Ambush where I had to get some trucks across a river through a Russian ambush. Weird scoring I thought I did a lot better (got all the trucks off which was not easy) but it came out as a draw. Now I am playing US side on Bridgehead at Karyalak. Its a beautiful map but I had to stay hunkered down first 15 minutes as his attack helicopters pounded the forest that was my setup zone and his Arty kept my troops bottled up in their Bradleys. It was a very frustrating start if I un-loaded them to try and get the MANPADS to work I would be fragged by the arty so I had to just endure. Thats what makes the game great having to live with the real world consequences.
Now I am rolling forward but have lost a Bradley (that had all its laser warnings and smoke dischargers scoured off by a Hind gun run) so it was blind to a BMP tracking it and lighting it up. One of my M1A12 SEP Abrams cooked the BMP in the same turn and now all my pixel troops are looking at each other and saying this crap is about to get real.
I have room for another battle when you get the game
Con
Let me know if you want to play PBEM. Con, ucg, or anyone else.
Is there a bug with NVG? My Russians aren't wearing them in a PBEM match and I'm running blind. The US are chewing us up. Weather is Dense Fog / Night.
Ok. I've got some response in the forums. Those Russian troops only carry NV scopes on their firearms. Only scouts have NVG.
NV scopes are quite useless in the fog. the US troops will start shooting at me from a greater distance. Can't even plot cover fire because the view is very much restricted in the fog. Thermals perform better in fog.
Together with the free Javelin found in vehicles these little advantages aren't really represented in the purchase points making PBEM unbalanced depending on the situation.
I've seen more discussion on BFC forums about the aparent advantage the US forces have over the others with their Javelins.
If I recall there is a Russian weapon system modelled in the game with similar capabilities, but its up to the mission designer to make it available. I might be wrong.
Anyway in your scenario it seems to be rather unbalanced indeed.
Have you had contact with the mission designer? What are his points of view? Was this a H2H scenario to begin with?
Quote from: Yskonyn on March 10, 2015, 03:58:31 AM
I've seen more discussion on BFC forums about the aparent advantage the US forces have over the others with their Javelins.
If I recall there is a Russian weapon system modelled in the game with similar capabilities, but its up to the mission designer to make it available. I might be wrong.
Anyway in your scenario it seems to be rather unbalanced indeed.
Have you had contact with the mission designer? What are his points of view? Was this a H2H scenario to begin with?
I'm not worried about canned missions. This is about quick battle maps with troops bought by each player with Purchase Points. The US conveniently has a Javelin launcher in every APC which can turn any infantry into an Anti Tank team. The Russians don't have any Javelin like device stashed in their vehicles. So the purchase points should be adjusted for this which I think they do not. But of course I have not seen the AI pick up those Javelins, only human opponents.
In my game, the US conveniently has thermals by default and my russian infantry does not. But this advantage appears only in night and fog environment. So you can't really make a conditional purchase point system. It seems to not matter in day time and clear night so it is also unfair to impose a higher cost for US troops than what is being charged now by default. Unless the point system is by individual equipment which is somewhat implemented to some degree.
I guess the best is to just be aware of this disadvantage and purchase the proper troops appropriate for the situation. That mean only Russian Recon units are able to go againt the US during a foggy night.
Quote from: Yskonyn on March 10, 2015, 03:58:31 AM
I've seen more discussion on BFC forums about the aparent advantage the US forces have over the others with their Javelins.
If I recall there is a Russian weapon system modelled in the game with similar capabilities, but its up to the mission designer to make it available. I might be wrong.
Anyway in your scenario it seems to be rather unbalanced indeed.
Have you had contact with the mission designer? What are his points of view? Was this a H2H scenario to begin with?
'Murica!
i'm not an expert but fairly well read and I am not aware that the Russians are working on a similar system as the javelin but I could very well be wrong. Even if they were, it would be in the initial stages and certainly nothing has been even close to deployed. Fact is and many have said the same thing to the people on the battlefront forms, war is a bitch and unfair....and sometimes the other guy has weapon systems that you have to figure out a way to counter...i'm sure the Iraqis were complaining that their T-72 rounds couldn't penetrate the M1's armor; that's life in the big city. as in actual combat conditions, once the javelin is fired it is extremely reliable and accurate the key is to target the infantry... once the thing is fired that's your ass. By all indications in combat the weapon functions phenomenally
Not directing this at you Yskonyn...it's just the usual "my dad can beat up your dad" on the battlefront forms concerning the t-90 versus the M1 and so on. Many of those on the "Russian side" are crying and whining about the javelin but hey it's a great system...better figure something out before they meet in real life or the same things going to happen
Another problem is that current Russian APS protection systems are not designed to intercept top down attacks. Right now the Ukrainians, Estonians,Latvians, Lithuanians and Poles are all screaming bloody murder for as many javelins as they can get their hands on the Ukrainians are convinced it's the only way they could keep the Russian tanks out of Ukraine; and they're probably right
But yes, in my experience a few well-placed javelin crewman can completely decimate Russian armored formation in the game
On a similar note, in the game the Russian APS system is quite a effective against TOW missiles
I strongly supported the return to cherry-picking in CMx2 post SF and am glad it's back.
I despise point systems. As suggested by mikeck, point systems imply war can be made "fair" or "equal". It almost never is. Generals are paid to make this so. It's what makes meeting engagement scenarios so damn silly most of the time, but I digress. I will guaran-damn-tee that the Wehrmacht soldiers slogging their way up to the state farms at Kursk thought those Katyushas "unfair" in their own way...
Use points for sizing scenarios if you must, but, ultimately, play from history, play from plausibility, and then play with friends. You'll live longer and enjoy the experience of the game more.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Quote from: Cyrano on March 10, 2015, 09:35:03 AM
I strongly supported the return to cherry-picking in CMx2 post SF and am glad it's back.
I despise point systems. As suggested by mikeck, point systems imply war can be made "fair" or "equal". It almost never is. Generals are paid to make this so. It's what makes meeting engagement scenarios so damn silly most of the time, but I digress. I will guaran-damn-tee that the Wehrmacht soldiers slogging their way up to the state farms at Kursk thought those Katyushas "unfair" in their own way...
Use points for sizing scenarios if you must, but, ultimately, play from history, play from plausibility, and then play with friends. You'll live longer and enjoy the experience of the game more.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
+1. it is not a matter of "convenience" as suggested by Jomni. it is a matter of the reality that US troops are generally better equipped than their eastern bloc counterparts in some very important ways. That is war.
I think increasing the "point cost" of a weapon works when in reality, that weapon was rare. For example, in CMBO, I should have to spend a lot of points if I want a king Tiger because they were rare. On the other hand, I SHOULDNT have to spend more points for a T-34 than a german Panzer mark3 in a 1941 scenarios simply because the T-34 is better
US army is stocked with Javelins
Not to sidetrack but genuinely curious -- is it typical for Javelins to be used as an anti-personnel weapon? I was surprised (and slightly pissed off) when one of my Javelin-equipped squads launched a missile against a Russian soldier -- and a single soldier at that. Tagged the bastard, but man, talk about overkill.
I thought Javelin was exclusively an anti-armor / anti-vehicle weapons system...
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 10, 2015, 10:51:57 AM
Not to sidetrack but genuinely curious -- is it typical for Javelins to be used as an anti-personnel weapon? I was surprised (and slightly pissed off) when one of my Javelin-equipped squads launched a missile against a Russian soldier -- and a single soldier at that. Tagged the bastard, but man, talk about overkill.
I thought Javelin was exclusively an anti-armor / anti-vehicle weapons system...
The javelin has a "direct attack mode" in which the missile flies a traditionally straight pattern like a TOW missile. This allows it to be fired at buildings from which the troops are receiving fire or into the mouth of the cave etc. So to answer your question, the javelin can be used to hit a lot of things besides vehicles however that's a lot of money to spend putting a missile into dirt so you can kill one soldier.
To solve that issue I take my team and split off and antitank squad and then give them an area to target armor only.
On a similar note, the new TOW-2a missile with the directed charge enabling top attack on the top of the tank is nasty
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E1VWPOpYbQI
Interesting -- although in this case, the javelin missile followed its usual top-armor-penetrating parabolic trajectory...to take out single grunt. Seemed like a bug... or at least, an incredibly boneheaded tactical decision.
Anyway, good solution you propose.
Also, re: the TOW2, I was amazed the other day when one of my Bradleys took out a T-90 using this method... I thought he was toast...
When faced with the enemy, any weapon that makes a casualty will do :P
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 10, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Interesting -- although in this case, the javelin missile followed its usual top-armor-penetrating parabolic trajectory...to take out single grunt. Seemed like a bug... or at least, an incredibly boneheaded tactical decision.
Anyway, good solution you propose.
Also, re: the TOW2, I was amazed the other day when one of my Bradleys took out a T-90 using this method... I thought he was toast...
I believe the direct attack flight path of a Javelin still causes it to elevate a little above the target. Just not as high as in the top-attack mode.
No offense taken at all. O0
But I can see where jomni comes from. Especially in the Quick Battle system. Ideally you want to play an opponent and have similar chances to win a battle.
Once people know that every APC has the 'cane of doom' equipped, it'll quickly make for unbalanced matches if they resort to Javelin spam.
I am not sure how widely available Javelins are in US platoons, but in CM:BS they aren't rare at all and so not really expensive to purchase. While this may be reality, I do agree with jomni that this can be a game killer between two human players.
CM players value realism. I do too, but I also value a fair fight in terms of it being a game and all. There is no skill needed for Javelin spam.
Quote from: RyanE on March 10, 2015, 11:42:41 AM
Quote from: sandman2575 on March 10, 2015, 11:18:30 AM
Interesting -- although in this case, the javelin missile followed its usual top-armor-penetrating parabolic trajectory...to take out single grunt. Seemed like a bug... or at least, an incredibly boneheaded tactical decision.
Anyway, good solution you propose.
Also, re: the TOW2, I was amazed the other day when one of my Bradleys took out a T-90 using this method... I thought he was toast...
I believe the direct attack flight path of a Javelin still causes it to elevate a little above the target. Just not as high as in the top-attack mode.
Maybe, but not enough that it can't be put through the window of a building in Iraq or the mouth of the cave in Afghanistan
Quote from: Yskonyn on March 10, 2015, 02:00:11 PM
No offense taken at all. O0
But I can see where jomni comes from. Especially in the Quick Battle system. Ideally you want to play an opponent and have similar chances to win a battle.
Once people know that every APC has the 'cane of doom' equipped, it'll quickly make for unbalanced matches if they resort to Javelin spam.
I am not sure how widely available Javelins are in US platoons, but in CM:BS they aren't rare at all and so not really expensive to purchase. While this may be reality, I do agree with jomni that this can be a game killer between two human players.
CM players value realism. I do too, but I also value a fair fight in terms of it being a game and all. There is no skill needed for Javelin spam.
If players do not want javelin spam then they can set a house rule. But I would hate to see the cost of the javelin be increased in the game because players can't figure out how to defeat it.
I am also against increasing the price because javelin dominance is only applicable when the opponent adopts a vehicle-dependent strategy.
Well I can accept the presence of advanced US equipment and I will use them as well in my PBEM games. O0
Another argument about cost and real life. I'm pretty sure a Javelin is relatively expensive. http://www.bga-aeroweb.com/Defense/Javelin-Anti-Tank.html
It is there because the Department of Defence spent money (purchase points) on it. So the player should by right spend "money" on it too if they want to perform a javelin spam.
BTW, Javelin has a weakness = minimum range. So all in not lost. The Russians just have to use a lot of infantry to counter the Javelin.
A well placed sniper and observer with some artillery do wonders as well. Javelin crews have to move to get into position. When I see one fired (which inevitably kills me), I call in mortar/arty strike heavy with short duration. While suppressed I rush up. It's tough to time. not sure it would work against a human opponent as they would likely move after firing
Quote from: mikeck on March 10, 2015, 05:43:24 PM
A well placed sniper and observer with some artillery do wonders as well. Javelin crews have to move to get into position. When I see one fired (which inevitably kills me), I call in mortar/arty strike heavy with short duration. While suppressed I rush up. It's tough to time. not sure it would work against a human opponent as they would likely move after firing
Not just Javelin crews. Every US solder can become a Javelin crew by picking one up from dead bodies or from their APC's. A full US squad with a Javelin soldier is more deadly.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 03, 2015, 03:45:58 PM
You should try some of the mods already released - the background one that adds electricity pylons and a TV antenna are great - such a small change such a big difference.
What's the name of that mod? For some reason I can't find it in the repository..
How much will you pay BF for them to update the AI?
http://community.battlefront.com/forum/99-combat-mission-black-sea/
I say zero! Good AI should be given to us for free! It should be there in the first place. Lol. But hey, those hard core fans are willing to pay top dollar. BF is really in a good financial position with these guys around.
^ I agree...a competent AI should be in the game. Of course, competent could be measured differently depending on how good you are as a player.
Personally I'm reasonably happy with the AI and I wouldn't pay a single penny.
Quote from: Tinkershuffle on March 11, 2015, 02:38:50 PM
Quote from: Zulu1966 on February 03, 2015, 03:45:58 PM
You should try some of the mods already released - the background one that adds electricity pylons and a TV antenna are great - such a small change such a big difference.
What's the name of that mod? For some reason I can't find it in the repository..
its called:
Kieme CMBS reworked horizons.rar :)
and can be found with alot of other of Kiemes OUTSTANDING O0 work at the upper half of "Kieme's modding corner " thread over in the Battlefront forum
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/117795-kiemes-modding-corner/?p=1577808
link to his file
https://app.box.com/s/qcxm6o3sx6wztbtreszl3cd0qamdkrm8
Quote from: jomni on March 13, 2015, 12:07:13 AM
How much will you pay BF for them to update the AI?
http://community.battlefront.com/forum/99-combat-mission-black-sea/
I say zero! Good AI should be given to us for free! It should be there in the first place. Lol. But hey, those hard core fans are willing to pay top dollar. BF is really in a good financial position with these guys around.
Quote from: BF Poll
BFC is convinced that nobody would pay an economically sustainable price to make spending a lot of development time on AI improvement to the detriment of new features. I'm thinking that if the game is largely feature-complete (what's missing? Flares and proper nighttime illumination sources; environmental fire; mast-mounted vision equipment... can't think of anything else immediately) and they're working on a UI improvement already, perhaps an AI upgrade might be next if there's enough support for it. Whadday'all think?
Edit: by "Nobody" I mean "insufficient people".
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/118805-how-much-would-you-pay-for-an-improved-ai-upgrade/
Man.. I just don't know what to say. Would this mean that they want extra money
and the AI work would cost dev time on new features?
The randomized skirmish maps in CMx2 definitely need improved AI. Whether that should be some costly DLC is a pandora's box, especially with BF. That's the real question in the poll. Will you CM die-hards be forced to pay for extra AI DLC (or the like) from now on, if this becomes a thing?
Sounds like they don't want to do it, despite all the requests, unless they get paid extra. Am I misunderstanding that BF post in this sense? Offering it is nice.. but asking for extra money to change their priorities? *shrug*
Would
I be willing to pay an "economically sustainable price" to improve the CMx2 AI? I'll answer that with a statement: I'd be more inclined to actually purchase new versions if the AI was improved, especially for skirmishes.
Quote from: Nefaro on March 13, 2015, 05:21:04 AM
[
Sounds like they don't want to do it, despite all the requests, unless they get paid extra. Am I misunderstanding that BF post in this sense? Offering it is nice.. but asking for extra money to change their priorities? *shrug*
As I read it "BFC is convinced that nobody would pay" is the opinion of the forum member who started the poll. Maybe somebody can confirm if this is also BFC's opinion.
Paying extra for a working AI, wait until Creative Assembly hears about this.
Isn't the poll by a customer? I didn't think it was BFC who did it. I its a customer trying to convince BFC to add features to the upgrade.
One huge feature not in the game is any real engineering capability. They actually have engineering vehicles, but there are just window dressing. No fast scrapes for tanks. No quick foxholes. No real breaching of obstacles. Adding mineclearing vehicles is step in that direction, but not very far.
LOS is still wonky through vehicles. No friendly fire or fire lanes. Night illumination capability is still not very capable and its a hugely important part of even modern combat. Tank gun depression and elevation is still a little laughable, considering the agonizing detail in other parts of the game.
I know there are reasons for all of these and those reasons are more than acceptable to me. So there is plenty of stuff to work on and I am sure my list is only a small part of the list BFC has for themselves.
It's a customer poll. They are more than willing to throw money at BFC for development of the AI.
Quote from: RyanE on March 13, 2015, 05:53:47 AM
Isn't the poll by a customer? I didn't think it was BFC who did it. I its a customer trying to convince BFC to add features to the upgrade.
One huge feature not in the game is any real engineering capability. They actually have engineering vehicles, but there are just window dressing. No fast scrapes for tanks. No quick foxholes. No real breaching of obstacles. Adding mineclearing vehicles is step in that direction, but not very far.
LOS is still wonky through vehicles. No friendly fire or fire lanes. Night illumination capability is still not very capable and its a hugely important part of even modern combat. Tank gun depression and elevation is still a little laughable, considering the agonizing detail in other parts of the game.
I know there are reasons for all of these and those reasons are more than acceptable to me. So there is plenty of stuff to work on and I am sure my list is only a small part of the list BFC has for themselves.
A lot of these are old engine issues as a result of the design. They are just busy adding new toys and theatres.
The poll is not as outrageous as you might think, considering BFC only have 2 or so programmers.
AI is a very hard thing to code well and the simple fact is that a Tiny studio just doesn't have the manpower to spare to dedicate to special missions like this.
The guy who created the poll is not a BFC employee. He is just gauging wether the argument he mentions stands up to the community and if not, the community could show willingness to pay extra for extra advanced AI. Maybe BFC can expand if it turns out the community would pay up for such things. Its all speculative and 'feelie-touchy'. :D
Quote from: RyanE on March 13, 2015, 05:53:47 AM
Isn't the poll by a customer? I didn't think it was BFC who did it. I its a customer trying to convince BFC to add features to the upgrade.
I guess so. I stopped frequenting the place ages ago, so I have no idea what's going on over there.
This is far from the first time I've heard of the regular BF customers attempting to bribe them into addressing something. Not sure if it ever worked. I'd hope that such things were addressed at some point in normal development, without such odd offers.
In the end, I would expect BF to not bother paying much attention to it if they would be forced to expand in order to make more money. :idiot2:
Well we don't want to give the impression that the game doesn't work well, either.
The AI could be more intelligent or pro-active, but that is the case for so many games.
And we are solely talking about the TacAI here.
The strategic 'AI' is as clever as the author of the mission enables it to be.
So while its nice to have an (even more) advanced AI for the CMx2 games (the AI regularly kicks my add anyway as it is), we're not talking World in Flames here.
Let's keep it fair towards BFC. :)
Yes, reading that poll and accompanying threads I am left thinking ignorance is bliss! :) Like a few thousand dollars is somehow going to enable BFC to profoundly 'improve' the AI, which will in turn dramatically increase the marketability and then sales of the product. Typical internet wishful thinking.
I think to be fair it isn't like the CM AI is a slouch either. The TacAI is pretty impressive for the various units and the varying situations, doing a great job simulating realistic behavior. (Still room for improvement though in many more areas) The inclusion of triggers has really raised the bar of the strategic AI as created by the scenario designers imo.
Especially with Black Sea, the enemy conducts itself in a very convincing and believable manner. Fleshing that out, which BFC has already stated as one of their goals, will make it even better. There is no way I would want a return to the type of AI from the original CM. I think some have rose colored glasses when comparing. The SP experience is much, much better with CMx2.
I'm always having my butt handed to me (well, more often than not) by a middle of the road AI setting.
I have NO problems with the AI how it is. :)
Quote from: Yskonyn on March 13, 2015, 02:41:50 PM
Well we don't want to give the impression that the game doesn't work well, either.
The AI could be more intelligent or pro-active, but that is the case for so many games.
And we are solely talking about the TacAI here.
The strategic 'AI' is as clever as the author of the mission enables it to be.
So while its nice to have an (even more) advanced AI for the CMx2 games (the AI regularly kicks my add anyway as it is), we're not talking World in Flames here.
Let's keep it fair towards BFC. :)
Oh they're still challenging games. More so in the canned missions with programmed AI, of course.
But I think the randomized skirmishes are an essential feature and I've seen the AI do some bonehead straight-at-you-willy-nilly moves in them, so those could definitely use some work (along with any TacAI tweaks of course).
IIRC, the random battle AI tactic is always the "Hey Diddle Diddle" right down the middle with little organization or timing. I've been told that Skirm AI just a generic one that tells it to send everything straight at the victory point(s), and that seems to be the case to whatever extent.
Quote from: MikeGER on March 13, 2015, 02:41:56 AM
its called:
Kieme CMBS reworked horizons.rar :)
Thanks Mike!
Quote from: Nefaro on March 13, 2015, 03:37:29 PM
IIRC, the random battle AI tactic is always the "Hey Diddle Diddle" right down the middle with little organization or timing. I've been told that Skirm AI just a generic one that tells it to send everything straight at the victory point(s), and that seems to be the case to whatever extent.
No, the quick battle maps have AI plans designed (usually) by the map maker. And, most if not all, all QB maps shipped with the game have 3 different sets of AI orders for each side. Where you can see great success and great failure with this is the players force selection. The old CMx1 was pretty much a zombie walk to the VLs, making playing defense not very interesting. That said, I only rarely play QBs for fun...... And that goes back to CMx1. But that's just me. :)
I scanned through the post you linked to before reading the rest of this thread looking for the BFC comment. As others have already pointed out, Battlefront hasn't chimed in. That said, when BFC talks about "costs", they almost always refer to time costs of programmers, as opposed to actual dollars being spent. With the possible exception of talks about Upgrades, which ultimately go back to programmer time as well. So being "bribed" into doing something because their public is willing to pay them more to spend their time working on one thing rather than another, doesn't sound like their style.
Quote from: RyanE on March 13, 2015, 05:53:47 AM
Isn't the poll by a customer? I didn't think it was BFC who did it. I its a customer trying to convince BFC to add features to the upgrade.
One huge feature not in the game is any real engineering capability. They actually have engineering vehicles, but there are just window dressing. No fast scrapes for tanks. No quick foxholes. No real breaching of obstacles. Adding mineclearing vehicles is step in that direction, but not very far.
LOS is still wonky through vehicles. No friendly fire or fire lanes. Night illumination capability is still not very capable and its a hugely important part of even modern combat. Tank gun depression and elevation is still a little laughable, considering the agonizing detail in other parts of the game.
I know there are reasons for all of these and those reasons are more than acceptable to me. So there is plenty of stuff to work on and I am sure my list is only a small part of the list BFC has for themselves.
How bout WeGo TCP with playback? There is no other feature that I want more than that (although I've been told so many times that, if it ever happens, it ain't gonna be any time soon, that I've stopped asking. :) )
So the randomly created skirmish battles have more than one AI "plan"?
If so, I still don't think even the stock random battle AI plans knew how to use some troop types very well. And the 'rush straight at VP' effect seemed to be the order of the day in the last couple I tried with randomly generated missions on CMBN+C and CMSF.
I should point out, whilst I'm thumbing up the AI that I do not play any mode other than the built in scenarios and campaigns.
I have no idea what user generated or game generated maps and modes are like from an AI perspective.
You can talk up the AI in QBs all you want, but it is very weak. It is as much troop selection as anything. How about a company of TOW teams that have to cross an entire map and fight it out with an airborne platoon. Or the 15 Humvees battling it out with some T-90s.
They have been trying to fix that literally for years and yet still seems not a lot different than CMSF. Quality of the QB maps has improved significantly though.
The simple AI scripting method is alright for those campaign and stand alone missions but at the hands of a skilled designer. And most of the time you are the attacker.
But it does not work well in QB. Despite the QB having some AI orders already in the map. Clearly there needs to be conditions, triggers and stuff.
For those of us who don't have Black Sea yet, the demo has been released: http://www.battlefront.com/ (http://www.battlefront.com/)
This game plays SP? Heavens, why? Doug'll be more than happy to drive his tanks right over you :).
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
^ this is true. :)
quick question for those who know and i that dont
advancing to contact - i realise now why ive never played a mechanised force in CM - i dont know how to advance to contact in them!
When do you get out? be it strykers, bdms, bradleys, how far do you go forward before thinking, 'wed better get out in case we get blown up', and then use the vehicle as infantry back up
is it on contact (which seems a bit late to me), or some arbitrary point you decide, or is it a cleverly sought spot out of LOS and then send recon out from there?
Quote from: undercovergeek on March 27, 2015, 01:15:43 PM
quick question for those who know and i that dont
advancing to contact - i realise now why ive never played a mechanised force in CM - i dont know how to advance to contact in them!
When do you get out? be it strykers, bdms, bradleys, how far do you go forward before thinking, 'wed better get out in case we get blown up', and then use the vehicle as infantry back up
is it on contact (which seems a bit late to me), or some arbitrary point you decide, or is it a cleverly sought spot out of LOS and then send recon out from there?
Technically on CMBS/CMSF sized maps, you really are already in contact or the chance of contact is imminent. I treat the situation as already in contact and potentially observed.
In open terrain where you think contact is imminent get some scouts out and try and put the IFVs in a hull down overwatch position, or, it there's no good ground, get them hidden. I'll usually then have my infantry dismount and deploy, hidden, to the front of the IFVs. Use plenty of dismounted scouts to try and find the bad guys. Once the scouts get out far enough you should start advancing the infantry and IFVs by bounds. If you have a lot of territory to cover, have the infantry mount up, move the bounding IFV, and then dismount again when the IFVs are in an overwatch position. Then move the remaining IFVs by a similar bound. Once you have the IFVs in a position where they can target the objective (particularly Bradleys with TOWs!)
leave them there and advance just the dismounts. IFVs suck as tanks.
In built up areas, get out of the IFVs and advance with the dismounts. Keep the IFVs back where they can provide fire support on some initial objectives. Don't move the IFVs into the built up area until you're sure it's clear. Then check again, because there's always some jerk with an RPG somewhere you thought you cleared.
If you are moving up with the IFVs, seek a covered route, and don't leave cover with the IFVs until you have dismounted scouts out. Use your drones to try and find the bad guys before you move up.
If you feel you have to assault, cover the area with smoke and HE and move in fast. Pop more smoke from the IFVs and dismount into the smoke, and then get the IFVs back to a support position. You'll probably still lose some, but that should give you a better chance than not.
If possible, get some real armor in overwatch. Modern AFVs can kill stuff in poor visibility conditions clear across the map. If a bad guy pops up to shoot an AFV with a good target arc will often get him.
In general, don't move IFVs with mounted troops in them anywhere you aren't pretty sure they can't be shot at if you can avoid it. They are just too fragile. Sometimes, you have to, but you are almost certainly going to get some blowed up.
I'll only add that it's a process that requires practice and patience. Practice for figuring out where that "right" moment to dismount is and patience for the many times you'll get out too early and either have your troops hoof it far farther than they should have had to or you wind up dismounting, walking, remounting, driving, dismounting, walking, &c.
As Doug suggests, though, if you're trying to dismount under fire, it is the bad day.
Quote from: Cyrano on March 27, 2015, 03:17:34 PM
I'll only add that it's a process that requires practice and patience. Practice for figuring out where that "right" moment to dismount is and patience for the many times you'll get out too early and either have your troops hoof it far farther than they should have had to or you wind up dismounting, walking, remounting, driving, dismounting, walking, &c.
As Doug suggests, though, if you're trying to dismount under fire, it is the bad day.
I always...always pop smoke when I stop my vehicle to dismount. If I am dismounting my soldiers, it's because I think I may take heavy fire so why not
Quote from: mikeck on March 28, 2015, 06:35:23 PM
Quote from: Cyrano on March 27, 2015, 03:17:34 PM
I'll only add that it's a process that requires practice and patience. Practice for figuring out where that "right" moment to dismount is and patience for the many times you'll get out too early and either have your troops hoof it far farther than they should have had to or you wind up dismounting, walking, remounting, driving, dismounting, walking, &c.
As Doug suggests, though, if you're trying to dismount under fire, it is the bad day.
I always...always pop smoke when I stop my vehicle to dismount. If I am dismounting my soldiers, it's because I think I may take heavy fire so why not
I pop smoke like that sometimes. But smoke ammo is finite. So if I suspect enemy in nearby locations that may open up- they get the platoon's IFV fire, or brief fire as a prep that stops just before the dismounts are near.
Edited: just mid a company attack now, and 5x BMP3 prepping the edge of a wood line, with other company assets in over watch was a beautiful and awesome sight :smitten:
Yes, but if you have several vehicles in Column or close together, one smoke pop from one vehicle covers a wide area. I just alternate vehicles and try to keep them in mutual support. But yeah, smoke is pretty limited unfortunately.
Quote from: mikeck on March 29, 2015, 12:27:52 PM
Yes, but if you have several vehicles in Column or close together, one smoke pop from one vehicle covers a wide area. I just alternate vehicles and try to keep them in mutual support. But yeah, smoke is pretty limited unfortunately.
Nice tip, will use that one.
Also, the game models types of smoke, regular and IR block. But some of the top stuff can still see through the black IR smoke.
is smoke that limited in rl? Do they lack reloads?
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 29, 2015, 12:48:52 PM
is smoke that limited in rl? Do they lack reloads?
Yes. 1-2 pops a vehicle I find. 1 for infantry. If you have mortar support, you can drop rounds also. I use the mortars for large movements -4-5 shells, and the vehicle smoke for retreating or disembarking
Just don't drop smoke too close to friendlies as it's WP
I am getting murdered by MANPADS any suggestions on how to limit their effectiveness? They shot down my drones so I cant spot them wit ht at they are widely dispersed either behind buildings or in valleys so I cant spot them with my troops so I am not able to bring Arty fire down on them and so far I have lost three drones and an AH64 and now an F15 to them. Its not a good day to be flying for the US.
The scenario is Bridgehead at Kharalyk. I spotted Russian Tanguskas and I took at least two of them out with precision munitions. Then I lost the drones. My last foray I had an RQ-7B shadow drone paired up with an F15. I was planning on using the F15 to suppress a hilltop where I suspected their might be some MANPADS thinking that the F15 would have a better chance of surviving them. Also I figured that either the drone or the F15 would draw fire from the other. Instead I get two separate MANPAD launches (in the spots I mentioned) that KO the drone and the F15 in the same turn.....was I just unlucky or are these things that lethal?
Interesting puzzle and I was hoping to see how you guys cope with them.
Con
This advice is for QB. I seldom buy air assets because of this. Just use more arty which cannot be intercepted.
The air support vs manpads sounds wrong. F-15s wouldn't drop below 20,000 which is out of manpad range. If BF is going to model the airwar, they should have added sead missions to take out the enemies SAM capability. Also, I'm not sure the game handles the air craft right, I notice they overfly right into the threat zone rather than use standoff weapons from safety.
Quote from: Skoop on March 30, 2015, 11:53:52 AM
The air support vs manpads sounds wrong. F-15s wouldn't drop below 20,000 which is out of manpad range. If BF is going to model the airwar, they should have added sead missions to take enemies SAM capability. Also, I'm not sure the game handles the air craft right, I notice they overfly right into the threat zone rather than use standoff weapons from safety.
I think that above 20k is fighting Afghan, insurgent. Modern Russia has capable AD assets, the BUK can destroy aerodynamic targets with a maximum speed of 830m/s flying at an altitude between 0.015km and 25km, and within 3km to 45km range. let alone the S300 and S400
NAP at least offers some defence, and stealth is the big ?; but those assets would have operational assignments early war, and that's presuming the West impose local Air Superiority at some point latter in a hot war.
That's why I suggested modeling sead missions because of radar guided AA now in game. Once those threats are neutral, then the standard 20,000 to avoid manpads applies.
Quote from: Skoop on March 30, 2015, 12:53:54 PM
That's why I suggested modeling sead missions because of radar guided AA now in game. Once those threats are neutral, then the standard 20,000 to avoid manpads applies.
Ah, yes I see. Yes SEAD, and other AD attrit assets would have an impact, just likely not the sort that a blanket 20k total air supremacy would allow. I'm not up to date with developments, but last I read around the likelihood is that Air Supremacy is uncertain, and a high threat environment would remain.
Two caveats, 1. US/NATO would likely be able to achieve local superiority when and when for periods. 2. The Devs stated they don't want mission creep in the game away from the tactical battle focus.
Re-read your post.. Oops, yeah they would likely use stand-off much more, but I guess they made some balance decisions like the one to leave MLRS out
Large scale rocket artillery was not left out for balance. It was left out because it is out of scale of the game, in general. It would be like having tac nukes in the game. CM is about tactical units fighting it out. Its not an air warfare game or artillery duel game. Artillery plays a supporting role. If its about covering a sq km in HE, you probably want a different game that is more grand tactical or operational.
Similar to even discussing SEAD. The way a granular tactical game handles SEAD is by limiting AA assets or limiting air attacks. The assumption is that fight happens at another level and the CM battlefield only sees the results.
Quote from: RyanE on March 31, 2015, 06:07:43 AM
Large scale rocket artillery was not left out for balance. It was left out because it is out of scale of the game, in general. It would be like having tac nukes in the game. CM is about tactical units fighting it out. Its not an air warfare game or artillery duel game. Artillery plays a supporting role. If its about covering a sq km in HE, you probably want a different game that is more grand tactical or operational.
Similar to even discussing SEAD. The way a granular tactical game handles SEAD is by limiting AA assets or limiting air attacks. The assumption is that fight happens at another level and the CM battlefield only sees the results.
Yes, partially agree, but sort of semantic nit pickin'. In a stream Chris ND said it was balance as, like you say it could take out the whole side of the map. He also said that they will consider it again in future. That said, there are assets available that are similar level of, and I would not be surprised if they sneak in in some restricted form, for example singular precision missiles shot from MLRS.
Edited: back on topic- I'm liking the game, but dislike how modern IFVs pretty much nullify infantry with their super spotting ability. I think that after the stock campaigns I'll get the most mileage out of Black Sea from Infantry QBs.
Fabius -- Re: IFV spotting, do you believe it is unrealistically modeled or that, though accurate, it makes for a less enjoyable experience?
Curious as I'm having some, erm, conundrums along these lines in my PBEM with Doug.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Quote from: Cyrano on March 31, 2015, 12:27:48 PM
Fabius -- Re: IFV spotting, do you believe it is unrealistically modeled or that, though accurate, it makes for a less enjoyable experience?
Curious as I'm having some, erm, conundrums along these lines in my PBEM with Doug.
We're just being vewy, vewy quiet.
Also, we have no jeeps.
Quote from: Cyrano on March 31, 2015, 12:27:48 PM
Fabius -- Re: IFV spotting, do you believe it is unrealistically modeled or that, though accurate, it makes for a less enjoyable experience?
Curious as I'm having some, erm, conundrums along these lines in my PBEM with Doug.
Best,
Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)
Bit of both. There's so many situations that stuff would get in the way, but with vehicles only you still have to get real close to still infantry in cover and building is more difficult.
Still, once they are spotted HE or rapid fire auto cannons is good night squishies. For US side this is balance by Javelin
My bias: I generally prefer infantry V infantry anyway.
BS is fun, and I've just scratched the surface. And for some reason, am actually enjoying playing as Russian and Ukrainian rather than US more so that I would with other games.
I get What you guys are saying about feature creep, got to draw the line some where and let Wargame ALB, CMNAO, or DCS tackle those areas.
But Still, the apache was designed for this kind of tactical CAS in high threat environment. You shouldn't even hear it on map. In RL, it would be 2 or three maps away doing pop up attacks with hellfires guided buy jtac laser designators. I feel like the BS aircraft are just RT aircraft with modern weapons and sensors.
Quote from: RyanE on March 31, 2015, 06:07:43 AM
Large scale rocket artillery was not left out for balance. It was left out because it is out of scale of the game, in general. It would be like having tac nukes in the game. CM is about tactical units fighting it out. Its not an air warfare game or artillery duel game. Artillery plays a supporting role. If its about covering a sq km in HE, you probably want a different game that is more grand tactical or operational.
Similar to even discussing SEAD. The way a granular tactical game handles SEAD is by limiting AA assets or limiting air attacks. The assumption is that fight happens at another level and the CM battlefield only sees the results.
And yet MRLS rocket artillery featured in Red Thunder, and is commonplace in the current Ukraine conflict.
And I don't think its needed in RT. There is no point in having it. One of the first house rules you see in CMRT is no rocket arty.
Just ran a short test on a 1km by 1 km map. On the Soviet side: a single FO team anf three rocket batteries. On the German side, 12 scout teams of 3 soldiers apiece.
During set up, I called in the rockets with maximum area and no overlap in bombardment areas. I was able to cover almost the top third of the map with the areas.
During turn 1, almost half the map was covered by the bombardment. At the end of the strike, 12 German soldiers were unwounded and the rest were dead or wounded. the 12 left were all rattled, panicked or broken.
Caveats...no trees, buildings, or trenches. But it shows only a few rocket units can almost blanket half of a normal-sized map. Rockets were not used like this anyway. They were typically used on support units and facilities slightly behind the lines. They would be the reason reinforcements don't show up and ammo runs low.
BF forum post regarding the upcoming CMBS 1.03 patch: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119209-black-sea-patch-v103-preview/ (http://community.battlefront.com/topic/119209-black-sea-patch-v103-preview/)
Interesting discussion on the Blitz. Take note of the ATGM tests (stats will change after the patch).
Also beware of the "hollow" victory objectives. This one sucks.
http://www.theblitz.org/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=67874&page=4
I'm fine with javs the way they are, I hope they don't get nerfed. It makes up for the severely nerfed NATO CAS airpower in the game.
Quote from: mikeck on March 29, 2015, 01:41:28 PM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 29, 2015, 12:48:52 PM
is smoke that limited in rl? Do they lack reloads?
Yes. 1-2 pops a vehicle I find. 1 for infantry. If you have mortar support, you can drop rounds also. I use the mortars for large movements -4-5 shells, and the vehicle smoke for retreating or disembarking
Do you use any smoke mods? I find Aris' dust and smoke mod is really immersive, but I've edited the dust .bmp file for Ukraine and CMBN, and use vanilla dust instead - as it kicks out too much dust for those climates (they are just fine otherwise for arid places like you'd find with CMFI, and CMSF). The smoke looks really nice for all CM games though.
Quote from: Skoop on April 29, 2015, 10:59:35 AM
I'm fine with javs the way they are, I hope they don't get nerfed. It makes up for the severely nerfed NATO CAS airpower in the game.
They won't get nerfed based on capabilities. Not sure if they will get more expensive though after the "balancing" patch.
There might be some tweaks on Russian ATGMs.
Quote from: Boggit on April 29, 2015, 11:43:25 AM
The smoke looks really nice for all CM games though.
Including that ugly black smoke?
Quote from: jomni on April 29, 2015, 05:43:28 PM
Quote from: Boggit on April 29, 2015, 11:43:25 AM
The smoke looks really nice for all CM games though.
Including that ugly black smoke?
LOL! ;D Well, that's relative I suppose. It looks better than the vanilla in my opinion. The black smoke is a bit weird, but I suppose you could be burning oil with it... ;) Anyway, if you haven't tried it, check it out - you can get it at Battlefront's repository - Smoke and Dust mod by Aris. You need to stick it in the \Data\Z folder to get it to work - here is a youTube clip that shows it quite nicely (I also use Aris' fire, and explosion mod too, which go well with it)....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBO-i9JeGqY (BTW the fire mod is improved over the one seen in the video, and is much better).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIB7_2k4IL4 Smoke and dust looks like it's from the Aris mod
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NESJbph_Puc Some smoke and dust - but mainly an entertaining one...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXP_DzX540s This illustrates it nicely, plus is visually very immersive.
Are you guys talking about the black smoke from the smoke launchers on Soviet-era AFVs?
Quote from: panzerde on May 01, 2015, 03:14:51 PM
Are you guys talking about the black smoke from the smoke launchers on Soviet-era AFVs?
I was - if you mean the stuff that the Syrians get in CMSF, and the stuff in CMBS. I guess Jomni was too, but he'll confirm yea or nea. Any particular reason why you ask?
Quote from: Boggit on May 01, 2015, 03:21:58 PM
I was - if you mean the stuff that the Syrians get in CMSF, and the stuff in CMBS. I guess Jomni was too, but he'll confirm yea or nea. Any particular reason why you ask?
I just never thought of it as particularly "ugly." AFAIK it's at least accurate for the smoke launchers on those vehicles. I *think* the newer Russian vehicles use a smoke more like what NATO uses now.
I completely agree with you on the Smoke & Dust mod, btw. A definite must have.
I'd actually like to see more smoke in the game, especially from burning buildings. I was looking at some pictures from Kursk the other day and I want my games to look like that!
Quote from: panzerde on May 01, 2015, 03:29:47 PM
Quote from: Boggit on May 01, 2015, 03:21:58 PM
I was - if you mean the stuff that the Syrians get in CMSF, and the stuff in CMBS. I guess Jomni was too, but he'll confirm yea or nea. Any particular reason why you ask?
I just never thought of it as particularly "ugly." AFAIK it's at least accurate for the smoke launchers on those vehicles. I *think* the newer Russian vehicles use a smoke more like what NATO uses now.
I completely agree with you on the Smoke & Dust mod, btw. A definite must have.
I'd actually like to see more smoke in the game, especially from burning buildings. I was looking at some pictures from Kursk the other day and I want my games to look like that!
Personally, I never gave much thought to the black smoke. I just thought it was white for blue force, and black for red - which is why I thought it a bit weird, but heigh-ho that's what it is. I hadn't realised that it was actually an expression of reality. I feel much happier about it now. Thanks for the heads up. O0
Yep, I definitely agree with you with fire and smoke. I guess if we ever see it it'll be in a v4 or 5 upgrade. :'( Fire works well in Steel Panthers - including spread. I don't see on the face of it why it couldn't happen in CM. I suspect that calculating casualties by fire/smoke inhalation might be a bit tricky, but not impossible.
The really "ugly" smoke IMHO is that brown thermal opaque smoke you see in CMSF. NATO IFVs tend to dump it and it is ugly stuff!
The 1.03 patch was released last night. Fixes a bunch of things, but not much beyond that. BFC stated this is the last being done on CMBS for a while, so enjoy.
Does it mess up ongoing PBEM?
i think as long as youre both on the same version it should be ok
Will you be updating?
Quote from: RyanE on May 02, 2015, 05:47:54 AM
The 1.03 patch was released last night. Fixes a bunch of things, but not much beyond that. BFC stated this is the last being done on CMBS for a while, so enjoy.
Here's the list:
QuoteINFANTRY WEAPONS:
Makarov pistol ammunition is now listed as "9mm".
RPG-7 rounds now self-detonate at a distance of 920 meters.
The dismounted AT-14 Kornet can now be fired from inside buildings, albeit with a suppression penalty.
The M25 CDTE is now better at estimating range, allowing it to more accurately airburst rounds over walls.
Under barrel rifle grenade launcher (M320, GP-25, GP-30) grenadiers are now better at "dialing in" the range to target, allowing them to fire more accurately adjust range after firing successive grenades at the target.
FIXED: Incorrect muzzle flash for SVD and PSR rifles.
FIXED: Problems with max detection range of some US Army infantry thermal weapon sights.
FIXED: Javelin missile would appear a meter to the right of the tube when the launcher was facing a specific cardinal direction.
FIXED: Tripod-mounted M240L machineguns had to pause firing every 50 rounds, as opposed to every 200 rounds.
VEHICLE WEAPONS:
Previously overly restricted BM Oplot AAMG should now be able to fire over most of the frontal arc of the vehicle.
BMP-2M and BTR-82A now use the same modernized 30mm APFSDS ammunition as the BMP-3M.
US now uses only HEDP grenades for Mk.19 grenade launcher. HE grenades have been removed.
Russian 12.7mm ammo is now AP-I, instead of AP.
Vehicle airburst rounds are now better at estimating range, allowing them to more accurately airburst rounds over walls.
FIXED: Humvee-mounted US Army .50 caliber machineguns were using Mk. 211 ammunition instead of AP-I.
FIXED: T-72 rotating cupola with attached AAMG failing to rotate and use the MG.
FIXED: Rare issue that could cause ATGMs from a vehicle to consistently swerve off course.
FIXED: Vehicles firing a direct trajectory gun (such as APFSDS ammo) at the same elevation as the target were occasionally hitting the target's top armor or hull deck.
VEHICLE PROTECTION:
All T-90 variants have increased hull side protection.
All T-90 variants have slightly increased front hull armor protection.
BM Oplot lower front hull armor protection was slightly reduced.
The T-90AM now simulates 10 main gun rounds being protected in a turret bustle with blow out panels. In effect this will make the T-90AM somewhat less prone than the T-90A and T-72 to catastrophic explosions after being penetrated.
The single layer of Abrams turret side ERA (M32 scutum ERA tiles) is now less effective against tandem HEAT warheads.
Duplet ERA on BM Oplot tanks is now more effective against tandem HEAT warheads.
FIXED: ERA on a few vehicles occasionally not functioning properly.
FIXED: Some rare issues with T-72B3, T-90AM, and BM Oplot armor protection.
FIXED: Occasional issue where a tank's frontal hit location would be reported incorrectly.
FIXED: Issues with smoke grenade launchers for some Russian vehicles, causing them to form insufficient smoke screens to their front.
FIXED: Shtora deploying smoke grenades twice in a row.
FIRE SUPPORT:
The flight path of Air-to-Surface Missiles (ASMs) such as the Hellfire now have a steeper attack angle, removing their vulnerability to active protection systems and making them less likely to hit terrain obstacles.
Krasnopol precision artillery round accuracy has been slightly increased, while Excalibur accuracy has been slightly reduced.
Electronic Warfare settings of Medium or higher will no longer prevent laser-guided precision artillery missions from happening. These missions will continue to suffer the usual delivery time penalties due to communications interference.
AAA fire (such as the cannon fire from Tunguskas) can now be seen in the sky by the enemy when they are fired at aircraft. This matches the current behavior of SAMs.
UNIT BEHAVIOR:
Troops will now "Cower" less readily after being shot at if they are in a low suppression state.
Small arms fire and ricochets from friendly units will no longer cause units using the Hunt command to stop moving.
Units are better at targeting the exposed portions of a hulldown vehicle.
Units with handheld AT weapons are more willing to attack APS-equipped vehicles on their own without needing an explicit Target command.
IFVs (such as BMPs or Bradleys) are now better at choosing the optimal weapon system for engaging enemy IFVs. In most cases this means that they will favor immediate use of autocannons over ATGMs.
FIXED: Vehicles with a dismounting vehicle commander (such as a BMP's squad leader who also doubles as a vehicle commander) not getting the proper benefit of having a trained crew commander when the leader was in the vehicle.
FIXED: Passengers in the bed of a M1152 Humvee not recognized as valid small arms targets.
FIXED: Infantry on the move that had their next waypoint adjusted would sometimes turn around and run back to the last waypoint before continuing with their orders.
QUICK BATTLES:
All vehicles equipped with Active Protection Systems (APS) now also cost Rarity points in Quick Battles, which under normal settings will further limit the amount that can be purchased.
A variety of IFVs and APCs with advanced sensor and defensive systems now cost more points in relation to older vehicles with less sophisticated equipment (such as thermals and night vision).
Russian vehicles equipped with APS now cost less points in Quick Battles, bringing the cost of APS in line with equivalent US Army systems.
T-90AM now costs more points in Quick Battles relative to the T-90A.
Most infantry units now cost less points in Quick Battles.
FIXED: Attacker Electronic Warfare setting in Quick Battles would apply to both sides.
ARTWORK:
US Soldiers now visually carry their pistols in thigh drop holsters.
Russian and Ukrainian rifle grenadiers equipped with GP-25 and GP-30 grenade launchers now use a unique hand grip animation.
More vehicles and weapons have normal maps.
Numerous tweaks to vehicle 3D models.
Russian night vision goggles are now worn over the left eye.
FIXED: Some black textures: gear stowed in back of UAZ 469 appearing as black, M1152 steering wheel, Igla-S missile, and occasionally Ukrainian tanker helmets.
FIXED: Some buildings in a small number of maps had an invisible second floor.
MISC:
Removed laser designator from Russian recon squads.
Amphibious capability for a vehicle is now noted with text in the Vehicle Info Panel.
Micro UAVs will no longer make a large explosion when they crash.
BM Oplot tank is now equipped with TIUS-NM navigation support system.
FIXED: Various crashes.
FIXED: Elevation changes improperly calculated in some maps under specific circumstances.
FIXED: A variety of bugs caused by vehicles moving onto or under bridges.
FIXED: An independent house had a couple windows that could not be seen through.
Quote from: Elvis on May 02, 2015, 11:25:09 AM
Quote from: RyanE on May 02, 2015, 05:47:54 AM
The 1.03 patch was released last night. Fixes a bunch of things, but not much beyond that. BFC stated this is the last being done on CMBS for a while, so enjoy.
Here's the list:
QuoteINFANTRY WEAPONS:
Makarov pistol ammunition is now listed as "9mm".
RPG-7 rounds now self-detonate at a distance of 920 meters.
The dismounted AT-14 Kornet can now be fired from inside buildings, albeit with a suppression penalty.
The M25 CDTE is now better at estimating range, allowing it to more accurately airburst rounds over walls.
Under barrel rifle grenade launcher (M320, GP-25, GP-30) grenadiers are now better at "dialing in" the range to target, allowing them to fire more accurately adjust range after firing successive grenades at the target.
FIXED: Incorrect muzzle flash for SVD and PSR rifles.
FIXED: Problems with max detection range of some US Army infantry thermal weapon sights.
FIXED: Javelin missile would appear a meter to the right of the tube when the launcher was facing a specific cardinal direction.
FIXED: Tripod-mounted M240L machineguns had to pause firing every 50 rounds, as opposed to every 200 rounds.
VEHICLE WEAPONS:
Previously overly restricted BM Oplot AAMG should now be able to fire over most of the frontal arc of the vehicle.
BMP-2M and BTR-82A now use the same modernized 30mm APFSDS ammunition as the BMP-3M.
US now uses only HEDP grenades for Mk.19 grenade launcher. HE grenades have been removed.
Russian 12.7mm ammo is now AP-I, instead of AP.
Vehicle airburst rounds are now better at estimating range, allowing them to more accurately airburst rounds over walls.
FIXED: Humvee-mounted US Army .50 caliber machineguns were using Mk. 211 ammunition instead of AP-I.
FIXED: T-72 rotating cupola with attached AAMG failing to rotate and use the MG.
FIXED: Rare issue that could cause ATGMs from a vehicle to consistently swerve off course.
FIXED: Vehicles firing a direct trajectory gun (such as APFSDS ammo) at the same elevation as the target were occasionally hitting the target's top armor or hull deck.
VEHICLE PROTECTION:
All T-90 variants have increased hull side protection.
All T-90 variants have slightly increased front hull armor protection.
BM Oplot lower front hull armor protection was slightly reduced.
The T-90AM now simulates 10 main gun rounds being protected in a turret bustle with blow out panels. In effect this will make the T-90AM somewhat less prone than the T-90A and T-72 to catastrophic explosions after being penetrated.
The single layer of Abrams turret side ERA (M32 scutum ERA tiles) is now less effective against tandem HEAT warheads.
Duplet ERA on BM Oplot tanks is now more effective against tandem HEAT warheads.
FIXED: ERA on a few vehicles occasionally not functioning properly.
FIXED: Some rare issues with T-72B3, T-90AM, and BM Oplot armor protection.
FIXED: Occasional issue where a tank's frontal hit location would be reported incorrectly.
FIXED: Issues with smoke grenade launchers for some Russian vehicles, causing them to form insufficient smoke screens to their front.
FIXED: Shtora deploying smoke grenades twice in a row.
FIRE SUPPORT:
The flight path of Air-to-Surface Missiles (ASMs) such as the Hellfire now have a steeper attack angle, removing their vulnerability to active protection systems and making them less likely to hit terrain obstacles.
Krasnopol precision artillery round accuracy has been slightly increased, while Excalibur accuracy has been slightly reduced.
Electronic Warfare settings of Medium or higher will no longer prevent laser-guided precision artillery missions from happening. These missions will continue to suffer the usual delivery time penalties due to communications interference.
AAA fire (such as the cannon fire from Tunguskas) can now be seen in the sky by the enemy when they are fired at aircraft. This matches the current behavior of SAMs.
UNIT BEHAVIOR:
Troops will now "Cower" less readily after being shot at if they are in a low suppression state.
Small arms fire and ricochets from friendly units will no longer cause units using the Hunt command to stop moving.
Units are better at targeting the exposed portions of a hulldown vehicle.
Units with handheld AT weapons are more willing to attack APS-equipped vehicles on their own without needing an explicit Target command.
IFVs (such as BMPs or Bradleys) are now better at choosing the optimal weapon system for engaging enemy IFVs. In most cases this means that they will favor immediate use of autocannons over ATGMs.
FIXED: Vehicles with a dismounting vehicle commander (such as a BMP's squad leader who also doubles as a vehicle commander) not getting the proper benefit of having a trained crew commander when the leader was in the vehicle.
FIXED: Passengers in the bed of a M1152 Humvee not recognized as valid small arms targets.
FIXED: Infantry on the move that had their next waypoint adjusted would sometimes turn around and run back to the last waypoint before continuing with their orders.
QUICK BATTLES:
All vehicles equipped with Active Protection Systems (APS) now also cost Rarity points in Quick Battles, which under normal settings will further limit the amount that can be purchased.
A variety of IFVs and APCs with advanced sensor and defensive systems now cost more points in relation to older vehicles with less sophisticated equipment (such as thermals and night vision).
Russian vehicles equipped with APS now cost less points in Quick Battles, bringing the cost of APS in line with equivalent US Army systems.
T-90AM now costs more points in Quick Battles relative to the T-90A.
Most infantry units now cost less points in Quick Battles.
FIXED: Attacker Electronic Warfare setting in Quick Battles would apply to both sides.
ARTWORK:
US Soldiers now visually carry their pistols in thigh drop holsters.
Russian and Ukrainian rifle grenadiers equipped with GP-25 and GP-30 grenade launchers now use a unique hand grip animation.
More vehicles and weapons have normal maps.
Numerous tweaks to vehicle 3D models.
Russian night vision goggles are now worn over the left eye.
FIXED: Some black textures: gear stowed in back of UAZ 469 appearing as black, M1152 steering wheel, Igla-S missile, and occasionally Ukrainian tanker helmets.
FIXED: Some buildings in a small number of maps had an invisible second floor.
MISC:
Removed laser designator from Russian recon squads.
Amphibious capability for a vehicle is now noted with text in the Vehicle Info Panel.
Micro UAVs will no longer make a large explosion when they crash.
BM Oplot tank is now equipped with TIUS-NM navigation support system.
FIXED: Various crashes.
FIXED: Elevation changes improperly calculated in some maps under specific circumstances.
FIXED: A variety of bugs caused by vehicles moving onto or under bridges.
FIXED: An independent house had a couple windows that could not be seen through.
Do you mind if I check with JD and con? I'm personally in no rush
Unless I can make 2 exes one upgraded one not
I can up-grade but I have another PBEM game going as well so I need to check with that person also
Thanks
Con
Let's make this the meeting place to decide I'm happy either way as long as you an jomni are
I'm not fussed. If you want to upgrade, I will do so. If you want to hold off - I will do so. :)
Remember, if you're updating in mid-game, save the game during the orders phase in the old version. Then complete the turn in the new version before sending. Not every patch requires this but better safe than sorry.
Great News. Thanks for the heads up.
@Elvis
If I delete the CMSF localisation folders - fichiers de jeu, archivos de jeugo, spieldatien etc, will it affect any multiplayer games I have with French/German/Spanish opponents? I suspect they are redundant files, but please confirm. Thanks.
Quote from: undercovergeek on May 02, 2015, 02:23:19 PM
Let's make this the meeting place to decide I'm happy either way as long as you an jomni are
our game is ending anyway. We can keep the same version.
UCG are you using CM Helper? Its a great tool for keeping all the turns synced up.
You can find it at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jvh9sx2zla2k0eq/S6LZaVAw_7
I highly highly recommend this if you are doing PBEM it is a fantastic little tool for keeping track of all the PBEM games and emails and syncing everything up through dropbox.
Con
Definately true! And Con, once the storm settles down here I will be right back at commanding the German defense of our game!
Quote from: Con on May 02, 2015, 06:51:33 PM
UCG are you using CM Helper? Its a great tool for keeping all the turns synced up.
You can find it at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jvh9sx2zla2k0eq/S6LZaVAw_7
I highly highly recommend this if you are doing PBEM it is a fantastic little tool for keeping track of all the PBEM games and emails and syncing everything up through dropbox.
Con
Thanks for that - grabbed it myself. It instantly recognised my dropbox and PBEM folders
Yeah I'm all helpered up
Same edition it is then - it been a great game jomni, short and violent and I'm sorry to the residents of the village
I just checked with the other player I am going against in CMBS and we agreed to keep it the same addition. We are in the overtime period so this should end pretty soon. Having played both sides now I would say that the US has some decided advantages against the Ruskies.
Con
Quote from: Con on May 03, 2015, 08:59:39 AM
I just checked with the other player I am going against in CMBS and we agreed to keep it the same addition. We are in the overtime period so this should end pretty soon. Having played both sides now I would say that the US has some decided advantages against the Ruskies.
Con
Oh bugger! >:D
Quote from: JudgeDredd on May 03, 2015, 09:44:43 AM
Quote from: Con on May 03, 2015, 08:59:39 AM
I just checked with the other player I am going against in CMBS and we agreed to keep it the same addition. We are in the overtime period so this should end pretty soon. Having played both sides now I would say that the US has some decided advantages against the Ruskies.
Con
Oh bugger! >:D
Makes you wonder how many copies of this game were purchased by the Russian Military to 'try out' US kit and look for weaknesses.
Quote from: Con on May 02, 2015, 06:51:33 PM
UCG are you using CM Helper? Its a great tool for keeping all the turns synced up.
You can find it at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jvh9sx2zla2k0eq/S6LZaVAw_7
I highly highly recommend this if you are doing PBEM it is a fantastic little tool for keeping track of all the PBEM games and emails and syncing everything up through dropbox.
Con
Nice one Con! O0
Thanks Con! Looks very useful!
Quote from: Staggerwing on May 03, 2015, 09:53:33 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on May 03, 2015, 09:44:43 AM
Quote from: Con on May 03, 2015, 08:59:39 AM
I just checked with the other player I am going against in CMBS and we agreed to keep it the same addition. We are in the overtime period so this should end pretty soon. Having played both sides now I would say that the US has some decided advantages against the Ruskies.
Con
Oh bugger! >:D
Makes you wonder how many copies of this game were purchased by the Russian Military to 'try out' US kit and look for weaknesses.
Well its not all bad I think I am giving UCG a pretty bloody nose. He might push me off some objectives but it is costing him a lot of casualties
Con
Pffft they're just flesh wounds and good acting to lull you into a false sense of security - besides, I'm the king of the weather station now! :P
I notice your blazing US Strykers give off a much more sparkly expensive kind of roiling black smoke. Almost like they are made of combustible stacks of 1000 dollar bills. ;D
Con
Quote from: undercovergeek on May 03, 2015, 12:00:50 PM
Pffft they're just flesh wounds and good acting to lull you into a false sense of security - besides, I'm the king of the weather station now! :P
'Tis but a scratch! UCG as the Black Knight vs Con as King Arthur! ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjEcj8KpuJw
Quote from: Con on May 03, 2015, 12:21:52 PM
I notice your blazing US Strykers give off a much more sparkly expensive kind of roiling black smoke. Almost like they are made of combustible stacks of 1000 dollar bills. ;D
Con
lmao, indeed, as opposed to those cheap ass tin cans youre rolling around in - honestly its like playing against the Orks!
Quote from: Boggit on May 03, 2015, 12:35:14 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on May 03, 2015, 12:00:50 PM
Pffft they're just flesh wounds and good acting to lull you into a false sense of security - besides, I'm the king of the weather station now! :P
'Tis but a scratch! UCG as the Black Knight vs Con as King Arthur! ;)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjEcj8KpuJw
ha, exactly this!
Quote from: JudgeDredd on May 03, 2015, 12:44:07 AM
Quote from: Con on May 02, 2015, 06:51:33 PM
UCG are you using CM Helper? Its a great tool for keeping all the turns synced up.
You can find it at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/jvh9sx2zla2k0eq/S6LZaVAw_7
I highly highly recommend this if you are doing PBEM it is a fantastic little tool for keeping track of all the PBEM games and emails and syncing everything up through dropbox.
Con
Thanks for that - grabbed it myself. It instantly recognised my dropbox and PBEM folders
cool - so, you can see the bit that says its your turn then ^-^
oops
lol, im taking the piss, id hate to be that guy - wheres my turn, wheres my turn!!
when youre ready matey
Is the website down? Not responding at my end. I'm ready to patch. :knuppel2:
Quote from: jomni on May 04, 2015, 05:38:39 PM
Is the website down? Not responding at my end. I'm ready to patch. :knuppel2:
I am unable to access www.battlefront.com. Just the forums in my PC. Though I can access it using my phone when not in Wifi using my telco. Any ideas what is happening?
Comes up fine for me. Your broadband provider must be having some random snafu.
That's it. I'M DONE WITH BATTLEFRONT. They blocked my IP again. I think this is the 3rd time.
Well what do you know. I can access it again after ranting.
Quote from: undercovergeek on May 03, 2015, 03:21:08 PM
lol, im taking the piss, id hate to be that guy - wheres my turn, wheres my turn!!
when youre ready matey
I guessed that - but it is an "oops" moment 'cos I don't do alot of PBEM and without a notification I've been forgetting to check.
It might take a few turns to "get in the groove"