As the night sky pales over a dusty plateau near Damascus, two Wolf Land Rovers and two Jackal patrol vehicles parked in the lee of a ruined wall, start their engines and move off in search of the enemy. My first Combat Mission Shock Force: British Forces battle is underway. Wish me luck.
The scenario, plucked at random from the 28 available in the preview version of this second CMSF expansion pack, is called Out of the Wilderness and seems straightforward enough on paper. C Company Group – a scratch expeditionary force combining mechanized infantry and light recon elements – has been tasked with taking positions on the south-eastern fringe of the Syrian capital (CMSF models a hypothetical near-future invasion of Syria). Information on opposition strength is sketchy, but the briefing mentions “a handful of second echelon reserves” so I’m anticipating wall-to-wall tanks and hordes of elite Republican Guard cyborgs. First rule of Combat Mission: Never trust the briefing writers.
Turn 1. The bulk of my forces won’t arrive for a few turns, so I’m going to kick things off by using the Jackals and Land Rovers to scout the plateau. As both vehicle types might as well be made from twiglets and moth wings for all the protection they afford their crews, caution will be the watchword for this stage of the operation.
Turn 3. The southern area of the plateau appears to be foe-free. Close to the edge, the Land Rovers disgorge a sniper and Javelin missile team who creep forward taking up useful overwatch positions. Perhaps when the sun comes up there’ll be targets visible in the streets and fields below. On the eastern section of the plateau things are a little livelier. The lone Jackal sent this way spots and briefly engages a Sagger ATGM team before popping smoke and reversing to safety. I’ll need to neutralise cunningly sited tank killers like these before entering the suburb.
Turn 4. Didn’t expect that. My Jav team decided to have a pop at their freshly spotted Syrian counterparts. The resulting kaboom looked lethal, but being CM I’ve no idea whether the targets are dead or just temporarily cowering.
Turn 6. The first half of my strike force arrives. Painted pink by the rays of the rising sun, are a group of three fully loaded Spartan APCs, more Wolf Land Rovers (with another Javelin team and a mortar fire controller aboard) plus a trio of handsome Scimitar light tanks . I’m not going to throw the Scimitars into the fray until I have a better idea what I’m up against, but the Spartans I send scurrying eastward to tackle those pesky Sagger louts (who may already be dead).
Turn 8. As the Spartan passengers dismount and start advancing, the mortar fire controllers, now ensconced on the plateau edge, call in an artillery barrage on the nearest objective, a fortress-like police compound. Many CMSF scenarios have ‘preserve’ rules in the victory conditions meaning you can’t stonk the sherbet out of urban areas. This scenario has no such constraints so I plan to make full use of the three artillery batteries (1 x 88mm, 2 x 155mm) at my disposal. I hope those Ba’athists down there like the taste of brick dust.
Turn 10. As the shells start dropping, the rest of my troops show up. A platoon of assault pioneers in Land Rovers, more squaddy-stuffed APCs (FV432s) and a pair of strange-looking trundlers that turn out to be Sultans. I was hoping the designer might have slipped in the odd Challenger 2 tank or Warrior IFV, but no, it looks like I’m going to have to make do with a fleet of glorified mini-buses.
Turn 14. The infantry moving up the east side of the plateau have just had a very close shave with a Sagger missile. There looks to be a clutch of AT positions up there, not just one. Time to give the mortars a bell, I think.
Turn 16. The police compound is now wreathed in dust, and ringed by rubble rather than walls. A couple of the smaller buildings have been totally levelled. One more salvo and I think it will be safe to move in. Meanwhile up at Sagger Corner, mortar bombs are airbursting over the Syrian trenches yet somehow a few of the defenders are still perky enough to exchange rifle fire with my grunts. Depressingly, at least three of the AK rounds have found flesh. One yellow dot, two red. My first casualties of the battle.
Turn 17. Pricked into boldness by last turn’s losses, I send a Scimitar scampering towards the action. The boys up there need support. I just hope all those Saggers are kaput and none of the Syrians thought to bring RPG-7s.
Turn 19. The police compound may be a cratered ruin, but I’m still worried about crossing the open ground in front it. Possible solution? Lay a corridor of smoke from plateau to compound and race my FV432s in under its swirling veil.
Turn 21. That Scimitar together with further shrapnel showers seems to have turned the tide at Sagger Corner. Time to shift attention to the police base.
Turn 22. With the curtain of smoke in place, a quartet of squat FV432s storm down the plateau slope and make for the shelter of the compound. As they slam on the anchors and start spilling their soldier cargoes, one catches an RPG in the side and is instantly immobilised. Despite the fierce bombardment, it seems there are still fighters alive inside the complex.
Turn 24. One of the two Jav teams I’ve now got positioned on the plateau rim, spots a T-72 lurking in the fields at the back of the map and takes a shot. Watching one of these missiles soar skyward then plunge onto its prey like a stooping raptor, is one of CMSF’s most satisfying sights.
Turn 25. Seconds later I’m remembering why CMSF still gets my goat at times. The assault on the police compound went rather well – just a handful of light casualties plus that immobilised APC. However, as the troops advance, clearing the remaining buildings, one section decides to route outside the compound instead of inside it. Within seconds an entire eight man section is laying dead or wounded, cut down by the same gleeful MG. Yes, I probably could have avoided the carnage by using another waypoint or movement type, but blimey, shouldn’t the TacAI have helped out there?
Turn 29. As the light improves, my troops spot and engage more and more targets. The Syrians also seem to be seeing further. Without warning both of my Jav teams are shaken by sizeable explosions. Some men don’t get up. Was it artillery? Tank fire? It’s hard to tell. Up at Sagger Corner, the last of the ATGM team survivors is wiped out and, moving up to occupy their corpse-littered positions, my men find themselves looking down on a second T-72. This one loiters menacingly in a field behind the mosque.
Turn 33. Time to pull back the battered Jav teams, load them in a Land Rover (thanks to the losses they’ll now fit in a single vehicle) and send them along the plateau to Sagger Corner to take on the newly sighted steel beast.
Turn 35. It’s all over in a second. The T-72 perishes in a flash of fire and smoke. Rather implausibly three crewman clamber from its carcass and dive into a nearby ditch.
Turn 40. Time is marching on. Must start tightening the vice – pushing eastward from the police compound and west from Sagger Corner.
Turn 42. Dust trails pluming behind them, the assault pioneers sweep down from the plateau in their Wolves. The safe ground behind the police compound is becoming quite the taxi rank.
Turn 50. Despite brutal artillery bombardment the enemy clings stubbornly to positions in the suburb. Around the police compound progress is painfully slow and not without cost. Frustrated I move a Scimitar up a narrow track on the western edge of the map. It’s greeted with a rocket-propelled ‘hello’ that, thankfully, misses by a whisker.
Turn 52. The same tank has just been shaken by a near miss from a wayward round fired by one of my own 155mm guns. Calling in artillery in such claustrophobic fighting is a risky business.
Turn 54. Third time unlucky. In my haste to grab the two remaining victory locations (road intersections on the northern edge of the map) I put the western Scimitar under the crosshairs of a previously undetected enemy grenadier. Result – one dead AFV and three crewman pinned by MG fire in the middle of a road. Damn. By the time one of my HQs has used its squad mortar (yep, they’re back) to lay down a protective smokescreen, two of the tankers are no more.
Turn 55. That lost Scimitar is the final straw. From now on I’m not taking any more chances with the lives of my men. Let the 155mm Sky Gods carve a path to victory.
Turn 57. CRUMP-CRUMP-CRUMP-CRUMP
Turn 60. CRUMP-CRUMP-CRUMP
Turn 62. Syrians fleeing from the hard rain are cut down as they run.
Turn 64. CRUMP-CRUMP-CRUMP-CRUMPITY-CRUMP
Turn 67. God. This is murder.
Turn 68. CRUMP-CRUMP-CRUMP
Turn 70. With the clock ticking down and desultory fire still coming from scattered Syrian positions amongst the craters, I realise I’m going to have to end the battle with an ignominious VL grab. Two Scimitars race along the back road, slewing to a stop on the all-important intersections then surrounding themselves in smoke. It’s a shameful, gamey way to end a battle, but hey, if that’s what it takes to keep my casualty figures down, then so be it.
The debrief says I achieved a ‘Major Victory’. Looking at those accusing ‘17 Men Killed’ and ’23 Men Wounded’ statistics I honestly don’t feel very victorious.
GG though.
Related Stories:
I think the AAR shows both the best and worst bits of CMSF. The best bits are undoubtedly the graphics and the vehicles. They are a leap forward over CM-1 ones. And the worst bits are definitely the infantry, AI and commands.
Tanks and Armour look good, feel solid, move well and fight well and although armour and penetration values are guessed at, you feel as if BF has gotten them about right and thats half the battle in convincing me of reality. The other graphocs, while not being state of the art, are a great leap forwards as the desert looks good and buildings feel more solid.
The downside for me then is the infantry. We have what I like to call a representative 1-1 representation of an actual 1-1. You can see them all, but they arent where the PC sees them all. This coupled with the fact that the infantry dont actually behave like real infantry kind of spoils the realism. Infantry dont run around in little bunched up groups and their officers dont only have the ‘Hunt, Move, Quick’ commands to give them. Infantry use formations and Infantry have their own IA (Immediate Action) drills for certain situations.
Dont get me wrong, SF is a step in the right direction of realism, but until 1-1 representation arrives for real and each soldier is tracked in space and can carry out some basic actions, then what came before is always better, that is squad abstraction.
In sum. If you want to run around as the mighty West blowing the crap out of a 1970’s Army then this is the game for you. If you want a tactical challenge of pitting 2 evenly matched forces together then try CM-1 games.
However, the game is enjoyable and I would definitely recomment anyone trying the demo, or even buying the original SF which comes at about $5 these days and for that price is definitely worth it.
Burntfork says: The infantry in real life all have assault rifles firing the same ammunition, with roughly the same mix of similar special weapons, wear similar body armour and have similar ancillary equipment. Therefore if the game indicates radical differences then that would be an indication that it isn’t a good simulation. The differences in establishments (TsO&E) should make a difference to the playing style.
Where there are tanks, these always dominate, from WW1 to the present day. Expecting otherwise is silly. If you want infantry, play an infantry game.
******************************************
This isn’t remotely true. Armored divisions made up perhaps 10 percent of the total strength of any of the armies in World War II, and with the increased cost per unit for AFVs, tanks are about as rare today, particularly with the types of missions that first world armies are being employed in (counter-insurgency, “three block war”, etc.) So your argument is that CM:SF is accurately depicting modern warfare by showing only tanks, it is only doing about 10 percent of its job.
But we know that it isn’t because battlefront itself is selling the game based on its depiction of infantry. CM:SF IS an infantry game – it’s about the Stryker brigades, always has been. The draw was supposed to be the 1:1 rep of the soldiers, not the tank vs. tank combat. If the game was supposed to be tank vs. tank action, they would have picked better matchups than M1A2 Abrams vs. 1970s Red Army surplus. The front cover of the box shows GIs advancing with purpose with their Strykers in support. CM:SF IS an infantry game. Just because you use it as a tank simulator doesn’t mean that is what it was intended as. In fact, it pretty much supports the notion that, in fact, the game fails in its intended purpose.
No one seems to realize that BFC is a small company, and companies need to make money. If they spent the time to add everything a small group of consumers want not only would CM:SF still not be released, but no one would be able to run it either.
Also, JC, a module is the equivalent an expansions, and expansions usually include a new race, and a new campaign. It is rare for an expansion to bring about a radical change in gameplay or environment.
Additionally, if anyone finds the Syrians lacking you can play Syrian Vs. Syrian battles, and Blue v. Blue battles.
One last thing, Josh mesmo, CM:SF depicts a modern war between NATO and Syria, and associated indigenous fighters. Not the “three block war” or counter insurgency operations.
Additionally, if anyone finds the Syrians lacking you can play Syrian Vs. Syrian battles, and Blue v. Blue battles.
Wow. Who wants to play “weekend training exercise” with me via PBEM? Is that one step up from “Deer Hunter” and “Boy Scout Jamboree”, or two?
One last thing, Josh mesmo, CM:SF depicts a modern war between NATO and Syria, and associated indigenous fighters. Not the “three block war” or counter insurgency operations.
Don’t read my comments about the three block war as confusion about what CM:SF does. Read them again; I said that modern militaries train for a variety of missions. I in no way meant to imply that CM:SF is capable of depicting those missions. It clearly is not, even with the cute little “unconventionals” in their designer jeans and ski masks.
Josh Mesmo, I believe that you are misrepresenting my argument. People are claiming that tanks are powerful and their presence renders the infantry battle moot. My point is that this is what happens in real life as well. By leaving the AFVs out, you can get an infantry centric game.
You stated it quite well, actually. The US Army in CM:SF consists of robot drones running around firing 5.56mm weapons over which you have no control over squad formations, individual battle drills, and have very few options as to how to deploy to do things like clear houses, etc. Basically, you have, run, shoot, hide. The British module will have – wait for it – robot drones running around firing 5.56mm weapons over which the player has no control over squad formations, individual battle drills and have very few options as to how to deploy to do things like…
Well, you get the idea. From the comments I’ve been reading from actual soldiers, none of the in-game battle practices are anything like real. House clearing is one of the big ones that is phony – any FIBUA manual I’ve ever seen (or whatever it is called now) talks about starting from the top floor and working down. You blow holes in walls and go through them rather than using doors. You assault rooms in pairs, not entire squads. None of this is in the game. It’s all homogenized – again, you can have fun with it, but every army does things differently, and if the point is to make money off the different flavours, how do you do that if the only functional differences are different clothes and funny talking voices in the sound files?
The infantry-centric game you mention is as dull as dishwater because there are no details in it, and it is unrealistic to boot.
Tanks don’t render the infantry battle moot, they render the infantry battle a colossal yawner which is why few bother to play them.
“TacAI: the bots still happily walk straight into a kill sack, even when they are seeing the mangled remains of fellow soldiers. No solution after how many patches?”
A*, the classic pathfinding algorithm, lets you implement that. Adding “costs” to a node, so the mob will chose a different route. The more teammates death, the more expensive that route.
Tei,
Thank you for your comment.
The A* algorithm has been around for like a decade. Hard to believe that the “increased terrain fidelity” of CMx2 makes it “prohibitively expensive” to implement.
But if BF cannot do it, nobody can. ;)
Cheers,
Josh Mesmo:
I find the infantry battle quite interesting, as it happens. Considering that I generally play as company commander* or higher I think that individual squad formations would be a waste of time and effort, commanding infantry pairs to do any number of pre-determined battle drills would be my idea of dull as reading the entirety of a US army field manual. Differences between forces in the modules have been covered. Some aspects are limited, other aspects have wider scope for variation.
Tei and JC
This A* algorithm sounds interesting, but how do you define nodes or routes?(that’s where the terrain fidelity is liable to cause problems) How does it account for the situations where you can “bull through” compared to when a different route would be more sensible.
* Considering that this is what most scenarios are designed around.
burntfork misses the point entirely. The point isn’t to command individuals and pairs, the point is to see them operate as they are trained in real life, instead of staggering around as if drunk, running in circles, etc. Just admit that you are “playing army men” just the same as a six year old girl in knee pants throwing rocks at her brothers toys in the sandbox. That’s about as realistic as CM:SF is. You haven’t offered a single thing in defence of it other than “I like it.” And as I stated in every one of my posts, “I don’t care”, and if you do like it, I think that’s great. Just stop pretending that CM:SF is something it’s not. It’s designed to make noise and make people like you – who clearly don’t know any better – think they have a detailed simulation in their hands. You don’t. You have a noisemaker that keeps you occupied with flashes and bangs. And that’s ok. I still play checkers once inawhile too. You just don’t see me on the Internet desperate to convince other people that it is actually chess.
Well thank you for taking an adult stance Master Mesmo.
My view is that the TacAI should take care of the soldiers actions rather than asking the commander to deal with every single aspect of micro-management.
“From the comments I’ve been reading from actual soldiers” Please. Is that some kind of ex cathedra argument?
I do like CM:SF. I also think that it is the most realistic game in its class. You’ll probably ignore that realistic is a relative term rather than an absolute because that would detract from your apparent hobby of chasing it around the internet making disparaging remarks about it. Presumably because it’s something that you cannot do, but I am no psychoanalyst.