Great AAR Going up against the US in SF2 is a daunting task even with another bluefor force. Javelins are just so damn powerful that they largely influence where and how you can fight. In this instance even letting a single javelin team get onto the central hill would have practically guaranteed a defeat. And as the germans there simply isnt an equivalent especially with the milan getting a 400m min range for some reason. Im looking forward to trying again at some point though. If youre interested i happen to have next month off due to current events.
@@karlhungus545 You dont. It just requires smart manouvering and good application of artillery to counter. In this battle for example it made the central hill an extremely important position for me to deny Hapless or all my vehicles will get picked off by javelins which in turn would mean no ability for me to counter his tanks as the german army cant really rely on the milan to deal with abrams as it cant pen the front and since they gave it an unrealistically lont initial range it cant really flankshot. On the flipside if i did have javelins that armour push would have failed spectacularly though i doubt Hapless would have attempted it if i did.
@@holoween8103 Yes, but it's a lot of extra work/planning for the player without the javelins and can lead to 'you only won because you had javelins'. Either limit the javelins or the other side doesn't get Abrams, that levels the playing field a bit more.
@@karlhungus545 Both sides have enough tools to win the game they just fight differently. Just how you have to adapt your gameplan as americans vs germans in the ww2 titles.
i worked for a Marine tanker on a B billet. he said the Corps always treats tanks like hookers - they don't want to have them around but when you do want them they don't really want to pay for them.
James Duston Gen Berger is making tough choices to take the Corps to 2030. The F35 is a far more strategic asset than the puny number of tanks we owned. The F35 can self deploy across the Pacific. Tanks can’t get the stratlift to get to the fight in time. If you want to talk budget waster - AAAV!!!
I think if the USMC is making procurement decisions based on youtube videos then they have bigger problems. That said... I think that whether the Marines should have their own tanks depends on what role they want. If they want to be the USN's pocket army, then they need tanks. If they want to go down the hyper light infantry-SF route, then they probably don't need tanks.
It's actually somewhat different. It's not "Tanks vs F-35", but rather a complete changing of the way they intend to fight wars. No longer are they going to be focused on being able to perform a massed amphibious landing of a division(-) (two MEBs) in the first wave. If you read the 2030 Force Design Document they just released, (and I suggest you do it's quite fascinating), the Commandant is much more focused on much smaller scale operations, hopping around islands in the South China Sea, deploying anti-ship missiles and SAM batteries on said islands and then running away to another one in another day or two, so they can never get hammered down. The Commandant wants to divest a ton of current capability to free up funding to research, develop, and procure the necessary systems to allow for that form of warfare.
Excellent video! I'd love to see you go Red v Red in CMSF2, especially with lower quality formations and older armor variants. The lethality and approach are more similar to WWII with just enough modern amenities like ATGMs and automatic weapons to make things interesting.
Mayor failure by the German player was to get the tank commanders out of tank, the leo2 has two thermals. gunner and commander thermal but when the commander is out of the hatch he cant operate his own thermals. He would have spottet the enemy m1´s much faster. This is not WW2 and you never unbotten your tank commander. NEVER, EVER!
if your tank is old garbage like the t55 ,t62 and etc, with no fancy optics you have to unbutton the tank commander in order to actually see someone. also when you have any tank some times is better to unbutton commander so he can have a better view whats going on.
Been a while since I've had the chance to sit down and watch you, glad I found the time for this one. You templated very well and as you conclude yourself it paid off in spades. Loved that aggression once your opponent punched himself out.
I've played the demos, and I find the awkwardness of the interface and the poor performance of the engine to be a real pain in the butt. At the cost, I didn't find it worth it. (Hapless makes it look painless.) I just stick with the free version of SPWAW and the Enhanced mod. It may be 20 years old, but it's still in my top 3 videogames.
@@cf453 Yeah I had real difficulty finding enjoyment in the latest demo. Maybe with more playtime I would find it enjoyable, but it somehow still feels like something out of the 90's.
@@cf453 A fellow SP freak! Played Spwaw for years but after the Enhanced mod came out most scenarios weren't updated to accommodate it. Switched to Shrapnel Games' WinSpwww2 and MBT from Camo Workshop. It's been patched annually with lots of new stuff added, especially for disc or paid DL owners. Been playing those games on free DL for at least ten years now. Not as realistic as CM in many ways but can't beat the cost--nada!
Bonus points for including a reference to General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett, VC, KCB, DSO. Also the Leo bulk ammunition stowage is in the hull front (beside the driver) so the partial penetration probably initiated secondary explosions.
@@usuallyhapless9481 Yes its a trade off (at least in RL). Leo 2 reloads quicker, but accepts risk in that the turret needs to traverse to about 5 o'clock relative to the axis of hull (so do it in dead ground). M1 family can reload with turret at 12 o'clock but is slower, due to the safety panels, lock outs, etc. Can't remember if CMSF models any of that though.
Excellent stuff! I would definitely enjoy seeing more Blue on Blue stuff in the future! Seems like we could get some good, more balanced SF2 content! Say, the Dutch vs the British?
@@usuallyhapless9481 Warrior vs anything more modern than a BMP-2 is an awful matchup for the Brits, as it is in real life. Considering the major concessions made within its design to fit Britain's minimal defense spending in the 1970s and 80s, that's to be expected. Lack of stabilization, power elevation, and proper ammunition feeds is rather a killer. The new upgrade can't come soon enough.
Hey Hapless, I love the AARs you do. Do you have a video on how to do terrain analysis? Also, how much time do you spend on terrain analysis for a given game? Just curious... I love CM but have a hard time wanting to invest a lot of time in terrain analysis yet from what I've seen of your videos it's an essential task to obtaining victory. Any quick analysis tips for players short on time? You seem to see things that I don't even consider half the time.
Its actually a pretty tough thing to explain: it's definitely something on my list of things to make a video on. In the meantime: the Defence of Duffer's Drift is a good start. Its over a century old, so its out of copyright: www.gutenberg.org/files/24842/24842-h/24842-h.htm
@@TheCartoonHead I'm quoting a line from the 1970 film Patton. However, Rommel did author a book on infantry tactics in 1937, aptly titled "Infantry Attacks".
Yeah, I've templated it. So from what I've seen, I think there is a German Mechanised Infantry Company out there, which has 3 platoons: that's my "template". I've seen one platoon on my left and one platoon on the hill, so if I'm seeing some Mech Inf activity on the far right, that must be where the 3rd platoon is.
little simulations and war games such as this prove why the tank is still viable on the battlefield. if used correctly with other assets, it fills a role thats extremely hard to replace.
24min in and this is super messy and nasty. I guess that's what happens when two strong military forces square off. Good job tho so far. Really making the best out of a bad hand.
A awesome Blue V Blue battle that I would love to see is a us marine assault vs a random NATO faction on the day at the beach map. That would be awesome!
Thanks for your excellent videos. The only major issue I have with the modern war Battlefront games is that artillery hits/near misses don't destroy/damage armoured vehicles, inc tanks. This is not realistic, as there is plentiful evidence from WW2 onwards that armoured vehicles do suffer major damage from artillery. Unfortunately the BF team often are deaf to evidence, presented to them. I've had, on all sorts of different forces, direct hits on vehicles that they have suffered minimal or zero damage - e.g. a Bradley, which had a 122mm round explode underneath it, [e.g. completely penetrated through], which is wrong.
Usually Hapless i don’t know if current Marines even know about it because I believe that was when C rations had canned apricots. You won’t find any in an MRE! SF
These PVP matches really convince me that PVP maps should be symmetrical, in order to avoid giving one side a disproportionate advantage. Sure, it's not realistic, but neither is it that both you and your enemy are going to start deploying at the same time, with roughly equal forces on both sides. Leave the unbalanced maps to PVE, pr as challenge maps. Sometimes, balance is more important then realism on every level. Keep in mind, the fact that all of the information is processed by a giant mastermind(the player) isn't realistic either.
Great AAR
Going up against the US in SF2 is a daunting task even with another bluefor force. Javelins are just so damn powerful that they largely influence where and how you can fight.
In this instance even letting a single javelin team get onto the central hill would have practically guaranteed a defeat. And as the germans there simply isnt an equivalent especially with the milan getting a 400m min range for some reason.
Im looking forward to trying again at some point though. If youre interested i happen to have next month off due to current events.
Yah, you have to agree not to use Javelins in order for it to be a fair/fun fight.
@@karlhungus545 You dont. It just requires smart manouvering and good application of artillery to counter. In this battle for example it made the central hill an extremely important position for me to deny Hapless or all my vehicles will get picked off by javelins which in turn would mean no ability for me to counter his tanks as the german army cant really rely on the milan to deal with abrams as it cant pen the front and since they gave it an unrealistically lont initial range it cant really flankshot. On the flipside if i did have javelins that armour push would have failed spectacularly though i doubt Hapless would have attempted it if i did.
@@holoween8103 Yes, but it's a lot of extra work/planning for the player without the javelins and can lead to 'you only won because you had javelins'. Either limit the javelins or the other side doesn't get Abrams, that levels the playing field a bit more.
@@karlhungus545 Both sides have enough tools to win the game they just fight differently. Just how you have to adapt your gameplan as americans vs germans in the ww2 titles.
This video came just in time. The USMC just announced that armor battalions are being canned.
i worked for a Marine tanker on a B billet. he said the Corps always treats tanks like hookers - they don't want to have them around but when you do want them they don't really want to pay for them.
It’s disappointing seeing that budget wasters like the F-35 and countless other projects have not been scraped but the Marine’s tanks are.
James Duston Gen Berger is making tough choices to take the Corps to 2030. The F35 is a far more strategic asset than the puny number of tanks we owned. The F35 can self deploy across the Pacific. Tanks can’t get the stratlift to get to the fight in time. If you want to talk budget waster - AAAV!!!
I think if the USMC is making procurement decisions based on youtube videos then they have bigger problems. That said... I think that whether the Marines should have their own tanks depends on what role they want. If they want to be the USN's pocket army, then they need tanks. If they want to go down the hyper light infantry-SF route, then they probably don't need tanks.
It's actually somewhat different. It's not "Tanks vs F-35", but rather a complete changing of the way they intend to fight wars. No longer are they going to be focused on being able to perform a massed amphibious landing of a division(-) (two MEBs) in the first wave. If you read the 2030 Force Design Document they just released, (and I suggest you do it's quite fascinating), the Commandant is much more focused on much smaller scale operations, hopping around islands in the South China Sea, deploying anti-ship missiles and SAM batteries on said islands and then running away to another one in another day or two, so they can never get hammered down. The Commandant wants to divest a ton of current capability to free up funding to research, develop, and procure the necessary systems to allow for that form of warfare.
Excellent video! I'd love to see you go Red v Red in CMSF2, especially with lower quality formations and older armor variants. The lethality and approach are more similar to WWII with just enough modern amenities like ATGMs and automatic weapons to make things interesting.
Come to think of it, I can't believe I haven't done any Red vs Red yet. Like you say: its an interesting middle ground.
I second this idea.
This is a fantastic idea. I'd love to see this.
By far your best Shock Force 2 AAR yet! This was the ultimate tug of war.
Mayor failure by the German player was to get the tank commanders out of tank, the leo2 has two thermals. gunner and commander thermal but when the commander is out of the hatch he cant operate his own thermals. He would have spottet the enemy m1´s much faster. This is not WW2 and you never unbotten your tank commander. NEVER, EVER!
if your tank is old garbage like the t55 ,t62 and etc, with no fancy optics you have to unbutton the tank commander in order to actually see someone.
also when you have any tank some times is better to unbutton commander so he can have a better view whats going on.
@@Arthsycz ya i know people who were in armored who said they did unbutton and that eastern bloc have different rules on it.
UK doctrine is hatch open until you go into urban or the main gun needs to fire
Wow, was this exciting to watch! A hard fought victory, for sure. I'm loving how you opened this one, too. Nice win!
Brutal,
Bloody,
Brilliant.
Keep em coming hapless.
Great work as usual. Love that high overhead view starting at 16:25
I'd love to see an unskipped version of these!
Good vid!
Been a while since I've had the chance to sit down and watch you, glad I found the time for this one. You templated very well and as you conclude yourself it paid off in spades. Loved that aggression once your opponent punched himself out.
Wonderful as always, strategic genius at work!
This is awesome content UH - I'm considering joining the community and picking up CMSF, but I haven't played since Beyond Overlord lol
I'd try the demo first. A LOT has changed since CMBO.
I've played the demos, and I find the awkwardness of the interface and the poor performance of the engine to be a real pain in the butt. At the cost, I didn't find it worth it. (Hapless makes it look painless.) I just stick with the free version of SPWAW and the Enhanced mod. It may be 20 years old, but it's still in my top 3 videogames.
@@cf453 Yeah I had real difficulty finding enjoyment in the latest demo. Maybe with more playtime I would find it enjoyable, but it somehow still feels like something out of the 90's.
@@cf453 A fellow SP freak! Played Spwaw for years but after the Enhanced mod came out most scenarios weren't updated to accommodate it. Switched to Shrapnel Games' WinSpwww2 and MBT from Camo Workshop. It's been patched annually with lots of new stuff added, especially for disc or paid DL owners. Been playing those games on free DL for at least ten years now. Not as realistic as CM in many ways but can't beat the cost--nada!
@@jonshive5482 Thanks for the recommendation, I'll give it a look. :)
Bonus points for including a reference to General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett, VC, KCB, DSO. Also the Leo bulk ammunition stowage is in the hull front (beside the driver) so the partial penetration probably initiated secondary explosions.
That'd make sense, I'm not 100% up on my ammo stowage areas on the Leopards
@@usuallyhapless9481 Yes its a trade off (at least in RL). Leo 2 reloads quicker, but accepts risk in that the turret needs to traverse to about 5 o'clock relative to the axis of hull (so do it in dead ground). M1 family can reload with turret at 12 o'clock but is slower, due to the safety panels, lock outs, etc. Can't remember if CMSF models any of that though.
Great work!
Really enjoyed this, well done.
Excellent stuff! I would definitely enjoy seeing more Blue on Blue stuff in the future! Seems like we could get some good, more balanced SF2 content! Say, the Dutch vs the British?
Its on the card, though I can't see CV90 vs Warrior ending well for the Brits
@@usuallyhapless9481 Warrior vs anything more modern than a BMP-2 is an awful matchup for the Brits, as it is in real life. Considering the major concessions made within its design to fit Britain's minimal defense spending in the 1970s and 80s, that's to be expected. Lack of stabilization, power elevation, and proper ammunition feeds is rather a killer. The new upgrade can't come soon enough.
Hey Hapless, I love the AARs you do. Do you have a video on how to do terrain analysis? Also, how much time do you spend on terrain analysis for a given game? Just curious... I love CM but have a hard time wanting to invest a lot of time in terrain analysis yet from what I've seen of your videos it's an essential task to obtaining victory. Any quick analysis tips for players short on time? You seem to see things that I don't even consider half the time.
Its actually a pretty tough thing to explain: it's definitely something on my list of things to make a video on. In the meantime: the Defence of Duffer's Drift is a good start. Its over a century old, so its out of copyright: www.gutenberg.org/files/24842/24842-h/24842-h.htm
Well played!
"Rommel... you magnificent bastard, I read your book"!
It IS a good book ;)
@@usuallyhapless9481 Sorry to stick my nose in, but can I ask which particular Rommel book you guys are speaking of?
@@TheCartoonHead I'm quoting a line from the 1970 film Patton. However, Rommel did author a book on infantry tactics in 1937, aptly titled "Infantry Attacks".
@@williamlydon2554 thanks, I managed to figure it out a while back and obtained a copy for the reading pile.
That Leopard getting shot through was crazy.
BTW, totally random, but at 28:00 what is it you're saying? The platoon has been "templated"?
Yeah, I've templated it. So from what I've seen, I think there is a German Mechanised Infantry Company out there, which has 3 platoons: that's my "template". I've seen one platoon on my left and one platoon on the hill, so if I'm seeing some Mech Inf activity on the far right, that must be where the 3rd platoon is.
little simulations and war games such as this prove why the tank is still viable on the battlefield. if used correctly with other assets, it fills a role thats extremely hard to replace.
24min in and this is super messy and nasty. I guess that's what happens when two strong military forces square off.
Good job tho so far. Really making the best out of a bad hand.
Yep. Peer-peer warfare is not pretty.
Yess
There was no AAVs in this video, whats the apricots comment about?
I found attacking a King Tiger with Easy8 Shermans more challenging than tackling a Toyota Hilux with an Abrams Tank that is 76 year progress for you.
A awesome Blue V Blue battle that I would love to see is a us marine assault vs a random NATO faction on the day at the beach map. That would be awesome!
Those modern MBT are really tough as nail
Thanks for your excellent videos. The only major issue I have with the modern war Battlefront games is that artillery hits/near misses don't destroy/damage armoured vehicles, inc tanks. This is not realistic, as there is plentiful evidence from WW2 onwards that armoured vehicles do suffer major damage from artillery. Unfortunately the BF team often are deaf to evidence, presented to them. I've had, on all sorts of different forces, direct hits on vehicles that they have suffered minimal or zero damage - e.g. a Bradley, which had a 122mm round explode underneath it, [e.g. completely penetrated through], which is wrong.
For my fellow Cheeseburger, Freedom Loving, Gun totting Mericans, 33 degrees of heat as mention around the 12:45 mark is about 91.4 F = Freedom units
I like the apricot reference. No one will understand.
I'm glad at least one person got it ;)
Usually Hapless i don’t know if current Marines even know about it because I believe that was when C rations had canned apricots. You won’t find any in an MRE! SF
These PVP matches really convince me that PVP maps should be symmetrical, in order to avoid giving one side a disproportionate advantage. Sure, it's not realistic, but neither is it that both you and your enemy are going to start deploying at the same time, with roughly equal forces on both sides. Leave the unbalanced maps to PVE, pr as challenge maps.
Sometimes, balance is more important then realism on every level. Keep in mind, the fact that all of the information is processed by a giant mastermind(the player) isn't realistic either.
969th like on the video, nice
666th like. very unholy...
my God stop saying "pixeltruppen", please, I beg you.
I'm curious why you ask that xD
i like it