Nathan Wailes - Blog - GitHub - LinkedIn - Patreon - Reddit - Stack Overflow - Twitter - YouTube
TacOps
I want to play this.
This seems very similar to Armored Brigade in concept. I’m curious what (if any) differences there are in terms of realism.
TacOps 1
Where to get it: https://www.old-games.com/download/5611/tacops
TacOps 2
TacOps 3
Reviews
https://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan20/tacops2.htm
It doesn’t give any analysis of the actual gameplay.
"included are maps of the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California, Germany - near the Fulda Gap, Canadian Army Training Areas, an area in Kentucky used by the Armor School for terrain walks, and an Australian Army Training Area. These maps provide TACOPS terrain overlaid over actual 1:50,000 scale maps.“
“A Command Post Exercise (CPX) involves several people playing together on two different sides. Two players usually serve as the commander for each side and others serve as various subordinates and communicate via the Internet. One player controls the game and passes information to each side as the game progresses. The players in this case do not actually play the game, but attempt to follow the progress of their side through the reports and printable maps (also provided in the game) on which they plot the reports.”
“Most scenarios are rather short, requiring about an hour of game time and up to two hours of real time, depending on how fast you issue orders. CPX games can take rather longer, as much as 8 hours to resolve.”
TacOps 4
Where to get it
https://archive.org/details/TacOpsCav_Edition_Version_4.0.3FG_September_2002
You can find a discussion of people getting it to work here: https://www.reddit.com/r/computerwargames/comments/fyqcv5/tac_ops_v4_where_to_find/
Reviews
https://wavehh.dyndns.org/tacops4/tacops-for-cmplayers.html
In multiplayer games [the turn length] can be set to longer intervals, which is often used during parts of a game that are in phases of long and boring patrols and no intense combat.
The orders that TacOps players give to units are of a sligtly different structure than in CM, with more control about what to do then.
TacOps simulate modern combat. (…) I found I could adapt very well. There is something to sit down and learn, but overall I found that the tactical challenge is quite similar in both games. TacOps also has a easily accessible unit database built in, and you generally don't have to worry about armor thickness values as much as in WW2, most things can kill most other things on a modern battlefield anyway.
The scale is slightly different than CM, generally larger. Instead of individual vehicles you can have one "marker" represent groups of vehicles between one and a full company of identical vehicles. Usually you use that for platoons, and one marker representing several vehicles will ensure that all vehicles come into LOS of a target or threat at the same time (which is often difficult to do in Combat Mission). The bigger scale also means you don't have to search hull-down positions yourself. You just give a command to go hulldown and the game just gives it a certain success chance, without actually moving or splitting the platoon marker on the map.
modern weapons are much more lethal, and faster, even the same kind of weapons. "First shot wins" is much more true in TacOps, because the first-shot hit probability is much larger. If a moving unit comes into LOS and reach of a standing unit waiting for it, the mover is in very big trouble, much more than in Combat Mission. In addition to the better first-shot hit probability the standing unit will most probably be in cover, hulldown, or even fortification. I find this to be the singlemost gameplay difference between the two simulations. Do not move into LOS and reach of a standing enemy, or you will die, unless you have a 10:1 superiority and/or substancial artillery already targetted. Much of actual tactics develop around this principle. In Combat Mission you can break into LOS of enemy units much more easily. Sure, you are at a disadvantage, but you often see the moving units ralley quickly and sucessfully return shots. That is much less common in TacOps.
Artillery is the next huge difference, it is not only more lethal and plentiful. The TacOps artillery is much easier to control and you can create TRPs on the fly. ICM ammunition is effective to knock out AFVs. Smoke is separately counted ammo in off-map artillery, you cannot trade HE for smoke like you can in Combat Mission's off-map artillery. The other way round, there is no seperation for smoke and HE in TacOps on-map artillery. Treebursts and VT artillery are not modeled in TacOps, but artillery is generall much larger, 155mm is the norm for Blue forces, 152 or 122mm for Red. Both can have rocket launchers (MLRS), basically like the Nebelwerfer in Combat Mission but more useful in TacOps, because their "blast value" is even bigger, saturating the area, and the maps and distances are big enough to live with the lower precision without hurting your own troops.
On-map artillery can fire indirect in TacOps and follows the same spotting rules as off-map modules, plus the on-map modules get a decreased time for zeroing in when they have LOS to the target. 120mm-class mortars used right can be a very decisive weapon in both games, but in TacOps you usually get them as on-map units and you have to move them into range on the bigger TacOps maps. Thus the mortars are vulnerable to counterbattery, air or ground attack.
The initial delay until you can get shots off is only about a minute for Blue and two for Red, zeroing in to good precision under normal observation adds 5 more minutes. If you have dedicated artillery spotter units in LOS, they will make zeroing in much faster. Once you reach precision 4 of 5, you can make a TRP on the position (none of these modules here reached that). Reusing a TRP means you have the inital oen or two minute delay, but you have good precision right afterwards.
On thing I find makes a surprisingly small difference between TacOps and CMBO is modern ATGMs (guided anti-tank missiles). (…) I found that the way people use WW2 anti-tank guns in CMBO and ATGMs in TacOps make them more similar than one would think. (…) In practice, players in both games use the AT guns or missiles to deny ground to enemy armor, and they do it with similar results as far as gameplay is concerned.
Helicopters make a huge difference, but they are not part of every scenario. TacOps has both attack helicopters, which are devastating and fragile, and transport helicopters. The bigger transport helicopters can be used to airlift vehicles during a TacOps battle.
TacOps does not have the waypoint and command delay features that Combat Mission has.
TacOps has a display that predicts how long it will take to follow a given path.
Tanks in the woods are allowed in TacOps, but you get punished speed-wise
TacOps only has elite quality units in Combat Mission terms.
when TacOps infantry walks and is suddenly shot at in sufficient quantity, then the casualties from the first volley are likely to be even more than in CMBO, but afterwards the unit will stop, no matter what the orders were, go into cover and return fire.
TacOps chose a different model to control movement and safety. Combat Mission as of the first engine (that means CMBO and CMBB) has made an unfortunate decision to melt movement orders, the tendency to stop when meeting enemy units, the tendency to engage and the speed of movement into combined commands (sneak, run, move, crawl, but no "be careful"). TacOps has seperate movement commands which do not specify behaviour and has seperate SOPs (= "standard operations procedures") that allow you to give instructions for the event of meeting enemy units. As possible reactions you can specify stopping or drive on, pop smoke, retreat and -very important- have vehicles unload infantry. All these options can be checked for a number of possible events.
A lot of commands that have delay in CMBO are instantaneous in TacOps.
This load and unload business is much more important in TacOps, since the bigger maps and the lack of a "run" command mean that infantry can't walk the whole map during a game.
TacOps machineguns are more lethal than the CMBO ones
AA guns are not as especially dangerous to light vehicles as they are in CMBO. Mostly because all other weapons has that huge precision benefit anyway.
Defense in TacOps is much stronger. Part of that is based on reality, the more lethal and more precise weapons give bigger benefits to units lying in ambush than units moving in. Also smoke is much less useful, since TacOps tanks and ATGMs usually have thermal sights. Artillery is faster, too, which hurts both ways, but the attacker more before he has to find defending units to shoot on before his artillery counts. TacOps artillery can lay TRPs on the fly, during gameplay, which is a huge benefit when you have fewer batteries, as the defender usually has.
TacOps allows you to specify approximate time and target area for airstrikes, and they have cluster bombs. Major parts of a TacOps battle center around distributing your AA assets for effective protection of your force or on the other hand to hunt down or otherwise invalidate enemy AA units.
[Me: This was the thing I immediately noticed while playing Decisive Action: I realized I should focus on trying to kill the enemy SAM system so that my helicopters could take out the enemy AFVs when night fell.]
two-player games are usually much shorter in real (player) time than comparable Combat Mission games. Reasons include:
Infantry can't get anywhere alone, so once the vehicles are gone you are ready for surrender.
More and heavier artillery, and artillery can hurt vehicles. Airstrikes can also be pretty decisive.
Orders are much more efficient to give, since you have your permanent SOP settings (unless triggered) and just plot where units should should go. There is no clickfest to make many interleaved fasts/sneak moves like you have in CMBO. Hulldown positions and getting platoons simultaneously into LOS are also none of your concerns either.
PBEM is done in a "trusted" mode. You exchange always exchange orders for two turns in one mail, which means a 30 turn game is done with 30 mails (15 per person) plus setup. Of course that requires you trust the opponent not to replot one move if he doesn't like the result the first time.
I found that a medium-size two-player TacOps TCP game takes about 2.5 to 3 hours, where a comparable CM game takes four to six hours.
Here are some Combat Mission features I miss in TacOps:
Seasons.
Action phase replay. TacOps does not have the VCR-like control to watch the action again.
Area direct fire. (…) e.g. when you want on-map howitzers to shoot smoke into the flank of one of your other units where the howitzers have LOS to, you just cannot do it right now, you have to wait for indirect zeroing.
The terrain in TacOps is too simple.
No play against the AI on maps the AI does not know. The AI in TacOps is fed with plans how to handle certain missions on certain maps.
In TacOps, all infantry goes one speed and all vehicles go one speed.
Here are some cool features of TacOps not mentioned (enough) above.
MGs actually work. Gun damage on vehicles leaves the coax MG intact, which I think is better for gameplay. MG-only APCs and gun-damaged tanks can do serious combat work. .50cal and 14.5mm MG armed vehicles feel more like the thin 20mm armed Combat Mission vehicles, except they don't have the extreme hit probability.
Useful reports: OOB at start, OOB as of now, losses so far, TRPs, ammunition, and some more.
When planning your move, hide units with orders or hide units with checks [units you’ve clicked on]
Map overlay: people can supply pictures of the dimension of the map with drawing and writings that gets blended into the map on a keystroke. Like a transparency with your labels placed over a real map.
Much more sophisticated fire control.
Copy orders from one unit to another, or to a group of units. You can also copy SOP settings.
TacOps units do not push each other away. It is assumed that the enemy artillery and airstrikes will keep unit density at realistic levels.
Name units and jump to units. You can give your own names to units (which will be displayed on the TAB key), and you can jump with a keystroke to a unit by unit number.
https://community.battlefront.com/topic/2021-tacops-vs-bct-vs-armored-task-force/
played in one minute turns
only three elevations.
simplified airstrikes
units are typically platoons or company. Units can split down to sections. Units are issued orders by platoon / company.
if your new to gaming(or wargaming) go tacops. its much faster and fun to learn.
No scenario writer for single play. If TacOps had this it would be spectacular.
TACOPS is wonderful in its simplicity.
https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/so-tacops-and-armored-brigade.65862/
while being something like a military simulation, it's still very gamey - the scenarios are designed to be balanced and challenging - the battles are very brutal with high attrition rates on both sides. The downside is that it doesn't allow modding and playing as OPFOR or designing ones own single-player scenarios (as the AI scripted for each scenario using the Soviet doctrine or something like that).
TacOps is very gamey. It's not a hardcore simulation. The developer comments in TacOps Gazette are full of explanations about how this or that isn't realistic because it's a game made to be entertaining.
in TacOps you get scenarios designed by an actual USMC major, which are also made to be balanced and have a scenario-specfic AI. They are fun to play if you like challenge.
Apparently the dev: TacOps has been on sale, more or less continuously, since 1994. A small niche of generally older military gamers like it, most young gamers won't. TacOps v4 is still available today from Battlefront.com and I still get a royalty check each month. I haven't worked on the code seriously in three or four years - I burned out between the v5 military version and the unreleased retail v6.
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/tac-ops-4-more-bang-for-the-buck.73112/
Units are platoons or squads, or can be grouped into companies, which tends to be unwise.
The order depth is very good, with a handy demo featue which causes the unit to 'run through' its full order string to insure that you have it set up right.
You can set a unit (or all of that type, or all units) for a specific SOP-how to react to fire, sighting an enemy, etc. You can even impose Rules of Engagement (some scenarios have armed third-faction elements in play).
The gameplay is fast; a 120 turn scenario takes less than an hour to play on a fast machine, and faster if you really are getting your butt whipped, which the AI will do.
The game system emphasizes combined arms; you simply cannot win otherwise; additionally, it hammers home that fire and maneuver is essential; sit in one place after firing for more than a turn or two, and either supporting arms (artillery, gunships, or air strikes) hit, or you'll get flanked. Smoke grenade management or timely use of FA-deliveryed smoke is critical-there's a reason why self-propelled mortars are included at the battalion level.
Minefields and barriers make engineers critical (as do water obstacles); helcopters are exceedingly useful for stand-off gunship attacks and scouting; air strikes are more astracted, but unless you suppress enemy AD, they're useless. And count on the AI keeping its AD screen up, engineer assets close, and a scout line moving forward.
Although there is lots of unit detail, for the most part after a few battles you learn what works and what doesn't.
A good idea for you might be to 'thumb' through a few of the included manuals to get a feel for what is involved in organizations. Play the tutorial, then go into the US side and play the Task Force Kelly scenario-it comes in eight varients using the same map and forces. A few bloody noses will have you up and fighting with the best.
Advice for playing
TacOps for Combat Mission gamers, part 3 - A short guide to modern equipment for WW2 players
Tanks
tanks are basically the same as in WW2. In TacOps games, you will usually find that both sides have comparable tanks. At least up to 2500m, everyone can kill everyone else
Anti-tank assets
The things that kill tanks and other AFVs in TacOps are: Other tanks with their main gun, ATGMs, Infantry AT weapons, ICM artillery, Planes
Artillery
Same as in WW2, but ICM ammunition kills AFVs. Otherwise even caliber is the same. 120mm mortars and 152-155mm howitzer are the main killers.
For a Combat Mission player it is important to remember that modern artillery is faster, and that the wide spaces in TacOps make it difficult to escape.
In the usual TacOps game you will get much more artilley ammunition than in the typical Combat Mission game. You can often fire a 155mm module through most of the turns in the game.
In Combat Mission artillery play is usually focused on getting the spotters into LOS without getting them killed, carefully selecting the right time for the very few barrages you can place, and then waiting for the delay to pass. This is not neccessary in TacOps, as anybody can spot, the delays are less and you have more ammunition.
In TacOps the scarce resource is the module, the battery. One battery can only fire at one place at a time. Selecting a new target outside of adjust range causes the initial delay to restart, even when you have a TRP. Without TRP you lose 6-7 minutes until you are at max precision again. On a big may the opponent may deliberately trick you into targetting some remote spot and then breaking his main body out of cover kilometers away.
you usually have few ICM ammunition and deciding about the right moment to fire it is as complicated as for any scarce resource.
You may also have spotter units (infantry or vehicles) which cut down the targetting delay, meaning you get into the same LOS game as in Combat Mission.
Scouts
Single scout vehicles are generally not useful in TacOps. The high first-shot hit probablity and general lethality of all weapons involved means the opponent can probably kill it without it having seen anything. You should have at least a pair, with infantry loaded and SOPs set to flee and unload (!) on contact. That way you may end up with a useful look at the enemy.
[Scout units are much more deadly against tanks than in WW2.] For a WW2 person, it is important to realize how different these units are. (…) If you expose a too weak flank to approching vehicles of this kind they may very well shoot their way through.
APCs and IFVs
TacOps APCs are much more vulnerable to .50cal and 14.5mm MG rounds than CM APCs, due to improved ammunition. Thin APCs like the Soviet BTR series are vulnerable even to 7.62 MG fire from the sides and rear.
Combat Misson has a very noticable bump in the effectivity of .50cal MGs on one hand and the autocannons (20mm, 37mm Flak, Bofors) on the other. There is no such fundamental difference between TacOps .50cal, 14.5mm MGs and the Flak and autocannon guns. All of them have normal AT firing performance data you can inspect.
Gaming around tanks and their enemies
In typical TacOps games you have tanks with effectiv range of 3000-3500m and ATGMs with 3750 to 4000 meters. The hit probablity of a tank cannon gets worse with distance, the ATGM has optimal hit probability starting from 1000 meters or so depending on the model. The range games you can play with this should be obvious.
On the other hand, the tank has a much better rate of fire and more ammunition. ATGM vehicles or IFVs gettinging into a prolonged engament with tanks inside both unit's effective range will lose in the end.