Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Today
  3. Tank Combat Support Vehicle. The latest fade is to call them BMOP - Combat Fire Support Vehicle. To make it short BMP-T is just an ugly brood of excessive military budgets and dire needs for more money of Russian weapons producers. There's no coherent military science behind it.
  4. My assumption was that ten BMPTs was likely to be the complement appended to a Tank Battalion.....But it was only an assumption. PS - By the way, what's a BMP-T?
  5. The face command can do this without the draw back of preventing the unit from firing on surprise contacts. And it also wouldn't prevent them firing HE at (and/or suppressing) friendlies which tends to be my problem rather than incoming fire from an unknown position outside a TA. I also consider being spotted prematurely to the very worst thing that can happen. I don't need the team LMG to fire off at 500m when everyone can do so at 300m. The former reveals your position and rarely scores a knock-out while the latter will do both. I'm not against free fire. I simply prefer defined overlapping zones of fire. It's the those darn vehicles with their total disregard of dismounts that I blame! I hear you. I play it looser in the WWII titles. In the modern titles - too many things kill you.
  6. And what a BMP-T battalion TO&E looks like by your estimation? 🤔 'Cause seems like you know more than the Russian Army itself There's no tactical doctrine for BMP-T yet. Nobody knows what a separate BMP-T battalion should look like or should BMP-T be an integral capability to another unit? Armor? Mechanized? A heavy armored space troopers battalion may be? PS And by the way what's the difference between a tank/BMP-T unit and a mixed Abrams/Bradley one in terms of basic capabilities?
  7. The modded buildings are giving me grief.....Would it be possible to restrict the wooden look to just one skin option? It would be useful to keep the brick options, at least one of the white options & the pink & white option to make more specialised buildings (industrial buildings, monasteries/churches & gas stations/commercial units). For the time being I've removed the new buildings from my mod file and am working with the default options (horrid though they are for this environment). PS - The main screen is very hard for my old eyes to read too!
  8. Okay, I see the issue, but I'm not sure it is avoidable due to how the code for uniforms works. The FJ motorized battalion and the FJ Panzer Aufklärung Battalion are both motorized rather than true airborne formations, but they did wear full FJ uniform and equipment. This all works properly in the full scenario editor, but at some point it was decided that even though these are airborne division / corps assets, they should not be in the "Airborne Infantry" QB section in fully motorized form for balance reasons. As such, the QB Airborne Infantry section has dismounted versions of both formations (which have correct uniform / helmets) and the QB Armored Infantry section has the intact, fully-motorized formations. Unfortunately, uniforms are not set by the formation, but by the "branch," so this placement under Armored Infantry leads to change in appearance although the formations are functionally the same. However, I think the premise of removing them from Airborne Infantry because they have vehicles needs to be revisited, as it causes problems like this and is not implemented consistently. Looking into this, also found some Brit Airborne formations missing entirely, so will try to get that addressed also.
  9. Received.....I'll install 'em and see what it does to what I've made so far. That's kind of what I'm going for, but I also decided to add a section of highway, to imply that we're not that far into the boonies.
  10. Also, the decision whether to spread AT weapons or keep them together is something which is real, tactically interesting and modelled in CM quite well already - having multiple ATGMs across the map makes C2 difficult, which means that they won't easily pick up each others spotting information, and run the risk of being engaged separately. As a trade for that, they gain power through manoeuvre - splitting them up makes it difficult to suppress them all at once, so you gain resilience for a loss in effective comms.
  11. The face command can do this without the draw back of preventing the unit from firing on surprise contacts. I don't think so - all this is interesting and could be subject to rules. But then you would be better off just not setting cover arcs. If one is required to based on the rules then that setup a totally unrealistic scenario where an AT unit might see armour and be unable to shoot it - according to the rules - yuck.
  12. I´d more or less successfully transfered over a CMSF2 flat roof 8x8m over to CMBN, so with bits of fiddling there might be a number of options. Modding just textures is the more easy affair though.
  13. haven´t had a look into CMSF2 demo for some. If it´s the same hedges as in other titles (CMBN), then theres some difference. Height and that 3D geometry, that 1-2 feet high earthen berm beneath. When used as flavor object doesn´t makes a difference, as it´s just eye candy and not cover/concealment, like the real thing.
  14. Link sent. I intend to do some model swapping experiments with the roofs. Perhaps if you thought of each CMSF building as a group of very close habitations that might make things easier for you to visualize? So, for example, a village with 40 buildings could be represented by 10 CMSF buildings. I'm sure anyone would understand that a lot of abstraction will be needed to simulate 1960's Vietnam with a 21st Century Desert War simulator!
  15. Not as bushy.....If you have CM:BN or CM:FI, they have both so you can compare (CM:RT may have both too, haven't checked). Buildings are proving to be the weakest link in my map-making efforts, they're just too damned big and the roofs are wrong.....Might have to do something on the outskirts of Hue or Saigon instead of a more rural location.
  16. I'm not sure if anyone has touched on this regarding TA usage but, along the points already raised, the following two come to mind: When contact is imminent and you want try getting the team an AS or two closer using Hunt to secure better cover. I shorten the TA to encourage this short movement. Otherwise, Quick/Fast is used when the need is more immediate (mandatory) and the position rather than the fire is wanted; Placing a TA upon reaching firing position not only to establish fire zones but to also and force a slight orientation within the AS to encourage better usage of cover. (I think a few have mentioned this.) Also, I'm getting the impression that no one actually adjusts TAs while on the move. I also use them as a trigger to reconsider intentions. A half-circle being acceptable early on when contacts haven't started to appear. Not so good when trying to commit force to gain fire superiority. Things tend to go well at that point when they are instead defined wedges or completely free. Of course, I'm skipping over the required usage of 20-30m circles when assaulting buildings to secure/police the area when we think it's been taken... Yes, TAs are limiters. Considering the lethality of modern weapons; I can't see how one can provide vehicular or heavy weapon teams support when friendly infantry is this soft. Hoping I didn't drift off topic much. I realize you are hashing out rules.
  17. CMSF2 does have hedges... are they different in some manner to "low bocage"?
  18. Information you have shown for QB Maps is not accurate. I suggest you start with the base game, open up the Quick Battle Maps Folder and note the number of maps. Depending on what you are actually after, know this: There are always 3 types of attack maps: Assault, Attack, & Probe. So a single map will have 3 variations. Meeting engagement maps have no variations. To best count QB Maps simply start any kind of Attack style game, use"Human" for map selection and count the maps. Then start a Meeting engagement and do the same. You will then have the ACTUAL number of QB Maps. Once you have counted the Base game. Add each module. Do keep in mind that all QB Maps will always play for any module of the base game title. Good luck
  19. It's much like the first, but a bit more French. Pine forest is by and large a cultivated environment, now and in the forties.....Not exclusively by any means, of course.
  20. no, not all off course. I know plenty of more or less uncultivated, left alone pine forests, mostly of younger tree types. Even some in my backyard so to say. Also depends on the soil I guess and particular pine tree types and height (mountainous). Same for Nam, which has very different forest types and not all thick jungle. can´t see the second pic of yours?
  21. I generally agree with @IanL on the use of target arcs, though I would add that I tend to use them much more on heavy weapons teams (such as an anti-tank gun or an ATGM). I think that the target armor arc is especially useful for certain heavy weapons teams. I could easily see a set of rules governing the use of target arcs being very important for units like that. For example, in order to target arc your various ATGMs (or more importantly, change their already set target arcs) they would have to be in C2 range of their commander. That would require you to keep heavy weapons elements closer together, instead of spreading them out all across a map. It would also make the commander a much more important and mobile asset. Plus, because the commander would be moving around between his teams, he could act much more as a runner, transferring spotting information around. That said, my thinking doesn't extend much beyond heavy weapon units so its rather niche. Still an interesting concept that might be worth trying out at some point.
  22. Searching and sorting with this might help: http://www.combatmission.lesliesoftware.com/index.html
  23. I'm not convinced that gap should always be filled up. Finland: France: But these are all a long way from 'Nam.
  24. Yeah, but not always (which is why it's only in odd situations) - if you're coming down a row of houses, and need to target something at ninety degrees, you may not be able to make a move in the right direction. Again, not always, but sometimes being in control of your turret can be extremely useful.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...