Jump to content

IMHO

Members
  • Posts

    1,054
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    IMHO got a reaction from dbsapp in FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine   
    If you remember Haiduk openly said in a discussion in 2014 or 2015 that people from the East of Ukraine who want to speak Russian should pack up and move to Russia. And if they don't do it by themselves then ideologically pure Ukrainians (obviously from the Western Ukraine) will make sure they do. As a side note I'm far from being a fan of the current brinkmanship - certain folks in Russia should stop living in the past, start thinking about economy of today etc.
  2. Upvote
    IMHO got a reaction from dbsapp in FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine   
    Obviously Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan have your support  Because their respective surrender documents of WWII were signed exactly at gunpoint. Diplomatic agreements exists not to make one side morally superior to the other but to avoid / stop wars.
  3. Upvote
    IMHO got a reaction from dbsapp in FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine   
    It's worse than that. European energy companies CAN buy additional gas from Russia as part of the long term contracts. Yet they chose not to do so since this gas is sold at current spot market prices and European energy companies believe they will fall after the winter period ends.
  4. Upvote
    IMHO got a reaction from dbsapp in FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine   
    Ukrainian Su-25 bombs Lugansk on 02.06.2014.
  5. Like
    IMHO reacted to MOS:96B2P in How can T90s Knock Out Abrams?   
    +1.  This.  Below is a Khrizantema drill.
     
    1. Check wind strength and direction. (Wind strength not more than medium.)
    2. Give smoke vehicle1 Fast order waypoint short of where you want smoke & upwind of Khriz. Vehicles.  
    3. At Fast waypoint give Pop Smoke order.2 (make sure smoke is on (Alt K))
    4. Next turn Fast buttoned3 Khriz. vehicles to a shoot position4 behind smoke.
    5. Once vehicles are in good LOS location place them on Pause. 
    6. Maintain smoke as long as possible / necessary.  Reposition before smoke clears.  If Khrizantema crews become rattled they may not shoot.
    Notes: 1)Typically BRM-3K which can Pop Smoke twice with a range of 72m (9xA/S). 2)If vehicle spots OpFor it may engage instead of Pop Smoke.  3)Khris. must be buttoned to use radar and has a minimum range of 400m. 4)Keep at least two open Action Spots between Khrizantema vehicles.     
  6. Like
    IMHO reacted to Haiduk in Ukrainian Armed Drone (from Turkey) Destroys Separatist Howitzer in Donbass in UA's First Such Strike   
    This is 2011 year, T-90A of 19th motor-rifle brigade, dislocated in Caucasian North Osetia autonomy repuplic. Mistake of driver. Crew got traumas, but survived.
  7. Like
    IMHO reacted to Vanir Ausf B in Tac Air and AA   
    I just tested this in Red Thunder, n=10. Casualties were:
    Killed           Wounded
    2                   1
    1                    0
    3                   0
    2                   0
    2                   2
    1                    0
    0                    1
    3                    0
    1                    1
    3                    0
    I don't think so. I'll attach a Final Blitz test save file that shows why.
     
    RT building test 001.bts FB 105L28 HE test 001.bts
  8. Like
    IMHO reacted to Sgt.Squarehead in Infamous Mig-23/27   
    Shhhh.....Be careful or the Yanks will elect it! 
  9. Like
    IMHO reacted to IICptMillerII in 1.02 patch notes   
    There is no computer solution. Battle sight zero is designed to allow the gunner to target and engage an enemy as fast as possible, without having to do manual gunnery. If the target is outside of battle sight zero, then you have to "walk" your shots onto the target. 
    To be more clear: if a target is placed in the crosshairs, it does not matter what range the target as at, as long as it is 1200m or less. If the target is at 200m, the crosshairs will still aim true. Just as if the target is at 1200m. That is the entire point of battle sight zero. It is a simple zero. Put the crosshair on the target and you should hit it. 
  10. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from Marwek77 aka Red Reporter in 1.02 patch notes   
    The procedure for zeroing AKM and AK-74:
    Sighting target is placed at 100m The gun sight is set at 3 (300m) The gun is aimed at the appropriate line below the center of target to compensate for the sighting distance of 300m Overall it gives you an aim with no vertical adjustment if the sight is set at "П" - прямой выстрел / direct shot. 300-450m is the distance at which you can shoot at the center of the mass and still the vertical drop will be no bigger than the size of a human figure.

  11. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from Sgt.Squarehead in Ukrainian Armed Drone (from Turkey) Destroys Separatist Howitzer in Donbass in UA's First Such Strike   
    No, MAM-C. It's a Turkish take at APKWS less the engine to save some weight as TB2's payload is rather limited. MAM-L is kinda... Impressive in terms of HE contents
  12. Like
    IMHO reacted to George MC in Hard kill APS rarely have more than 2-4 rounds available on each aspect, ever wondered why?   
    Interesting thread on twitter re APS systems and number of reloads they have and the rationale for them. Of note is even if everything works perfectly, when an APS defeats an ATGM or RPG, a large volume of fragmentation and debris is projected over the vehicle, with a high probability of damaging mission critical components mounted on the vehicle.
    This is worth a wee read lots of detail in it.
     
  13. Like
    IMHO reacted to Redwolf in BMD series Russian IFVs   
    Every AFV is air-droppable. At least once.
  14. Like
    IMHO reacted to domfluff in What's the story of the soviet tank platoon size?   
    Aside from what The_Capt says above, there's also a mathematical reason why three tanks would be preferred for a platoon. The reason usually given is that three tanks are more efficient, because there will be less chance of two tanks targeting the same target at the same time (and therefore wasting shots).

    One example of this kind of testing:
    https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA395368.pdf
    Where the three tank platoons were demonstrated to be more survivable, and of about equal effectiveness, despite their smaller numbers, although the conclusions were concerned with the noisy data.

    Since the three tank platoons are supposed to be used as a single unit, on-line, it doesn't really make a ton of sense to go to four or five, in the Soviet context, where there is always going to be another unit available to support a move.

    In the NATO context, this situation is reversed - the combined arms company is supposed to be able to fight independently (and possibly overrun), so it's very important that a tank platoon can operate without the requirement for external help - that means splitting into two groups (either 2/2 or 2/3) is much more important in that context.

    So yes, mainline tank platoons were 3 tanks, because the minimum unit you'd engage with would be a tank company (and more realistically larger than that). The tank platoons that were supporting formations like the Forward Security Element would have to operate in a more flexible fashion, so four-tank platoons would make more sense.
     
  15. Like
    IMHO reacted to ASL Veteran in CMCW save files grow all by itself - no player action...   
    the game calculates the LOS from every action square to every action square and the file probably gets large after it's done that.
  16. Like
    IMHO reacted to domfluff in CMCW save files grow all by itself - no player action...   
    Yup, it needs to build its lookup table, and the more elevation changes a map has (especially elevation change points entered on the map), the more complex that tends to be - that's why sometimes you'll see similarly sized maps with vastly different sizes on disk.
  17. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from John Kettler in Russian arms topic revived... :)   
    Russian answer to Gray Eagle


  18. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from John Kettler in Russian arms topic revived... :)   
    SOF day showreel
    The most interesting part (at least to me )- the use of kamikaze drones:
     
  19. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from John Kettler in Reforger Nostalgia   
  20. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from Phantom Captain in About to be overrun at the 2 Fahrbahns   
    Seems like everyone has to play CMBS before playing CMCW  Specifically RUS vs US or at least UKR vs RUS.

    SPOILERS!!!
    PS CMCW is pure gold! Kudos to the team - arguably the best release ever!
  21. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from rocketman in Czechmate Battle- baffled by map design (vague spoilers)   
    Guys you have to play CMBS more  RUS vs US or Excellent RUS (BMP-3/T-90) vs UKR  Thermals teach to:
    Never ever move armor to a place that can be fired at from a place that has not been under observation by two observer teams for at least a minute (and two-three minutes is much-much better). Count seconds for your vehicle exposure. 3secs for APs, 5secs for HEATs, 10secs for TL/ATGMs at medium distances. That is the time for the actual exposure - vehicles take some time to drive out of the view. Use pop-and-hide multiple times to trigger a shot and thus force a lengthy reload for an enemy armor. That reveals enemy armor position as a bonus if you have eyes to look at  Find unconventional observation angles for observer teams. Putting even 1-2 psn observation teams in front of enemy armor with thermals is a sure recipe for disaster. Even 1.0-1.5km distance is not enough - thermals can sometimes acquire targets pretty quickly. Be greedy with the number of people in observation teams. One guy is waaaay better than two and two is always better than three. Yes, you'd need more time to dwell upon the battlefield but you'd keep your guys alive. Hopefully How CMCW is easier than CMBS (so far ):
    No Javs that can be fired from inside the buildings with impunity. No thermals for US infantry. Relatively few thermals for US armor. PS
    CMCW is a really great game! Czechmate is a really great scenario
  22. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from Bagpipe in How often do sales come up on the BF website?   
    If my memory does not fail me we've had just two major engine upgrades for the past 21 years of CM series existence  And the first engine upgrade was released via new games rather than altering existing games so you didn't really need to invest more into the games you already own - old games stayed on the old engine and you got a new engine simply by buying a new game. Second engine upgrade was released step by step for the newest games in the portfolio (newest back then ). But you had to buy this upgrade just once and it upgraded all the games that you own that were meant to be upgraded. If I remember correctly it was 10 bucks whereas new games costed 40 bucks back then. Again 10 bucks in past 21 years and you got it all in one  And those were TOTALLY different and MUCH improved games after the engine release. Minor upgrades come in patches and they are free. May be there were paid upgrades for WWII titles - I don't know. After CMBS I stopped playing WWII titles though I own two full sets of them as well. I didn't know I can reuse Win keys for Mac platform so bought a second full set by accident There are modules that add to your unit roster - they cost money but you really need to buy them only if you're either into "authentic looks" or you want some specific set of equipment or units that significantly alters the gameplay. I'm not a big fan of the former so I own only Marines for CMSF1/2. Three full strength fire teams, AAVs and Milkor do change how you play the game IMO. So basically the CM business model is (or was - let's see what Slitherine will do to the game ) different from big Triple-A titles. Yes, you pay more upfront but basically that's it. You don't need to burn monies every year or half a year to stay in the game.
    The question is will there be more revenue if BTS changes the business model. Will more gamers flock to the titles should BTS lowers the bar? I really doubt. CM is a VERY special game made for VERY special audience. If you like it - you'll buy anyway and if you don't - you won't bring your monies irrespective of the price. E.g. up-to-date GAME MECHANICS in EU4 will set you for $200-$300, up-to-date HOI4 - $150-$200. And when I say GAME MECHANICS I mean it. Without major DLCs you're playing TOTALLY DIFFERENT game from the rest of "the bunch". You have nothing to speak about with other players, guides and tutorials are useless etc. Good strategy/tactical game is expensive to develop so if the costs are allocated to a smaller audience you have no choice but to charge more for individual title. I'd say in terms of bang for a buck BTS is super-efficient.
  23. Like
    IMHO reacted to Ultradave in Czechmate Battle- baffled by map design (vague spoilers)   
    Make a duplicate of it now with the name Czechmate-orig and save a copy of that somewhere safe just in case. An update wouldn't overwrite it then. But that way you are covered if you for some reason had to reinstall the game.
    Dave
  24. Like
    IMHO reacted to Monty's Mighty Moustache in How often do sales come up on the BF website?   
    How does that work with say, Unreal engine? Why don’t companies offer discounts on every game built using that engine since the first one? Because it’s an engine, not a game. The engine powers the physics, ballistics etc but each game, not module, has a ton of custom code to model the differerent weapons, TO&E, vehicles, terrain, weather and such as other have said.
    It’s not the first time I’ve seen someone say this and it seems to stem from the gameplay feeling similar but each game is very much its own thing. 
    I also thought that way way back when but I soon was sucked in and now don’t think twice about the price. As for sales as I mentioned earlier Steam had a sale recently and BF did indeed price match and they have stated the intent to do so going forward. But obviously that only applies to the titles that are available on Steam. 
    MMM
  25. Like
    IMHO got a reaction from THH149 in Czechmate Battle- baffled by map design (vague spoilers)   
    Guys you have to play CMBS more  RUS vs US or Excellent RUS (BMP-3/T-90) vs UKR  Thermals teach to:
    Never ever move armor to a place that can be fired at from a place that has not been under observation by two observer teams for at least a minute (and two-three minutes is much-much better). Count seconds for your vehicle exposure. 3secs for APs, 5secs for HEATs, 10secs for TL/ATGMs at medium distances. That is the time for the actual exposure - vehicles take some time to drive out of the view. Use pop-and-hide multiple times to trigger a shot and thus force a lengthy reload for an enemy armor. That reveals enemy armor position as a bonus if you have eyes to look at  Find unconventional observation angles for observer teams. Putting even 1-2 psn observation teams in front of enemy armor with thermals is a sure recipe for disaster. Even 1.0-1.5km distance is not enough - thermals can sometimes acquire targets pretty quickly. Be greedy with the number of people in observation teams. One guy is waaaay better than two and two is always better than three. Yes, you'd need more time to dwell upon the battlefield but you'd keep your guys alive. Hopefully How CMCW is easier than CMBS (so far ):
    No Javs that can be fired from inside the buildings with impunity. No thermals for US infantry. Relatively few thermals for US armor. PS
    CMCW is a really great game! Czechmate is a really great scenario
×
×
  • Create New...