Jump to content

Vanir Ausf B

Members
  • Content Count

    8,394
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    4

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from Sasa Narinasa in Hull Down command?   
    Issuing a Hull Down command is a two-step process. The first step is plotting the movement. Using the Hull Down Command you plot a movement path usually a short distance past where you want to be hull down because you have to be able to trace direct line of sight from the end of the movement line to wherever you want to be hull down to. That lets you do the second step which is clicking on the waypoint at the end of the movement line and Targeting (or Target Briefly, doesn't matter) the spot you want to be hull down to, same as if you were plotting area fire but in this context the tank won't shoot, it's just how you tell the game where you want to be hull down relative to. The tank will then stop moving when it is hull down to that spot or it reaches the end of the movement line, whichever comes first, but if you do it correctly it should almost always stop prior to the end. But if you don't Target from the endpoint the tank will treat the Hull Down movement command like a normal movement order and drive the full distance every time. 
     
  2. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from IanL in Hull Down command?   
    Issuing a Hull Down command is a two-step process. The first step is plotting the movement. Using the Hull Down Command you plot a movement path usually a short distance past where you want to be hull down because you have to be able to trace direct line of sight from the end of the movement line to wherever you want to be hull down to. That lets you do the second step which is clicking on the waypoint at the end of the movement line and Targeting (or Target Briefly, doesn't matter) the spot you want to be hull down to, same as if you were plotting area fire but in this context the tank won't shoot, it's just how you tell the game where you want to be hull down relative to. The tank will then stop moving when it is hull down to that spot or it reaches the end of the movement line, whichever comes first, but if you do it correctly it should almost always stop prior to the end. But if you don't Target from the endpoint the tank will treat the Hull Down movement command like a normal movement order and drive the full distance every time. 
     
  3. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from BletchleyGeek in Hull Down command?   
    Issuing a Hull Down command is a two-step process. The first step is plotting the movement. Using the Hull Down Command you plot a movement path usually a short distance past where you want to be hull down because you have to be able to trace direct line of sight from the end of the movement line to wherever you want to be hull down to. That lets you do the second step which is clicking on the waypoint at the end of the movement line and Targeting (or Target Briefly, doesn't matter) the spot you want to be hull down to, same as if you were plotting area fire but in this context the tank won't shoot, it's just how you tell the game where you want to be hull down relative to. The tank will then stop moving when it is hull down to that spot or it reaches the end of the movement line, whichever comes first, but if you do it correctly it should almost always stop prior to the end. But if you don't Target from the endpoint the tank will treat the Hull Down movement command like a normal movement order and drive the full distance every time. 
     
  4. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from IanL in Tank targeting mystery   
    That may be it. I ran the saved game for a while until the Panther re-spotted the TD on the right, but still could not fire even when I Targeted manually. The TD never fired on the Panther either. Then I ran a pioneer squad up and blew a hole in the bocage directly in front of the Panther, which immediately opened up on the TD.
  5. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to squish1962 in Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures   
    I realize I am late to the party but I wanted to add some real life experience to the discussion on the effectiveness of indirect fire upon dug in Infantry.
    In 1986 we completely dug an infantry platoon defensive position plus company weapons det. This totalled 12 x 2 man fire trenches, Platoon HQ bunker, a mortar pit and 1 x AT trench and a M249 MG trench. We also dug all the communication trenches as well. The individual fire trenches had proper overhead protection consisting of corrugated metal (you could stick your bayonet through it) covered by 2 layers of sandbags. The HQ bunker consisted of 6inch. diameter logs covered by corrugated steel and 2 layers of sand bags.
    In each trench we put 2 x target balloons. In the HQ bunker we put 3 x target balloons. The mortar pit had 2 x balloons as did the MG and AT trench for a total simulation of 33 humans.
    4x 155mm Howitzers (7km distance) and 4 x 81mm Mortars (3km distance) continuously fired both impact and airburst rounds. for exactly 3 min.
    Upon inspection of aftermath we found the 2 balloons of the Mortar pit gone from a direct hit. 2 other balloons were gone presumably from shrapnel. The HQ bunker took a direct hit. 29 persons survived. Although bleeding ears and an overall stunning would most certainly have occurred.
    Suppression is the main purpose for both artillery/mortars and machine guns. I have heard many gamers complain that their MGs and artillery/mortars are useless because they are not very accurate...good..they are not supposed to be.
  6. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to LongLeftFlank in Armoured Infantry   
    .... The Postwar Years

  7. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to MOS:96B2P in C2 & Information Sharing (REDUX)   
    The screenshots in the original C2 and Information Sharing topic were destroyed by Photobucket. As a result a REDUX C2 and Information Sharing topic was created with new screenshots. Some mods that will show up most often in the screenshots are, user interface (UI) and floating icons:  
    Floating Icons – Cat Tactical Icons CMFI
    User Interface – Juju’s TweakedUI CMFI V5
    Some interesting topics have been started about how information moves through the C2 chain both vertically (up & down the chain of command) and horizontally (directly from one team to another team).  As a result I did some experimenting with C2 & information sharing.  Below are the results with screenshots from the experiment.  If anyone can offer a correction or additional information please do. 
    Additional useful information and supplemental C2 rules:   
    4.0 Engine Manual page 66 Command & Control.
    @Bil Hardenberger Command Friction 2.0 -  http://community.battlefront.com/topic/125172-command-friction-20/
    @Peregrine Command Layers - http://community.battlefront.com/topic/110861-command-layer-in-ai-battles/
     
     
    The distance information can be shared vertically (chain of command).
    Voice C2: Up to six action spots, approximately 48 meters. If either unit is on Hide then the distance is reduced to approximately 16 meters.
    Close Visual C2: Up to 12 action spots, approximately 96 meters. This is also the maximum distance a higher HQ can fill in for a lower HQ. Example: Company or battalion HQ fills in for a platoon HQ and provides C2 to the platoon's fire teams. 
    Distant Visual C2: As far as the unit’s line of sight.  (In the experiment I had units in distant visual C2 at 40 action spots, approximately 480 meters before I stopped.)
    Radio C2: Entire map.  In the WWII titles, CMSF & CMA - C2 via backpack radio is lost during foot movement. C2 is maintained during foot movement in CMBS.
    The distance information can be shared horizontally (directly between teams).
    Up to four action spots, approximately 32 meters. (Sometimes a team had to move to within 3 action spots)
    Can information be shared horizontally between teams from different battalions?
    Yes
    Can information be shared between two different HQs that do not have a common higher HQ?
    Vertically: No (With no common higher HQ there is no bridge for the information to pass over) 
    Horizontally: Yes
    The experiment was conducted on skill level Iron in CMFI v2.0 Engine 4.  I used two different US battalions on a custom made map for the experiment.  The 4th US Tank Battalion on the west (left) side of the map and the 1st US Infantry Battalion on the east (right) side.  A high ridgeline divided the two battalions.  HQ units are blocked from C2 Voice, Close Visual and Distant Visual with other HQ units. At the beginning of the experiment no units of the 4thBattalion were in C2 with units of the 1st Battalion.  An immobilized German Tiger and a destroyed Tiger were used as the OpFor unit to be spotted and reported.  
    The Area of Operations (A/O) for the experiment. Note the highlighted scout team with no C2.   
     
  8. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Bulletpoint in Well I played Most Battles in Blitz As Us Side....   
    There's really no reason to get into a groggy discussion about weapons here, because user1000 answered his own question in his first post:
    If a scenario gives the Germans high motivation and the US low motivation, of course the Americans will cower and the Germans fire back. It's just how the scenario was made.
  9. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Mord in Armoured Infantry   
    Mord.
  10. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Mord in Armoured Infantry   
    Mord.
  11. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Mord in Armoured Infantry   
    Mord.
  12. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Mord in Armoured Infantry   
    Shows what you know...
     

     
     
    Mord.
  13. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Michael Emrys in Armoured Infantry   
    That would be nice, but I have yet to see a book with the title I Was a Halftrack Gunner and I'm not holding my breath.

    Michael
  14. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to ThePhantom in Smoke as a Force Field   
    This is an interesting topic indeed. In a combat situation, with known enemy spotted in the area, a smoke screen to the front would initiate immediate suppression fire from an infantry rifle company (or platoon). There is no "waiting" until you see the enemy. The smoke deployment would mean the enemy is attempting a flanking maneuver or an advance (or hopefully a withdrawal). The infantry organization's life would depend on an aggressive reaction. So, I firmly believe we should be able to area fire into a smoke screen. A smoke screen is not a "Secret hiding spot" or "Safe Space".... it's extremely noticeable and would cause life saving reaction fire.    
  15. Like
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Stick1975 in oops   
    nothing to see here
  16. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to BarbaricCo in FXShine shader   
    CMRT Night vision mode for night scenarios
    - This is modified Battlefront CM “War Movie” shader.
    - It will replace the Alt-M (Opt-M) mode.
    - Does not work with Alt-B (Opt-B) mode.
    - Works with CMRT, CMBN, CMFI and CMBS (engine v3.0).
    - Little or no performance hit.
    - OS X and Windows.
    - Experimental stuff.
    Credits to @SLIM for night vision ideas and @Rambler for first making it for CMBS!
    Download:  Zielgerat_1229_NIGHT_HUNTER_mode.zip


    thread: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120902-released-zielgerät-1229-night-hunter-mode/
    @Rambler Night vision mode thread: http://community.battlefront.com/topic/120834-released-night-vision-mode/
  17. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to sonar in Smoke gets in your eyes.   
    Hi, a little thing I would like to see would be simulated smoke pots for Pioneer squads. I don't know if this could be done by making their existing smoke grenade give off more smoke and burn longer or what, but something emiting smoke for a few minutes at time could create enough concealment for them to actually achieve something.It seems that smoke grenades and smoke pots were a pretty essential part of their equipment, and I think it would lend to them being a bit more specialised than at the moment and also more capable of performing their historical tasks like wire/obstacle/bunker clearing.The use of smoke was deemed to be so much an integral part of their capability to carry out their role, that the german pioneer assault pack even has two pockets designed specifically to carry two smoke grenades. So even assuming every man in the squad does not have a full load out, the pop smoke capability of a pioneer squad is surely under modelled as it is now where they have the standard two smoke grenades that all [I think] inf. squads are allocated. I think if this could be implemented there is potential for pioneer units employed in the assault to closer resemble the valuable asset that they were in reality more so than they are in the game at the moment. cheers.
  18. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to Sublime in QB as Brits   
    I hate Cromwells. Absolutely loathe them. Yeah theyre fast but not much faster than Shermans. The Churchill IMO is about as distinctly British as you can get. If you have GL try out the Mk I id buy it in normandy if I could. Love the hull mounted 75mm and the 2lber on the turret. Also CW Stuarts dont carry canister like US Stuarts do.
    The Anzac forces and Canucks have some interesting inf carriers - such as the defrocked Priest thats like a large early APC with a MG mount. I dig those.
    The Challengers those apparently were very rare seem to be pretty similar to Cromwells but I found them a cooler experience and a little better than the Cromwell. Seriously I cant go on enough about how lousy the Cromwells armor is, it makes a Sherman look tough, and the 75mm cannon is nothing to write home about for it, the sherman, or churchill for AT work. It does well enough for infantry. But I find the ideal CW all purpose tank force has at least 1 firefly with 1 churchill 6lber, 1 churchill 95mm, and a couple 75 mm churchills preferably the latest X model which has superb armor. If you can buy two fireflies or add a stuart or two to that.  The 95mm Churchills are excellent for infantry support and then you also get the specialist models - the AVRE which fires a ridiculously large shell and the crocodile which shoots a flamethrower at a pretty long range. The Churchills arent the quickest tanks in the game but they do move quick enough for game purposes and hardly ever bog. Historically they were famous for getting over almost any kind of terrain. They also come with about 9k rounds of Besa MG ammo so you can literally spray mg fire the entire battle just about without running out of ammo.
    The CW infantry platoons work handily enough. Often i prefer them over Americans. If I know Im gonna have a tough armor battle i choose them. If i know itll be more infantry oriented with only a couple tanks at most I take Americans.
    Interestingly the assault engineer CW units and recon teams are probably amongst the most flexible infantry units for the Allies in the game. They come in three man teams  One packs a 51mm mortar and rifle. One packs a Bren. The leader carries a Sten.
     
  19. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from umlaut in Night lighting missing after Nvidia GPU upgrade   
    I am 99% sure Phil is well aware of it. It's always been like this. It's probably something similar to the incompatibility of anti-aliasing with Movie Mode. I may log a bug report on it anyways so the issue isn't forgotten.
  20. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to womble in QB as Brits   
    That puzzled me for ages: it's a radio. The uncommon one has one, the common one does not. It's a "quirk" of the way rarity is assigned. Sure, there weren't as many radio-Bren carriers in the establishment, but that's because the TO&E didn't assign them, not because they were in short supply relative to the levels the TO&E said they should be equipped, and if they were in short supply, the scout sections should have the option of having a non-radio bren carrier as a replacement for the radio-equipped one.
  21. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from Bulletpoint in Terrain?   
    Unit experience appears to have only a very small effect on use of cover. I tested Light Forest + 2 trees with elite and conscript targets. The elite targets suffered 5% fewer casualties which is on the margin of statistical significance for the sample size.
  22. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B got a reaction from Bulletpoint in Terrain?   
    I see double and triple tree action spots frequently in Heavy Forest tiles in particular. But from a map-makers perspective I think the take-away from this is that there is a very strong relationship between the number of trees and the quality of the action spot as a fighting position. 
  23. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to markshot in Terrain?   
    Two problems:
    (1)  Some of us have no actually training and don't really know what's best in the real world.
    (2)  Some who have real world experience still cannot fully recognize its abstraction in software.
    This is why there are things like a LOS tool.  In the real world, a shooter should be able to estimate distances by various factors.  This is a simulated world.  Providing aids to be used for quick judgements is not the same thing as trying to turn your game play into an exercise in statistics and probabilities.  BTW, your intuitive knowledge is, in fact, your brain's compilation of empirical knowledge into high speed stereotypical choices.
    Lastly, this type of experimentation besides aiding player and designers is good for the devs too.  Many bug and anomalies have been found by players trying to understand the mechanics of the game (former beta tester of 20 years speaking here).
  24. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to slysniper in Terrain?   
    Well, don't take me wrong in that I do not personally understand that it is a numbers game. No matter what it always will be.
    I also will say that I do plenty of calculations as to what might happen within the game and with my units. I do think there is a place for it. But in the game now, I see that place with each weapon and how that weapon works. And to me, that is very much how I see what someone does that is leading real troops and is wanting to use the weapons at his disposal to their best effect.
    Example, when black sea first came out, The first thing I did was make a bunch of little fire fight scenarios and made determinations as to what effective ranges different rifles were being effective at.
    But did I chart it, I guess I could have, and yes many real soldiers have a similar understanding of that with their weapons.So it makes somewhat sense to me that someone would do that.
    But It only took only one time sending troops into a barn and seeing them mowed down to understand it is nothing more than concealment and I don't need no chart to tell me that, just like any other terrain on the map. its pretty easy to understand the likely results of the terrain without any numbers to verify it. That is all I am saying. Of course that comes with playing the game and seeing the results of such terrain.
    Where as , in cmX1 I will say, terrain was very much more like a mathematical formula. The results were pretty consistent also. Now, I would not say that anymore with the terrain, it can give you surprises.
  25. Upvote
    Vanir Ausf B reacted to antaress73 in Zala Capabilities   
    Javelin is standard US equipment and frankly in the games i've played they shoot once and then get killed by return fire, are supressed by HE artillery  or are severely degraded by my artillery deployed smokescreens. They Kill my tanks 50% of the time since I dash from tree to tree whenever possible so they are not a uberweapon against a competent russian commander  (like sublime). As for Abrams having an excellent chance of surviving return fire , I would say moderate since weapons mount, top armor and lower Hull penetrations are fairly common at the average ranges  in game (depressingly so when I play the US). Even the thickest armored parts (right and left front turret) are ônly 100% effective if the shot comes from head-on. As soon as the shooter is not right in front (a little bit to the side)  you start to see disabling partial and full penetrations on those areas.  You achieve this by having multiple spread out shooters at a single Abrams. The only part of the Abrams 100% invulnerable is the upper front Hull IF the shooter is at the same terrain level. If its higher its à question of luck.  
    I always play as or play against veteran and crack Russians .
×
×
  • Create New...