Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Russian aps   
    In service T72B3 with Arena.

    How many APS equiped BTR-4s does Ukraine operate?
  2. Like
    Bydax reacted to Pelican Pal in TO&E Bug? Missing MG in Panzergrenadier squads.   
    @Warts 'n' all

    Ts4EVER mentioned that it would be nice to see more captured equipment in the game. In response to that you decided to fill up the thread with your chaff attacking him for some thing or another that happened on youtube. If you think that is defending BF (or that they particularly need a white knight on their own forum) please stop it.

    If you don't like his content go to youtube and dislike it, unsubscribe, post in the comments section. But so far in this thread you are the one making an unpleasant ruckus and not Ts4EVER.  There are 31 posts in this thread - nearly a full 25% of them consist of you complaining. Yet Ts4EVER is the problem.


    I would like to see far more captured weapons, and hopefully as modules finally release for RT and FB we'll see some. One thing I've noticed reading veteran's narratives are that captured equipment were found almost everywhere - although I'm sure that has a bit to do with them sticking out in the minds of the soldier at the time. Its worth pointing out that someone is using a PPSH, and not so much all the guy with MP-40s.


    Most of what I've read points to the Germans having a general issue getting supplies to men at the front, and not necessarily an actual lack of the item. E.G. many German units were understrength not so much because there weren't men to fill the spots - but that the men weren't where replacements were needed.


    Do you have a link to those reports, I would appreciate it if you did.
  3. Like
    Bydax reacted to Ts4EVER in TO&E Bug? Missing MG in Panzergrenadier squads.   
    Just because they call it an "engine upgrade" doesn't mean it's more than a patch. Bug fixes and quality of life improvements behind a paywall are on the same level as those silly loot boxes they have in "triple A" games. Also nice from warts and all to apparently completely leave behind the point of "plugging new games", instead looping back to the start, ensuring that the conversation will go nowhere. But I guess at least you displayed what you mistake for wit, so congrats.
    Anyway, to actually return to the way more interesting discussion of this thread:
    Well, let's look at the monthly reports of different divisions. This time around the late 1944 era, since we are in the Ardennes game forum.
    Lastly, for the Red Thunder game;
    In conclusion, I think it would be cool to have this kind of obsolete or foreign equipment ingame, maybe when setting equipment levels to low. Some of these weapons actually already exist ingame and the Beretta MP is already used by Germans in Fortress Italy.
  4. Like
    Bydax reacted to Frenchy56 in TO&E Bug? Missing MG in Panzergrenadier squads.   
    I think BF could investigate adding new weapons like these in addition to vehicles. I doubt it would cost many resources, and it would add a nice touch to low-quality and rear-guard units.
    I have noticed that many vehicles introduced by some modules could be added to other games. The Brummbar from CMFI and CMFB could find its way into CMBN, like the upcoming StuG IV for R2V.
  5. Like
    Bydax reacted to Pelican Pal in TO&E Bug? Missing MG in Panzergrenadier squads.   
    Christ guys - if you don;t like his videos then don't watch the damn things. So far it looks like TS4EVER is the only one posting anything of interest here. If you are just going to be ****ty about it don't post.
  6. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Russian Artillery - long time to arrive   
    Incidentally your whole view on the organisation of fire support in Russian service appears to be wrong an bizzarre to me, I think this was discussed in the other thread. This is concerning as if you are using modern documents discussing the modern employment of Russian artillery then the whole establishment that produces them seems to be incompetent.
    To that end I would suggest reading one of the better writers on topic - Grau, for example this article:
    or this book for the bigger picture (it is sadly a bit outdated now):
    For example if an artillery battalion was to be allocated to direct support of a tactical unit (or if an artillery group was formed for that same purpose) then the artillery commander of that battalion would move and be co-located with the tactical unit he supports and would be the one drawing up artillery employment plans and would have direct voice and data link to his subordinate HQ in the rear, with the artillery battalion itself.
    This method, while not being the only one, is the one imbeded into the organisational structure of the artillery units and their automation complexes, such as the one you could see above. For the older (than present day) automation complexes (such as the one depicted above) the time within which is processes the calls is 50s I seem to recall.
  7. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Russian Artillery - long time to arrive   
    The fires are called in by the forward based artillery officer, not the manuever unit commander. As such I am not sure how the above is applicable.
    Incidentally this is why you get separation between commander's vehicles and senior officer's vehicles down to battery level, one moves with the troops, the other stays with the guns. Such direct and competent control of arty, all other things being the same, allows for faster fires.

  8. Upvote
    Bydax reacted to Thewood1 in Update on Engine 4 patches   
    Graviteam is not a huge team.  Its a few guys.  Their PR person is the main dev.  He can be a dick, but part of it is a language issue, with a little cultural issue thrown in.  Graviteam responds daily to comments in their forum on Steam.  And they do basically monthly updates to address any issues that come up.  And they are very interactive with their customers on issues with the game and suggestions for change.
  9. Like
    Bydax reacted to Rinaldi in ~5 minute video of what I think is Azov on parade   
    Everyone, let's take a moment to give @Sgt.Squarehead a slow clap for his fantastic bait. We already have a nationalist spaz-out in response. 
    Telemark Battalion DUI:

    2.SS Das Reich DUI:

    Really makes you think friendo. Going to be a Y I K E S from me. 
  10. Upvote
    Bydax reacted to DMS in More drama in Ukraine--Sea of Azov   
    -You Soviets shoot at our German planes!
    -But... They bomb our airfields!
    -It is whataboutism! We discuss how you shoot at German planes!
  11. Upvote
    Bydax reacted to DMS in More drama in Ukraine--Sea of Azov   
    To all guys who said about Russia grabbing something.
    Did you ever hear about Russian ship "Nord", that was captured by Ukrainians in Azov sea? Just because she visitited Crimia ports. Captain is still in prison. Ukrainians refuse to release him. I think that you didn't. Am I mistaken?
  12. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Vostok-2018   
    I doubt that they had some 25k troops, 7k equipment items and 250 helicopters and aircraft in that movie (those are the stated numbers for Cugol training area where the main focus of the exercise would be, as well as PLA/Mongolian troops)

    The plan for Cugol trainin area exercsie

    Split between "eastern" and "western" forces
  13. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Vostok-2018   
    Looks like Vostok-2018 main event would be a battle of the 5 Armies, with 2 from Center and 3 from East on a single training area.
  14. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Vostok-2018   
    You are welcome, but actual Vostok-2018 final exercise would start later this month
    It appears that there are also a number of other exercises and events going on, such as:
    - large exercise in Med from combined forces from Northern, Baltic, Black, Caspian, Red seas, 26 ships and vessels would participate, including 2 submarines, as well as 34 aircraft. Flagship would be Marshal Ustinov cruiser. The force would be supported by Naval Aviation MPA  (Tu-142 and IL-38 series) and fighter aircraft (Su-33 and Su30SM), as well by Long Range Aviation's Tu160 bombers.
    - RVSN exercise, with mobile TELs being dispersed onto their patrol routes.
    - Peace Mission joint exercise of the SOC countries held in southern Urals region (so in the Vostok-2018 area but separate from it), video related:
  15. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Vostok-2018   
    Review by Kofman, a good read as always.
  16. Like
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Vostok-2018   
    Yes, it is that time of the year and the big annual exercises begin.
    I would try to cover them, as it seems to me that they are not covered otherwise here and that they may be of interest to the public here.
    While they may not be as exciting as Zapad-2017 or Kavkaz-2016 to certain observers in Europe (as we can remember said observers claimed that those exercises are a cover up for an attack on Baltic and Ukraine)  they do seem to be the biggest exercises since Zapad-1981 with 3 MDs (East, Central, North) and various centrally commanded assets (VDV and others) participating. Overall it appears that the overall event can be split into 3 main parts:
    - surprise alert drills
    - logisics/rear area exercises
    - actual final exercises
    Between the three above it appears that around 1/4 (some 262k servicemen) participated (and/or will participate, as final exercises would be in September) in the event,
    The scenario appears to be combating a mass attack by a peer adversary, with a lot of emphasis placed on:
    - mobilisation
    - rear services such as repairs and logistics
    - inter theatre and local relocation of forces (especially aircraft), dispersal (ie to back up airfields or road strips)
    - counter sabboteur exercises (by some VDV air assault units and by Navy)
    - cruise missile strikes (by Tu95MSs, Iskander-Ms, Bastions)

    Overall it is unclear who is the adversary, as large scale invasion, which would warrant the scale of the exercise, by Western Forces seems implausible in the East and China is participating with some 3200 troops as an ally rather than as an enemy.
    Some footage by Zvezda:
  17. Upvote
    Bydax reacted to ikalugin in Russian army under equipped?   
    A bit late (but then I don't really post here much anymore):
    A new contract for 132 Armata based vehicles has been sighned, so it seems that Armata is moving towards LRIP and brigade sized IOC.
    Full scale rearmament, however, indeed has been pushed beyound 2020 with all the delays, which creates a need for the T90A->T90M upgrades, as the Ground Forces need more tanks than the 1000+ run of T72B3s can provide.
  18. Like
    Bydax reacted to BTR in Russian army under equipped?   
    So, we know that MoD ordered 132 Armata-based vehicles. Previously we knew that they were to sign a contract of two tank and one IFV battalions which was to be "more than a hundred" vehicles so these two things match. Under regular ToE this would mean the following - 
    41x2 Т-14 + 2x Т-16 = 84
    44x1 Т-15 + 1x Т-16 = 45
    If we count an IFV battalion with AGL support platoon. This comes to 129 vehicles. If we include organic battalion recon platoon of three T-15s which were planned in 2008 but never realized we get the 132 vehicles we need.
  19. Like
    Bydax got a reaction from DerKommissar in Russian army under equipped?   
    T-72B3 obr.2016  production ≈ 150 per year.

    68th Tank Regiment 150th Motorized Rifle Division.

    5th Tank Brigade.

    1st Tank Regiment 2nd Motorized Rifle Division.

    6th Tank Brigade.
    T-72B3M ≈ 20 in 2nd Motorized Rifle Division.
    T-80BVM* 10 (2017)

    61st Naval Infantry Brigade.
    *Tanks for Naval Infantry don't have additional side armor.
    Contracts for T-80BVM/T-90M:
    T-80BVM  62 (2018-2019).
    T-90M ≈ 60 (2018-2019).
  20. Like
    Bydax reacted to sid_burn in The patch?   
    This is a bad argument. They keep all relevant information (sales figures, cash flow, etc.) secret ostensibly to "protect it from competition." Just pointing to longevity is ridiculous, for all you know they could have been limping along for 20 years, it's literally impossible to know how successful they are. 
    I'll tell you what's not a sign of a good company, releasing an update with a game breaking bug (I consider it game breaking because it effectively makes the single player unplayable, unless you enjoy effortlessly gunning down fleeing AI troops) and charge $10 for it. Then going over a year and a half without any sign of a fix on the way. Bonus points for the fact that the update to fix 4.0 will also likely require you to pay for it because BFC loves its customers so much that they nickle and dime them for basic bug fixes. 
    But hey, I gotta give some credit to BFC, they've clearly mastered the art of building up a dedicated fanbase. Paying customers are demanding some action to fix their game, and we got @IanL throwing out terms like snowflakes, because screw them for wanting to be able to play their $60 game without using janky workarounds. 
  21. Like
    Bydax reacted to HerrTom in How accurate *is* CMBS?   
    Quit reminding me that I haven't finished that yet!
    Not just direct hits.  Nearby hits too - particularly with APCs and IFVs.

    That 152mm shell that lands five meters from your BTR is going to ruin its day!  A Bradley may only have a few holes, though.
    Man... now that I brought this up I need to go back to coding... pfah. 
  22. Like
    Bydax reacted to kinophile in How accurate *is* CMBS?   
    You miss the point - its the Abrams unrealistic reaction/acquire/fire time that bothers a lot of "us". Not the T-90's. It , for now, is a reasonably dangerous beast, not the magical psychic 6-eyed unicorn that the Abrams can sometimes feel like.
  23. Like
    Bydax reacted to IMHO in How accurate *is* CMBS?   
    Seems like US commanders do not share your opinion that Abrams does not need ERA.

    My understanding is by saying "infantry held AT weapons being fired from complex geometries" you meant ligher hand-held RPGs as an antithesis to heavier tripod-based ATGMs. No doubt Trophy provides protection against RPGs as well but I believe your statement that was the main intention of Trophy development is invalid. Here's an excerpt from "Hezbollah anti-amour tactics and weapons. Assessment of the Second Lebanon War By Col. David Eshel":
    Realizing the capabilities of the Merkava 4 tank, Hezbollah allocated their most advanced weaponry to combat this advanced tank, engaging these tanks exclusively with the heavier, more capable missiles such as 9M133 AT-14 Kornet, 9M131 Metis M and RPG-29. RPG-29 and 9M113 Konkurs (AT-5) were employed mostly against Merkava 3 and 2 while non-tandem weapons, such as Tow, Fagot and improved RPG 7Vs were left to engage other armored vehicles such as AIFV My points:
    In many interviews after 2006 Lebanon War Israeli said that they underestimated the threat posed by modern heavy ATGMs and Israli tanks sustained considerable losses. Second Lebanon War's battles was fought mostly in rural rather than urban settings. Israel dispatched a special diplomatic mission to Russia to compain s"pecifically about Syria's passing of its Russia's supplied Kornet heavy ATGM to Hezbollah. Israel sped up testing and system selection for APS right after the war. Since hard-kill APS poses a considerable danger to nearby infantry Israel changed their urban warfare doctrine after the Trophy was inducted into the armored force. Infantry now follows tanks at a distance. This difficulties in infantry-tank cooperation was actually one of the main criticism of the Trophy implementation. So I do believe your statement that "TROPHY is intended to protect tanks in urban environments from infantry held AT weapons" is misleading.
    Can you provide specific names/models for those "most modern and lethal ATGMs, which only exist in double digit numbers"?
    Kornet vs. American Abrams, 2003 Iraqi War: from 2 to 4 reported penetrations, tanks disabled. Iraqi military possessed limited number of Kornets as they have never been officially supplied, only few were smuggled from Syria. RPG-29 vs. American Abrams, 2003 Iraqi War: 3 reported penetrations, crews wounded/killed. RPG-29 vs. Challenger 2, 2003 Iraqi War: one known FRONTAL ERA penetration, crew wounded. RPG-29 has way less armor penetration than Kornet yet American military prohibited post-Saddam Iraqi Army from buying them http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/weekinreview/big-guns-for-iraq-not-so-fast.html.
    "He [General Jassem of Iraqi Army] also complained that the United States wants to supply his troops with RPG-7's, the Soviet-era rocket-propelled grenade launcher. 'Why are they always giving us the oldest models?' he asked, saying he likes the more modern, larger caliber RPG-29, which penetrates armor better. But such weapons could raise a threat against the United States if they fell into the wrong hands ... "The RPG-7 is more versatile than other antitank weapons, which really only have one use -- destroying armor," the senior American officer said."
    Israel is well known for putting specific emphasis on tanks protection. If we put aside the argument that a way more modern Merkava-4 is less protected than American Abrams just by pure magic of it not being American then 2003 Lebanon War may be a good proxy for evaluating modern tanks protection level against current ATGMs.
  24. Like
    Bydax reacted to IMHO in How accurate *is* CMBS?   
    Abrams armor plates

    Chobham/Burlington armor of Chieftain

    Merkava armor

    And the last but not the least... T-72B armor

    @IICptMillerII, I believe we can be fairly sure no one passed the "dreaded secret" of Chobham armor to the Soviet Union. It's just the laws of the physics are the same be it US, UK, Israel or the Soviet Union so the engineers come to the same designs when concieving similar things. I can tell you even more:
    The effect that forms the basis of the spaced composite armor / NERA (Chobham armor) was first used in the armor of the Soviet tanks albeit in a different, considerably less efficient setup And even more, the way Kontakt-5 ERA works is the same as NERA, it's just NERA uses the energy of incoming projectile while ERA - the energy of chemical explosion
  25. Like
    Bydax reacted to IMHO in How accurate *is* CMBS?   
    Not quite right... Ehhh... CMBS' LWR-equipped tanks (like M1) acquire ATGM-launchers almost instanteniously. What is the basis for such a behaviour when real life LWRs (Thales, Leonardo) give you 30/45 degrees sector??? Instant target acquisition in a 30/45 degrees sector at a distance of 2-4km??? Why not have an Abrams with an ion-gun then?
    And it has profound impact on the gameplay. In real life (Yemen, Syria) we see tanks being burned every time they are careless enough while facing an ATGM-armed opposition. In CMBS a platoon of Abramses can simply drive through the whole map blasting everyone around.
  • Create New...