VladimirTarasov
-
Posts
817 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by VladimirTarasov
-
-
31 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
The Ukrainians are in DPR positions. Since they did not magically appear there, of course they were on the offensive at some point in the battle. The issue is if the DPR started an attack, got beaten back, and then Ukraine advanced. So this piece of logic only confirms what nobody is disputing.
I meant from our Ukrainian bros. I'd think that if this battle was going so right they'd have some footage of the left overs of the DPR offensive.
32 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:The old saying here is "the absence of evidence is not evidence" applies.
No of course... But seeing that DPR has footage I'd think the UAF would as well..
33 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:After all, how many times did Givi and Motorola take the Donetsk Airport? I lost count
Airport traded hands a lot. Crazy how long it took.
34 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:You're forgetting that there have been other disastrous DPR offensive activities in the past 2 years that didn't seem to make sense for the DPR, especially after the offensive activity was badly beaten. Two cases I can think of this happened and after the defeat things quieted down. No retaliation by regular Russian forces. Though Haiduk seems to be saying we might be seeing that happening now.
Yeah he mentioned a northern wind. If that's the case then I'd think the Ukrainians were the first to launch the offensive. And if that is the case... Looking at past battles as reference a bad counter-offensive might hurt the UAF.
-
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Unfortunately, the only people that know for sure what the purpose of the attack is are the same people that say there was no attack at all and that there's no Russian forces involved. Which means we are left with having to guess. The best way to guess is to put ourselves in the Russian commander's shoes and look at the situation from his perspective. Doing so indicates four primary reasons to launch the attack:
If we're guessing that won't work out... We can't even confirm whether Ukraine was the aggressor or DPR barbarians were. We have no actual footage or legitimate confirmation of the rebels attacking first. The zone around here has been actually facing shelling periodically before December 18th. One thing that doesn't make sense about this whole battle is why is there no footage or photo of these assaults. The Ukrainians managed to get their troops encircled... Which confirms they were on the offensive, but to my knowledge there is no photos of any DPR troops dead beyond the zones they were already stationed at. There's already footage from the DPR terrorists not supported by the locals of course; with Ukrainian bodies in their hands (I'd share but it's graphic if you want it I can DM you) also 3 Ukrainians were confirmed to be taken by DPR according to UA sources who are already claimed they have been executed, without evidence.
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:1. To gain ground
To my knowledge DPR already had the better ground in the area, high elevations. Would make no sense to advance further unless they wanted the media to do exactly what they're doing now, and probably with way better evidence rather than some tweets and statements.
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:To test capabilities (offensive and/or defensive)
Wouldn't make sense to do it during this time BECAUSE many things have already been tested in terms of tactics. Unless DPR or Kremlin is stupid enough to test company level capabilities in a hot zone of the war (Debaltsevo) I don't think this is going to be smart.
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:3. To keep grumbling soldiers occupied
Occupied by possibly reheating the conflict? Sounds legit.
3 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:4. To yield some sort of political leverage
For what Minsk 3? This is definitely not the case. DPR/LPR uprisings are already in hold of the major cities, however they still lack half their territories. Assaulting in order to gain leverage by risking this is not smart at all.
I'm still lost however on who actually started this offensive, but working by common sense the DPR has more to lose by this assault than UAF does. So I'm leaning with the UA started it narrative. Plus... Let's be honest here if Russia was the cause of this, the results would have been way different just as in August 2014. Not enough information to go off on this battle to make much of an analysis anyways.
-
-
11 minutes ago, HerrTom said:
Tell me about it. Quite the headache! Thank you Haiduk for the correction.
DPR guys say the Ukrainians launched the operation, they hit a minefield somewhere took some casualties from that during December 18, and the separatist FO got some strikes with mortars onto the UA forces. Artillery duels are being fought since December 18, constant bombardment. I'm not sure what source to believe in conflicts like these where both sides are known to exaggerate or lower casualty rates. I shared a video on the first page with an interview with a DPR Colonel, he also said that the UA forces suffered tens of losses.
-
3 hours ago, Kalavelka said:
Just a friendly thought: Threads would stay in focus if Vlad would be kicked next time he starts broadcasting
Happy holildays!
Great recommendations, merry Christmas to you as well!
3 hours ago, HerrTom said:Thanks everyone for the information about Censor.net! The More You Know!
All in all, it seems the following has happened:
18. Dec a DNR detachment attacked Ukrainian positions on hill 220, leaving 3 Ukrainian soldiers dead, and 4 dead and 1 wounded on the DNR side. In response, the Ukrainians lead a 20 man detachment to cut off the retreat, routing the DNR attack. In response, artillery fire commenced on Ukrainian positions. Ukrainian artillery moved forwards to retaliate but was unable to completely silence the DNR's guns. There may have been tanks and BMPs involved in the battle.
19. Dec further skirmishing and a cease fire of artillery at 2000L
20. Dec continued skirmish using infantry weapons - presumably DNR units from the neighbouring heights engaging the Ukrainian trenches and vice versa.
Overall, Ukraine says 7 dead, 1 missing, and 25 wounded. An IFV was damaged but repaired in the field.
So much sources saying so much different things just about this one battle.
-
39 minutes ago, Kalavelka said:
Why does the adminstration even let him spread his pro Kremlin propaganda time after time?
Listen if you think I'm a putin bot go ahead get me banned, I'm just sharing my view on the matter at hand. I'll stop commenting about politics if it really gets under your nerves that much.
-
20 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
The simple facts are:
Not going to start there because as our past arguments we've just stretched out for pages. But the thing is the Russian military wouldn't be able to organize the uprising if the people in the region didn't support it. It's not like we supported an uprising where the goal was to get to Kiev and topple the government (cough Syria and US/Saudi support for documented terrorists) it's strictly defensive in a way, if it was offensive I could see more than the half of Donbas controlled by now the same way it was happening in Syria. The conflict needs to stop Ukraine needs to recognize the region as autonomous and the war is over it's not going to spread over anywhere else is it?
20 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:the DPR/LPR didn't regularly block and interfere with the OSCE's activities, maybe they could cover the Russian point of view a little better?
Not true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MOukaoUrlQ this being one of many links to OSCE observers being able to freely observe. Anyways, the point wasn't whether or not they are allowed to observe it's that they don't report it fairly, and sometimes they just refuse to go and observe the militia areas. In this case Russian observers were present with this OSCE unit. OSCE is credible but reading other sources especially local ones that post high intensity shelling coming over the Ukrainian side, the reporting does seem unfair.
20 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:Not even remotely equivalent. The blogs are about as useful and useless on both sides, for sure, but the reporting out of the area by people who claim to be journalists is decidedly different in tone, content, and portrayal of reality. Which is understandable because Ukraine really is defending its country from a ruthless foreign enemy so it doesn't have to make up stuff like the Russian media does.
Oh yes Shevchenko being marked a Kremlin agent... Or the many other funny statements coming out of Ukraine. Even them supporting the recent killing of the Russian ambassador... Ukraine isn't defending anything... That is outrageous. Even the Ukrainians know the populace in the East is in support of DPR/LPR and Russian support... They lost the chance to be able to defend their nation after they couldn't defend the rights of the Russian minority in the country... In which they've been living as brothers with for centuries. Here's something I think we both can agree on; if the people who hated the old government would have forced a country wide election rather than oust the power right out without the say of the minority, things would have been less dramatic than the way they are now.
-
-
11 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:
The Russians want to destabilize Ukraine, Ukrainian politicians want reelection, and Ukrainian volunteers want to retake their land. It's funny to think a ceasefire will ever hold in this war.
I'm not going there because this'll turn into 30 pages of back and forth. So sure, Russia totally wants to mess up Ukraine. They unconstitutionally ousted the legal president of the time right? Or was that someone else?
11 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:OSCE is not biased. It is an independent observer that makes no claims and only records objective truth.
No definitely it does tell the truth that can't be argued about, but sometimes they aren't fair in what they record. A point that can be backed up by videos from DPR/LPR sources.
11 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:No offense but I do, and I get gems like "Ukrainian army crucifies little boy in Sloviansk for thinking in Russian" and "Eurofascists burn books written in Russian".
You know I face palm any time I do see something like that come from DPR/LPR sources, but every side has horrible sources and has credible sources. Ukraine isn't much better in that regard either.
-
15 hours ago, JUAN DEAG said:
http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/290011?download=true
On the 16th and the 17th militants push within small arms range and attempt to take outlying positions occupied by Ukrainian troops, Russians are supported with illegal artillery (122mm). Heavy firefight ensued. Ukrainians resisted the assault/probe with direct fire heavy weapons (HMG and SPG) and small arms. Attack likely failed due to good Ukrainian LOS on roads and fields to the south of Svitlodarsk.
On the 18th Ukraine responded to the attack with a mass violation of Minsk protocol by firing almost a 1000 rounds of 122mm at the separatists and even rolling tanks into the firefight. Separatists were working from nearby Debaltsevo (likely staging area of the attack, a lot of activity here) with BM-21 Grad, ZU-23, and BMP-2. In terms of casualties, the numbers are mixed but the general consensus is that the engagement went favorably for Ukrainian troops.
Everything I've just stated is supported by dates, weapons, and locations recorded by a reliable independent observer. No propaganda. Attack happened. The question is: why?
Both sides do shell each other, minsk 2 is broken every day... But you also need to look up Donetsk and Luhansk sources as well. They're in Russian and makes it difficult for that information to get out since most media outlets will be working with a bias for Ukraine. Daily shelling are reported from both sides... Local sources call it on, on both sides. The Ukrainians even posted a video with an assault on the Sveltodarskoi arc http://korrespondent.net/ukraine/3788765-opublykovano-vydeo-boia-n deleted after though of course.
-
6 hours ago, kinophile said:
So this was a Ukrainian attack initially? Was it an opportunistic battalion commander, attacking on his own initiative, or a division+ ordered attack to shut down artillery spotting?
Yes according to my sources it was a Ukrainian push and DPR counter-attacked. Doesn't look good for Ukrainian forces there for now.
Edit: Some of the separatists claims heavy casualties for Ukrainian troops so far in the area. Separatists seem to have lost around 30 troops and they claim Ukrainians lost like almost triple of that(80 I believe). Artillery duels are still on going. This is gonna escalate into something big.
Edit part 2: 80 plus KIA/WIA probably exaggerated but according to Haiduk's post if 50 guys are actually encircled and break through to reach them have failed then could be so.
-
1 hour ago, Holien said:
Are you saying there was no push? Does the media have it wrong?
If we go by what Ukraine says there's no truth, if we go by what DNR says we get the same result. Both sides claim the other has launched an assault, most of them are just claim with no evidence. The only solid fact is there was a battle, and both sides have fired artillery. I don't get why you're trying to act like the media would have it right most of the time anyways. Wherever it's from of course always some false information that could be reported wrongly.
-
Lol... So the separatists pushed!!! No just no...
-
49 minutes ago, Erwin said:
Have noticed that Russian arty strikes take a long time to arrive and are not accurate. For area fire you often have to set a point target. If you have a 25m area, the strike will cover 75m etc.
If this reflects RL, the Russians are in unbelievable trouble. So, am not sure that I do believe that their arty is this bad.
Not sure why it's so inaccurate in game. I called mortars on a apartment type structure had shells land 30 meters to the left.
-
@JUAN DEAG that gives Russia the go ahead to use nukes in self defense. Not a wise choice at all.
-
17 hours ago, HerrTom said:
Hell, why not. I still haven't finished a lot of stuff. Map itself needs road cleanup and the Russian briefing has some errors in it. And there's no Ukraininan briefing or AI plans. Here it is anyway!
Thanks really cool map tbh.
-
1 minute ago, gnarly said:
Listening to Kino's trash talk was even more fun!
Definitely he's a funny dude
-
Hmm... All this talk gets me wanting a battle. Kino or TFO or anyone else if you guys want a battle let me know. I'm sure someone here holds a grudge against me so... Watching you guys play was fun.
-
Excellent map, is there a link to the download? You're in for a fight if you've lost your forward defense lines.
-
47 minutes ago, Erwin said:
Unfortunately, jokes in English often don't work here as many don't have English as a first language. Can you explain the joke?
Joke was that if the dude was talking about commonality among the branches for the 30mm already; then does that mean it's going to have the A-10s or Apache's cannon but nevermind that obviously didn't work out the way I thought it would.
-
2 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:
The guns in the Apache and the Warthog are emphatically not the same even though they are of the same caliber. And their ammo is not the same.
Michael
No I know, I was just trying to make a joke.
-
23 minutes ago, Haveatya said:
This is why
AC-130 normally has a 40mm Bofors but some of the new special ones sub it out for a faster firing 30mm, though these are less common.
Could work IMO
-
Did the dude say commonality in the branches? Wasn't the only 30mm in the inventory the one on the Apache and the A-10 as well as the AC-130? which brings me to an idea, why not just install the A-10's cannon on the 'PC?
-
2 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:
REDFOR has a disadvantage in the game because in real life they are at a disadvantage. 'Balance' has absolutely no place in CM when it comes to core mechanics and the simulation of weapon capabilities. If you want a better tank for the Russians, or better ammo for the guns of Russian tanks, you'll have to wait for them to be developed and introduced in real life.
Obviously the M1A2 has great armor. But the top armor on modern Russian tanks aren't any weaker in the top than the Abrams, considering T-72B3s and T-90As have ERA on top, and obviously tanks on average do not really have any good top armor. A direct hit to my knowledge and reading upon experiences should kill or mess up the crew bad enough to render them useless or less capable than they were. Not to say Russian tanks are going to fair any better against artillery of course.
I'll agree with TheFO that the Abrams does need a slight tweak to it's resistance against artillery, and I'd also love for BFC to throw in some more artillery capabilities into the game, I'd wait months for it, it'd be worth it in the long run to simulate better battles. TOS-1As would be very very interesting. My Christmas wishlist is DPICM and illumination rounds to be honest
2 hours ago, IICptMillerII said:As far as the Javelin incident is concerned, I could offer an explanation. For instance, its possible that the explosion of the javelin next to the BMP-3 caused shrapnel to pierce the side armor of the BMP-3 and set off the very volatile ammo inside. "But wait, why can javelin shrapnel, a much smaller warhead, penetrate the side armor of a BMP-3 but artillery cannot do the same to a tank?" Its because the side armor on a BMP-3 is much, much thinner, and is likely only RHA
Considering the Javelin is a HEAT weapon it is very unlikely for a shrapnel to pierce the side armor of a IFV that has 22.5 RHA worth armor on the sides landing like half a meter or more away.
<--- *accurate representation of Vlad's feels right now*
Separatist push/Ukraine shove back
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
I was using the term in another way as in aggressor of the battle. Anyways I'm not going to get heated up over this... I'm arguing strictly militarily we dropped the political part way back.