Jump to content

IICptMillerII

Members
  • Content Count

    1,266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

IICptMillerII last won the day on September 2 2019

IICptMillerII had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About IICptMillerII

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,686 profile views
  1. Yeah... no. There isn’t a single doctrine, SOP, ATP, or TTP out there that assumes anything is invincible, especially when it comes to hardware. In fact, every single one of those governing documents/doctrines/procedures assumes (correctly) that the hardware is not only capable of failure/destruction, but most likely will even under ideal circumstances. Just because something is considered survivable or hard to kill dies not mean it’s ok for that thing to take damage or be in a compromising position. Humans can survive direct hots from .50 caliber rounds and even 25mm HE. Does that mean everyone disregards these things as threats though? No, of course not. The whole “muh murican” memes are old and boring and definitely shouldn’t be used as an example of anything, especially survivability against ATGMs or RPGs.
  2. Yeah I have to parrot @DerKommissar on this one. Citino is very highly regarded by the US Army among others, and his book titled “Blitzkrieg to Desert Storm” is in fact a fantastic overview of modern maneuver warfare. I would say Citino is quite well versed in the nuance of at least operational warfare in a WWII and post WWII world. While I’ve read his maneuver warfare book, I have not read any of his books that cover in depth German military operations, strategy and operational art during WWII, but I also know that these works are highly regarded by sources I trust. So again I have to disagree with your claim that he lacks the needed knowledge to discuss/analyze these topics.
  3. Agree completely. The more content the better.
  4. Big fan of that first screenshot of the fighters moving along the mountain trail at night, very cool!
  5. Those skins look great! I think they would fit in very well in @Combatintman's 'Op Baras' Scenario. Looking forward to the release!
  6. The only way for this to be tested and verified as an issue is for savegames to be posted/submitted for testing and review. If you notice this behavior, save the turn and submit it.
  7. Winter on the Eastern Front, in CM, finally! Thanks for the bones! Especially glad to see that Black Sea will be getting some love in the (hopefully) near future. Looking forward to the new content. Happy New Years!
  8. No military is going to advertise its losses, to the enemy it is fighting, during the conflict. “Hey Adolf, you knocked out xx Sherman’s this month! Just wanted to let you know so you know that us allies are the good guys because we disclose everything immediately!” -Eisenhower, showing the world that being a war fighter is no excuse not to disclose the truth at all times. The vast majority are wear and tear. Sorry to shatter the sexy image, but after 2003-2004 tanks simply weren’t heavily used all over the place (or really at all in Afghanistan) because they were the wrong tool for the job. On top of that, no one was driving these things down city streets to be lit up by RPGs from every possible angle. So do most heavy units that rotate through NTC. No joke, this happens. A unit slated for a deployment will go to NTC for a train up and break all of their equipment, rendering them unable to deploy. Granted that isn’t the norm, but it has happened a few times. Point is, combat conditions and just general field operations are hard on vehicles. They require constant maintenance to keep in the field. And there are different levels of maintenance as well. All those Bradley’s at a depot in TX? Those are deadlined vehicles that have to be repaired by the company that makes the Bradley. Not from combat damage, but regular wear and tear. These vehicles are 30-40 years old, and are handled by 18-20 year olds who are tired, hopped up on caffeine, and pissed off at everything. And they’re essentially driving a big rental vehicle that they perceive to be invincible. How long do you think your car would last in the hands of a 19 year old with a fetish for amateur off-roading? Again, the point is that regular wear and tear does far more damage to vehicles than people realize. Not to mention the desert is not a friendly environment to vehicles. As you correctly point out, a US Abrams does not equal an Iraqi Abrams. And the fact that the Iraqis lost so many tanks to ISIS is no surprise. You know who the Iraqis also lost a lot of tanks to? Literal human wave attacks in the Iran-Iraq war. As in Iraqi tanks in fighting positions were overrun by Iranian human wave attacks, across open terrain. Yeah... I think it’s safe to say that Iraq could use some remedial training in the art of armored warfare. I certainly agree on both points here. I don’t think RPGs are undermodeled, and I also think that the wounded to killed ratio in general, but specifically with vehicle crews favors killed over wounded far too much. But I suppose that’s a different discussion.
  9. Thanks for the screenshots MOS. Perfect time of year to play some CMFB. I think your screenshots really help to show how atmospheric CMFB is. Looks like a great scenario too!
  10. Well, there’s a lot going on here... First and foremost, anecdotal evidence is not evidence. Not saying this to belittle, just state a fact. There’s an anecdote of a B-17 crew member falling over 10k feet and surviving, but I won’t be using that as an example of why parachutes are not needed. As to RPG vs armor, I frankly have no idea what you’re talking about here. I’ve never seen an RPG-7 do more than scratch the paint on an Abrams in game, and there are a whole multitude of AARs and other documented examples of this here on the forum. Further, most ATGMs, to include the AT-14 are largely ineffective against the frontal armor of the M1. This is all realistic and very well modeled. I have two ideas of what it may be that you’re seeing. The first is that for whatever reason you are putting your vehicles in highly vulnerable positions. Driving a stryker or a tank down a narrow alleyway where it can be engaged from the sides and rear at point blank range by anti-tank weapons is never healthy, even if the anti-tank weapons being used against them are generally ineffective under ideal circumstances. If you allow the enemy a chance to get that lucky shot off, chances are it'll happen. Second, its possible that you were up against RPG-29s. Not sure how much you know about the RPG-29, but in a nutshell its got a monster HEAT warhead that is capable of cutting through all kinds of armor, including the Abrams, from most aspects. It could have been that whatever scenario you were playing, OpFor were equipped with a large number of RPG-29s and you were on the receiving end of it. Both Syrian special ops and fighter formations come with the RPG-29. As to "reducing RPG accuracy" that mostly comes down to the skill of the operator. Conscript soldiers will be much less accurate with an RPG than Veteran or Elite soldiers will be. Motivation will affect how much fire they're willing to brave to get off a shot. As for reducing the "killing power" of an RPG by "90" I would strongly disagree here. CM does an exceptional job of simulating armor and the weapons made to defeat armor. RPG warheads are well modeled in this respect, and I highly doubt that their hard coded "stats" are going to be changed anytime soon. (Unless of course you can prevent Steve and the BFC crew with credible sources showing that the RPG is in fact over-modeled, though I think this would be a fools errand.) I will give you this however, I do think that if CM modeled weapon failure rates more, then the base RPG-7 available to the Syrians would be much less effective. In Iraq 2003 a large number of RPG-7 warheads fired at US forces failed to detonate. There were Bradley's that got hit dozens of times but the RPG's literally just bounced off the armor because they had bad fuses and such. This was mostly due to the Iraqi's having large amounts of cheap knockoff Chinese warheads that even under ideal circumstances would have failed to perform more often than not. Add into that equation less than ideal storage and maintenance by the Iraqi's and the high failure rates of the warheads makes a lot of sense. The Syrians (at least the fighters/combatants) would very likely suffer from the same affliction in game, so I do think there is an argument for increasing the rate of weapons failure in game. .
  11. I'll definitely be using a different font for future AAR projects for the picture captions. I've gotten a number of comments about them being hard to read and I definitely intend to take the advice and change it. Thanks for the feedback!
  12. Just wanted to pop in and give a quick update. This AAR isn't dead. I'm back among the living though I have very little free time at the moment, and I currently don't have the files for this AAR with me. I may be able to get them next month, but if not the AAR will not resume until the Spring. Apologies to those who are eagerly awaiting the next update. I hope that knowing the AAR is not dead and just on hiatus is some consolation. I'm excited to get back to this when I get the chance, especially now that C:MO has been released.
  13. Ha very true. Though I'm not sure I can hold a candle to those authors. Can't wait for the next book in the series!
  14. An update for those of you following along: Unfortunately, I will not be able to finish this AAR until later this year. I'm going to be away for the next few months. I did my damnedest to get this finished before I had to leave, but in the end there just wasn't enough time. However, I fully plan on finishing this AAR when I return. The good news is that there shouldn't be too many more updates until we reach the conclusion, so when I get back I should be able to bang out the last few parts. Apologies for the unexpected mid-AAR cliffhanger.
×
×
  • Create New...