DerKommissar

I'm happy to see that PLA is replacing their VAB-style 6x6s with a proper 8x8 platform. Looks like quite a platform too, so many different variants. A 155mm on a 8x8 APC chassis without supports? That suspension must be made of adamantium! It does look more roomy than the 82s, but also a bigger target. I am curious what those specialist vehicles behind the TOS-1A were, with the two large boxes on the turret. Is that some kind of ammo carrier, or some sort of engineering vehicle? Never seen anything like it. Also, I'm impressed VDV has so many BMD-4s, on the initial video they only showed BMD-2s. Does the BMD-4 also drop crewed? Yeah, it's surprising to see how far the SCO has come. I'll admit, I was a skeptic, myself.

Didn't some people want to separate from the US, a while back? I remember that too was not a bloodless enterprise. More currently, we got rid of Qaddafi -- so, Libya is officially peaceful? Last I heard, it's gotten even worse. They also supported Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war, he used chemical weapons against civilians. Well, at the top of my memory Iran Air Flight 655. How many assassinations has the CIA orchestrated? I don't know. I do know they tried to whack Castro a bunch of times. The GRU has much to learn about meddling in other countries' internal politics and regime changes from the CIA. Switzerland. They don't go out of their way to "help" other nations, and, incidentally, get people killed. Swiss didn't bomb Yugoslavia, invade Grenada or get involved in a civil war in Yemen. Yeah, my bad for OT. It was not my intention to get into a political argument. I try not to do it, but sometimes my amateur enthusiasm in history of geopolitics gets better of me. I'm Canadian, actually. Very informative thread, actually. Love the videos.

Welcome back! In my, entirely subjective opinion, BS maps *feel* smaller. Advances in optics and weaponry resulted in much longer engagement ranges. 1km in BN is medium range, 1km in BS is battlesight range. BS also tends to bring more units into the fold. So it feels like 10 guys fighting with pikes in an elevator. Modern warfare is lightning fast. Engagements last a fraction of a time that WW2 ones did. Getting both is a great idea. It's like two different types of games. Whenever I get too comfortable in WW2, I go into Modern titles and vice versa. Compare them and see which era you like the most. I own every CM2 -- I still can't decide which is better.

Absolutely. While the Allies tried to standardize, the Germans diversified. The Japanese tanks were absolute garbage, but preformed well when pitted against colonial forces and militias that had no tanks/little AT. Too bad they started bumping into more and more rank-and-file Allied troops. Yeah, I think this was the case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing. The factories in Czechoslovakia were tooled for the 38(t). So they started making various support vehicles based on the chassis, including the controversial Hetzer. Thousands of Marders served, on every front, well liked by troops, as they were mobile Paks. They were made of P. 2s, 38(t)s and french chassis'. Speaking of which, those statistics didn't mention French chassis-based vehicles. Which were also used, adding to the menagerie. Not enough resources/manpower/time to turn all factories to the most modern chassis. Especially when the most modern chassis changed yearly, and became increasingly more complicated, production-wise. Meanwhile somebody in the Reich was cranking out Elefants...

I'm just saying that if bullets are bouncing off your vehicle -- you may want to duck. xD Some of these guys are more brave than Braveheart.

Here's the way I play CM, this is the way to get the best experience: 1. Play RT without pause. 2. Turn off your screen. 3. Call your mates. 4. Make them play PBEM company leaders. 5. Make them play battlefield sounds at 11. 6. Have them report their situation to you. Give them your orders. 7. Somebody gets shot in-game? Hit in the head with a hammer. 8. Rinse and repeat until you're in the hospital. 9. Give yourself a medal.

Aye. You're not wrong. I recently noticed this with my Hanomags in Pieper campaign. It'd be nice if they had a bit more self preservation. If tracers are flying, keep your head down? When I fought US mech guys in BN quick battles, I picked out a bunch of supporting halftracks with basic infantry this way. I also have this issue with tankers. They'll be half-buttoned when shots are fired -- yet, they'll pop out their torso way too soon. Only way to be safe is to button them -- which makes them less safe because they can't sense anything.

I've always found that false flag op to be absolutely meaningless. Great Britain and friends declared war -- but did nothing to help Poland. Even when Poles fought for the Allies, few lifted a finger to help them during the Warsaw Uprising. We also often forget that SU was involved in a proxy war with GB in Scandinavia. At that time, Nazi Germany was seen as a potential client state of the SU. The RAF planned to bomb oil fields in the Caucuses during Battle of France. From that perspective, the German Wehrmacht in France was trained in SU and fueled by SU. Had Barbarossa not happened, who's corner do you think the SU would be in? Hardly surprising that in '45, the status quo returned. I would akin the "invasion" of Crimea to Anschluss more than '39. This being said I think the word "invasion" has been hit by the PC stick for the last 50 years. Are the NATO troops in Syria considered "invaders"? After all, the official government did not consent to them being within their borders? I'd mention Libya too -- but that was more than 5 years ago. In the West, there is paranoia about Eastern aggression and in the East, there is paranoia about Western aggression. Unfortunately, our hands are as dirty as the Russians. We just got better PR.

Yeah, never got why there weren't more women in tank crews in the West. Tanks tend to be small -- it makes perfect sense. Curious to see those bottom hull shields on one and the ERA on the other. I've always been curious about those bottom shields. I've never seen them outside of later T-80s. How useful are they? Always thought those sideskirts looked flimsy though. xD

I kinda want Rome to Victory... :x

The Tiger, as far as tanks go, wasn't a bad implementation of unrealistic requirements. The problem lies in that the niche the tank was set to fill was imaginary. Any original vision for it was lost during its long development. Germany ended up with another tank family that was difficult to manufacture and maintain, which was especially critical in the year they came in service. In '44 and '43, there's 7 different chassis of vehicles being manufactured. Notice that in 1944, Tiger I production dropped -- while P. 4 and P. 3 production increased significantly. It is also important to note for how many years the first 5 vehicles were manufactured. If you had an issue with your P.4, StuG or Marder -- you had the option of spare parts. If your Tiger broke down, you're gonna have to call Berlin to send you a replacement part. What is the Elefant doing there? Why were 90 Porsche hulls even produced? Those were terrible, even-more-over-engineered, designs (hybrids?) that were rejected. Who was overseeing this Tiger I program that didn't notice 90 expensive beasts being built that weren't asked to be built? Another symptom of the large problem of unrealistic requirements and troubled development of armoured vehicles during a very time-sensitive period. I'll admit that the blame on the interleaved suspension may not be founded. It's a nice concept. Why did no one else use it? Why were many of the tanks it was used on not successful? Like I said, it could just be bad luck. A lot of innovations the Germans put in their tanks were successful, but often not worth their price tag. The Allies would carefully watch them and try to make them practical. A lot of things seemed apparent to the Germans during WW2, it seems that the majority of them didn't materialize. With unrealistic forecasts, you get unrealistic requirements, with unrealistic requirements you get unrealistic designs. They predicted they could afford excess during a time when they were on a lean budget. After the early successes of the war, they thought they could afford these crazy last 4 designs. The Allies didn't try to jump over their heads. They saw what worked and improved on it. They had less families of tanks in production, for longer. Especially when their manufacturing was not yet at its peak, they stuck to very modern and simple designs. Simplicity was the goal, as opposed to making a dragon of a tank. At the end of the day, it's the difference of ideology. Germany was overly-ambitious to a very destructive effect. This is absolutely true. Heavy tanks were always the rockstars of AFVs. They carry massive propaganda value, from the Mark VIII to the Char 2b to the T-35. They're big, imposing and very happy to be put in newspapers. The ideological war was also being waged, not just the military war. Stalin put his name on this new heavy tank that would beat the Tiger, a tank that Hitler had sent to Kursk under personal supervision. Churchill is also a good example. It's also why these tanks remain symbols of all AFVs, to this day -- even if they did the least amount of work. A lot of the requirements for these designs were political. I think especially during the Tiger production, any practical requirements for the tank were overshadowed by the overbearing political requirements during its lengthy development period. The Tiger did rock the world, but not with its impressive performance -- but with its image of German superiority.

Enter the Armoured Breacher Vehicle, nick-named Shredder. It launches a rocket propelled line charge, clearing a path for its mates. Gotta love the USMC. There's plenty of other MBT engineering vehicles. They've been around for a long time. Wish we had these beauties in CM...

If they wanted to sort Kim out, they'd hardly need an invasion. Kim would simply have an accident, and be revealed to be a long-time Western sympathizer. Then Kim 2, a newly groomed leader would take charge of the party and do as their larger benefactors say. All of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again. I'll admit, I'd be pretty excited for CM: Korea, or Vietnam, or even FULDA GAP (if you can believe it). It'd play well with the Fallout soundtrack. No current (unless they update CMA) Cold War CM, though. Doubt we'll get one. BFC seems to be focusing on WW2 and the 21st century, so CM3 is probably gonna be set there.

While both of the previous answers to this rhetorical questions are valid. I think we often DO forget why we need tanks (MBTs), at all? In the early 2000s, when Canada got involved in Afghanistan. Government figured that tanks would be useless in that scenario, planning to replacing MBTs with IFVs. Instead, there proved to be not only a demand for tanks, but a demand for newer tanks than the Leo 1 derivatives. They even borrowed Leo 2a6s from the Germans. As the mission wrapped up, very recently, they actually replaced C2s with Leo 2a4 variants. So what are tanks good for? If not for fighting other tanks? Modern ATGMs are getting better and a platform like a Bradley can do that. Tanks were originally conceived as an answer to the static fighting of WW1. Smashing through trenches, demolishing pillboxes and taking a beating -- so the infantry won't have to. Tank on tank engagements were unheard of until the Spanish Civil War. It would still take years after for nations to start focusing on anti-tank capabilities of tanks. Much like cavalry of old, an MBT smashes through defensive lines, much as they did in WW1. For this task, they need the heaviest armour and the biggest guns. IFVs carry and support infantry, they are not meant to spearhead into the enemy's kill zone. To this day, you can watch tanks smashing through barriers in Ghouta and demolishing infantry fortifications made from rubble. Infantry and their IFVs come after, and clean up. If they roll into the killzone, they'll become a burning wreck. Guess what the 2a4s in Afrin were there for? This World of Tanks culture, partly inspired by defensive tank tactics of NATO in West Germany, has put emphasis on AFVs fighting other AFVs. While this is, no doubt, still a priority, the infantry still rules the modern battlefield. Fighting holed up infantry isn't as glamorous as tank duels, but it's the reality 90% of the time. Using the performance of an AFV in aduel as a metric really does a disservice to a lot of these vehicles.

Implying that SF Canucks = 'nam Yanks? ... Hey, we're replacing our M113s, okay? Eventually... in 2020... maybe... Also, Hueys and Sea Kings... Oh wait... xD

Inquisition has arrived. (When you really think about it, a T-80UK IS a hideously mutated T-64... on steroids)

Panther started development in '38, the Tiger in '37. Panther entered service in '43, and Tiger in '42. Tiger started being replaced in '44 and the Panther needed to be overhauled (as half of them broke down on the way to Kursk). The T-34 started development in '37 and entered service in '40. Sherman started development in '40 and entered service in '42. The USA picked the simplest of all competitors. Both serving well into the 50s. Churchill tank was designed in '40 and entered service in '41. It seems Hitler was a perfectionist with tanks, much to their detriment. He would famously demand tanks to be better both better armoured and weigh less. In reality, the workhorses were still the STuG and P. 4. Now, think F-35, or the Comanche. This is a typical problem in any development cycle, not exclusive to military hardware. This is what happens when requirements are constantly updated, and often contradictory. By the time it's "ready" for prime-time, its fundamental purpose is already obsolete. As for AT guns... CM doesn't have horses. Even lighter ones are impractical to be pushed by soldiers. Trucks often can't get where the AT gun is/needs to go. So, hopefully you deploy them in the right place.

Opfor Cinematic Universe: Infinity War

The Tiger is a text book case of over-engineering. Take the suspension for example, it's more complex than ordinary torsion bar and works well on paper. Too bad the interleaved wheels get jammed with mud and snow. Tiger also had a long and hectic development, too. The Porsche version actually went into production, albeit very briefly -- which was MORE expensive, complicated and unnecissary. The Tiger was designed with expensive parts, and took a lot of time to manufacture. From my brief look in the manual, it looks like the maintenance was involved. How/were would one find parts to fix it? The T-26 was a budget tank from the start. Soviet doctrine being that tanks are meant to be replaced, not repaired. The worst part is that they weren't really necessary for most of the war. That's why the production was low and its successor only came in `44 -- when they became necessary. Tiger II production began in 43. If the Tiger was such a good design, why begin replacing it after less than a year? Funny enough, the Tiger II had worse reliability and many of them broke down before they ended up on the Eastern Front. Why not continue building Tiger Is? I always saw heavy tanks as the rockstars of tanks. They're larger than life,really cool in concept, great propaganda, yet unnecessary and sickly in practice. How many designs did the Soviets go through before reaching the IS-2? How soon would they have replaced it with the IS-3?

In March, I preordered a game called Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2. It's a sequel to a shiny game, based on a well known IP and published by Focus Home Interactive on Steam. The release date, on their store page was September 2018 -- beta would be available one month prior for preorders. As the year moved from spring through summer, people in the community started predicting release date -- as there was no communication from the devs since January. Some said the beta would be released in late September -- game being released in October. These were worst case scenario based on info from the dev, publisher and Steam. As September began, we got an update from the dev. This included a minute trailer and an announcement that they pushed back release to January 2019. On these forums people often bring up stories about better release dates/communication. The truth is that most of the industry treats their customers much worse, often using communication to purposefully deceive them. Striving for better is always great, but it's also important to appreciate what you do get. You can be getting a broken, unifinished and lackluster game from a company that spends millions on publicity. Demos that are absolutely unrepresentative of the product are industry standard now.

Exciting, mayhaps -- but certainly not surprising? There's been at least 4 Indo-Pakistani wars since the end of WW2, roughly one war every 20 years. Considering both nations possess nuclear weapons, I think it's good to see them pretending to get along for the in-laws. Who knows? The 5th one is soon overdue -- hopefully it won't happen. So they're doing Peace Mission, Vostok and Mediterranean exercises all at the same time?

"The Russian batteries, however, were situated so far to the rear of the Russian main line of resistance that although they were able to hit the German battle position with long-range fire, they could not, in turn, be reached by the German artillery from normal firing positions. In some cases the German sound-ranging battery did not even manage to detect these distant Russian batteries. If, however, German artillery was displaced forward and employed close behind the German main line of resistance in order to shell a Russian battery which had been located, it was very soon identified by the Russians — whether by means of sound-ranging equipment could not be determined — and was shelled by 80-mm and 120-mm mortars (the latter had a range of six kilometers), against which it was helpless, and, in addition, was taken under fire by Russian artillery." - H.G. Richert ( http://www.allworldwars.com/Tactics-and-Fire-Control-of-Russian-Artillery-in-1941-44-by-Richert.html ) The paper also states that 82mm and 120mm mortars were often used together for pounding infantry -- and for counter fire, apparently. "In two known instances the Russians again used artillery observer? who were located behind the German battle position and had radio communications. The Russian artillery directed excellently adjusted fire at all targets which the observers were able to see, and this lasted until the observers were tracked down and killed." - H.G. Richert An interesting tactic, I believe this quote's from the early war section, which is kind of weird. Saying that the Soviets DIDN'T use radios would be inaccurate. "When the Russians conduct a defense with weak artillery, especially on the broad front, mortars of the infantry and elements of heavy machine gun units are attached to the divisional artillery in addition to the heavy mortar battalions which are regularly assigned to the artillery. Then the fire of all these units is controlled according to a single plan. " - H.G. Richert It looks like they had special Artillery officers attached to Infantry division command, who was responsible for all fire missions -- including infantry guns and HMGs. The theme is that the Artillery arm would centralize all artillery, so it could be used according to operational plans.

The latter ones are better, IMHO. Kursk is probably my favourite. They're like super cheap on Steam too, I got like the entire collection for like 8 CAD.

Aye, nearly all IFVs are made with that, in mind. Linebackers would also be nice. AA MGs are also mounted on many vehicles. Never saw them shooting up at helis. Yeah, their IR passive guidance makes them very accurate, and virtually impossible to detect. Recent advances have increased their range and resistance to countermeasures. And they're pretty much mounted on everything, nowadays. Including helicopters! This being said, AD was never really a focus of CM. And like any weapon, it is more effective when well networked, coordinated and supplemented by other tech. I think it'd be cool if we got radar warnings for incoming air targets. Stealthier craft would be a boon. Also it'd be cool to have an abstracted Patriot or S-X00 defenses -- flying in from off-map.

Good to see that Vampires can also serve in the Armed Forces.