Sergei Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 (edited) Hello, I've joined this website after watching a live stream of this game and thought I would join and could provide some information. I served in the Russian Airborne Forces during the 2008-2011. You are in a tight situation and knowing that M1A2 is overpowered in most games I think you are in a tight situation. It really does annoy me that M1A2 surpasses the T-90A even the AM variant. Go defensive use RPG-7 with VR rocket and flank tanks from the sides. No need to risk any tanks. Tanks should be a layer of defense for now once you thin out his forces go for a push on the weakest flanks. Artillery tree lines that you fear enemies are and use infantry on his flanks and take out recon teams and anti tank teams. This should provide you more easy maneuvers. Artillery is key if you want to thin out enemy forces never over think if you should use it or not. If there is a anti-tank unit there is bound to be its support team nearby bomb the location this is an example though. I like this no-nonsense, informational approach! Welcome! So, as you know, we have this mandatory funny anecdote requirement for all newcomers... P.S. Did you play CM Afghanistan and if so, what did you think of it? Edited January 9, 2015 by Sergei 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet 0369 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Still trying to get one of my damned BMPs to fire at the wall... I've wasted a couple turns now trying to get them to fire at it and not use airburst. If you have anything with a 30mm close by, that should take down the wall. ChrisND used it to open a wall in one of his Twitch when he did the first mission of the Ukr campaign. It did a very nice job of opening a passage. I think he was using a BTR, but I'm not sure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VladimirTarasov Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I like this no-nonsense, informational approach! Welcome! So, as you know, we have this mandatory funny anecdote requirement for all newcomers... P.S. Did you play CM Afghanistan and if so, what did you think of it? I have actually played it and I think it could have been better with bigger maps and the graphics were not the best but it was still a decent game. If a funny anecdote is required then you shall get one In the army when we had a parachute drill my company was doing a parachute jump my parachute deployed late and in those seconds I had a heart attack, It deployed and once I landed the wind made my parachute drag me across the ground for a minute or so it was a horrible experience but good news is our company accomplished the given task. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackMoria Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) I've got to say welcome to the forums for anyone crazy enough to jump out of a perfectly good military aircraft with nearly a 100 lbs of gear and get dragged on the ground for a minute or so. Welcome to the forums, Vladimir. Edited January 10, 2015 by BlackMoria 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I have actually played it and I think it could have been better with bigger maps and the graphics were not the best but it was still a decent game. If a funny anecdote is required then you shall get one In the army when we had a parachute drill my company was doing a parachute jump my parachute deployed late and in those seconds I had a heart attack, It deployed and once I landed the wind made my parachute drag me across the ground for a minute or so it was a horrible experience but good news is our company accomplished the given task. Sounds like you had a fun time!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtHatred Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Hello, I've joined this website after watching a live stream of this game and thought I would join and could provide some information. I served in the Russian Airborne Forces during the 2008-2011. You are in a tight situation and knowing that M1A2 is overpowered in most games I think you are in a tight situation. It really does annoy me that M1A2 surpasses the T-90A even the AM variant. Go defensive use RPG-7 with VR rocket and flank tanks from the sides. No need to risk any tanks. Tanks should be a layer of defense for now once you thin out his forces go for a push on the weakest flanks. Artillery tree lines that you fear enemies are and use infantry on his flanks and take out recon teams and anti tank teams. This should provide you more easy maneuvers. Artillery is key if you want to thin out enemy forces never over think if you should use it or not. If there is a anti-tank unit there is bound to be its support team nearby bomb the location this is an example though. Any reason why you feel the M1A2 is overpowered? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VladimirTarasov Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Any reason why you feel the M1A2 is overpowered? I use to think M1A2 was the best and that it really had superb armor and firepower but I watched a series from a youtube account by the name of Blacktaildefense where he goes into details of the M1 series faults which really had me shocked.. And seeing the M1A2 being very powerful then it is really throws me off. There is a game called Arma 2 where M1A2 can take 5 shots from the front to the glacis without any penetration but the T-90 explodes in a fireball one the first shot on any spot. I hope that is not how it will be in this game, And I will be honest that BMP-3's arkan missile should have been able to atleast contuse the tank crew for a while the tank would have shaken if not penetrated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danzig5 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) I use to think M1A2 was the best and that it really had superb armor and firepower but I watched a series from a youtube account by the name of Blacktaildefense where he goes into details of the M1 series faults which really had me shocked.. And seeing the M1A2 being very powerful then it is really throws me off. There is a game called Arma 2 where M1A2 can take 5 shots from the front to the glacis without any penetration but the T-90 explodes in a fireball one the first shot on any spot. I hope that is not how it will be in this game, And I will be honest that BMP-3's arkan missile should have been able to atleast contuse the tank crew for a while the tank would have shaken if not penetrated. LOL blacktail is just mike sparks, that raving lunatic who loves the m113 and call it the Gavin. Not one word he says even resembles fact. Edited January 10, 2015 by danzig5 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtHatred Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I use to think M1A2 was the best and that it really had superb armor and firepower but I watched a series from a youtube account by the name of Blacktaildefense where he goes into details of the M1 series faults which really had me shocked.. And seeing the M1A2 being very powerful then it is really throws me off. There is a game called Arma 2 where M1A2 can take 5 shots from the front to the glacis without any penetration but the T-90 explodes in a fireball one the first shot on any spot. I hope that is not how it will be in this game, And I will be honest that BMP-3's arkan missile should have been able to atleast contuse the tank crew for a while the tank would have shaken if not penetrated. Yeah... Mike Sparks (BlacktailDefense) probably thinks an m113 with an added 105mm cannon would crush a whole platoon of T-90s. He is a really terrible source. Here is another video from one of his many accounts, to illustrate the madness. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VladimirTarasov Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 obviously not blacktaildefense... not even his account 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtHatred Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 obviously not blacktaildefense... not even his account It's the same guy. Mike Sparks goes by many names. You can tell it is him when he calls the M113 a "gavin". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danzig5 Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) obviously not blacktaildefense... not even his account Even then, blacktail has eight half-hour videos totaling 4.5 hours on how the battleship is still the king of the sea . I would look elsewhere to form opinions. Edited January 10, 2015 by danzig5 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) I came across some of this guy's vids awhile back. At first, he seems legit, but things start to smell fishy pretty quick. He believes the SEP is actually a more expensive downgrade to the M1 Abrams. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acqFzbtsKMs Yes, the Pentagon wastes a lot of money, but that seems looney. I'll leave it to others better informed than myself as to discussing the details. Arma II does some things well, but the vehicles look pretty and that is largely it. The hits, ballistics, and damage are pretty arcade, IMO. CMBS should be vastly superior to Arma II in terms of realism levels of equipment modeling. In CMBS, it's looking like the Abrams vs. T90 frontal matchup is more like: US Player crosses fingers. Russian Player prays. In other words, frontally, 1-1, the Abrams is likely going to spot and hit first. And, it has a chance (but not a gurantee, and it may take damage) to survive a frontal hit from a T90, while the T90 has to get lucky to survive a frontal hit from the Abrams. So, the T90's main problem vs. an Abrams is making sure it can get a shot in. 1-1, that's looking tricky. 2-1 and you may be trading 1-1 in lost tanks or doing a little better. 3-1 and the T90s may be dominating the Abrams in frontal clashes. It's not that the Abrams has a large advantage over the T90. It's that the Abrams has several slight/marginal advantages (speed of spotting, speed of acquisition, accuracy, and better frontal armor) that add up and are multiplied as the number of Abrams increases. Again, I'm no expert on this stuff and will leave it to those who know more. However, given the US military budget, its severe aversion to casualties, and its extensive use of the Abrams in live hot zones, it would be odd if the Abrams did not have these small advantages. In fact, the US tax payer would have a right to be pretty pissed off. Designers just need to apply due diligence when putting Abrams into their scenarios to make sure that the other side has numbers or other factors in play to balance things out. An occasional scenario that has stiff casualty penalties for the NATO player is fine, but the standard scenario should seek to provide "different but balanced" force mixes, rather than casualty penalties. Edited January 10, 2015 by Macisle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BletchleyGeek Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Welcome to the forums Vadim Arma 2 does a pretty decent work of immersion when you play the infantryman. For anything else, well, there are as many tastes as colors, I guess. CMBS specialises in the same kind of combined arms operations as CM Afghanistan. But here forces modeled have quite similar equipment, maps are bigger, terrain is better modeled (water, bridges, etc), the TacAi is smarter, the UI has several very nice "quality of life" improvements and the graphics are prettier. Check out the CMBS manual, there's an entire section devoted to put people whose last CM was Shock Force up to date with all the changes since then. Edited January 10, 2015 by BletchleyGeek 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chazz Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 You can compare sensors all you want. The Abrams does have a slight advantage in those. However, you have to think about how that is going to work in a practical combat application. In shock force I found that the static tank almost always spots first against a moving one unless they have really terrible sensors. That means that yes, the thermal equipped t-72 was able to spot first and even shoot first at incoming Abrams. Unless something significantly changed in CMBS, I expect the T-90 to preform the same. The lesson here is that either put your tanks in good defensive positions and let the enemy come to you, or if you are attacking try to scout the enemy tanks with other assets first so that you can either move your tanks to approach from an advantageous position or at least they would have the C3 advantage that would aid them in spotting the static tank quickly enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 You can compare sensors all you want. The Abrams does have a slight advantage in those. However, you have to think about how that is going to work in a practical combat application. In shock force I found that the static tank almost always spots first against a moving one unless they have really terrible sensors. That means that yes, the thermal equipped t-72 was able to spot first and even shoot first at incoming Abrams. Unless something significantly changed in CMBS, I expect the T-90 to preform the same. The lesson here is that either put your tanks in good defensive positions and let the enemy come to you, or if you are attacking try to scout the enemy tanks with other assets first so that you can either move your tanks to approach from an advantageous position or at least they would have the C3 advantage that would aid them in spotting the static tank quickly enough. Flank shots are effective against the Abrams.. however in my tests even when getting a beautiful flank position often the M1 will spot, be able to rotate its turret, and fire before T90 ever gets a firm spot. I did get quite a few kills in my tests, and those were only against stationary M1s with no AI orders, and most of the time they were dearly purchased. These M1s will be commanded by Scott who knows his business, he would not be a Lt. Colonel if he did not. The M1A2 SEP spots faster, shoots more accurately, and is far better protected than the T-90AM. I know my limitations, and yes it is that bad of a matchup. We should have some very interesting turns coming our way soon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I always sort of wondered what would happen if someone who didn't know better watched a blacktaildefense video.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macisle Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I always sort of wondered what would happen if someone who didn't know better watched a blacktaildefense video.... At the time I found that video, I was trying to get more up to speed with modern gear. Reading the comments on any videos relating to the Abrams and/or T90, there are a ton of people who think the T90 not only equals, but outright outclasses the Abrams. Usually, the best counter arguments are posted by US armor crew members. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin S Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 i've not been in a real tank, but i have played a fair bit of Steel Beasts. Having spent quite some time playing in the M1A1 model, and then going to the M1A2 SEP when they started modeling that, was pretty amazing. The commanders independent TIS changes it to a whole new level. put an A1 in this environment, where the commander only has the GPS extension or putting his head out and using binos, i'd say the T90 could have the spotting edge. As it is, first shot will rule the day. Any SF vets, or people basing their ideas of the Abrams off of Desert Storm\OIF will get a rude awakening. But when it comes to the real life, aren't the thermals etc. now at such a level that there is effectively no diffrence, because there is really no where to go improvement-wise from where we're at now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetchez la Vache Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Will AeroGavins be in the base game or will we have to wait for an expansion? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kieme(ITA) Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 I hope we will never see this monstrosity in a CM game: http://www.combatreform.org/aerogavinbankingcompositetn.jpg 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Sergei is slipping, all this talk of "Gavins" and he hasn't jumped on it yet! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Combatreform - haven't been there for ages ... it is even better comedy value than I remembered - thanks for reintroducing me to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted January 10, 2015 Author Share Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) This blood board covers turns 16 and 17... all the new kills (the red text) except one 2nd MRC BMP were suffered in turn 16, one BMP was lost in 2nd MRC in turn 17. Turn 18 turn report coming up later today. Edited January 10, 2015 by Bil Hardenberger 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMS Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 In other words, frontally, 1-1, the Abrams is likely going to spot and hit first. And, it has a chance (but not a gurantee, and it may take damage) to survive a frontal hit from a T90, while the T90 has to get lucky to survive a frontal hit from the Abrams. So, the T90's main problem vs. an Abrams is making sure it can get a shot in. 1-1, that's looking tricky. 2-1 and you may be trading 1-1 in lost tanks or doing a little better. 3-1 and the T90s may be dominating the Abrams in frontal clashes. Why? Abrams has a large enough weak zone under the turret, every schoolboy in Russia who plays WoT knows about it. Under 1000m it is no problems to get this weak zone at static Abrams, trajectory is flat. In it geometrical center of the tank, at the end. And what do you think about resistance of external equipment to hits? Abrams spotting equipment is not grandfather's hole in the commanders's turret. Will it survive a hit? Subcaliber round hit? HE hit? RPG? Good "Grad" shelling? I think, that Abrams armor is enough to save a crew and a tank from single random hit, but it is not enough to keep tank fighting. You all saw photos of "Tiger II" and "Ferdinand" from Soviet firing tests. Abrams will look like that after multiple hits. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.