Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 If I was a TC in an open hatch and I saw an Abrams side on point-blank, I'd slam it down and take that shot.....Wonder why this one didn't? "Oh look, there's an Abrams! Should I tell the gunner? Nah, he must have seen it, I'll just sit up here in the fresh air and spectate." It doesn't really make much sense as an explanation does it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 36 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: If I was a TC in an open hatch and I saw an Abrams side on point-blank, I'd slam it down and take that shot.....Wonder why this one didn't? "Oh look, there's an Abrams! Should I tell the gunner? Nah, he must have seen it, I'll just sit up here in the fresh air and spectate." It doesn't really make much sense as an explanation does it? At first I was same with you, but I eventually understand the situation. It is same as @Erwin mentioned in the reply above. TC's view might be clear while the view of gunner blocked by wood or bush. But my point is, I thought that the override action would be possible even with TC out of opened hatch, but I also remembered in Steel Beasts that TC override was only available while TC is inside the tank. I'm not sure how the override action is modeled in CMBS so I raised the question, just in case if the TC is possible to use override out of the hatch, but it seems that it is same with Steel Beasts. Or, override ability is not introduced in the first place. Or other 3rd option. I'm not sure which one is the case for CMBS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 I don't think the override capability is modelled in the game. I'm not sure but I don't think it is. If the tank commander is out in the fresh are contemplating life then they cannot use the override - at least according to the description of the feature posted: 14 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: In 1951, the T-54 obr. 1951 pioneered a semi-automatic system where the commander only has to press a button to activate the electrical powered traverse drive and slew the turret towards whatever target he is viewing through his optic. The T-72, like the T-64 and T-62 before it, has this feature as well. That means for the "automatic turn the turret to face the spotted target" the TC has to be using his in tank sight because the system is tied to what direction it is pointing. So, in this case, to use that system the TC would have to drop down into the tank move his sight to find the target he just saw when he was outside and then trigger it. I think it would be faster to just tell the gunner. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Currently it appears neither is taking place. Please don't take my comments here as an attack on BF, they are anything but.....If I didn't care about these games, I wouldn't comment (or spend hours at a time in the editor working) on them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 11 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: Currently it appears neither is taking place. Ah no way man: crews do talk to each other that is definitely modelled. It could be as simple as once one crew spots something there is a set time for the rest of the crew to be clued in. I honestly do not now how it works under the cover but there is no question that the crew is treated separately for where they are looking and with what assistance and therefore they "communicate" what they see with each other and react accordingly. 11 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: Please don't take my comments here as an attack on BF, they are anything but.....If I didn't care about these games, I wouldn't comment (or spend hours at a time in the editor working) on them. Totaly agree with you there. Roger that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Special delivery from the sky, with love. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 (edited) According to unconfirmed report, Russian high command recommended the hero of federation medal to that tree. What a giving tree, this is the second time during CMBS PBEM, that tree saved my tank There are actually 0.1~0.2 sec of difference between two shots. Distance was around 320m. If it were not that tree, Abrams could got my T-72, or this could be a cross counter. Edited March 22, 2017 by exsonic01 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzzleflash1990 Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 (edited) Reading ye' olde lexicon: "Trees are an essential part of both the micro and macro eco system of fauna. In addition to sustaining life, trees are also in general consided beatiful and is an essential part of planning and development. They have noise cancelling effects and ...... .... Also, in mechanized warfare, trees function as excellent cover against armor piercing penetrators. In fact Oak Tree #412 was awarded the Hero of the Federation: without regard for personal safety, the tree decided to stand still in the midst of heavy fighting, thus protecting the more vulnerable tanks." Sigh... Edited March 22, 2017 by Muzzleflash1990 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) In regards to your Tank Trap video Exsonic01, it should be noted that abrams op Edited March 24, 2017 by Artkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 On 3/22/2017 at 4:47 PM, Muzzleflash1990 said: Reading ye' olde lexicon: "Trees are an essential part of both the micro and macro eco system of fauna. In addition to sustaining life, trees are also in general consided beatiful and is an essential part of planning and development. They have noise cancelling effects and ...... .... Also, in mechanized warfare, trees function as excellent cover against armor piercing penetrators. In fact Oak Tree #412 was awarded the Hero of the Federation: without regard for personal safety, the tree decided to stand still in the midst of heavy fighting, thus protecting the more vulnerable tanks." Sigh... The Oak tree #412 will be remembered in our hearts. 3 hours ago, Artkin said: In regards to your Tank Trap video Exsonic01, it should be noted that abrams op Well there are different factors regarding that situation, and I don't particularly think the CMBS Abrams is OP, but I think he was lucky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 OP? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) T-72B3 can do this~! Same T-72B3 yesterday made a home run again. Heavy wind condition blow the smoke away at 30 sec point. 15 sec later, (around 45sec) crews detected unidentified contact, and 8 sec later (around 53 sec) gunner observed the enemy tank and engaged, hit turret front, and destroyed. I couldn't find the hole, so I'm not sure about the exact penetration spot, but my guess is just above the cannon mount, the area not protected by DU armor. 305m is close enough distance for T-72B3 kinetic shell to penetrate/damage the Abrams, but there are still a chance to fail to penetrate against Abrams. It is the work of random generator in the CM code, so I'm would not be surprised if my tank fails to penetrate. If it hits the DU armor plate, then I'm not sure what would happened. In that sense, I think I was lucky this time. But my opponent was lucky several times as well XD So, in this case, T-72B3 detected Abrams earlier, and engaged earlier, and killed at one shot. At this distance, the chance of T-72B3 triumph increases. Edited March 24, 2017 by exsonic01 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: OP? OverPowered Edited March 24, 2017 by exsonic01 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Don't know if that's true in all regards, my main issue would be that it seems to react extremely swiftly compared to other vehicles in its general class. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 @exsonic01 nice ambushes! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 22 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: Don't know if that's true in all regards, my main issue would be that it seems to react extremely swiftly compared to other vehicles in its general class. I still think that crews were crack or elite. If they were regular, I would be really surprised, but oh well, sxxt happens on the battlefield, I will take that. And I got my lucky moments too. 10 hours ago, Lethaface said: nice ambushes! That was lucky moment 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exsonic01 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) Gunner of that Khriz would never know, about where his first missile headed. He may still thinks that his first missile punched the tree, complaining his bad luck that day. Edited March 25, 2017 by exsonic01 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steepdate Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Been working through the scenarios for a few weeks now-- this would be the second one I've tried commanding combined Abrams and Bradley platoons. Possible spoilers for the scenario First Clash! 16 square km map took a lot of study. It's paying off with some very interesting engagements, such as this hot date here. This is my first CM video. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 steepdate, Though it was hard to see at first, because of the dim lighting and murk, going to full screen helped enormously. Looks like Reds drew first blood with Ainet or impromptu treeburst, then a US shot (TOW?) which missed, then the TOWs blazing toward the T-90s. The trajectories looked extremely odd to me, more like Javelin than TOW, though it looked as though they dropped back down for terminal phase. Color me perplexed. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinaldi Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, John Kettler said: steepdate, The trajectories looked extremely odd to me, more like Javelin than TOW, though it looked as though they dropped back down for terminal phase. Color me perplexed. Regards, John Kettler New TOW 2Bs have a top down function, they are in game. "The TOW-2B has a new top attack capability: the missile still flies straight towards the target (instead of a plunging top attack like the Javelin), but instead of hitting the closest surface the missile flies above the target and shoots tandem explosivelyformed penetrators (EFP) vertically down towards the target." - Manual Great video @steepdate. From a PBEM that did not end well for me. The reverse slope produced results initially but I was tilting at windmills, ultimately. A lesson to fall back sooner learned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steepdate Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 36 minutes ago, John Kettler said: steepdate, Though it was hard to see at first, because of the dim lighting and murk, going to full screen helped enormously. Looks like Reds drew first blood with Ainet or impromptu treeburst, then a US shot (TOW?) which missed, then the TOWs blazing toward the T-90s. The trajectories looked extremely odd to me, more like Javelin than TOW, though it looked as though they dropped back down for terminal phase. Color me perplexed. Regards, John Kettler There was at least one TOW launch previous turn, which hit a tree instead of the bookin' T-90. And yes, I did record in 1080p so fullscreen is a must. The treeline airburst from the T-90 caused 4 casualties on my split team. However, in subsequent turns, the split AT team gained armor kills thanks to their Brad-looted Javelin rounds. The trajectories of the TOWs are odd. they actually arc around trees and then plunge. Many misses, I guess, due to inability to keep lasers on tgt? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steepdate Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 23 minutes ago, Rinaldi said: New TOW 2Bs have a top down function, they are in game. "The TOW-2B has a new top attack capability: the missile still flies straight towards the target (instead of a plunging top attack like the Javelin), but instead of hitting the closest surface the missile flies above the target and shoots tandem explosivelyformed penetrators (EFP) vertically down towards the target." - Manual Great video @steepdate. From a PBEM that did not end well for me. The reverse slope produced results initially but I was tilting at windmills, ultimately. A lesson to fall back sooner learned. Fascinating. Yes, this is the second scenario I have seen a Brad-launched TOW score a top-kill, much to my surprise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steepdate Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 26 minutes ago, Rinaldi said: New TOW 2Bs have a top down function, they are in game. "The TOW-2B has a new top attack capability: the missile still flies straight towards the target (instead of a plunging top attack like the Javelin), but instead of hitting the closest surface the missile flies above the target and shoots tandem explosivelyformed penetrators (EFP) vertically down towards the target." - Manual Great video @steepdate. From a PBEM that did not end well for me. The reverse slope produced results initially but I was tilting at windmills, ultimately. A lesson to fall back sooner learned. Those cabbages look positively delectable, btw. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 Rinaldi, I know how a TOW 2 B works. That wasn't the issue. The issue was the to me strange trajectory, as seen from the perspective of someone who's watched gobs of TOW live fire videos for every model clear through TOW 2B. steepdate, I noticed the TOW which didn't leave the woods, but I failed to notice the casualties. It's entirely possible the missile might not have armed. There's a minimum arming distance designed to make sure TOW doesn't blow up its crew if something goes wrong at/near the launch site. Am sure one of our Army types can provide that item. steepdate, TOW 2B doesn't use a laser at all, no do any other models of TOW. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rinaldi Posted March 28, 2017 Share Posted March 28, 2017 (edited) I'm not sure what the issue is frankly, they're firing at targets at a higher elevation, hence the initial angle, and then it's just standard action. The first TOW shot is just a straight up miss. As were the second and third; the one that hit flew as it should've. Edited March 28, 2017 by Rinaldi 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.