Vinnart Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 Yeah, tough break losing a piece to a pathfinding glitch like that Bil. I hate when that happens on occasion, but a real kick in the balls in a multiplayer. When these things happen in single player I will redo the turn and order to see if it happens again. The strange thing is with it wanting to reverse when not given that order often it will not when tested the same. Really is mystery as to why the engine will get an unexplained hiccup then not repeat on occasion. I'm sure these must be some of the more frustrating things for Charles to deal with in trying to figure out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 1, 2018 Author Share Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) MINUTE 12 Apologies ahead of time for the media heavy content in this post... Another Warrior IFV platoon appears to be moving toward Point 32.9… M1 #1 moved into position in the early stages of this turn and almost immediately spotted one of them moving up to the Ruined Farm (Baneman does like that position), with one round it was sent to Valhalla… 10 seconds later it killed a second Warrior also near the Ruined Farm. Think he has learned the lesson to stay away from that farm yet? Immediately after killing the second Warrior IFV, M1 #1 spotted a Challenger! Alas... before he could reload and reorient, the Challenger killed the Abrams with a one round turret front penetration… wow… After looking at it from the Challenger’s perspective, I don’t think M1 #1 was hulldown to it… not sure if that would have even made a difference though. To kill an Abrams from the front is impressive gun performance. M1 #2 spotted one of the Warrior IFVs headed toward Farm 002 and got off one round, which hit the weapon mount with no ill effects that I could see, but that must be a gun kill. The IFV trundled on toward Farm 002. At the end of the turn the other Challenger was seen moving around the southern end of the large stone walled field in KT1. M1 #2 will attempt to get a spot next turn and see if we can’t even the score. I do like that he has split up his Challenger tanks so each is now operating independently. Baneman has at least one dismounted infantry AT team (German) far forward near the wall… he is obviously attempting to get close enough to engage my LAVs with an AT weapon. I need to check on the range for that weapon. I suspect it looks meaner than it is. LAV #4 spotted and fired on this team which went to ground. The Bradley platoon started to arrive this turn, the dismounts will organize a Javelin armed AT team which will proceed to the ridge while the remaining infantry will remount next turn. At least two Warrior IFVs moved beyond Point 32.9 appearing to be heading toward the position that is held by the BMP-3 Platoon. I think he has two Warrior platoons in this area, one near the Ruined Farm (two vehicles spotted, both destroyed), and the other moving past Point 32.9 (three vehicles spotted). Overview of enemy movements this turn: Battle Position 1 (BP1): Edited July 1, 2018 by Bil Hardenberger 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Backer Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 Well holy hanna, that was a nasty little turn. Does the Challenger still have a rifled gun? I assume a Javelin is more than capable of taking it out. And you probably don't have a shortage of those little toys... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 1, 2018 Author Share Posted July 1, 2018 35 minutes ago, Bud Backer said: Well holy hanna, that was a nasty little turn. Does the Challenger still have a rifled gun? I assume a Javelin is more than capable of taking it out. And you probably don't have a shortage of those little toys... It was brutal.. took forever to prep those graphics too. Yes the Challenger has a rifled gun, nasty bugger. From this point on the action will start to ramp up dramatically... it is a dangerous battleground for sure. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 Excellent 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Backer Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said: It was brutal.. took forever to prep those graphics too. Don’t I know it! I’m enjoying/studying/admiring every one you make. Edited July 1, 2018 by Bud Backer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) On 6/28/2018 at 10:40 PM, The_MonkeyKing said: Having never played SF. How does the FV 510 Warrior compare to the M2A3 Bradley in mechanized platoon vs mechanized platoon fight? Bradleys win every time. The Warrior's rounds bounce off the Bradley's front plate at 500m. Lol. CV9035 fared significantly better. Edited July 1, 2018 by Artkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_MonkeyKing Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 2 minutes ago, Artkin said: Bradleys win every time. The Warrior's rounds bounce off the Bradley's front plate at 500m. Lol. Oh, I never had a high opinion of the Warrior but never thought it lacks in penetration ability as well as missing thermals and abysmal RoF. It is 30mm and has access to western ammunition after all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 Which surprises me that the rounds bounced. Besides the lacking in the 30mm, warrior does not have an atgm unlike the bradley. Often the bradleys engage with tows first slaughtering warriors. The warriors during this period of time fire at the bradleys but the rounds bounce. The CV9035 is like the warrior, no atgm. But it does have the more powerful cannon, suppressing the bradleys and making their TOWS miss. Cool. @Battlefront.com Bring us the Javelin CVs!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_MonkeyKing Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 I would go as far as to say CV9035 outclasses the Bradley in many aspects: armor, caliber (although 25mm DU beats 35mm tungsten,) carry capacity (8vs6) and all the advantages being developed a decade after Bradley brings. The whole ATGM question is deep and complicated. Always better to have one than not if you don't lose anything for it but this is not always the case. For an example here in Finland an ATGM on our CV9030 would make as little sense as a stinger launcher mounted on the turret. This is because of our short LoS terrain, budget and simpler clearer IFV doctrine. You never want to fight MBTs with IFVs in symmetrical warfare and those ATGM resources are better spend on arming dedicated AT systems. As an ex IFV tanker I would say better to live to fight another IFV than getting blow to bits by an MBT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 MINUTE 13 M1 #2 had a tight cover arc covering the position the Challenger was moving into and had a 20 second pause to give it time to spot and fire before withdrawing. I know now that those tanks can kill mine with ease, so I am taking few chances. The enemy Challenger turned the corner and stopped, then took aim and fired at M1 #1, which if you remember last turn was already dead… though its crew had survived.. well after this hit and another I think from the other Challenger the crew was cut in half and only two survivors crawled out of the stricken tank. But then M1 #2 got a good firing solution and put a SABOT right into the Challenger’s front turret… double wow… it shrugged off that hit without any noticeable damage. Good news is that this Challenger never spotted mine before the Abrams pulled back into safety. One of the Leos moved out of its position and appeared to be moving towards… the Ruined Farm… now renamed the Gate to Valhalla... keep sending them that way buddy. The HQ tank from the T-90 platoon spotted a Marder breaching a stone wall near Farm 001 and was spotted in return. The T-90 took several cannon rounds and returned one of its own, which... missed of course. Will any Syrian vehicle get a kill in this game? It’s looking doubtful at this point. The Warrior platoon that was heading toward Farm 002 has at least three vehicles moving beyond it, two of them (maybe only one with the second in support) appears to be heading through the field toward OBJ SAPPHIRE, a third has moved into the gully that leads into OBJ DIAMOND. I had already started to reorient one of the T-90s to cover the water tower area and the field beyond. T-90 #2 will pull into position next turn to overwatch this field in front of Farm 002. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 hour ago, Bil Hardenberger said: MINUTE 13 But then M1 #2 got a good firing solution and put a SABOT right into the Challenger’s front turret… double wow… it shrugged off that hit without any noticeable damage. Good news is that this Challenger never spotted mine before the Abrams pulled back into safety. Hopefully a sign that it's optics got shredded. Also may have resulted in some soiled underwear for your opponent. Planning a turn is never good when you are sitting there in soiled underwear. Challengers are a beast, but they do have some serious weak points if you can hit em. Unfortunately the turret isn't one of them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Backer Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 Well, this is looking like the World Cup - a lot of surprises and upsets. I thought the Abrams outclassed any tank, armour-wise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 Mantlet penetrations are common for me on Abrams tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 Well, definitely nice to see the Abrams has some competition! Despite the fact that the Challenger almost certainly fired APFSDS, I'm quietly wondering what happens when you hit something like an Abrams with HESH (composite armour says "not much", but still curious). CMSF2 is looking plenty appealing based on Blue-on-Blue alone! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 8 hours ago, Bud Backer said: I thought the Abrams outclassed any tank, armour-wise. You misspelled armor Bud. 3 hours ago, Hapless said: Well, definitely nice to see the Abrams has some competition! Despite the fact that the Challenger almost certainly fired APFSDS, I'm quietly wondering what happens when you hit something like an Abrams with HESH (composite armour says "not much", but still curious). CMSF2 is looking plenty appealing based on Blue-on-Blue alone! Yes, the round was APFSDS... though the hit decals are too large for the penetrator rod.. I need to make a report about that. Remember also that I purposefully took the M1A1 instead of the M1A2, and though I;m not sure of the armor difference between them, the M1A2 should be more survivable against the other western tanks. Did anyone notice that in the last few turn reports there were no black floating icons? Progress! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 8 hours ago, sburke said: Hopefully a sign that it's optics got shredded. Also may have resulted in some soiled underwear for your opponent. Planning a turn is never good when you are sitting there in soiled underwear. Challengers are a beast, but they do have some serious weak points if you can hit em. Unfortunately the turret isn't one of them. Yes, I also suspect that tank took some damage to its optics or gun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waffelmann Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 25 minutes ago, Bil Hardenberger said: Did anyone notice that in the last few turn reports there were no black floating icons? Progress! And it seems, that the us-troopers have equipment now (even with night vision!)... Greetings, alex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 1 minute ago, waffelmann said: And it seems, that the us-troopers have equipment now (even with night vision!)... Greetings, alex Alex, yeah the night vision is a known bug. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waffelmann Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 24 minutes ago, Bil Hardenberger said: Alex, yeah the night vision is a known bug. Oh...this was not meant as complaint! I like this little forecast (right expression???)! I admit, that I am extremly curious about the new sysrian soldier models! Greetings, alex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzuya Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 I would be wary of those Panzerfaust 3s on the German dismounts Bill, being unguided means their range is limited but they can disable even MBTs frontally and should not be underestimated. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 20 minutes ago, Suzuya said: I would be wary of those Panzerfaust 3s on the German dismounts Bill, being unguided means their range is limited but they can disable even MBTs frontally and should not be underestimated. Thanks for that. I will be careful around them and try to keep them outside their effective range (around 900 meters) though I think this AT Team is already within that range to some of my vehicles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 7 hours ago, Bil Hardenberger said: You misspelled armor Bud. Yes, the round was APFSDS... though the hit decals are too large for the penetrator rod.. I need to make a report about that. Sure on that Bil? At one time during CMBS development the decals were basically the same diameter as the penetrators, but this was clearly wrong. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted July 2, 2018 Author Share Posted July 2, 2018 5 minutes ago, akd said: Sure on that Bil? At one time during CMBS development the decals were basically the same diameter as the penetrators, but this was clearly wrong. Interesting! Obviously I am not sure. Glad you are around to correct me akd. Bil 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 (edited) Are your T-90 crews green or do they have negative training levels, Bil.....Their apparently ludicrous inaccuracy is already giving me major cause for concern. Fairly sure a M1A1HA is inferior to a 2008 spec Challenger II. A T-90SA should be quite a handful for a Leopard 2A4, a tank that has been demonstrated to have serious vulnerabilities following its actual deployment in Syria (T-90s routinely shrug off hits from weapons that kill Leopard IIs). Edited July 2, 2018 by Sgt.Squarehead 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.