George MC

PDFs showing houses in CMBN and other scenario stuff:
 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hcpas10cd31y716/AAAByUx3Xd6mygerASO1W-u2a?dl=0

PDFs showing houses in CMBN and other scenario stuff:
 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/hcpas10cd31y716/AAAByUx3Xd6mygerASO1W-u2a?dl=0

There was a wee PDF doing the rounds which showed you what was what. I'm, errr...at work right now but when I get home I'll dig it out and upload a copy.

When approaching infantry transport:
 
Anything that has four wheels is functionally the same as a jeep.  The exceptions to this are the american HMMWVs that fit MK-19s, TOW missiles, or what looks like a big box.
 
   Tangent: MK-19 has already been discussed.  Its murderous against infantry, unarmored vehicles, and some of the APC type targets can be knocked out by it with some luck
                  Treat the TOW version a lot like a 17 pound gun that's somehow merged with a speedy prime mover.  You don't want to place it somewhere it can be shot at at all, but it will reap a terrible toll on tanks if you give it a chance.
                  The Big box is the LRAS3, which is one of the most powerful sensor systems in the US Army.  The upside is it is a great tool for calling for support, or keeping sneaky things away from your flank.  The downside is it is not especially better at either of those than an Abrams, and is knocked out by anything more than small arms fire.  This sensor is also mounted on the Stryker scout vehicle.
 
 
Anything with 6-8 wheels/tracks and a machine gun: Treat like a halftrack.  They're really not that well armored, but are great for getting infantry forward fast.  Semi-exceptions to this:
 
    The BTR/MTLBs with 30 mm guns are great against not-tank type vehicles, and very good at suppressing or killing enemy infantry.  
    The Stryker with MK19 is just good enough to use forward, great at digging out infantry from buildings, or suppressing trenchlines.  
 
IFVs (tracked things with troops, some sort of autocannon, and ATGMs)
 
Imagine if your halftracks, light tanks, and AT vehicles all had a beautiful baby!
 
    Treat them like halftracks until they get to the point where they can deposit troops, once the troops are kicked out, then feel less nervous about using them as the mini-tanks they can be.  In a lot of ways, think of them like the M5 tanks from World War Two, they're great against other light vehicles, they're amazing against infantry, but you do not want it anywhere near something that can be called "anti-tank" or a real tank for that matter. 
 
Re: ATGMs
 
Here's the important caveats to remember when operating ATGMs from any platform (except the Javelin)
1. Bullets are faster than missile. The longer you fire the missile from, the longer it takes to impact, the more time the enemy has to react to missile.  It takes a TOW missile about 30 seconds to reach its max range around 3750 meters, that's enough time for the enemy to pop smoke, or return fire with a tank gun, which could very well kill the launching crew before the missile is even close to the target.  To this end it can be wise to ignore max range shots in favor of letting the enemy close in a bit (or it takes a tank shell 2ish seconds to go to 4 KM, it's flight time is fairly constant, while your missile fired at 2000 meters will only take 15ish seconds, which is a much harder thing to react to than 30 seconds)
 
2. ERA is built to ruin your ATGM.  APS also will wreck your day.  With that said, both systems degrade the more missiles they have to deal with.  To that end firing more missiles is often a good solution, so rather than spreading out your fires, massing 2-3 missiles on one tank will often overwhelm the APS (or deplete it's ammunition), and strip away a lot of the ERA protection.  
 
Also when playing against other players, it's much more likely they'll reverse out of an engagement if one of their tanks gets piled on by a few missiles, vs the fire being more spread out.
 
3. Reloading takes a bit.  This is especially true with vehicles like the Bradley or BMP series that have their launchers external to the vehicle.  When engaging with ATGMs, don't be afraid to mass like I said earlier, but hold a few launchers in reserve to continue to engage while your first salvo is being reloaded.
 
4. Mass your missiles.  If you've got two or even three different flavors of missiles, find their average optimal engagement area, and plan to hit the enemy in that range.  Using the Americans as an example the max effective range on the Javelin is 2500 meters or so.  To that end, holding off on firing off your TOWs until the enemy is 2000-2500 meters out ensures that target area is saturated with missiles, and rather than returning fire effectively, the enemy is evading and trying to leave the kill zone.
 
5. Trees give bad vibes.  Anything that is described as "wire guided" needs to be kept away from trees and similar obstructions to ensure the missile's guidance wire doesn't get snagged and cause the missile to rather dramatically miss the target.
 
Random errata:
 
1. Q. Which American units are spotters for artillery and aviation?
 
    A. All of them. Some are better at it than others, but if it's a team with a radio or digital communications it can call for a fire mission.  Plan accordingly from both ends for that one.
 
2. Borg spotting actually does kind of exist now.  Given the advances in battle tracking, all US, and many higher tech Russian units can share situational awareness to varying degrees.  They may still not be able to engage, but if the scouts up front spot your dudes sneaking along, odds are the rest of the force now has at least a very strong idea where your forces are at vs vaguely there's enemy somewhere up front.  
 
3. Fear the Abrams.  No.  Really.  Fear it.  It is the apex predator in this game.  If the enemy has them, you really need to have a plan on how and where to kill them vs simply having some AT assets on hand.  The APS and ERA ones appear especially dangerous at this point.

have you met an Indian before? They are like miniature Einsteins.

That was phenomenal. I thought it was going to be some good old fashioned tank porn at first - which is great, but then the dialogue came in and it just got better. You did really well with making the radio chatter seem non intrusive.

An oldie now and made using an early Beta.
 

Sorry but sadly Bil is toast. Those M1s will just roll in, shrug of any rpg shots and machine gun (iirc buildings might be preserve options) any Russian infantry sheltering in the buildings. Once Bil runs out of a/ T90s b/ anti tank assets nowt left to do but surrender. A company team with a plartoon of M1s and two platoons of BIFVs would have made for a more balanced challenge IMO.

Use tanks to suppress likely points of enemy resistance using area fire, don't wait or try to spot em - infantry move up under this supporting fire. Rinse and repeat.
 
Or mount infantry onto tanks and charge hell for leather onto the position - take yer knocks but overrun it. You've enough infantry.

Whilst we're waiting From the link below:
 
However the quality of Soviet optics combined with the limited visibility from inside the tank affected combat performance. A German unit that used the T-34/76 model ’43 in combat noted (8): ‘The gun sights in Russian tanks are far behind the German designs. The German gunners need to be thoroughly accustomed to the Russian telescopic gunsights. The ability to spot a hit through the gunsight is very limited.’

‘In a Russian tank it is difficult to command a Panzer or a unit and at the same time serve as the gunner Therefore fire direction for the entire Kompanie is hardly possible, and the concentrated effect of the unit’s firepower is lost. The commander's cupola on the T 43 makes it easier to command and fire at the same time; however; vision is very limited to five very small and narrow slits.’
 
‘Safe driving and sure command of both the T 43 and SU 85 can't be achieved with the hatches closed. We base this statement on our experience that on the first day in combat in the Jassy bridgehead, four Beute-Panzer got stuck in the trench system and couldn't get free with their own power, resulting in the destruction of German defensive weapons during the attempt to retrieve them. The same thing happened on the second day.’  
http://chris-intel-corner.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/wwii-myths-t-34-best-tank-of-war.html

pnzrldr,
 
In light of the proliferation of first, TV backup systems on SAM systems for operation in jamming environments, and now, FLIR to do the same thing, I decided to look into the question of FLIR on Tunguska. I think some corrections may be in order. From the amazing Dr. Carlo Kopp and his Australia Airpower site.
 
http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-96K6-Pantsir-2K22-Tunguska.html
 
Optical Sensors
Early variants of the Tunguska series introduced an electroptical tracker to provide silent angle tracking in jamming environments. The electro-optical tracking system includes a longwave (8 - 14 μm band) thermal imager for target acquisition and tracking, and a dual band short (3 - 5 μm) / midwave  (0.6 -1.1. μm) IR tracker for angular measurement of the missile beacon.
 
The Tunguska has a full-on FLIR, and by 2017 likely a better one than above, which allows it to conduct gun and missile engagements without any radar emissions. Said FLIR would presumably also be usable vs. ground targets, thus giving your horribly cut up Ukrainians two FLIR equipped AFVs--nasty ones at that. In short, you may be able to do to Bil's AFVs and infantry hiding in foliage something like what he's done to yours. Savage them when they think they're concealed. With something of the order of a 5 meter blast radius per shell, I'd think it would be pretty easy to grease infantry, even sans FLIR.
 
While we're on Tunguska, I was wondering whether the system and subsystem modeling is granular enough to permit multiple hits on the Acq/Track radar antenna, without killing it outright? The key component, after all, isn't the antenna per se, which is pretty projectile damage tolerant, but the small feed horn via which the radar does its thing. Also, can you stow the radar for ground engagements when not under air attack threat?
 
MikeyD,
 
I think you misunderstand how laser designation for weapons work. You don't have to lase continuously, but only in the far shorter period immediately preceding weapon launch and TOF to the target. Thus, the lasing unit might get a "two minutes out" warning for CAS and a "shot out" call from artillery. this makes tracking the target and lasing it a much easier proposition. Also a laser guided weapons these days doesn't have to be precisely aimed. Rather, it simply has to arrive in an acquisition basket in which the seeker's FOVs allows it to see the reflected laser spot from the now-designated target. When I worked at Hughes, we made a laser-guided version of Maverick for Marine CAS, and I'm thoroughly familiar with how these weapons work.
 
Regards,
 
John Kettler