Apocal

Cavalry mostly fought dismounted during the ACW because firearms technology had moved far beyond the original. I'm just saying there was a considerable overlap (at least four centuries) between the widespread adoption of firearms (1400s) and the practical obsolescence of battlefield heavy cavalry. Tanks are going to be far from useless for as long as artillery and machine guns can threaten infantry, although they might shed some of their armor.

The historical counter to dense ant-tank networks is liberal amounts of indirect fire from mortars and artillery, applied in such a way it has a minimum chance of harming the tanks (i.e. airbursts) while suppressing any AT shooters not also under armor, closely followed by liberal amounts of machine-gunning to keep them suppressed. As long as the dismounted soldier remains vulnerable to artillery and machine gun fire, there will be a place for tanks. They might look a bit different, but mobile, protected firepower is just too valuable on the battlefield. Also, mounted heavy cavalry (what I assume you meant by 'knights') remained relevant well into the era of the musket -- they just cut down on the pointless armor and adopted firearms for themselves.

...or you could use the Javelin.

The doctrinal solution for big money systems like that is keeping a backfield Rivet Joint/Compass Call to monitor emissions (including radio communications), then plaster the area with long-range rockets to force them away from the front line or suffer attrition. Since there aren't that many actual systems, the Russian Army can't afford to habitually lose them to dumb **** like that.

Yeah, it is pretty much balancing to have aircraft actually overflying the battlefield at low-altitude in a high-threat environment. Dedicated SEAD? Probably not, those sorts of sorties go towards protecting specific strike packages against specific threats, generally by forcing the big money high-alt, long-range systems to either go silent or be silenced. I could see something like a self-escorting CAS flight of F-16s or F/A-18s having a harm to spare,, but realistically, HARM stocks would drop to critical levels after the first two weeks and thereby be restricted.

They are a spent cartridge though; they'll never fight to full effect and almost any additional fire will send them right back to broken status.

Berlin was the final battle (for most) of a very long, devastating war. Most commanders would be thoroughly uninterested in throwing away such a large chunk of mobile firepower reserve just to make a single push a bit easier, while simultaneously doing NATO air defense's homework for them by sending every available helo to one (necessarily limited) section of the front. As an aside, there were never that many Hinds in the Soviet inventory that they could have carelessly thrown them across the battlefield and simply hope that something stuck. They'd learned the hard way that helo operations in even a modest air defense environment require planning and caution moreso than aggression and flexibility.

Seriously? Who is "us?"

No, but they do serve to not telegraph the moment when you kick off your assault on the position.

This is absolutely possible with a real Javelin. Here is an actual briefing series on Javelin employment in Afghanistan, not 1-to-1 applicable to Black Sea obviously, but there is some good tactical stuff in there. http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2012armaments/Tuesday14015schlabach.pdf

Off the top of my head, panzersaurkrautwerfer, pnzrldr, StrykerPL and I think two others have actual command (or close to command) experience, regularly play CMx2 and post on this forum.

Already happened. The IS has confirmed possession of the FN-6s that were originally sent to the FSA. Certainly no one saw this coming. http://www.janes.com/article/44267/islamic-state-uses-manpads-against-iraqi-helo (the last sentence is sarcasm)

From approximately eight years ago.

Odds are they are benefiting not just from being stationary, but also have dismounted infantry eyes aiding in their spotting. Try using mortars -- or any responsive tube, really -- to work the area over before you advance and see how that works out.

If it isn't giving too much the NDA game away: was the reasoning due to a technical issue or was it felt to be an overreach of player ability to intervene?

Good thread, should be stickied. I remember you as well.

It has been a (minor) issue as far back as CMSF as I recall. I was just wondering if there was any possibility of a "Target heavy" command to avoid TacAI issues with reluctance to fire heavier (ATGMs on IFVs, rockets and missiles for dismounts) at targets deemed unworthy. It would certainly be helpful for those times when you really, really want your infantry to launch and RPG into the building before assaulting it, but as it stands right now, the odds there are hit-or-miss with no player control involved. I think it is becoming even more of an issue with gear like the BMP-3 where you might want a cannon round, but it sticks with 30mm or the Bradley not firing a TOW at an obvious target holed up inside a building. I am most definitely not suggesting taking away the TacAI's ability to function as it stands today or forcing players to micromanage ATGM shots. I would just like a command to guarantee the heaviest weapon for non-AFVs/infantry squads will be used. Thoughts?

IRL, generally, you watch the right arms for a weapon and their backs for weapons or military equipment.

Because Red Storm Rising is a more popular book.

Google Earth with borders turned off.

Javelin actually does have a non-LOS mode, I'm not sure how reliable it is though.

With rotary-wing aviation, Hellfires can be launched from outside of line-of-sight with the Apache only exposing its radar or (in case of non-Apaches) a different platform can buddy-lase the target. For fixed-wing tactical aircraft, Mavericks, JDAMs, SDBs and Paveways all out-range the Tunguska by a substantial margin and the aircraft themselves don't make it a point of flying directly over the battlefield. That's why you're seeing so many newer Russian systems claiming the ability to shoot down PGMs: they don't realistically expect they'll get a shot at aircraft flying low-level 5, 10, 20, even 30 miles deep in our backfield but they ordnance has to come to them.

IIRC, they were speaking Polish, i.e. not Germans.

I'm pretty sure they didn't mean put men in a minefield.

At what price, Javelin?