Apocal

If they are firing absurdly fast, odds are they are M32 multiple grenade launchers. Those have six shots in the magazine.

Ah OK. The building collapsed from .50BMG and 40mm in my game but I was still taking fire from the ruins. Definitely had trouble believing that for a few seconds.

The reasoning in my mind was that they were high on meth and/or painkillers. I had fewer problems, I used Javelins to suppress/destroy MG positions and used close assault by my scouts (I know, don't bite my head off) to get the ATGMs. The only tricky part was bunkers by the main road. Out of my 12 killed, 9 were from the teams I'd tasked with clearing those bunkers out.

Age has nothing to do with it. Capability does.

Also Steve mentioned that they decided against a purely realistic modelling of suppression, because it would lead to longer, less decisive battles overall. Which would put off many (most?) casual wargamers.

Yes, I was kidding. I didn't think they'd actually include something like that, but was actually trying to parody incessant whining about details no one cares about.

Yes. Personally, I have a couple of 500GB external drives laying around I use to store all this kind of stuff.

I just checked. Can't believe BFC couldn't be assed to include constellations for celestial land navigation. Really takes away from calling this some kind of serious wargame

I think it's because it's the sensors have a wider field of view than they would in real life. On the other hand, tanks will scan threat sectors without being micromanaged, so maybe it's to offset that effect.

I shoulda taken the blue pill.

Shouldn't the Syrians be able to request them? Are they on the plate for CM:N? Is it possible to do large-scale illumination or will it be simulated?

No you aren't.

Use reinforcements to simulate it.

Typical range of engagements has increased would be my best guess.

Against small arms I'm not too worried about my guys chilling out on the roof, even if it's the flat roof without the... wall protecting you from below. It's when they start shooting 25mm and up that I find myself wishing I'd had them go somewhere else. That and airbursts. Those always suck.

That was my foremost suspicion but otherwise knowledgeable people, who should know better, keep repeating this tale. My first time using the MK19, I asked if the same prohibition followed as the M2 and the instructor looked at me like I had gentalia sprouting from my forehead. AK. I wasn't exaggerating when I said an M2 is closer to an autocannon than a rifle. Far left is .50BMG, third from left is a very close stand-in for 7.62 NATO, AK and M16 rounds are the next to the right.

What treaty ays that .50 is banned for use against personnel? I've never been able to find it.

AT4? 40mm GL?

Both 5.56 and 7.62x39 Soviet pale in comparison to the potential penetration of .50BMG and 12.7x107. Anything in that size/mass range is closer to autocannon than rifle.

Most of them use it. It's the insurgents that use AK47s.

This has always been a head-scratcher for me; do people realize that while WP causes horrible burns, it's much less lethal than HE?

Aww... So any chance of seeing this in CM:N? I imagine calling for fire in CM:N is going to take very long unless you're talking about the actual FO, so this could be relatively useful.

I mean, we already have a seperate MOUT formation, is there any chance of getting task-organized companies themselves? It's not a huge deal, but it's slightly irritating from a command-control standpoint when I have a mech. infantry squad getting hit with huge Air Control delays when the HQ they are assigned to is right next to them, but their "official" HQ is off map entirely.

"All of you think that you know war because you have read Jomini. But if war could be learned from his book, would I have allowed it to be published?" Napoleon

Asked a similar question here, no official answer.