Apocal

So they calculated, on the fly, the factors for accurate, consistent HOB using mechanical time fuzes during unplanned fire missions? I'm not saying I disbelieve you, but I'm gonna have to see some proof of that.

The so-called 9/9/2 mix of combat vehicles, two platoons of Abrams plus the CO's track, two platoons of Bradley's plus the XO's track, and two 120mm mortar carrier M113s. Is this simply not in CMSF or did, somewhere along the line, the TOE of a heavy cav troop change?

I don't believe that mechanical time fuzes were (are?) viable for opportunity fire that most of CM's artillery is. That being said, if it were something like a preplanned barrage, that would be historical, yes?

What happens when you're on the proverbial outside looking in? As in your squad is at street level itself, would it breach, go the stairwell, get on the roof, then go back down and methodically clear the building? In-game, I don't think that's really possible, since buildings typically don't have rooms as it were.

This is relevant to my interests, though I've a trip to the sandbox coming up, so I don't know if I can do too much.

At this point, I'd like to request a steeper dive angle for A-10 gun runs. Given the likely air defense environment of Syria, relatively few intact, operating high-altitude defenses, lots of short range air defense assets left intact, along with legacy AAA systems, they'd probably attack from altitude, steeply, to minimize their exposure to the greater threat. You saw a similar thing in ODS. The Iraqis had some higher level air defenses, but they were either destroyed or suppressed early on. What proved too numerous to neutralize were the 7000+ AAA barrels they had. So the Hogs were restricted to altitudes greater than 15K, later lowered to 10K. At that altitude your dive has to be steep (at least steeper than the angle we get now) or your slant range is going to be further than you can reasonably expect to see a tank.

Isn't this a bit... backwards? As I understand it, artillery uses more base-discharging smoke shells than WP, while mortars fire quite a bit of WP.

I believe the brown is red phosphorus. Thanks for all the info though. I never realized vic smoke could damage friendlies.

I noticed that 155mm smoke can cause casualties, but is that just due to the impact of a shell hitting at terminal velocity or is the casualty-producing aspect of WP simulated? Also, no shake-and-bake WP/HE missions?

I am 150% sure that it does.

Shilka and Zeus. Gun-dueling either is not conducive to a long flying career. But also note the A-10 originally wasn't supposed to receive the Maverick. That came after a few pilots really broke down Soviet air defense organization and realized that even at echelons as low as battalion they'd be encountering rapid-fire, radar-directed AAA. Size, weapon has relatively poor range compared to a larger gun, questionable terminal effects against protected areas, etc. I imagine that MBT armor has had more advances, though I could be wrong. AFAIK, there have been no major capability upgrades for the 30mm API round.

Well, that depends. If I can find it, there was an A-10 pilot's cartoon made, depicting areas on a tank vulnerable to the GAU. EDIT: Warthog Coloring Book! EDIT2: It's made by pilot's for other, probably less intelligent, pilots. Language not for children.

Ran some more testing on my own. Setup was against 2 Hvy antitank A-10s (heavy) and 2 Lt AT A-10s (light) versus 10 T-90SAs. Four CAS request, light point from heavy, light area from heavy, light point from light and light area from light. None destroyed targets with their GAU-8s, which surprised me, but it was probably a golden BB the first time I did the test because I only ran it once and since it fit my preconceived notions... Anyhoo, I agree with you at this point. I'm almost certain the culprit is the shallow angle they fire from. Properly using the GAU-8 involves something like a 45 or 60 degree dive from 10,000-15,000, IIRC. With a steeper dive, more shots would be hitting the top armor, rather than the side or (God, I swear who ever was flying that Hog is FIRED) the front armor. Maybe someone else can check, but it looks closer to 20 degrees in-game and most of the runs were from the sides or front, none I saw from the rear.

Set up your own mission and test. And I'm playing on Elite, with a jet that is Veteran and a higher motivation setting.

As I recall, it was 25mm and up caused friendly fire.

Appears to be working from my end. With a point target, A-10 seems to be giving exclusive attention the the targetted vehicle, hosing it down with DU like it's at a heavy metal carwash. With an area target, effect seems to be geared more towards suppressing the selected zone rather than killing any vehicles within it. I'd assumed this was the way it was supposed to be?

Agree. Disagree from a gameplay standpoint. Players who dispense large amounts of hate without properly controlling it should bear some consequences. More than once my well-crafted fire support plan has turned to pure **** on me because I wasn't paying attention and supporting fires wallopped my assaulting infantry.

Honest answer? Like Santa Claus going twelve rounds with Iron Mike Tyson. This is the important part. It is a nice little scenario, even if imbalanced.

In my experience, it only helps with spotting insofar as you can make them look in a certain direction. As for ranging, I'm somewhat sure that LOS always goes until it's blocked or reaches the map edge. So even with a 100m target arc, they'd still bea bale to see targets at 500m. The scale only goes up to something like 9 mags per man. But if you acquire 3K rounds, they'll get all 3K of those additional rounds. I know because I've seen them shoot for a solid hour and not run out. As for the scales, they are just graphical representations. I can easily max the 5.56mm, 7.62mm and 40mm, AND throw Javelins, AT4s and LAWs on top of that with few ill-effects.

1 killed, 2 wounded my first playthrough. The IEDs were placed directly in front of the Bradley facing the initial onslaught. I ignored the proscribed movement plan and just cut straight through the palm groove and up to the wounded tank, then made several strongpoints with AT teams and MGs. Only problem was when one very bold T-72 rushed up to the building a mechanized infantry squad was in and plastered them with a 125mm round before getting chewed up by a Brad's 25mm gun and AT4s. Mortars got a bit of a workout keeping the first wave in their place, then gnawed on what my MGs left over of the second wave from the Old Quarter.

It was the author's of the AAR that wrote that, the SPMAGTF Recon unit.

What other game has FOW fortifications?

It's not so much the size difference, it's the fact that the the 105mm one has two warheads. Anywhoo, might it be because at poorer quality settings they don't have RPG launchers compatible with the more effective grenades? Perhaps quality settings could influence inventory of stowed items as well as equipment?

Are the more extensive C2 suites in command vehicles simulated? IE. do I gain a bigger, greener + by sitting my Air Controllers in certain kinds of vehicles?