Sublime

@Vet 0369. Of course you guys love campaign8ng with the army, marine memoirs and guys I talked to are replete with stories of stealin er scrounging endless amounts of army stuff =p And of course i meant inter service rivalry not like hatred or anything.- im genuinely surprised if anyone thought I implied the military services all wouldnt go balls to the wall for any American given a shot, let alone fellow military.

Ill pm you this evenin

Pm me please. Im down for either side too. So you pick Or email me jeffclark1111172@gmail.com Anyone else? Pretty please?

@Vet 0369. People I know who were variously a marine grunt in fallujah nov 04, and 2 army inf MOS guys who were in Afghan in 2010 and 2012 all saw m203s heavily used. AFAIK theyre still used. Afghanistans interesting though, they reissued m14s (arnd 1 or 2 a squad IIRC) because the distances and mudwalls etc though I FORGOT the it was only 25mm! So second question - WTF? I highly doubt bradley rounds are cross compatible and it breaks with tradition of 40mm..

Remember this weapon? Since it ended up not being adopted is it going to be in SF2? It actually seemed a really awesome idea and seemed to kickass in game ( though tbh I DID prefer the marine grenade launcher that was like a large revolver theyce been around awhile ) What went wrong in real life? All ISTR is some vague stuff about the shell not having enough kick? Why not use the weapon I mentioned then, or the M79? After all it was very effective and popular though I suppose perhaps redundant with the m203 attachment GL and maybe thats why the Xm25 didnt make it now I think about it. Thoughts?

I keep a reserve platoon if possible mounted but already acquired as much ammo as they can carry. Only do this if theyre in total cover other wise the infantry is hiding nearby to run into vehicles for rapid reaction. Otherwise unless its a very big map - in which case you probably have larger forces and a dedicated scout platoon that should be used to find and fix the enemy, and then you can roll your troops up in their afvs to the closest total cover before they disembark - really otherwise though in all circumstsnces its not worth the flaming deathtrap and loss of a squad even against WW2 weapons let alone SF2 or god forbid BS weapons; dismount immediately. I always acquire everything my troops can carry because otherwise aot of ammo getd wasted when afvs are lost. Once you get used to doing it you learn how to equally distribute your ammo across the line to your men and trust me this goes a LONG way against the AI and also more inexperienced human players. And trust me its an utter disaster to be in a firefight and run outta ammo when the enemy now is about at the same ammo level you began your firefight at. Acquiring and dismounting is also key in every CM game because every side has AT weapons - extra ones - that make a huge difference and make units that are perfect size wise and dont really have much else use very useful AT teams. Whether we.re talking extra US zooks, LAWs, or javelins; Russian RPG 7s and RPG 29s. Suddenly your ops team or XO squad is a perfect extra AT team. Theyre also so plentiful you usually can have an extra entire squad with high AT ability as opposed to average for 2 and 1 with a javelin. Id like to add I really missed LAWs in BS - theyre fantastic dual purpose weapons. Yes theyre not the greatest AT but they serve well enough for anything except MBTs and frankly if youre US using LAWs as your primary method to fight Syrian T72s you really screwed the pooch. T55s dont survive LAWs well IIRC. The LAW seems to shine in that troops can carry a relatively high amount and they work really well as IMO the most similar US weapon to an RPG 7 insomuch as its usefulness as a force multiplier in smaller infantry firefights..

Jeez Steve I mean if you ask the Marines they dont need anyones help at all ever in fact the marines seem to think the other services just get in the way (i kid. Sort of.) P.s. in respect of the marines as everyone knows my dad was a career AF officer. When I was considering enlisting at 17 to go into the infantry I was leaning towards the army but the marines are quintessential infantry nowadays - Ill always remember my fathers advice to go into the Army because the Marines would probably be a little too extreme for me. LOL that spoke volumes about his respect for but also opinion of the fanatical discipline and standards the Marines proudly hold themselves to. My father knew me too well - that wouldnt hace worked. Obviously the enlisting didnt work but thats waaay OT. Cant wait to use my OIF era Marines again

Im dying for a pbem or pbems. I havent been able to play anyone for awhile because I didnt upgrade my game engines. This seemed a great opportunity to enjoy to demo and play someone or people. Hell Ill even play RedFor for all the scenarios? Anyone

As I said I dont have a solution to it at all. Of course its an option, its already there, so I feel like why not. It simply just isnt a feature I personally ever really end up selecting. In a way, though in a much more noticeable to me manner, its similar to the EW setting in BS. I muddled with it a few battles than it just sat on off.

This is the one issue I always really had with civvie density. I always thought it was a great idea but killed immersion because it seemed to float back into x1 territory by having something so abstracted it was totally on your imagination to picture the work it was doing, and IMO like the old 3 man placeholders for real squads and firepower values instead of each gun this destroyed immersion. The other issue I had was simply the issue of how can you tell whats safe or what heavy even looks like? Obviously we cant model thousands of civvies - I dont have some neat answer to this question but it always ended up going unused by me because even if it was changed my brain simply would forget and see empty streets unless I was sitting there in 1 sesh really.

Ha not a lot going on at the beach now this time of year. Have a good one

Hey I appreciate it man but as a dependent, when I was a dependent I got the light side really. It was all stories or just the results of f*** stuff that happened to my father that caused problems, but I never had to sit by why he deployed into combat, I was too young to realize how utterly doomed me and everyone else in West Germany was if a war started. Ive dangerously risked derailing the thread enough, I really appreciate your generosity and kindness. PS: Since I cant leave well enough alone : I feel the most for my mom. She left Boston by enlisting in the late 70s to escape a really messed up home and met my Dad in Spain. She ended up marrying him when her enlistment was up. She really bore the brunt of the endless moves and the worst of my fathers PTSD, abuse, and of course the worst of the intrusiveness of "The Service, or the Career" not only as the instituition itself but also for my fathers moral failing ( IMO ) to constantly choose his career over his family at every turn and I say this not in a time of national emergency and war, nor even say an colonial war, no just peacetime constant freaking out and talks of below the zone promotions fitness reports and what happened last night has to be a secret because he.ll lose his clearance and job if not. Of course I experienced a lot of it too, and I have to say when friends my age started getting blown up in the Middle East and or coming back traumatized I realized how pathetic my fathers drunken bemoaning that he never got to fight the enemy face to face, or later that he had to retire as a Lt Col and didbt make Full Bird ( I mean the shame right? :Eye roll: ) I know a lot of people will probably see this as a bit much or airing dirty laundry but its just real and unfortunately waaaay too many other military brats I knew had similar problems at home vis a vis chaos fueled by booze and stress from the military. In a weird way in hindsight my life seems to have been destined to have been constantly around the military and interested in it; but also resentful AF about it ( divorced parents, didnt goto the same school for more than 1 year from 4th to 10th grade- to be fair the military didnt have anything to do with 3 of those changes; never feeling like I was "from" anywhere. In America thats always the 2nd question people ask it seems, and in Boston it seems to define who you were. It probably seems silly to lots of people here though ) -and hating it for what I felt it did to my family.

Thanks man and thanks for your service.

Oh man you dont need to apologize and I dont feel misled. I still have a fu*kton of respect for your and everyone elses service. I never served after all. Thats cool about the phantoms, my father was a WSO on F4Ds for the USAF. He ended up getting into intel after being grounded for eyesight issues in the mid 80s and retired as a Lt Col at Maxwell AFB working at the air war college. Thats a trip about using the greasegun just like you would potentially have 30 years earlier. What was your impression of the greasegun? Did you like the "pig" the M60? It seems a lot of stuff Ive read makes it seem it wasnt popular or felt it needed to be replaced in late cold war, but in Vietnam it seems to have been liked? (Or was it simply the mg they had and anecdotal accounts are biased because whose going to badmouth any gun that saves your hide?) Also being lazy since I could simply google but the m202 Im assuming is that boxy rocket launcher that had it looks like 4 tubes? Ive always found it interesting how the US casually disregarded the ban on shotguns per a treaty that IIRC preceded rhe Geneva Accords. Though I also STR it being pointed out to me the US didmt sign the first treaty. If I may ask sir: What was the scuttlebutt around base about Vietnam? As in how did your average Marine where you were feel about it by 71? How bad was the drug use in the military OUTSIDE of Nam? Were you guys most worried about the Russians, Chinese, or N Koreans? Or really all of them and it depended on what was going on? Really any memories or info you have Id treasure, just because you werent in Nam doesnt mean anything to me. Im very interested in the US military and how it turned itself around in the 70s to 80s also because though the reasons why are different I feel our military may have to go through a similar healing process if we ever get out of the Middle East. ( seriously, I never thought some forever war out of a dystopian novel would happen in my life but I can easily see Afghanistan just never ending) O/T but Vietnam stories always make me shake my head when I hear about some of the crazy ROE stuff. Like accounts from Hue during the Tet offensive would remark the NVA would sit and fight even if US armor came up because they quickly realized we.d been ordered not to use main gun fire. Apparently though when those 4 barreled recoilless rifle TDs, the Ontos IIRC (with the Greek nickname I cant remember. Oh ya Ontos. Or something) came the NVA would scramble. Somehow tank main gun was a no go but recoilless rifle is ok. Odd.

Ah. Well his frequent pro russian stances, arguing with the ukrainians here, and then the you guys thing just squarely put him as a russian in my eyes. I stand by my points and views though. I understand and felt the common sentiment from 9/11 - any government with the capability would have had to do something to avenge something like that. Afghanistan under the Taliban went out of its way to be obtuse and almost happy to be ignorant at a time the whole world was sympathetic to what happened and bin Laden released a tape gloating he had done it. They squarely put those crosshairs on their nation. Al Qaeda had to be destroyed and in my opinion bin Ladens head was the very least that could be done in response to that savage and cowardly act in 2001. I do feel the US government DID take advantage of the gigantic surge of patriotism, nationalism, support for the military, combined in a heady mix with fear and the dawning of a new age evident in all these little ways that affected all Americans - sweeping changes in law enforcement powers and searches especially travelling, news went from a evening ritual to tickers on the bottom of the screen and 24 hr networks. Unfortunately I feel the government wasnt satisfied with Afghanistan and took advantage and invaded Iraq which was a huge mistake IMO. Afghanistan I feel we.ve made our point and done a lot of damage. Im very thankful some members of the American government finally seem to have developed some backbone and are unwilling to deal with odious types of people. (such as those who may be party to murder) hopefully now we can stop squandering blood and treasure in Afghanistan and let our military and perhaps country heal. Lord knows we need it.

Thanks and thanks for the awesome story. Jeez man you had already been in country and back and the m14 was still standard? Much respect

Shoot I dont know, he said whats "your guys" problem with the truth and so I responded in kind. Since he was advocating for them so hard I figured he was Russian ( also since hes always on their side in other threads ) Sorry not sorry.

Gap which was a gaffe

What ^ he said. TheTalibanwasnt ever going to cooperate they just paid lip service with anunacceptable counteroffer. Whats with YOUR people and the truth is more like it MH17 Tugboat VBIEDs Katyn Revionism justifying allying with Hitler( or denying it) I could go on and on. We had a hell of a lot of a better reason to go in there than you guys did before what your leader terms 'the greatest tragedy of the 20th century' (fall of communism) And after all you guys invaded Chechnya twice, and the second time your casus belli is VERY SUSPECT. I.e. Theres actual credible info out there it was an FSB false flag op. Nevermind the Ukraine stuff now. People may think we.re starting to make stuff up, and over here we KNOW our President does it about 5 to 7 times daily, but the whole world knows Russia/Soviet Union both make almost everything up. Even the truth is layered with lies. And no its not comparavle to the 3k deaths and seeing airliners fly into national landmarks on live TV. Ive always asserted the "9/11 was an inside job' crowd are idiots and for one that operation was too BIG for a false flag and never would have needed to be that big. Not to mention if it was a false flag it would have been putting a lot of the powers that beat heavy risk.(Pentagon?) Regardless OBLs dead and this isnt going to be won. Time to come home IMO.

Gentlemen, with the recent events in Ukraine I think we need to join forces and adress as immediately as possible obtaining the proper 10 to 1 female to man ratio and making sure theres NO MINESHAFT GAFT between us and those pesky Russians! Thoughts?

And yes the resultant vacuum may cause terrorist problems.. Of course we.ve been hammering the local male population almost 2 decades there. Id say theres more threat of Terrorists springing from new enclaves (i.e. countries in chaos. Yemen. Syria. Iraq. Etc ad nauseum) Iran sponsoring TF out of Shiite terrorist groups. Saudi Arabia countinuing to be the shadiest ppl in the world IMO besixes my all time favorite for two faced perfidy - Pakistan.

We need to just GTFO. Arent we really trying to (like much of the middle east) putting a nation state construct on a tribal society that when left to their own devices happily kill eachother usually and generally only agree on one thing (again like... All of the mideast tbh) that the only people they like killing more than EACHOTHER is killing Americans. Sorry but its been 18 damn years. Leave.

Meh I dont believe it was a joke. I think the reaction just wasnt what they expected and Putin probably called the guy and said "Your making us look like asses" Like I said It was not personal to you DMS, not saying you re the one makin wild claims on hehalf of the Russian govt

I usually use a HI/LO mix for my atgms and the ratio depends on the terrain. Preferably I can have kornets and saxhorns for my hi lo. In more open terrain say 3 kornet teams and 2 saxhorn teams, more urban id flip it to 3 saxhorn for 2 kornets. I try to use really close engagement ranges for my atgms if theyre saxhorns as well - theyre very useful because they can be fired from the shoulder position and only have a 7 second delay to shoot in a building thst way unless you deploy them. Generally the saxhorns usually kill bradleys flat out and at least immobilize abrams. Often will kill them. Kornets usually kill the abrams too, but remember this has to be done right. Some points - I often have several groups or areas that ambush. I try as often as i can to have my defense open up all at once. This also makes it harder for the enemy to smash on unit to pieces at a time, if youre a near peer ambusher it depends on the firefigbt but if youre not then its only a question of are your defenders dying in place or are you going to try to fall some men back to new positions? Because you.ll always get wasted trying to stand and fight. So if your oppo is playing correctly and moving inf with his armor it should work well that your squads open up on enemy troops and the atgms open up on the armor same time. As much violence and noise packed into a really small amount of time and in an area youve isolated the enemy target from the main force even if only by sheets of smoke from burning vehicles, or a corner that was turned. I never try front on ambushes with my atgms unless its absolutely forced. Sometimes it is, many a saxhorn squad Ive had were forced to shoot and blow up a bradley and be wasted by a hail of return fire because the brad just disgourged a team thats gonna run into that building - That said ideally you have your atgms firing flank or rear shots at tue enemy to their left or right, and hopefully theyre in turn covered by another team or two to either lateral direction. I usually tie my atgms into a net, where my kornets usually can see one or two of eachother at least. The saxhorns not so much but of course if they can - If you have any armor this is where crappy RedFor armor, whether T72B3s with regular or green crews in BS or T72s SF, this is where you can hopefully actually kill US armor with those tanks. You position the tanks as you would a WW2 TD, in ambush. You want to be able to try to pull it out when its immediate visible threats are gone if it lives. Basically your tank or tanks will have the premo lines of sight and since they almost are always definite spots they are best used to kick off ambushes. Especially with timing problems in WeGo, a huge arc so the T72 opens up on anything it sees (but it cant seemuch bc its keyholed) so if the enemy rushes faster than you can set up the ambush properly the T72 at least opens up and yiur inf wont and still be unspotted. In this scenario worst case your T72is still ambushing the Blufor so whatever happens with that happens, and when your orders phase comes up you can unleash your troops, especially if your tank just opened up and the firefight exchange hasnt really begun or you.ll just take off the close cover arcs to begin the ambush. ( i let my men target for themselces except area fire and on map mortars.) I also never make 1m covered arcs thats insane. I may make them small but never that small thats asking for your men to get gunned down while you rage at the computer. Make sure you remember to give your men a little breathing room to defend themselces and also holding shift while making a covered arc makes it 360 degrees. Very important.

This. Emrys is totally right, in fact this is probably what the majority of some types of tank/TD (especially tds) ended up using their cannons mostly doing for lack of better more effective use to put them to. I mean jeesh not only was indirect tank fire used then, and indirect MG fire from all sides, Ive read plenty of accounts of indirect MG fire from the British and German side even in WW1. I mention the indirect machine gun fire because this is another inventive way of using a weapon that would be useful and not probably immediately thought up or ever intended for when said weapon was designed, just as indirect tank fire is. So no, unfortunately as much as anyone wants to believe the Russians invented indirect tank fire or it came about in the 50s - no it was old hat. I know the Kremlin would love for us to think the Russians invented every way of fighting and weapon and have unlimited powers sometimes, and certainly the Russians are very dangerous and worthy opponents; but this revisionist military history stuff coming out of Russia these days gets a bit old. @DMS this isnt really directed at you - I want to point that out because your statement caused my response but its not personal to you and I know language can be a barrier in communications on what I can read for what you provide and what you talk about. That said I can speak maybe 3 or 4 words of Russian and you can hold a conversation on an english speaking forum about military history and I tipmy hat to you on that. ( O/T - I know - and influenced by much eye rolling reading about the head of the Russian equivalent to NASA saying they wanted to check if the US really landed on the moon on 1969. Give. Me. A. Break. The Cold War is over get over it. Who cares if it even was a hoax, does that really change anything for anyone? It does seem like a colossal waste of money to possibly, maybe, embarass the actions of people in the US govt in 1969?)