IMHO
-
Posts
1,054 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Posts posted by IMHO
-
-
37 minutes ago, Holien said:
I think he is creating a context to annex more of Ukraine
What for? We've seen US failing in Afghanistan and Iraq and US has immensely more resources than Russia.
37 minutes ago, Holien said:what you think Putin is trying to achieve
He said it himself. He does not want Ukraine joining NATO. Ukrainian military and political leadership constantly talks about crushing Crimea and L/DNR the way Croats did with Serb Krajina (Operation Storm). Right now Russian forces outmatch Ukrainian so it would be suicidal for the Ukraine to do so. Yet Putin obviously believes that if Ukraine joins NATO then having full support of NATO behind them they will start a war.
-
8 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
Difference is that Germany and Japan were the aggressors. I said: "gunpoint by a aggressor"
Ukrainian Su-25 bombs Lugansk on 02.06.2014.
-
12 hours ago, dbsapp said:
Russia doesn't have any obligations to sell gas to Europe that had not been contracted.
It's worse than that. European energy companies CAN buy additional gas from Russia as part of the long term contracts. Yet they chose not to do so since this gas is sold at current spot market prices and European energy companies believe they will fall after the winter period ends.
-
13 minutes ago, The_MonkeyKing said:
In my personal opinion country that ignores treaties signed at gunpoint by a aggressor have my support.
Obviously Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan have your support Because their respective surrender documents of WWII were signed exactly at gunpoint. Diplomatic agreements exists not to make one side morally superior to the other but to avoid / stop wars.
-
23 minutes ago, DMS said:
your rhetoric is somewhat ultra conservative, like right wing in Republican party
If you remember Haiduk openly said in a discussion in 2014 or 2015 that people from the East of Ukraine who want to speak Russian should pack up and move to Russia. And if they don't do it by themselves then ideologically pure Ukrainians (obviously from the Western Ukraine) will make sure they do. As a side note I'm far from being a fan of the current brinkmanship - certain folks in Russia should stop living in the past, start thinking about economy of today etc.
-
11 hours ago, Haiduk said:
corrupted with Gazprom money
Isn't it Ukraine itself that demands from the outside world to make sure it is able to go on corrupting itself with Gazprom transit money?
-
13 hours ago, Haiduk said:
Did Russia threaten Ukraine with "consequenses" if we do not agree on Russian conditions around Donbas?
Ukraine already agreed to them when it signed Minsk agreements. The problem is Ukraine was ready for a compromise when there was a real and imminent threat. When the threat went away - it threw the agreements it signed in a trash bin.
-
12 hours ago, Haiduk said:
Russian forces in Transnistria depicted like a brigade, but really have three battalions in 200-300 men each. But they can easily can transform these battalions in full brigade or even more, reinforcing them with Transnistrian units, which personnel have Russian citizenship
- Does Transnistria have enough tanks, APCs and IFVs to equip such alleged brigades?
- Ethnic composition of Transnistria:
- Russians: 29.1%
- Moldovans: 28.6%
- Ukrainians: 22.9%
- Bulgarians: 2.4%
- Gagauz: 1.1%
- Belarusians: 0.5%
- Transnistrians: 0.2%
- Others: 1.4%
-
19 minutes ago, Vanir Ausf B said:
are not.
- You sure about buildings? I did multiple tests - like 40-50 and I always got the same number of casualties if the same kind of ordnance is shot along the same vector and the same squad is in the building facing the shooter. I remember quite vividly that the number was the same all the time irrespective of where specifically the shell hits as long as it hits the building square the "victim squad" is made to face. I.e. if the "victim squad" faces one side and the shell hits another or misses a bit and hits a bit above or below the building's facing square then the results are certainly differ. Though it was one of the early CMBS - many years ago so may be something's changed.
- As per the "adjacent squares" with HE explosions on the open terrain I should rephrase it to be more correct. I'm sure there's no rule coded-in that HE affects only the adjacent squares. Yet as fast as HE effect degrades with distance in CM it makes anything more than adjacent squares almost impossible to affect.
Your thoughts?
-
41 minutes ago, Shepherd74 said:
Decaf man. It's just as tasty as the real thing. His ire was obviously not directed at you personally.
Why comment an answer that's mere 4 months old? My account here is more than 21 years old (no joke) - you can find some real vintage ones!
-
19 minutes ago, Bufo said:
Nope, that folder is located here, @The_MonkeyKing is correct.
I meant you get a Steam app folder this way. Steam CMCW use Steam app folder for game saves but many apps not. E.g. ARMA3, Mount and Banner, Paradox use a subfolder in "My documents" for game saves just like BFC CMCW build.
-
-
- When loading or starting a new mission CM does a lot of heavy calcs at the beginning yet it uses no more than 4 cores. Is it possible to force it use more?
- I have enough both VRAM and RAM and CMCW is underutilizing both by a mile. Is there a way to force higher render depth to show roads and forests for the whole map? I maxed out the graphics settings yet for bigger CMCW maps forests and roads are "abstracted" at longer ranges.
-
46 minutes ago, Redwolf said:
We recently discussed that as part of on-map mortars being pretty deadly. But the deadlieness of small HE in CMx2 doesn't seem to scale up to larger HE.
From my observations HE effect on infantry is basically limited to the action square where the explosion takes place plus adjacent squares in case of higher calibers. So when compared to RL small caliber HEs in CM should be sufficiently close to RL whereas higher calibers are severely limited by this adjacent square rule. And even for higher calibers units in adjacent squares take waaaay smaller damage than the unit in the action square where the explosion takes place.
What I dislike is how HE-FRAG in CM does not affect armour enough. If a HE-FRAG hits an armoured vehicle and the caliber is not high enough to allow for an outright kill then the explosion can just slightly damage modules and even that is rather rare. If the shell falls VERY near the vehicle it can only damage tracks and no other modules. And if it falls even 3-4-5 meters away - no damage whatsoever. It basically changes the whole approach compared to RL. Non-precision HE-FRAG barrages are totally useless against armour. IMO the problem could have been solved in mission design by limiting the number of arty support instead of unrealistically cutting the effect of individual rounds. IRL E.g. 152/155mm can kill a tank in CM is it hits an engine compartment but not 120/122mm whereas IRL it will be mission kill at least in both cases if not a total write-off irrespective of where it hits. And both calibers severely degrade tank modules up to a mission/mobility kill IRL if they explode 10-15 meters. And for Russian IFVs/APCs even 82mm is deadly IRL within 10m. Even 82mm produces enough fragments of sufficient weight to pierce their armour.
BTW I didn't test much for open terrain but for the buildings HE damage is a constant. I.e. if an explosion takes place in the building square where an infantry unit is deployed then a fixed number of squad members will be hit if damage is dealt at all. The severity of damage to individual team members is random but the number of squad members affected is a constant. Actually there might be a constant damage pool as well with each level of damage severity - slightly wounded, severely wounded, dead - being assigned a certain weight so that the total always stays the same. Didn't lab-test for that but in a hindsight it may even work this way rather than individual damage being randomized. Anyway having the number of team members a constant helps immensely. If you test you'd know how many shells need to hit a section of the building to disable a possible enemy squad there. You just need to watch for near misses - they do not count.
-
13 hours ago, The_Capt said:
Not sure what you mean by "too dense" to be honest. The frontages you see in the campaigns and most scenarios are pretty close to doctrine.
Just like @Artkin said...
- I don't mean mission level frontage I mean team/squad members are too close. If you set HE-FRAG lethal radius as it is IRL then any nearby explosion will be killing full squads outright. Though the decision to put squad members closer to each other was sound as well. It would be rather inconvenient to manage squads with RL distances between members on pre-CMCW maps.
- Big campaign maps are the beauty of CMCW - CM used much smaller maps in the past instalments with mission level frontage was much tighter. And CMCW gameplay is different from those past titles. In CMCW you can concentrate more on how you approach your targets rather than on micro of terrain clearing. Yes, I admit I'm in love with CMCW IMO the best mission/campaign/map pack in the history of CM.
13 hours ago, The_Capt said:Can't say thay HE/HE-FRAG are "reduced" for reasons of balancing, never was a conversation we had in development.
If my memory does not fail me that was Charles who said this about 10 years ago. And I also posted articles on RL arty barrage effect on armour about 5-7 years ago. Though I had to delete them afterwards - I ran out of forum attachment quota But I can try to find them again if you're interested. CM arty barrages are waaaay inefficient against armour as compared to RL. I guess the rationale was to force players to conduct maneuver warfare instead of boring "arty camping"
-
On 10/30/2021 at 5:52 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:
I suspect that it used a MAM-L
No, MAM-C. It's a Turkish take at APKWS less the engine to save some weight as TB2's payload is rather limited. MAM-L is kinda... Impressive in terms of HE contents
-
On 10/13/2021 at 1:02 AM, The_Capt said:
In game (and matching sources) that is exactly their value
I guess that's the same old tale isn't it? CMxx units are packed too dense to ease the gameplay so to compensate for this HE/HE-FRAG effects are limited in distance. And HE/HE-FRAG effects are further reduced to force a full-contact hack and slash as opposed to boring win through remote carpet bombing.
-
3 hours ago, Bufo said:
For the AK-47 and it's variants it is 350m
The procedure for zeroing AKM and AK-74:
- Sighting target is placed at 100m
- The gun sight is set at 3 (300m)
- The gun is aimed at the appropriate line below the center of target to compensate for the sighting distance of 300m
Overall it gives you an aim with no vertical adjustment if the sight is set at "П" - прямой выстрел / direct shot. 300-450m is the distance at which you can shoot at the center of the mass and still the vertical drop will be no bigger than the size of a human figure.
-
-
- Is it Steam only or it can ba applied to BFC-distributed game as well?
- When it goes out? Patch page on battelfront.com does not have it yet.
-
1 hour ago, domfluff said:
Yup, it needs to build its lookup table
Does it still rebuild it each time it loads a save?
-
I started an NTC 1982 training in the desert campaign. I went to the first mission and saved it before doing anything - got 4.77Mb file. Now if load this save and re-save it again without doing anything - I instantly got 51.8Mb file. Again there were no actions on my side. For the last tests I didn't even change the camera angle - just loaded and re-saved immediately. Anyone seen this?
UPD After some more testing. So the small files are generated when I do game-suggested save after finishing one mission and before loading the next one in the campaign tree. So it seems this save just contains unit status and (probably) previous map that is rather small for the first mission in this NTC campaign that is just selection of the path you want to follow in the campaign. Only big saves seem to be proper saves with the new map. Yet 52 Mb for the initial position of a handful of units and not so big a map of barren desert looks... extravagant
-
1 hour ago, Artkin said:
And I thought I was the only one that was pizzed over the Soviet reinforcements hahah! Except my encounter was during the March or Die campaign.
Did you play the Blue side first?
-
12 hours ago, Ultradave said:
Make a duplicate of it now with the name Czechmate-orig
Thank you! Will do that!
FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by IMHO
I guess you get your answer
@The_MonkeyKing What do you think happen if some hot heads believe they better bomb out their compatriots rather than find a compromise with them and work out their differences politically? I swear to God I truly believed those "Ukrainian extremists" were purely Russian propaganda invention. Yet listen to Haiduk...
PS As a side note I think this whole Crimea-L/DNR thing was a giant tragic mistake for Russia. Russia could have had a Western-oriented yet more or less neutral Ukraine - something like Moldova. And what it has now is a constant threat of a major war, painful economical difficulties and politics in Russia's second biggest neighbour being controlled by war mongering ideologues.