Vanir Ausf B

IIRC, that was ONE scenario. IIRC it was two people who were experiencing crashes with it and you were not one of them. IIRC it was never determined what was causing the crashes but running out of memory was suspected. You really need to stop making these unsubstantiated declarations of engine problems. You don't know what you're talking about and some of your statements are disingenuous.

What crashes are you experiencing?

Same here. I am going to make an attack/defend version of the map.

I think the OP was talking about hull rotation, which typically happens in reaction to a new threat. If by "moving" you mean driving forward, tanks have no problem staying on target.

The primary effect of this is to delay the aquisition and targeting of off-axis threats. That's not such a bad thing, IMO, given the instant reaction time.

Nice summation. The difference is that in real time the effect of only seeing spotted friendly units when a friendly unit is selected is always in effect since there are no separate playback and orders phases. This is also true in turn-based TCP/IP since that is actually real time with mandatory pauses every 60 seconds.

What he said!

http://fofanov.armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/MBT/t-90_armor.html This would be a good candidate for the first module.

ECM is my guess as well.

1. Fulda Gap ~1983 2. Black Sea ~1946

Depends. We need to know the mass of the bullet and whether it is full metal jacket or jacketed hollow point, elevation of shooter and target, temperature, barometric pressure, body-mass index of target, and the thickness and weave of the soldiers' uniforms. Or you can just use this formula: Penetration{mm} = (0.5223*Velocity{m/s}-11.663)*Diameter{mm}*Density{g/cm3}/7.85{g/cm3} http://slingshotforum.com/blog/11/entry-416-terminal-ballistics-a-model-to-predict-penetration-depth/

I am not sure what the point of this thread is. What did you expect? You are testing ATGMs against a tank defended by APS and then appearing to be surprised that the ATGMs aren't very effective. Salvo fired ATGMs have a much better chance of getting past Trophy but it is far from guaranteed. If you salvo 2 missiles and one of them hits the ground on the way you are dead. If both missiles are intercepted by Trophy you are dead. If one of them gets through you have a fair chance of killing the tank and a very good chance of at least damaging it. Abrams with APS is a tough nut to crack and there no getting around that fact. In QBs I prefer to use a house rule of no APS for the US.

Some optics are destructible and some are not, so it's actually not possible to completely blind a tank. Unfortunately for Stagler's agenda this is not unique to the Abrams or even US equipment, it's just how the vehicle subsystem model works in CMx2. In fact this was discovered several years ago by testing a German Tiger I in CMBN.

John, I am already familiar with the page you linked to but thanks anyways (and BTW you mislabeled it as 14.5mm in your post). As for 12.7 x 108mm being "more potent" than .50 BMG, they are within spitting distance of each other and it mostly boils down to the individual round. The most common Russian 12.7mm machine gun round is, AFAIK, the B-32 AP-I that produces about 16,240 joules at the muzzle, compared to the US M8 AP-I round @ 15,900. That's only a 2% difference which translates to maybe 1mm of extra RHA penetration. BTW, I have already asked BFC to double check the Russian 12.7mm ammo type in-game to make sure it's not supposed to be AP-I.

I just tested this in the --next-- patch version of the game, and rest assured the 14.5mm will be out-penetrating the Ma Deuce. It looks like even the Russian 12.7mm slightly out-penetrates its US counterpart, although the US round is more damaging due to being incendiary while the Russian round is vanilla AP.

Let me restate that. I know for a fact that in the version of the game you are using -- v1.01 -- all US .50 cal weaponry is using Mk211. That has been changed for the next patch so that Mk211 is only used in sniper rifles. What I don't know is what ammunition the .50 cal machine guns were changed too. It should probably be M8 or M20. I don't know what ammunition the 14.5mm is using but I am guessing B-32 AP-I.

It's not clear to me what round US .50 cal. machine guns are using. It is an incendiary round of some sort, which would rule out SLAP. That would mean Mk211, M8 or M20 AP-I. I have read that Mk211 is typically only used in sniper rifles.

I have a v3.11 and a v2.12. Stick it in one of our shared folders and I'll take a look.

I have looked over the files. Holien, you mentioned in your email that you have had issues with units not moving through gaps in bocage. This is likely an unresolved bug that causes units to sometimes ignore small gaps in bocage when calculating the shortest movement path. You can mitigate this by placing a waypoint very near the opposite side of the gap. I will rattle BFCs cage on this again at some point. James... You are a soldier of misfortune. I see you have figured out why your infantry is frozen. I assumed a failed boarding was to blame since the trucks near them are also stuck in place. I don't know what caused it for sure, but I agree the "bit convoluted" path to the trucks is likely a factor (the nearest gaps through the bocage are over 100 meters in each direction). Definitely a bug. Your infantry guns actually can move, they just can't move where you need them to go. The problem is that they each have to pass through a gap about 1/2 of an action spot wide. There is a wall going down the middle of the action spot and a building on the other side. Visually it looks like they should fit but they don't. I have experimented with a Pak 38 and Pak 40 in the same area and they won't go through either. I don't know if this is a bug or not, but if it is intended behavior the tooltip should indicate that passage is not allowed, IMO. As others have surmised, the tall wall in front of your guns is blocking them from indirect fire. Actually, they can fire indirectly if the target is far enough away, but because they have to elevate so much to shoot over the wall their minimum range is about a kilometer. The good news is that there are ways to free your imprisoned guns and your frozen squads. The bad news is that it requires you to do things you won't enjoy doing, but the mitigation is preferable to the status quo. I will PM you detailed instructions.

Well that's interesting. When Black Sea began development they certainly did not and getting them to do so required a lot of trial and error.

Did some small scale testing. At 500m the BMP does favor the missile although there is some random variation. ATGM accuracy can be affected by many factors, but it was a perfect 10 for 10 in my test on flat featureless ground. It certainly kills faster than the 30mm cannon. If you ignore the APS factor it's not at all clear that the cannon is a better choice. APS does screw up the calculus, however. I never played CMSF but I am almost certain that thermal sights didn't do anything in that game but let you see through smoke. In Black Sea they make you spot better almost all time. The Bradly has the same Gen II FLIR as the Abrams, which is the most advanced of any vehicle in the game.

I'll look into it, but in a PBEM I am playing with the latest beta patch my BMP-3Ms are using 30mm exclusively against Ukrainian BMP-2s. That's not true. For example, the ARAT on the Abrams hull is a multiple layer ERA designed to stop tandem warheads. BMP-3M combat weight: 22t Bradley combat weight: 33t Those TOW missiles must be HEAVY!

It's random. Spotting the enemy inside isn't required. Range should be under 100 meters not so much to hit the window but just to hit the building.

It's because of accuracy and penetration. If the rocket just explodes on the exterior of the building it usually doesn't do much. If it penetrates into the interior then explodes it tends to do a lot. Obviously, the former happens a lot more often than the latter.

8%. Not a big deal. Actually I don't know. It's something BFC mentioned once. It has to be that way or games would last way too long. I mean, there are reasons why you can play out a battalion-sized battle in 1 or 2 hours when in reality it would usually take all day. EDIT: And note that when I say "easier to spot" what I really mean is faster. AFAIK, BFC did not deliberately make infantry able to be seen in situations where they should not seen at all.